Russian President Vladimir Putin, center, visits a pipe-laying ship in the Black Sea with Gazprom CEO Alexei Miller, right | Mikhail Metzel/AFP via Getty Images Nord Stream 2 fight set to heat up as countries show their cards EU members will clash over whether and how to regulate Gazprom-led pipeline.

The big battle over Gazprom’s plan to build the Nord Stream 2 pipeline begins this autumn — two years before it is slated to start pumping gas from Russia under the Baltic Sea to Germany.

Deep differences among EU countries on how to regulate the project are likely to emerge — testing the bloc’s unity on how to deal with Moscow and how to advance the EU’s energy diversification plans.

The spark for the conflict is the European Commission’s request for a mandate from national governments to negotiate with Russia on a special regulatory framework for the offshore pipeline. Moscow would also have to consent to the negotiations.

The Commission describes the current status of the project as “a legal void,” because the pipeline would not be subject to the EU’s energy liberalization laws, known as the Third Energy Package.

That’s forcing countries to publicly set out their positions on Nord Stream 2.

News in 2015 that Gazprom wanted to double capacity along the existing Nord Stream 1 pipeline, concentrating 80 percent of the EU’s Russian gas imports on the route, infuriated Central and Eastern European countries. Brussels also pushed back, worrying the project would deepen Gazprom’s dominance and undercut the Commission’s energy union project to lessen the bloc’s dependence on Russian gas.

But the €9.5 billion, 1,200-kilometer pipeline is supported by Germany, Austria and potentially other West European countries. It has the financial backing of Germany’s Uniper and Wintershall, Austria’s OMV, France’s Engie and Anglo-Dutch Shell.

“The Commission has always been against this … but in the end it came to the conclusion that there’s too much politics involved,” said Marco Giuli, policy analyst at Brussels-based think tank the European Policy Centre. “[Brussels] is transferring the responsibility to member states.”

The request for a mandate landed with energy ministers in June after Brussels felt increasing pressure from Central, Eastern and Nordic countries to show it is doing something.

“The debate about the mandate will be crucial,” said Severin Fischer, senior researcher at the Center for Security Studies in Zurich.

Officials are waiting for the results of the German election in late September, after which serious talks on the Commission mandate will begin, they said.

Who stands where

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who rarely speaks publicly about the proposed pipeline, told journalists in June there’s no need for a negotiating mandate because Nord Stream 2 is a commercial endeavor. Officials said Berlin stuck with the same position at the first technical meeting on the file in July.

Her foreign minister, Sigmar Gabriel, defended the project as U.S. lawmakers moved to impose additional sanctions against Russia, a step likely to target European companies involved in the project.

While Berlin has been clear about the project, Paris hasn’t been as involved, Fischer said.

He said if Berlin and Paris try to block the mandate in conjunction with other countries, such as Austria, the Commission is unlikely to get its way.

But that’s creating diplomatic tensions with countries like Poland, which are adamantly against the new pipeline. It also forces countries to square their support for the pipeline with backing for the energy union project.

“They will have to admit they are doing something against the spirit of the energy union they endorsed,” Giuli said.

Opponents want Nord Stream 2 to be fully subject to the Third Energy Package to ensnare the project in red tape. “The request for a mandate is a last resort to try to delay the process,” Giuli said.

“The Central and Eastern European countries realized that … the ideal option is to formulate conditions that the Russians would not be able to fulfill,” said Fischer.

The European Parliament hinted it may be on the same page.

“The EU should focus on projects which unite us, not divide, and Nord Stream 2 clearly has a negative impact on our unity,” Jerzy Buzek, former Polish prime minister and chair of the Parliament’s energy and industry committee, said in a letter in July.

Picking on Nord Stream 2

The pipeline’s proponents argue that a special regulatory regime for Nord Stream 2 would single out this one offshore gas pipeline, whereas the sister Nord Stream 1 pipeline and others bringing gas from North Africa into Europe are not subject to the Third Energy Package rules.

“The Commission itself causes the very uncertainty that it claims to be resolving,” said Sebastian Sass, Nord Stream 2’s EU representative. “There was never any notion of a ‘legal void’ in the context of offshore pipelines, until the Commission itself started talking about it."

The Commission’s mandate request is novel. If approved, it would be the first time it has received authority from countries to negotiate an intergovernmental agreement for an EU-destined gas pipeline from a third country.

Sass called the Commission’s mandate request “unacceptable,” saying it undermines national sovereignty.

However, Maroš Šefčovič, the Commission’s vice president in charge of the energy union, said that much has changed since the first Nord Stream pipeline was built in 2011.

The Commission is in the midst of a massive antitrust case against Gazprom, and the geopolitical situation is vastly different following Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014. There is concern that Nord Stream 2 would bypass existing pipelines running across Ukraine, a source of crucial cash for the country.

The Estonian Council presidency said it will try to strengthen the Commission’s proposal and “aim at a more ambitious implementation” of EU energy rules.

Sweden, Denmark and Finland, which have to issue construction permits because the project crosses either their territorial waters or exclusive economic zones, are also assessing the results of environmental impact assessments. The pipeline company said it hopes to have all permits in the first quarter of 2018.

“Despite all the political discussions, the formal permitting procedures are advancing well,” Sass said.

The Danish government is mulling a law that would permit offshore projects such as Nord Stream 2 to be blocked based on security concerns. But experts doubt Copenhagen will derail the pipeline.

There is also little optimism that imposing EU rules on the pipeline will kill the plan.

“This mandate is not actually likely to stop Nord Stream 2,” Giuli said.