A year ago, at the height of the oil price downturn, Kurdistan turned to Turkey for financial aid. At the time, USD1.15 billion was owed to Turkey in the form of loans together with c.USD500 million in outstanding payments to TEC for services provided to the KRG.
The Kurdish Minister of Natural Resources, Dr Ashti Hawrami, proposed to the Turkish Energy Minister, Berat Albayrak, that more funding be provided by Turkey to help Kurdistan with upcoming expenses. The proposal effectively asked Turkey to quadruple its funding to USD4.7 billion (including the existing debts above).
The budgetary position of Kurdistan meant that it was in no position to repay the debts to Turkey in the near term and Dr Ashti’s preferred solution was to transfer the KRG’s equity interests in certain oil assets (Tawke, Taq Taq and Shaikan) to Turkey. Turkey responded saying that if this was the preferred route, it would need further upside given taking a stake in the PSCs would result in the recovery of debts over a longer period than originally envisaged.
As of today, the Turkish debt problem remains unresolved and is an ongoing issue for both the KRG and Turkey. In the context of the upcoming referendum, Turkey is clearly displeased that it is being held but its ability to take strong action against Kurdistan could be detrimental to the recovery of debts. At the same time, Kurdistan could be an important future source of gas for Turkey. For Kurdistan, maintaining amicable relationships with Turkey is key, being the only viable oil export route in the near term. Turkey can make token threats, such as the rumoured closure of a border point, but is unlikely to escalate to anything more serious.
The Kurdish Minister of Natural Resources, Dr Ashti Hawrami, proposed to the Turkish Energy Minister, Berat Albayrak, that more funding be provided by Turkey to help Kurdistan with upcoming expenses. The proposal effectively asked Turkey to quadruple its funding to USD4.7 billion (including the existing debts above).
The budgetary position of Kurdistan meant that it was in no position to repay the debts to Turkey in the near term and Dr Ashti’s preferred solution was to transfer the KRG’s equity interests in certain oil assets (Tawke, Taq Taq and Shaikan) to Turkey. Turkey responded saying that if this was the preferred route, it would need further upside given taking a stake in the PSCs would result in the recovery of debts over a longer period than originally envisaged.
As of today, the Turkish debt problem remains unresolved and is an ongoing issue for both the KRG and Turkey. In the context of the upcoming referendum, Turkey is clearly displeased that it is being held but its ability to take strong action against Kurdistan could be detrimental to the recovery of debts. At the same time, Kurdistan could be an important future source of gas for Turkey. For Kurdistan, maintaining amicable relationships with Turkey is key, being the only viable oil export route in the near term. Turkey can make token threats, such as the rumoured closure of a border point, but is unlikely to escalate to anything more serious.
