論俄烏天然氣衝突之政治意涵―以2006年與2009年衝突為例

Abstract

本研究嘗試以地緣政治研究途徑針對國際層面、國家層面來解釋俄烏天然氣爆發的深層政治因素與俄羅斯此作為的實際目的何在。\n烏克蘭擁有黑海出海口，位居歐亞大陸中心，俄羅斯若控制了烏克蘭，便可直接與歐洲對話，因此烏克蘭對俄羅斯的戰略意義是不可忽視的。同時，2004年北約東擴後，烏克蘭是俄羅斯地緣安全的最後一道防線，尤申科加入北約之政策，自然招致莫斯科反彈。綜合以上因素，可以解釋出橙色革命後，俄羅斯與烏克蘭兩造於對外政策之矛盾，形成了天然氣衝突之背景。\n從國際層面分析，長年依賴自俄羅斯進口之低廉能源導致烏國能源部門效率相對低落，加強了莫斯科對基輔的能源外交力度，故本文認為兩次天然氣衝突皆為俄羅斯藉由天然氣議題對烏克蘭施壓。儘管斷氣風波也招致歐盟抨擊，使得俄烏兩國國際形象大為受損；但短期來說，俄羅斯與歐盟的能源合作難以改變，但烏克蘭之能源過境地位則可能因為替代管線投入營運因素而受到弱化。\n從國家層面分析，烏克蘭東部與南部多數人民支持親俄政權，西部多數人民則支持親西方政權，究其原因可分為：語言因素、宗教因素、民族因素、經濟因素、與歷史因素。本研究認為烏克蘭政治菁英之分歧導致政局動盪，同時，天然氣衝突給予不同政黨互相攻訐之議題，加上烏克蘭目前處於政治轉型之階段，以致於2006年至2008年爆發了多次政治危機。\n2009年之天然氣協議提升了兩國交易透明度，然而烏克蘭之積欠天然氣債務問題仍為未知數，意味著未來俄羅斯依舊有再度對烏克蘭施壓之空間。

In this study, I attempt to explain the political implications of natural gas conflicts between Russia and Ukraine at international and international level by means of geopolitical approach.\nUkraine faces Black Sea and possesses central location in Euro-Asia continent. Russia has an initiative to intervene in European affairs if Ukraine is under its control. In a result, Ukraine is critical to Russia in its strategic layout. Meanwhile, after NATO Enlargement, Ukraine is the last defense boundary of Russia to ensure its geopolitical security. The policy of joining NATO under Yushchenko definitely brought Russia’s objections. It shows after Orange Revolution the discrepancy in foreign policy between Russia and Ukraine gave an incentive to natural gas conflicts.\nIn the International system level, relying on gas imported from Russia at a low price led to relatively low-efficiency in Ukraine’s energy sections which strengthens the power of Russia’s energy diplomacy. Therefore, I believe the natural gas conflicts were aimed to put political pressure upon Ukraine. Although the interruptions brought about criticism from EC and caused great damage to the reputations of Russia and Ukraine, in the short term, it is unlikely to cease Russia-EC cooperation relationship in energy field. However, the status of Ukraine in energy transition could become less important due to the operations of alternative pipelines.\nIn the state system level, most people in Eastern and Southern are in favor of pro-Russia parties or candidates and those in Western and Northern are in the opposite. There are five factors that led to its discrepancy: race, religion, language, economic, and history. The political unrest in Ukraine came from disagreements among elites and gas conflicts provided a pretext for them to attack their opponents. Additionally, this country was under political transformation. Because of these elements, Ukraine suffered from several political crises in the following three years since 2006.\nThe new contract in 2009 provided a better transparency to Russia-Ukraine gas deal, but the problem of Ukraine’s gas debts was not yet dissolved. It suggests Russia is likely to put pressure upon Ukraine by means of energy diplomacy in the future.