During the outgoing week we saw the start of the last season of the show called South Stream. After Bulgaria blocked the gas pipeline project in 2014 under pressure from the European Commission and US lobbyists, it will soon be clear whether the country will come out winner or loser in this saga.

Since the start of democracy in this country the two English words – “winner” and “loser” - have become all the rage, frequently replacing their Bulgarian equivalents, with the second, “loser”, being used far more often, especially in situations describing how the country’s national interests are being upheld.

Leaving linguistic digressions aside – on Wednesday the plot thickened when the media broke the news that the Russian mega gas company Gazprom was officially terminating the contract for the construction of South Stream, a project that was supposed to deliver Russian gas to Europe via the Black Sea and Bulgaria, bypassing volatile Ukraine. But under their bombastic headlines, few registered the fact that it was only the contract with South Stream Transport that was being terminated, a company that was supposed to lay the pipes in the pipeline’s offshore sector i.e. on the Black Sea seabed from Russia to Bulgaria. The press service of the Bulgarian government issued an announcement in a flash, specifying that the Bulgarian Energy Holding and Bulgaria as a contracting party was in no way involved in the construction of the sea section of South Stream. And also that at that point in time, the Bulgarian side had not received any official letter that the project was being terminated on Bulgarian territory. In other words the Bulgarian company working on South Stream still existed. In point of fact, some of the pipes designated for the offshore zone are still in storage at ports Bourgas and Varna.

At the end of December 2014, during his visit to Ankara, Russian President Putin announced that South Stream was history and the project was being redirected towards the construction of Turkish Stream which should, in practical terms, have made use of a sizeable portion of South Stream’s route. “Should have”, as the crisis that broke out between Moscow and Ankara with the downing of the Russian fighter jet by the Turkish air force effectively froze Turkish Stream.  The plot thickened further still when on Thursday, Gazprom decided it would keep its work on Turkish Stream confidential. Several days earlier, the Bulgarian Standard newspaper had written that South Stream might be revived, but the information was denied by Prime Minister Borissov as well as by Russian energy Minister Alexander Novak.

Against this background, with much enthusiasm, PM Borrisov started talking of a “Bulgarian Stream” and, more specifically, the construction near Varna of a “Balkan” gas hub where gas would be delivered from Azerbaijan, Romania and… Russia. In his words, the European Commission had nothing against that, seeing as the requirements of the third EU energy package would be met. And millions would start pouring into Bulgaria from the transit of gas to the countries of Eastern and Central Europe. But wouldn’t that be reckoning without our host? Can Borrisov be sure Gazprom will forgive Bulgaria for the South Stream fiasco and will start filling the Balkan hub with gas? Because no amount of gas – from Azerbaijan or anywhere else - would be sufficient to fulfil the hypothetical purpose of the hub. One doesn’t need to be an expert to realize that things are really very simple. Russia has a vested interest and a growing need to sell Europe its gas; Europe on the other hand has no way of meeting its needs without Russian gas, even though it has been talking so profusely of diversification. So, we may soon expect the situation to be unraveled. And we can only hope that when that happens, Bulgaria won’t be the principal loser in the South Stream fiasco.

English version: Milena Daynova