The Bering Strait Tunnel Project

What do Russian President Vladimir Putin, spiritual leader the Dalai Lama, political activist Lyndon LaRouche and former U.S. Secretary of the Interior and Governor of Alaska Walter Hickel have in common? They are all supporters of the Bering Strait Tunnel (BST) Project, a US$65-70 billion project that would create a high-speed railway, energy and fiber optic cable network link from Yakutsk in Siberia through Anadyr in northeastern Russia beneath the Bering Strait to the western coast of Alaska.

First conceived nearly one-hundred years ago during the reign of Russian Tsar Nicolas II, the BST would be the longest tunnel in the world – over twice the length of Europe’s 30 mile long "Chunnel" linking Britain and France. Billed by its supporters as an unparalleled economic and energy conduit and a way to improve increasingly frigid U.S.-Russia bilateral relations, the project is certainly ambitious. [More]However, the project has gained attention in Russian political, economic and media circles over the past year, identified as an important part of the country’s infrastructure development plan for the first half of the 21st century. At a meeting chaired by Russian President Putin, Prime Minister Mikhail Fradkov and high-level railroad officials in early April, the construction of a railroad stretching from the banks of Russia’s Lena River to the Bering Strait was discussed at length, adding further evidence that Moscow sees the BST project as not only feasible, but inevitable.

At approximately the same time as the Putin meeting, several hundred attendees from Japan, S. Korea, Russia and the U.S. gathered at a separate Moscow location to attend the Megaprojects of Russia’s East Conference, the first in a series of conferences organized by several Russian economic development agencies and regional governments to discuss efforts surrounding the project. In a statement released to the public, conference attendees urged the U.S., Russia, Japan, EU and China to raise the issue of the tunnel project at next week’s G-8 Summit to be held in Heiligendamm, Germany.

Proponents of the project argue construction of the tunnel will provide economic benefits for Russia by allowing the country to develop its resource-rich, remote Far East region, while providing the U.S. with a reliable source of long-term energy. In addition, representatives from Russia’s main electricity producer, Unified Energy Systems, say the project could save Russia and the U.S. a combined $20 billion in electricity costs a year. Proponents note that the overall cost of the project would be recouped within a few decades, as the volume of tunnel freight transport activity increased, reaching an estimated 3 percent of the world’s total physical cargo or 100 million tons annually. Russian specialists have pointed out that the tunnel could be completed in 10 years if efforts are accelerated, private-public investment is secured and U.S.–Russia cooperation increases.

Critics of the mega-project within Russia such as Sergei Grigoryev, vice-president of state controlled energy conglomerate Transneft, have been skeptical of the plan. "We need to first develop oil fields in East Siberia," he noted last month. Others have questioned the longevity of the project, saying North America already has plenty of energy resources, thus, eliminating a significant benefit of the project. As an alternative, opponents say Moscow should focus on providing energy to resource-starved countries in Asia, such as China and Japan.

In terms of sheer size and complexity, the Channel Tunnel or "Chunnel" connecting England and France is most frequently compared to the BST project. Completed in 1994 by 13,000 workers at a total cost of US$13 billion, the seven year project is still considered a technological marvel. But the Chunnel project has been besieged by lingering problems such as bankruptcy, cost overruns; lower than expected passenger and freight volumes, high operating and debt levels, and competitive pressures.

The BST project is likely to face similar – if not more severe – problems, namely, issues such as infrastructure development, project planning and construction will require the development of unique geopolitical synergies. Moreover, dual U.S. and Canadian approval, inhospitable terrain, environmental concerns, long-term financing and tunnel administration will need to be adequately addressed.

Given the current state of U.S.-Russia bilateral relations, recent discussions surrounding the BST project are somewhat surprising. President Putin has shown that he will use energy as a weapon against countries such as the Ukraine, Belarus, and Georgia, displaying authoritarian tendencies that have complicated foreign relations with the EU and the U.S. He has called for the establishment of an anti-American energy block to counter perceived global U.S. hegemony, making moves to organize and lead a "gas cartel" in both Central Asia and the Middle East.

The idea of open competition and transparency in Russia’s energy markets has been an idea foreign to Putin, with the enigmatic leader consolidating his power by nationalizing key energy sectors, imprisoning energy executives opposed to his views and forbidding foreign access and investment in many of Russia’s "sensitive" industries.

Moreover, Putin has circumvented U.S. security efforts in the U.N., attempted to crush his country’s democracy movement, increased spying and espionage activities in the West and made statements this week that his country had successfully test-fired a new intercontinental ballistic missile capable of overcoming the U.S. missile defense shield. Over the past year, Putin has consolidated his country’s energy, defense and media sectors, all part of a larger strategic plan to increase Moscow’s control and global influence. With such a suspect record, why would Washington want to join forces with Moscow on the BST project, even if the economic and energy benefits were overwhelming?

One important difference to keep in mind as countries in Asia and North America explore the feasibility of the BST project is that the English Tunnel project involved two EU countries – France and England – with a history of economic, trade, security and energy cooperation. Will an economically independent and increasingly powerful Russia be a reliable friend or an emerging foe for America? For now, Washington would be wise to invest its money not in a 10-20 year construction project with a Cold War adversary; rather, it should support the development of alternative energy sources and support global markets that ensure free competition, transparency, human rights and Western ideals.