DOCSLIB.ORG

Ncsp Group a Harbor for Successful Business

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

www.nmtp.info NCSP GROUP A HARBOR FOR SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS SUCCESSFUL FOR A HARBOR FOR SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS FOR SUCCESSFUL BUSINESS A HARBOR A HARBOR ANNUAL REPORT 2007 NOVOROSSIYSK–MOSCOW NOVOROSSIYSK–MOSCOW NCSP GROUP ANNUAL rEPORT 2007 ness i NCSP Bus ul f GROUP ess cc U S or f or b ar A H акватория успешного бизнеса CONTENTS 2 About the Group 5 Novorossiysk in the Global Transportation Network 6 Key Operational and Financial Indicators 8 Letter from the Chairman of the Board and General Director 10 Investing in Growth 11 Focus on Efficiency 12 Review of Operational Results 14 Companies of the Group 30 Review of Financial Results 34 Information for Shareholders 37 Corporate Governance 43 Social Responsibility 45 Independent Auditors' Report and Consolidated Financial Statements 108 Contact Information Novorossiysk ANNUAL REPORT 2007 NCSP is Russia’s largest port operator maintaining key foreign-trade cargo channel NCSP Group was formed as a result of the consolidation of stevedoring Diagram 1. Largest Russian seaports by cargo turnover in 2007, mln. tons companies by the largest operator at Novorossiysk Port, PJsC NCsP, 90 in 2006. The Group now unites NCSP 6 stevedoring companies working in the Other 2.5 Black sea and the Baltic sea, including: 80 GROUP PJsC Novorossiysk Commercial sea 74.2 Port, oJsC Novoroslesexport , oJsC 78.4 iPP, PJsC Novorossiysk Grain Terminal, 70 oJsC Novorossiysk ship repair yard and LLC Baltic stevedore Company 61.3 THE 60 as well as the service company PJsC NCsP Fleet, which provides towing and 1 bunkering services. 50 IN the text of this Annual report, 40 OUT THE GROUP PJsC NCsP, together with its subsidiary b companies, is referred to as “NCsP A ABOUT Group” or “the Group” or NCsP. PJsC 30 NCsP, as the head company of the 25.40 group, is referred to as PJsC NCsP 24.70 22.2 21.6 or “the Company”. 20 19.6 15.6 13.4 NCSP is the largest port operator in russia that maintains the key channel 10 for the flow of russia’s foreign-trade cargo through Novorossiysk Port, the 0 Novorossiysk Primorsk St.Petersburg Murmansk Vysotsk Vanino Vostochniy Tuapse Kaliningrad Nakhodka southern sea Gates of the country. in Source: NCSP Group data 2007, the Group’s share accounted for around 18%2 of all import and export cargo handling carried out through russia’s sea ports. Diagram 2. Largest European seaports by cargo turnover in 2007, mln. tons the primaRy opeRations Of NCSP are concentrated in the port of Novorossiysk. The port is located in the 450 northeast part of the Black sea and NCSP Other occupies sixth place in terms of cargo 407 traffic among European ports3. it is the 400 single multimodal, ice-free deepwater port in russia’s southern basin allowing 350 year-round navigation. 300 250 200 183 150 140 % of NCSP shares were offered to investors 100 100 88 81 79 69 through an IPO in 2007. 58 19.4 50 Havre 0 Rotterdam Antwerp Hamburg Marseilles Amsterdam Novorossiysk Le Bremen Constance Source: NCSP Group data 1 The term “bunkering” covers the combination of technological operations connected with providing vessels coming into the port with fuel, water, oil and so forth. 2 source: russian Maritime Ports Association 2007 report. SP GROUP 2 3 3 source: NCsP and rotterdam sea Port estimates. c N ANNUAL REPORT 2007 NOVOROSSIySK ACCUMULATES CARGO TRAFFIC FROm ThE LARGEST RuSSIAN EXPORTERS NOvorossiySk is located at the RelatIve proxImIty of Novorossiysk tal Steel Temirtau, Cargill, sUCDEN Diagram 3. Port of Novorossiysk cargo turnover by stevedoring intersection of global transportation companies, 2007, % Port to the world’s primary centers of (sucres & Denrees), WJ Grain, Glencore, routes connecting russia with the trade makes it a very convenient point kazakhmys, kazzinc and many others. Mediterranean, the Middle East, Africa, for the handling of cargo flowing to and south and southeast Asia and North Independent from central russian regions, including NCSP contaINeR teRmINalS ness i and south America. The developed Stevedores, 4% the Urals and the volga as well as are well connected with leading railroad, auto-transport and pipeline NCSP, 96% Central Asia. international container lines like Bus infrastructure of Novorossiysk allows Mediterranean shipping Company s.A. ul f NCsP to efficiently exploit the potential Port Of NOvorossiySk (MsC), CMA CGM, Evergreen, Hapag- of the growing market for export and accumulates cargo traffic from Lloyd, ZiM, ADMIRAL Container lines ess import cargo handling. the largest russian exporters, includ- inc. and others. cc U ing: LUKOIL, Tatneft, sibneft, NLMk, GLOBAL S 4% 96% a group of multimodal port oEMk, severstal, EvrazHolding, or terminals permits NCsP to service all Mechel, rUsAL, TNk-BP, TMk, Mit- f of the main types of cargo conveyed or b by sea, including liquid, bulk, general THE ar and container loads. in 2007, the cargo turnover of the NCsP Group amounted the delIveRy Of containers from SoutheaSt Asia tO Moscow aNd OtheR CeNtRal RussiaN citIeS through A H акватория успешного бизнеса to 79.4 million tons1 and its share of NOvOROSSIySk takeS eIGht dayS leSS thaN by alteRNatIve ROUteS thROUGh the PORtS Of ROtteRdam/hambURG NOVOROSSIYSK IN TRANSPORTATION NETWORK the total cargo turnover of Novorossiysk aNd St PeteRSbURG. Port amounted to 96%. IN 2007, NCsP conducted an initial Source: NCSP Group data public offering (iPo) of 19.4% of its shares on the London stock Exchange (LsE) in the form of global depositary receipts (GDrs) as well, as on the rTs Diagram 4. NCSP cargo traffic by regions, 2007, % stock exchange in russia. NCsP’s GDrs are listed on the LsE under NCsP symbol. ordinary shares are traded on Russian Federation MiCEX and rTs exchanges in russia Australia, 1% under NMTP symbol. Latin America, 3% St-Petersburg North America, 11% moscow 12% Asia, 16% 11% Africa, 20% Rotterdam 3% Europe, 37% KAzakhstan Other, 12% Europe, 37% Novorossiysk North 20% 37% America, 11% 1% Asia, 16% Shanghai 16% Africa, 20% Bombay Latin Source: NCSP Group data America, 3% 1 Here and elsewhere, conversion from cubic meters to tons is based on the ratio of 0.55 tons to 1mЗ, and for containers on the ratio of 14 tons to 1 TEU. These ratios are used by NCsP as indicative numbers and based on assumptions that the Group believes to be well-founded. Any lack of accordance between the data and the factual weight of cargo SP GROUP 4 does not have a significant influence on the indicators for revenue and EBiTDA, as the calculation of tariff rates and according collections carried out on the relevant cargo is 5 c carried out on the basis of 1m3 and 1 TEU, and not by weight. N ANNUAL REPORT 2007 NCSP’S NET PROFIT GreW By 112.5% IN 2007 № 1 seaport in Russia № 6 seaport in Europe by 4 new terminals cargo turnover launched in 2007 ATORS IC ND i AL CI NAN FI ONAL AND № № i FINANCIAL OPERATIONAL 1 6 4 24% of Russian oil ex- 54% of Russian grain 31% of ferrous metals KEY OPERAT KEY AND INDICATORS ports by sea in 2007 exports by sea in 2007 handling at Russian ports in 2007 24% 54% 31% key eveNtS Of 2007: • New specialized Novorossiysk grain • New liquid cargo and bunkering fuel • successful iPo on the London stock terminal with a capacity of 4 million terminal launched into operation Exchange and russian exchanges tons per annum launched into by PJsC NCsP. MiCEX and rTs. operation by PJsC NGT. • Reconstruction of sheskharis oil • Eurobond issue for Us$ 300 million. • Expanded timber and container terminal’s main pipeline. • Assignment of long-term BB+ credit terminals launched into operation rating and ruAA+ national rating by oJsC Novoroslesexport . by Standard & Poor’s and Ba1 credit rating by Moody’s. Table 1. Summary of 2007 results Revenue, uS$ mln 483.4 74.3% EBITDA, uS$ mln 227.9 91.4% through Russian EBITDA Margin, % 47.1 % of total cargo traffic Net profit, uS$ mln 93.7 112.5% 18 seaports is handled by NCSP Group. Cargo turnover1, mln tons 79.4 1.7% 1 According to pro-forma Source: Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of NCSP according to International Accounting Standards SP GROUP 6 7 c N ANNUAL REPORT 2007 NCSP does not intend to stop with what has been achieved and sees great potential in the regional diversification of thE Business OARD OF b TOR c The consolidation of assets also allowed us to optimize and fruitful cooperation which has enabled the THE RE f i our pricing policy, eliminate previously existing tariff successful development of NCsP. We are convinced that AND discounts, and move to the active implementation of the experience which we have gained in the course of our investment program aimed at expanding throughput integrating assets and increasing the efficiency of our DIRECTOR RMAN O capacity and modernization of the handling capacity of business, in combination with the further successful i Novorossiysk Port. implementation of our investment plans, will be HA FROM c capitalized upon in the form of even better results in the BOARD IN 2007 we have completed 4 new modern terminals: future. a wheat terminal at PJsC NGT, container and timber terminals at oJsC Novoroslesexport and a bunkering yours sincerely, TORS AND GENERAL D ROM THE CHAIRMAN c f complex at oJsC iPP. A technical upgrade program was THE RE i implemented at PJsC NCsP and oJsC Novorossiysk ship D repair yard terminals. Container handling for the year f O LETTER increased to 261 thousand TEU (up 55% compared to LETTER THE OF DIRECTORS GENERAL 2006) and grain handling reached a record level of 5,808 thousand tons (up 42% compared to 2006).
Recommended publications
  • Crimea: Anatomy of a Decision

    Crimea: Anatomy of a Decision

    Crimea: Anatomy of a decision Daniel Treisman President Vladimir Putin’s decision to seize the Crimean peninsula from Ukraine and incorporate it into Russia was the most consequential of his first 15 years in power.1 It had profound implications for both foreign and domestic policy as well as for how Russia was viewed around the world. The intervention also took most observers—both in Russia and in the West—by surprise. For these reasons, it is a promising case from which to seek insight into the concerns and processes that drive Kremlin decision-making on high-stakes issues. One can distinguish two key questions: why Putin chose to do what he did, and how the decision was made. In fact, as will become clear, the answer to the second question helps one choose among different possible answers to the first. Why did Putin order his military intelligence commandos to take control of the peninsula? In the immediate aftermath, four explanations dominated discussion in the Western media and academic circles. A first image—call this “Putin the defender”—saw the Russian intervention as a desperate response to the perceived threat of NATO enlargement. Fearing that with President Viktor Yanukovych gone Ukraine’s new government would quickly join the Western military alliance, so the argument goes, Putin struck preemptively to prevent such a major strategic loss and to break the momentum of NATO’s eastward drive (see, e.g., Mearsheimer 2014). 1 This chapter draws heavily on “Why Putin Took Crimea,” Foreign Affairs, May/June, 2016. A second image—“Putin the imperialist”—cast Crimea as the climax of a gradually unfolding, systematic project on the part of the Kremlin to recapture the lost lands of the Soviet Union.
  • Black Sea Container Market and Georgia's Positioning

    Black Sea Container Market and Georgia's Positioning

    European Scientific Journal November 2018 edition Vol.14, No.31 ISSN: 1857 – 7881 (Print) e - ISSN 1857- 7431 Black Sea Container Market and Georgia’s Positioning Irakli Danelia, (PhD student) Tbilisi State University, Georgia Doi:10.19044/esj.2018.v14n31p100 URL:http://dx.doi.org/10.19044/esj.2018.v14n31p100 Abstract Due to the strategically important geographical location, Black Sea region has a key transit function throughout between Europe and Asia. Georgia, which is a part of Black sea area, has a vital transit function for Caucasus Region, as well as for whole New Silk Road area. Nevertheless, still there is no evidence what kind of role and place Georgia has in The Black Sea container market. As the country has ambition to be transit hub for containerizes cargo flows between west and east and is actively involved in the process of formation “One Belt One Road” project, it is very important to identify Country’s current circumstances, capacities and future potential. Because of this, the purpose of the study is to investigate cargo flows and opportunities of the Black Sea container market, level of competitiveness in the area and define Georgia’s positioning in the regional Container market. Keywords: Geostrategic Location, New Silk Road, Transit Corridor, Cargo flow, Container market, Georgia, Black Sea Methodology Based on practical and theoretical significance of the research the following paper provides systemic, historical and logical generalization methods of research in the performance of the work, scientific abstraction, analysis and synthesis methods are also used. Introduction Since the end of the Cold War, the Black Sea region has no longer been a static border between the West and the East.
  • Caucasian Review of International Affairs (CRIA) Is a Quarterly Peer-Reviewed Free, Non-Profit and Only-Online Academic Journal Based in Germany

    Caucasian Review of International Affairs (CRIA) Is a Quarterly Peer-Reviewed Free, Non-Profit and Only-Online Academic Journal Based in Germany

    CCCAUCASIAN REVIEW OF IIINTERNATIONAL AAAFFAIRS Vol. 4 (((2(222)))) spring 2020201020 101010 RUSSIAN ENERGY POLITICS AND THE EU: HOW TO CHANGE THE PARADIGM VLADIMER PAPAVA & MICHAEL TOKMAZISHVILI AUTHORITARIANISM AND FOREIGN POLICY : THE TWIN PILLARS OF RESURGENT RUSSIA LUKE CHAMBERS THE GEORGIA CRISIS : A NEW COLD WAR ON THE HORIZON ? HOUMAN A. SADRI & NATHAN L. BURNS ENFORCEABILITY OF A COMMON ENERGY SUPPLY SECURITY POLICY IN THE EU EDA KUSKU “A SSEMBLING ” A CIVIC NATION IN KAZAKHSTAN : THE NATION -BUILDING ROLE OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE PEOPLES OF KAZAKHSTAN NATHAN PAUL JONES NEW GEOPOLITICS OF THE SOUTH CAUCASUS FAREED SHAFEE CLIMBING THE MOUNTAIN OF LANGUAGES : LANGUAGE LEARNING IN GEORGIA HANS GUTBROD AND MALTE VIEFHUES , CRRC “DRAMATIC CHANGES IN THE POLITICAL ORDER ARE TYPICALLY NOT THE PROVINCE OF DEMOCRACIES ” INTERVIEW WITH DR. JULIE A. GEORGE , CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK ISSN: 1865-6773 www.cria -online.org EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Nasimi Aghayev EDITORIAL BOARD: Dr. Tracey German (King’s College Dr. Robin van der Hout (Europa-Institute, London, United Kingdom) University of Saarland, Germany) Dr. Andrew Liaropoulos (Institute for Dr. Jason Strakes (Analyst, Research European and American Studies, Greece) Reachback Center East, USA) Dr. Martin Malek (National Defence Dr. Cory Welt (Georgetown University, Academy, Austria) USA) INTERNATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD: Prof. Hüseyin Bagci , Middle East Prof. Werner Münch , former Prime Technical University, Ankara, Turkey Minister of Saxony-Anhalt, former Member of the European Parliament, Germany Prof. Hans-Georg Heinrich, University of Vienna, Austria Prof. Elkhan Nuriyev , Director of the Centre for Strategic Studies under the Prof. Edmund Herzig , Oxford University, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan UK Dr.
  • The Changing Strategic Situation in the Black Sea Region

    The Changing Strategic Situation in the Black Sea Region

    DUYGU BAZOGLU SEZER The Changing Strategic Situation in the Black Sea Region Introduction The wider Black Sea region, which includes almost a dozen countries stretching from the Balkans to the Caspian Sea,1 has become one of the world’s most dynamic and fluid areas in the post-Cold War and post-Soviet era. The Black Sea region is bordered on the west by the Balkans; on the east, by the Caucasus, two of the most conflict-ridden sub-regions in the 1990s on the periphery of Europe. Spanning thus the southern belt of the easternmost periphery of Europe, the newly evolving strategic situation in the Black Sea proper has important implications for European security. This paper will address the following questions: What essentially has changed in the Black Sea region? Second, what are the main issues that are on the agenda of Black Sea politics? Clearly, these two questions are interrelated. The discussion is intended to throw light on how the Black Sea region has slowly been acquiring a new significance in and of itself, and how developments in this region relate to and impinge upon European security. What has changed? From Rivalry to Cooperation The end of the Cold War has terminated the Black Sea’s position as one of the immediate zones of global ideological and military confrontation between two power blocs. Only eight years ago the Black Sea, surrounded by three Warsaw Pact countries (the Soviet Union, Romania, and Bulgaria) and one NATO country (Turkey), was considered the microcosm of the Cold War. Today that divide of adversity is history.
  • Argus Nefte Transport

    Argus Nefte Transport

    Argus Nefte Transport Oil transportation logistics in the former Soviet Union Volume XVI, 5, May 2017 Primorsk loads first 100,000t diesel cargo Russia’s main outlet for 10ppm diesel exports, the Baltic port of Primorsk, shipped a 100,000t cargo for the first time this month. The diesel was loaded on 4 May on the 113,300t Dong-A Thetis, owned by the South Korean shipping company Dong-A Tanker. The 100,000t cargo of Rosneft product was sold to trading company Vitol for delivery to the Amsterdam-Rotter- dam-Antwerp region, a market participant says. The Dong-A Thetis was loaded at Russian pipeline crude exports berth 3 or 4 — which can handle crude and diesel following a recent upgrade, and mn b/d can accommodate 90,000-150,000t vessels with 15.5m draught. 6.0 Transit crude Russian crude It remains unclear whether larger loadings at Primorsk will become a regular 5.0 occurrence. “Smaller 50,000-60,000t cargoes are more popular and the terminal 4.0 does not always have the opportunity to stockpile larger quantities of diesel for 3.0 export,” a source familiar with operations at the outlet says. But the loading is significant considering the planned 10mn t/yr capacity 2.0 addition to the 15mn t/yr Sever diesel pipeline by 2018. Expansion to 25mn t/yr 1.0 will enable Transneft to divert more diesel to its pipeline system from ports in 0.0 Apr Jul Oct Jan Apr the Baltic states, in particular from the pipeline to the Latvian port of Ventspils.
  • An Economic and Institutional Analysis of Multi-Port Gateway Regions in the Black Sea Basin

    An Economic and Institutional Analysis of Multi-Port Gateway Regions in the Black Sea Basin

    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Open Marine Archive JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL LOGISTICS AND TRADE 3 Volume 12, Number 2, August 2014, pp.3~35 An Economic and Institutional Analysis of Multi-Port Gateway Regions in the Black Sea Basin Kateryna Grushevska*, Theo Notteboom** _________________________________________________________________________ Abstract The concept of ‘multi-port gateway region’ has been introduced by Notteboom (2010) and has been applied to important seaport markets such as Europe and Asia. However, the dynamics and port development patterns in secondary multi-port gateway regions, such as the Black Sea region, have received far less attention in academic literature. An empirical application of established spatial and functional development models to such secondary port regions might substantiate the external validity of these models as these ports operate in a different spatial, economic and institutional environment. The aim of the paper is to characterize the spatial dynamics of container ports of the Black Sea multi-port gateway regions by testing the validity of established spatial models on port system development. Furthermore, the expected future evolution path for port hierarchy in the Black Sea basin is discussed. By doing so, the paper assesses to what extent the Black Sea port region is following an ‘expected’ development path as portrayed in a number of port system development models, or alternatively, can be characterized as an atypical port system following its own development logic. Key Words : Black Sea, Containers, Gateway, Hinterland, Port system development, Terminal. JEL classification : R40 & R49 * PhD Researcher, ITMMA – University of Antwerp, Kipdorp 59, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium E-mail: [email protected] ** (corresponding author) President and Professor, ITMMA – University of Antwerp, Kipdorp 59, 2000 Antwerp, Belgium.
  • Exposing GPS Spoofing in Russia and Syria Above Us Only Stars

    Exposing GPS Spoofing in Russia and Syria Above Us Only Stars

    C4ADS innovation for peace Exposing GPS Spoofing in Russia and Syria Above Us Only Stars ABOUT C4ADS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS C4ADS (www.c4ads.org) is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit The author would like to sincerely thank the team organization dedicated to data-driven analysis and of C4ADS analysts who happily gave their time evidence-based reporting of conflict and security and skills to assist with data structuring, graphic issues worldwide. We seek to alleviate the analytical design, editing, layout, and investigative analysis. burden carried by public sector institutions by This report truly would not have been possible applying manpower, depth, and rigor to questions without their efforts. of conflict and security. Our approach leverages The author would also like to thank Todd nontraditional investigative techniques and Humphreys, associate professor of aerospace emerging analytical technologies. We recognize engineering at The University of Texas at Austin, for the value of working on the ground in the field, his contributions to this report. Todd’s assistance capturing local knowledge, and collecting original throughout the research process were integral to data to inform our analysis. At the same time, we this report. employ cutting edge technology to manage and analyze that data. The result is an innovative analytical approach to conflict prevention and mitigation. COVER IMAGE The cover image was produced by Brian G. Payne. Additionally, the author would like to thank Dana Goward from the RNT Foundation for his invaluable LEGAL DISCLAIMER insight and continued efforts to raise awareness of PNT issues. The mention of any individual, company, organization, or other entity in this report does not imply the violation of any law or international agreement, and should not be construed as such.
  • Russia, NATO, and Black Sea Security for More Information on This Publication, Visit

    Russia, NATO, and Black Sea Security for More Information on This Publication, Visit

    Russia, NATO, and Black Sea Security Russia, NATO, C O R P O R A T I O N STEPHEN J. FLANAGAN, ANIKA BINNENDIJK, IRINA A. CHINDEA, KATHERINE COSTELLO, GEOFFREY KIRKWOOD, DARA MASSICOT, CLINT REACH Russia, NATO, and Black Sea Security For more information on this publication, visit www.rand.org/t/RRA357-1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data is available for this publication. ISBN: 978-1-9774-0568-5 Published by the RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif. © Copyright 2020 RAND Corporation R® is a registered trademark. Cover: Cover graphic by Dori Walker, adapted from a photo by Petty Officer 3rd Class Weston Jones. Limited Print and Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited. Permission is given to duplicate this document for personal use only, as long as it is unaltered and complete. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions. The RAND Corporation is a research organization that develops solutions to public policy challenges to help make communities throughout the world safer and more secure, healthier and more prosperous. RAND is nonprofit, nonpartisan, and committed to the public interest. RAND’s publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors. Support RAND Make a tax-deductible charitable contribution at www.rand.org/giving/contribute www.rand.org Preface The Black Sea region is a central locus of the competition between Russia and the West for the future of Europe.
  • Oil and the Great Game in the Caucasus Uwe Halbach

    Oil and the Great Game in the Caucasus Uwe Halbach

    In: IFSH (ed.), OSCE Yearbook 2004, Baden-Baden 2005, pp. 275-285. Uwe Halbach Oil and the Great Game in the Caucasus The “Caspian Region” as the Geopolitical Rediscovery of the 1990s The Caucasus and Central Asia were the hottest geopolitical discovery of the first decade following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The regions on either side of the Caspian Sea and the world’s largest lake itself emerged as sources of and transit regions for hydrocarbons and hence as a zone of economic, po- litical, and strategic competition. If, prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, the two regions had largely been absent from Europeans’ mental maps, their prominence is now ensured by international disputes over the routing of new pipelines and by the rivalry between Russia and the USA over the stationing of military forces in the area between the Caucasus and the Pamir mountains. Two historical precedents have frequently been invoked in relation to this process: Discussions of east-west transport corridors out of the Caspian re- gion, security matters, and the effect external actors have on the region have tended to speak of either a new “Great Game” or a new “Silk Road”. The transport routes north and south of the High Caucasus connect the Caspian to the Black Sea, thus providing access to the world’s oceans. They define the place of the Caucasian isthmus in the larger context of the region as a whole. Oil and Pipelines The Caspian Basin has not been explored on a scale comparable to the Gulf region, and estimates of the region’s energy potential have tended to vary considerably.
  • Geopolitical Rivalry in the Caspian-Caucasus Region and the Dilemma of Interstate Cooperation Nurettin Altundeger Old Dominion University

    Geopolitical Rivalry in the Caspian-Caucasus Region and the Dilemma of Interstate Cooperation Nurettin Altundeger Old Dominion University

    Old Dominion University ODU Digital Commons Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Graduate Program in International Studies Dissertations Summer 2007 Geopolitical Rivalry in the Caspian-Caucasus Region and the Dilemma of Interstate Cooperation Nurettin Altundeger Old Dominion University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds Part of the International Law Commons, and the International Relations Commons Recommended Citation Altundeger, Nurettin. "Geopolitical Rivalry in the Caspian-Caucasus Region and the Dilemma of Interstate Cooperation" (2007). Doctor of Philosophy (PhD), dissertation, International Studies, Old Dominion University, DOI: 10.25777/cr9e-hz14 https://digitalcommons.odu.edu/gpis_etds/33 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Program in International Studies at ODU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Program in International Studies Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ODU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. GEOPOLITICAL RIVALRY IN THE CASPIAN-CAUCASUS REGION AND THE DILEMMA OF INTERSTATE COOPERATION by Nurettin Altundeger B.A. May 1997, Bilkent University M.A. August 1999, Fatih University A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Old Dominion University in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY INTERNATIONAL STUDIES OLD DOMINION UNIVERSITY August 2007 Approved by: Steve A. Yetiv (Director) Austin Jersild tlv ember) Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission. ABSTRACT GEOPOLITICAL RIVALRY IN THE CASPIAN-CAUCASUS REGION AND THE DILEMMA OF INTERSTATE COOPERATION Nurettin Altundeger Old Dominion University, 2007 Director: Dr. Steve A. Yetiv This dissertation develops a unique way of analyzing the interstate relationship in the Caspian region over the development of Caspian oil resources.
  • Circassian Toponymy of the Krasnodar Territory Vitaliy Shtybin

    Circassian Toponymy of the Krasnodar Territory Vitaliy Shtybin

    Circassian toponymy of the Krasnodar Territory Vitaliy Shtybin Circassian toponymy is widely represented in the Krasnodar Territory. Basically, it has been preserved in medium and small geographical objects and is easy to translate. From the perspective of studying the history and culture of any nation, as well as preserving its memory associated with the geography of its ethnogenesis, local toponymy, preserved in the names of residential settlements, hydronyms, names of mountains, hills and tracts, is of great importance. Some toponyms are controversial today and cause distorted versions of the history of the region excluding the role of the indigenous population. As a rule, the local population mostly does not know about the Circassian origin of local toponymy. However, the Circassian (Adyghe) toponymy bears traces of the region’s ancient history right up to the Bronze Age and this is confirmed by archaeological material and its connection with local place names. In this article I consider the most famous examples of the Circassian toponymy of the region and their features. Main questions Circassian (Adyghe) toponymy is widely represented in the Krasnodar Territory to the south of the Kuban River. This is the historical area of residence of Circassians (Adyghe) and related Abkhazians (including their neighbours – Abaza). The majority of the Circassian (Adyghe) toponymic terms are well preserved in the names of small and medium-sized geographic objects and can be deciphered with varying degrees of confidence. The exceptions are the large toponymic objects such as the Laba and the Kuban rivers. It might be difficult to exclude Circassian origin or some relation to a very ancient period in the history of the Adyghe-Abkhazian language.
  • Russian Energy Policy Toward Neighboring Countries

    Russian Energy Policy Toward Neighboring Countries

    Russian Energy Policy Toward Neighboring Countries Steven Woehrel Specialist in European Affairs September 2, 2009 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34261 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress Russian Energy Policy Toward Neighboring Countries Summary Russian oil and natural gas industries have become key players in the global energy market, particularly in Europe and Eurasia. Another trend has been the concentration of these industries in the hands of the Russian government. This latter phenomenon has been accompanied by an authoritarian political system, in which former intelligence officers play key roles. Russian firms have tried to purchase a controlling stake in pipelines, ports, storage facilities, and other key energy assets of the countries of central and eastern Europe. They need these assets to transport energy supplies to lucrative western European markets, as well as to secure greater control over the domestic markets of the countries of the region. In several cases where assets were sold to non-Russian firms, Russian firms cut off energy supplies to the facilities. Russia has also tried to build new pipelines to circumvent infrastructure that it does not control. Another objective Russia has pursued has been to eliminate the energy subsidies former Soviet republics have received since the fall of the Soviet Union, including by raising the price these countries pay for natural gas to world market prices. It is not completely clear whether the pursuit of Russian foreign policy objectives is the primary explanation for the actions of its energy firms. Few would disagree in principle that the elimination of subsidies to post-Soviet countries is a sound business decision, even if questions have been raised about the timing of such moves.