[Solastalgia]

Read this article the other day and decided it would be worthy of discussion here.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/russias-pe ... sian-trade

China will re-open the old Silk Road as a new trading route linking Germany, Russia and China

Russia has just dropped another bombshell, announcing not only the de-coupling of its trade from the dollar, but also that its hydrocarbon trade will in the future be carried out in rubles and local currencies of its trading partners – no longer in dollars – see Voice of Russia

Russia’s trade in hydrocarbons amounts to about a trillion dollars per year. Other countries, especially the BRICS and BRCIS-associates (BRICSA) may soon follow suit and join forces with Russia, abandoning the ‘petro-dollar’ as trading unit for oil and gas. This could amount to tens of trillions in loss for demand of petro-dollars per year (US GDP about 17 trillion dollars – December 2013) – leaving an important dent in the US economy would be an understatement.

Added to this is the declaration today by Russia’s Press TV – China will re-open the old Silk Road as a new trading route linking Germany, Russia and China, allowing to connect and develop new markets along the road, especially in Central Asia, where this new project will bring economic and political stability, and in Western China provinces,where “New Areas” of development will be created. The first one will be the Lanzhou New Area in China’s Northwestern Gansu Province, one of China’s poorest regions.

“During his visit to Duisburg, Chinese President Xi Jinping made a master stroke of economic diplomacy that runs directly counter to the Washington neo-conservative faction’s effort to bring a new confrontation between NATO and Russia.” (press TV, April 6, 2014)

“Using the role of Duisburg as the world’s largest inland harbor, an historic transportation hub of Europe and of Germany’s Ruhr steel industry center, he proposed that Germany and China cooperate on building a new “economic Silk Road” linking China and Europe. The implications for economic growth across Eurasia are staggering.”

Curiously, western media have so far been oblivious to both events. It seems like a desire to extending the falsehood of our western illusion and arrogance – as long as the silence will bear.

Germany, the economic driver of Europe – the world’s fourth largest economy (US$ 3.6 trillion GDP) – on the western end of the new trading axis, will be like a giant magnet, attracting other European trading partners of Germany’s to the New Silk Road. What looks like a future gain for Russia and China, also bringing about security and stability, would be a lethal loss for Washington.

In addition, the BRICS are preparing to launch a new currency – composed by a basket of their local currencies – to be used for international trading, as well as for a new reserve currency, replacing the rather worthless debt ridden dollar – a welcome feat for the world.

Along with the new BRICS(A) currency will come a new international payment settlement system, replacing the SWIFT and IBAN exchanges, thereby breaking the hegemony of the infamous privately owned currency and gold manipulator, the Bank for International Settlement (BIS) in Basle, Switzerland – also called the central bank of all central banks.

To be sure – the BIS is a privately owned for profit institution, was created in the early 1930’s, in the midst of the big economic melt-down of the 20th Century. The BIS was formed precisely for that purpose – to control the world’s monetary system, along with the also privately owned FED and the Wall Street Banksters – the epitome of private unregulated ownership.

The BIS is known to hold at least half a dozen secret meetings per year, attended by the world’s elite, deciding the fate of countries and entire populations. Their demise would be another welcome new development.

As the new trading road and monetary system will take hold, other countries and nations, so far in the claws of US dependence, will flock to the ‘new system’, gradually isolating Washington’s military industrial economy (sic) and its NATO killing machine.

This Economic Sea Change may bring the empire to its knees, without spilling a drop of blood. An area of new hope for justice and more equality, a rebirth of sovereign states, may dawn and turn the spiral of darkness into a spiral of light.

[wiseraphael]

Yeah...China is really an icon of justice and equality.
And China really likes the idea of sovereign states.....aand as for a spiral of light....China??

[Solastalgia]

Yeah...China is really an icon of justice and equality.
And China really likes the idea of sovereign states.....aand as for a spiral of light....China??

That's not what it's saying.

It said that if the US looses it's hegemonic economic grip, then we may see more justice and equality.

[Thompson_NCL]

The rouble has been greatly devalued in the last few years. It's unlikely that the rest of the world is going to start trading in the rouble and what China and Russia use in their own dealings is of no consequence.

[Rei Murasame]

Globalresearch.ca are as usual out of their minds and amateurish. They seem to have completely overlooked the fact that the purpose of the 'Silk Road' is not to have Chinese and Russian collaboration, it's for the purpose of having Chinese and EU collaboration and to contain Russia.

That is the explicit intent of it, and it is set up to do that.

[Atlantis]

They seem to have completely overlooked the fact that the purpose of the 'Silk Road' is not to have Chinese and Russian collaboration, it's for the purpose of having Chinese and EU collaboration and to contain Russia.

Where do you get such nonsense from?

Having been encircled by a string of US vassal states in the East, Chinese logical conclusion is to open trade routes via land towards the West. That is the meaning of "China's Silk Road Strategy" or "China's March West". The partner countries in this plan are those of the Shanghai Corporation Organisation of which Russia is one of the major pillars. China's strategy aims at all of Central Asia and Easter Europe but most of all at Russia itselft. It will also include India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and even Turkey.

That a goods train arrives once or twice a week in Duisburg, Germany, all the way from China is more symbolic than anything else.

[Rei Murasame]

Where do you get such nonsense from?

We keep having this argument in every thread, and no matter what sources I show to you, you never believe it. You and the others who actually believe in the China+Russia BFF mythology, are so certain of it that even leaked cables showing Chinese officials laughing at the notion, is not enough to convince you that this thing does not exist.

China doesn't give one single fuck about helping Russia, and sees itself as being in a long game to contain and subordinate Russia, and to curb Russian imperial ambitions.

You mention the SCO. Did you know that China is planning to re-invite the US to interfere in SCO for the explicit purpose of annoying Russia? You didn't know that, did you? Or if you do know that, you are just wilfully ignoring it, because it's an inconvenient piece of information. All I do, is dispassionately look at the information, and draw conclusions based on it. You all on the other hand, emotionally want this thing to exist in the form that you think it does, but it does not exist in that form.

So tell me why I should keep having this argument with people like you, Igor Antunov, and Canis Lupus, and so on, when you are all impervious to facts?

[blackjack21]

So tell me why I should keep having this argument with people like you, Igor Antunov, and Canis Lupus, and so on, when you are all impervious to facts?

It's important to evaluate what a nation does, and give it more weight than what it says. Your love of the EU and your hatred for Vladimir Putin may blind you to China's actions. That doesn't mean China loves Russia, except for that it would love to get its hands on Siberia. Put that aside for the sake of realpolitik.

Consider Russia's recent actions. Does annexation of Crimea really weaken Russia, as Barack Obama suggests? I'd say no. It shows US weakness, but more particularly Barack Obama's weakness. What's China's vulnerability if the US cut off trade with China? It loses its biggest export market. What's their vulnerability now? The US is inflating its currency, and therefore taxing China. What's China's true military weakness relative to the United States? The US Navy. Right? So why the Silk Road? It cannot be sunk by the US Navy. It's not choked by the Singapore straits, Malaya, the Suez, etc. Exports to Europe via the Silk Road would weaken US influence.

Presumably container shipping is cheaper than container rail. However, what if China sells consumer goods to Europe, leaves some of it in its poorer Chinese provinces and imports oil and gas from Russia--paying in US dollars, while Europe pays in Euros? Think about it.

1. China reduces its dollar holdings.
2. Russia improves the ruble's strength, and the Euro at the expense of the dollar.
3. Russia weakens US seignorage by accepting payment in Euros for oil and gas.
4. China, Russia and Europe weaken the influence of the US Navy.
5. China and Russia dominate Central Asia, pushing America out.
6. China increases internal cohesion.
7. China increases its economic influence in Central Asia.

As an anti-US move, it's very interesting. Your hatred of Vladimir Putin aside, doesn't this scenario suggest the death of the US neoconservative foreign policy? From an American perspective, it has caused more problems both home and abroad.

I'm an American. I'm pro-American (in the non-Obama, anti-communist, center-right sense). I hate Obama. I've come to hate the neoconservatives too. I'm Californian. I love Ronald Reagan. So how do I feel about Lois Lerner, etc.? I think that should be pretty obvious. The neoconservatives have been dominant in US foreign policy at least since Bush the Elder, but they pushed everyone with a different viewpoint out with Bush the Younger. McCain lost, because the paleo-conservatives hate him. Mitt Romney lost, because the paleocons and the Christian fundamentalists didn't show up. Yet, the neocon faction in the US is desperate. Chuck Schumer, Al Franken, Alan Grayson, etc. are in a dead panic. Why use official power to wage war against Americans via the IRS? Look at the risks. Why use the NSA to spy on virtually everyone? These people are in a dead panic.

Why did Obama win? The media hid the 9/11/12 attack on Libya. They went along with the IRS leaking Mitt Romney's tax information. At every stage of the game, they were a step ahead. Why? They used the NSA to spy on Americans, too. They used the NSA to spy on the American press. Neconservatives played deep state, and they are losing it. Americans hate ObamaCare.

Couldn't it be more interesting than an anti-Russia China/Germany alliance? Couldn't it be that China and Russia cooperate with Europe to end US hegemony? Could it be that Putin is playing bad cop and China is playing good cop with Europe to that end?

I understand that as a Vladimir Putin hating lesbian, it may be difficult to see this as a relevant scenario. It's certainly not what you want, because Vladimir Putin comes out stronger. The EU/NATO hasn't lost any territory. If Russia takes Ukraine, Moldova and Romania and the EU has Western Europe sowed up, and China, the new Russian Empire and the Franco-German Empire (EU) can survive without the US, where does that leave the US?

At the end of the day, who do you hate more? Is your sexual identity more important to you than your political identity? Do you hate Russian machismo more than Yankee capitalism?

[Rei Murasame]

It's important to evaluate what a nation does, and give it more weight than what it says.

Then you should be in 100% agreement with me.

Couldn't it be more interesting than an anti-Russia China/Germany alliance? Couldn't it be that China and Russia cooperate with Europe to end US hegemony? Could it be that Putin is playing bad cop and China is playing good cop with Europe to that end?

Could it be that pigs will fly?

You know that your pro-Russia narrative is weak when you have to start dreaming up scenarios that are not happening, and then hanging question marks at the end of them.

Here are the actual facts:

[...]

But a landlocked province such as Xinjiang can be developed only if its immediate periphery is stable and prosperous enough to trade with it. Bordering Pakistan, Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan, Russia and Mongolia, Xinjiang is in the middle of a rough neighborhood. This means China has a keen interest in economic and security developments in Central Asia—stretching from the five post-Soviet Central Asian states to Afghanistan.

THIS CONCERN is reflected in a combination of security, economic and cultural efforts China has instituted across the region. Interestingly, these efforts don’t seem to be a product of a complete and considered strategy. But, taken together, they show a picture more comprehensive than is often appreciated. It isn’t clear that even China grasps the incidental impact of its regional activity in reshaping Central Asia or how it is perceived by regional states, as Chinese actors are simply so focused on developing Xinjiang and extracting what they want from Central Asia. With Russia’s influence in the region at a historically low ebb and the widespread perception across Central Asia that the United States will strategically abandon the region once most combat troops have withdrawn from Afghanistan, Beijing has carved out an inadvertent empire. Lacking a clear strategy and attempting to keep a low profile (a characteristic Chinese approach), China has become the most consequential actor in Central Asia.

Hallmarks of this approach are heavy investments in natural resources; infrastructure development; the establishment of Confucius Institutes, nonprofit institutions sponsored by the Chinese government that promote Chinese language and culture; security exercises; and the establishment of a multilateral regional organization. China also is bolstering cross-border traders who are the economic lifeblood of the old Silk Road. Sitting atop it all is the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which offers an umbrella for China to demonstrate that its regional activities are undertaken with the acquiescence of neighboring powers.

The driver is economics, seen most clearly in China’s heavy purchasing of large mineral and hydrocarbon sites across the region. In Kazakhstan, the China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) has gone into partnership with the local, state-owned enterprise (SOE) KazMunaiGaz to secure 4 percent of China’s oil imports from Kazakhstan. Turkmenistan currently accounts for almost a third of China’s imported natural gas—mostly coming through the speedily built China-Central Asia pipeline, which in 2011 brought some 15.5 billion cubic meters (BCM) of gas to China. CNPC aims to send 24.1 BCM this year and eventually get the flow up to 65 BCM. Further, CNPC secured the rights to develop an oil field in Amu Darya in northern Afghanistan, upriver to a project it already is exploiting in Turkmenistan. According to Kabul analysts, this field, a small one for a company as large as CNPC, is a kind of toe in the water for the Chinese SOE to prepare for future contracts in the hydrocarbon-rich area.

It is not only oil and gas that Chinese firms see in Central Asia. State-owned mining firms Jiangxi Copper and the China Metallurgical Group Corporation (MCC) partnered to invest near $4 billion to exploit the Mes Aynak copper mine southeast of Kabul. And while Chinese firms have been less visible on recent mining tenders in Afghanistan, they doubtless noted the U.S. Geological Survey’s estimate of nearly a trillion dollars worth of minerals in the country. Furthermore, Chinese mining firms have won concessions to mine for gold in Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.

But while this natural wealth will help feed China’s insatiable demand for resources, it won’t necessarily help develop Xinjiang. That will require the development of infrastructure across Central Asia. Crippled by aging Soviet infrastructure, the region is a blank canvas for outside developers. China is not the only player around. South Korea has a notable presence in Uzbekistan, while Turkish and French firms dominate the Turkmenistan market. But it is notable to see Chinese firms developing roads leading in and out of Xinjiang. The road from Kashgar to Osh in Kyrgyzstan through the Irkeshtam Pass was built by the China Bridge and Road Company. Chinese workers in distinctive green military greatcoats with shiny buttons could be found earlier this year directing trucks of dirt to complete the road’s final stretches. Other roads can be found in Tajikistan with crews of Chinese repairing parts from Dushanbe toward the Afghan border. Dual-language Russian-Chinese signs mark the workers’ presence. More notable in Tajikistan is the only toll road in the country, going north from Dushanbe to Khujand, built by a Chinese firm and broken up by a shoddily designed Iranian tunnel at the Shahriston Pass. This soon will be replaced by a Chinese-built tunnel.

China also has sought to help develop the region’s rail systems. A train line is being built from China through Kyrgyzstan to Uzbekistan. Other train networks are being developed to strengthen links with Kazakhstan, including a high-speed train to be exported there from China. Other infrastructure elements are being spearheaded or supported by Chinese firms, including gas metering in Uzbekistan, telecoms across the region and hydropower developments in Tajikistan.

Various forms of funding have emerged. Primary among them is the use of linked loans or lines of credit provided through China Export-Import Bank. Often granted with provisions guaranteeing that Chinese firms get the contracts, these loans are breeding a growing number of Chinese train carriages in the region as well as Chinese road crews. In addition, Chinese firms often are the winning bidders in projects tendered by the Asian Development Bank (ADB). Regional ADB officials openly praise the Chinese companies and their work. The ADB’s Central Asia Regional Economic Cooperation program dovetails with China’s road-building aim of connecting the underdeveloped region with its wealthier neighbors. But China wants this infrastructure to be oriented in its direction rather than toward Afghanistan, as the ADB would prefer.

The fruits of this road and rail construction are seen in the markets of Kara-Suu in Kyrgyzstan, Barakholka in Kazakhstan or as far as Türkmenabat’s bazaars in Turkmenistan, just across the border from Uzbekistan. Sprawling fields harbor truck trailers with doors cut in them so merchants can peddle goods to local buyers. Traders in Uzbekistan report using Chinese roads and rail links to get goods from Guangzhou and Urumqi to their markets, while in Dushanbe the aptly named Shanghai Market offers a shrunken version of this model focused mostly on home construction. This trade includes such goods as air conditioners, televisions and knickknacks of the kind commonly associated with China. Xinjiang traders and truckers are largely responsible for this back and forth, which is helping expand China’s market presence in Central Asia, opening up Xinjiang’s markets and providing employment in the region.

TAKEN AS a composite, this may appear to be a coherent strategy, but there is little evidence that it was developed consciously as a grand plan in Beijing. Beyond the Xinjiang development program, the other main area of Chinese concentration has been the SCO, a somewhat half-baked organization initially formed to resolve regional border disputes. For Beijing, the ideal would be for the organization to become a vehicle through which it can direct China’s economic investments in the region. Beijing policy makers have advanced notions of creating an SCO development bank and an SCO free-trade zone. At the latest summit in Beijing, China pledged $10 billion in regional support through the organization. But this eagerness is not shared by other SCO members—in particular Russia, which sees China’s rise in Central Asia as a direct threat to its interests. Regional powerhouses such as Kazakhstan also fear being overwhelmed by the Chinese economic machine.

This fearful undertone of economic dominance runs throughout Central Asia. Uzbekistan looks at Kyrgyzstan with concern, nervous of its fate if Chinese goods take over Uzbekistan’s economy in the same manner that they dominate Kyrgyzstan. The fact that Chinese firms entering Central Asia often bring their own workers from China raises fears of employment deprivation and eventual Chinese regional dominance. Conscious of this, China has made efforts to develop cultural links with the region to dispel such concerns.

These efforts involve sending cultural delegations to Central Asia, including Chinese orchestras and theater troupes. But the Chinese government also has sought to import the Chinese language through a network of Confucius Institutes. In Kyrgyzstan, institutes and affiliate organizations can be found in Bishkek, Osh, Jalabad and Naryn. In Tajikistan, a main institute in Dushanbe has a single satellite in a city near Khujand. In Uzbekistan, the institute offices are poor competitors to the local Chinese-language educational system, a leftover from Tashkent’s historical role as the region’s educational and economic leader. But even there, local university Chinese departments rely on professors from China to help them teach locals. In Kazakhstan, institute offices are in Astana and Almaty, based out of local universities and providing Chinese education in Kazakhstan’s growing educational system. Turkmenistan has no Confucius Institute presence, although a pair of Chinese teachers reportedly work out of the Turkmen National Institute of World Languages. And in Afghanistan, the institute office at Kabul University is run by an earnest, young Afghan Mandarin speaker while Beijing-sent teachers wait for the country to stabilize. Institute students largely plan to become traders or help their parents trade. A number have been recruited by Chinese firms operating regionally that seek managers or translators.

China also has welcomed Central Asian students at its universities, offering scholarships through the Confucius Institutes and other outreach efforts. Exact numbers are hard to come by, but there are at least a thousand Turkmen students in China, and in 2010 nearly eight thousand Kazakh students studied in China. Some of these Central Asian students participate in the SCO university program, a network of fifty-four universities across member states that sends groups of students across borders for course work. The long-term effect of these educational links is that China increasingly is building a profile as the power of the next generation in Central Asia. It is difficult to project, but the impact will be felt once today’s student generation begins to dominate the workforce and hold positions of power. This is not a centralized effort by China, but local knowledge of Chinese language and familiarity with Chinese culture ultimately will come to shape the future of China’s inadvertent empire.

[...]

[...] Currently the country has one oil refinery, and its finished product is of fairly poor quality. Domestic consumption in Kyrgyzstan is completely dependent on Russian production, and the journey from Siberian oil refineries obviously increases the cost to end users, despite the fact it is duty free.

The Kara-Balta refinery will probably have the capacity to meet at least half of the domestic market’s needs, producing ‘Euro 4’ or ‘Euro 5’ grade petrol. That will end Gazprom’s monopoly in the country and force the Russian producer to compete with locally refined fuel.

Politically, investments of this kind can strengthen Kyrgyzstan’s hand in future relations with Moscow. Currently the local economy is characterized by an unenviable reliance on Russia both for energy security and as a source of remittances. By building facilities that provide both local jobs and local fuel, China offers a helping hand twice. [...]

TOSHKENT, May 30 (Xinhua) -- China would like to work with Uzbekistan to enhance their bilateral military cooperation, a visiting senior Chinese military official said here on Wednesday.

Chen Bingde, chief of the General Staff of the People's Liberation Army (PLA), made the remarks during a meeting with his Uzbek couterpart, V.Makhmudov.

China and Uzbekistan in recent years have seen robust growth in their bilateral friendly partnership for cooperation and smooth development in inter-military cooperation, Chen said.

The two armed forces, Chen said, have maintained high level contacts and cooperated in personnel training and academic education. They also have maintained defense and security cooperation under the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Chen said.

China would like to advance its pragmatic cooperation with Uzbekistan and jointly lift inter-military cooperation to a higher level, he said.

The international community is currently undergoing the most complex and profound changes since the end of the Cold War, Chen said, adding that the Central Asian countries are facing a number of new challenges and threats.

He said it is significant for China and Uzbekistan to strengthen their coordination and cooperation, and to protect the fundamental interests of the two peoples and countries under such circumstances.

Makhmudov said China has been one of Uzbekistan's most important strategic partners, and Uzbekistan speaks highly of the development of bilateral ties.

He said Uzbekistan is willing to expand cooperation with China in various fields, including the military.

Uzbekistan will continue to adhere to the one-China policy on issues concerning Taiwan, Xinjiang and Tibet, Makhmudov said.

He added that Uzbekistan would like to deepen pragmatic cooperation between the two armed forces and contribute to the development of bilateral relations and regional stability.

DUSHANBE, June 6 (Xinhua) -- A visiting senior Chinese military official said Wednesday China was ready to work with Tajikistan to push the practical exchange and cooperation between the two armed forces to a new high.

Chen Bingde, chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA), made the remarks during a meeting here with Tajikistan Defense Minister Sherali Khayrulloyev.

Chen said that, with the development of China-Tajikistan relations, military-to-military ties between the two nations had also witnessed continuous progress. The armed forces of the two countries had conducted smooth cooperation in various fields, he said.

Under the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), in particular, the two militaries had conducted fruitful defense and security cooperation, and had played an important role in safeguarding the fundamental interests of the countries and peoples in the region and maintaining world peace and stability.

"The Chinese side is ready to make joint efforts with Tajikistan to elevate the practical exchange and cooperation between the two armed forces in various fields to a new level," Chen said.

Khayrulloyev said the two militaries, which had close relations and were deepening cooperation in all fields, had good prospects for future development.

Tajikistan was honored to host the "Peace Mission 2012" joint anti-terrorism military exercise, and believed, with the significant support and assitance from China and other SCO member countries, the drills would be a great success, he said.

Chen also held talks Wednesday with Ramil Nadyrov, chief of the General Staff of Tajikistan's armed forces.

During their talks, Chen said that, as an important part of bilateral relations, military ties between China and Tajikistan had maintained a good momentum of development. Their cooperation has growd in both breadth and depth, he said.

The Chinese side supported Tajikistan's holding of the "Peace Mission 2012" drills, and was ready to coordinate closely with Tajikistan and other countries to ensure the success of the exercise, Chen said.

Nadyrov thanked China for its support for the drills and said Tajikistan's military would work with China to push forward the friendly military ties between the two countries.

China's defense minister, on a visit to Tajikistan, has promised the Central Asian country "hundreds of millions of dollars" in military aid which -- if true -- would be a dramatic policy change for Beijing, which has focused more on economic ties in Central Asia.

The defense minister made the comments at a joint appearance with Tajikistan President Emomali Rahmon in Dushanbe, reported ITAR-TASS:

“China is satisfied with the level of bilateral cooperation in all spheres, including military and military-technical and guarantees assistance to Tajikistan in the strengthening of its defense capacity,” Chinese Defense Minister Chang Wanquan said. He said China would supply military uniforms and help in the training of military personnel, adding that this would involve “hundreds of millions of dollars”.

No details were given, but in the days before Wang's visit it also emerged that China had financed a $12 million "Officer's House" for the Tajikistan armed forces. (Wang, incidentally, is in Tajikistan for a defense ministerial meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.)

According to a 2013 report by the International Crisis Group, between 1993 and 2008 China gave Tajikistan a total of $15 million in military aid. In his recent report on external security assistance to Central Asia, military analyst Dmitry Gorenburg said that China generally deferred to Russia in the security sphere in Central Asia:

Even as it becomes the main external economic actor in the region, China has sought to assuage Russian sensitivities about potentially losing its pre-eminent role in Central Asian security by allowing Russia to take the lead on security and military engagement with Central Asian states. Local rulers are worried about China’s rapid entry into the region and do not trust China’s long term intentions. This has contributed to Chinese calculations largely to stay out of the Central Asian security sphere for the moment. Furthermore, Russia’s willingness to bear the burden of maintaining regional security has allowed China to free ride on Russian investments in Central Asian security.

So is that changing? One possible explanation for the "hundreds of millions of dollars" figure is that Wang was talking about training exercises under SCO auspices, which have been going on for some time and which, presumably, China finances and which aren't cheap. But that's the only explanation for this not being a major policy shift (and even in that case, it would be remarkable that he made a point to talk about how much Beijing was spending).

Anyway, we could be in for a wild ride.

Ceremonies have marked the commencement of construction of Line C of the Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline's Uzbekistan section.

A commencement ceremony was held in Gazli, Uzbekistan, to celebrate the start of construction for Line C of the Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline. China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) Vice President Wang Dongjin and Uzbekneftegaz First Deputy Chairman Shavkat Mazhitov cut the ribbon and delivered speeches at the ceremony.

Line C of the Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline covers a distance of 529 km in Uzbekistan and plays an important role in diversifying Uzbekistan’s gas exports.

Running 1,840 km in parallel with Lines A and B which have already become operational, Line C is designed to deliver 25 Bcm/a of natural gas from Turkme-nistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan to China.

It is estimated that gas supply will commence from January 2014, and reach the designed throughput in December 2015, enhancing the total transmission capacity of the Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline to 55 Bcm/a.

The Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline will start at Gedaim on the border of Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, running through central Uzbekistan and southern Kazakhstan before ending at Horgos in China's Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, where it will be connected to the Second West-East Gas Pipeline.

Line C will add to the Central Asia-China Gas Pipeline’s existing dual parallel lines, each running for 1,833 km. Line A became operational in December 2009, and Line B became operational in 2010.

In July 2007, CNPC signed a production-sharing contract to explore and develop gas fields on the right bank of the Amu-Darya River with the Turkmen State Agency, and a natural gas purchase and sales agreement with Turkmengazi State Concern.

CNPC then signed two basic principle agreements on gas pipeline construction and operation with KazMunayGaz and Uzbekneftegaz respectively, under the framework agreements on pipeline construction and operation between the Chinese government and the Kazakh and Uzbek governments. Under the agreements, CNPC would invest in a cross-border gas pipeline in central Asia, through which Turkmenistan would supply China with 30 Bcm/a of natural gas for 30 years.

Aside from fostering economic co-operation between China and central Asian countries, the pipeline is also expected to be a source of prosperity for the region, promoting the development of, and investment, in local natural gas resources, stimulating the growth of local equipment manufacturing and construction industries, and creating employment opportunities.

Safety a top priority

CNPC said “We believe in health, safety and environment management, and emphasise the health and safety of our overseas contractors.

In 2008, there were no accidents during the 5.89 million man hours of production, and no traffic accidents for vehicles travelling a total of 9.95 million kilometres.”

The company has implemented a number of safety and environmental measures on the project including:

• Forbidding project vehicles to travel outside the operating zone.
• Excavating pipe trenches on farmland strictly in accordance with rules on stripping of mature soil, piling immature and mature soil separately from each other, and backfilling the soil to restore the original environment.
• Welding the pipeline in a way that ensured there was a crossing every 2 km for cattle, sheep, and wild animals.
• Ensuring all engineering projects had passed local governments’ environmental assessments.
• Strictly observing local environmental laws and regulations.

And:

With Xi Jinping on his maiden tour of Europe just as Western governments levy sanctions on Russia for the annexation of Crimea, the Chinese president’s stance on the issue has overshadowed his travels and emphasized a depiction of “Xi as a world leader”. The Wall Street Journal reports:

From the start [...] the Ukraine crisis has loomed large over Mr. Xi’s closely watched visit. The first stop on his tour—a summit on nuclear security in The Hague—was immediately overshadowed by diplomatic disputes over Crimea’s annexation by Russia.

European policy makers have sought to cast as a diplomatic victory China’s decision to abstain from a United Nations Security Council vote condemning a referendum that cleared the way for Crimea to break away from Ukraine and join Russia.

[...] Privately, European diplomats concede that China’s relationship with Russia remains solid. China has often joined Russia in vetoing Security Council resolutions on issues like the civil war in Syria. In addition, Beijing’s abstention vote on Crimea was less a departure from Moscow than a move consistent with Beijing’s long-standing rejection of any meddling by foreign countries in its own domestic affairs, said a senior French diplomat.

[...] Mr. Xi is walking a tightrope as he weighs China’s partnership with Russia against its growing economic ties with the West.

[...] Even Europe’s pursuit of his support on Ukraine “helps portray Xi as a world leader,” said Rod Wye, an analyst with Chatham House. “The Chinese would not be unhappy to see him at the heart of discussion over difficult international issues.” [...] [Source]

Today, China abstained from the UN General Assembly decision that Russia’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula is illegitimate, as it had in the UN Security Council vote condemning the Crimean referendum earlier this month.

A report from The Telegraph notes that, while Putin has tried to characterize Chinese abstention on Crimea as support for Russia, in reality this may signal the beginnings of a Central Asian power struggle between China and Russia:

Mr Putin was careful to thank China’s Politburo for its alleged support in his victory speech on Crimea. Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has been claiming with his usual elasticity that “Russia and China have coinciding views on the situation in Ukraine.”

This is of course a desperate lie. China did not stand behind Russia in the UN Security Council vote on Crimea, as it had over Syria. It pointedly abstained. Its foreign ministry stated that “China always sticks to the principle of non-interference in any country’s internal affairs and respects the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”

[...] The reality is that China is breaking Russia’s control over the gas basins of Central Asia systematically and ruthlessly. Turkmenistan’s gas used to flow North, hostage to prices set by Gazprom. It now flows East. President Xi went in person last September to open the new 1,800 km pipeline to China from the Galkynysh field, the world’s second largest with 26 trillion cubic meters.

[...M]ore revealing is a cable quoting Cheng Guoping, China’s ambassador to Kazakhstan, warning that Russia and China are on a collision course, and China will not be the one to yield. “In the future, great power relations in Central Asia will be complicated, delicate. The new oil and gas pipelines are breaking Russia’s monopoly in energy exports.” [Source]

China has significant energy and security interests in Central Asia, and Beijing has recently invested a hefty sum into the region as part of the “New Silk Road” project.

At Tea Leaf Nation, David Wertime and Bethany Allen note a backfired attempt by the Russian Embassy to secure solidarity from Chinese netizens:

On March 26, the Russian Embassy’s official account on Sina Weibo, China’s massive microblogging platform, argued that “Western sanctions are only drawing Russia and China closer,” referring to the suspension of military cooperation with Russia after its recent annexation of Crimea. What do the two have in common? “Russia’s current situation somewhat resembles what China suffered after the Tiananmen incident.” That comment, which refers to Western backlash against a brutal suppression of student protesters in Tiananmen square in June 1989, touches something of a third rail in Chinese history, one which Communist Party authorities have been careful to minimize in the officially sanctioned version of China’s not-so-distant past.

[...I]nvoking the specter of Tiananmen, however vague in the eyes of China’s predominantly young netizens, is a [...] daring assay, and many of the 9,000 comments expressed strong disdain for — or even mocked — Russia’s appropriation of Tiananmen for its own political gain. One commenter asked, ”Do you want to rip open China’s wounds?” One user warned, “Do not fear god-like enemies; fear pig-like allies.” Another Weibo user complained, “Russia and the former Soviet Union swallowed up large swaths of Chinese territory on more than one occasion.” Indeed, just seven days ago, thousands of Chinese web users maintained that Crimea’s fate resembled Mongolia’s after a 1945 Soviet-backed referendum there, which some Chinese believe took territory that was rightfully theirs. [...] [Source]

More:

Ukraine: the view from China

With every new major international crisis – be it the Arab Spring, the 2008 Russian-Georgian war, recurrent emergencies in Africa, or the current Ukrainian-Russian tensions – it does not take long for diplomats and observers to start wondering ‘what does China think’. It is increasingly frequent during such crises for China to be put in the spotlight and expected to have a position on events and regions on which, until recently, Chinese opinions were barely worth a footnote. This is also true for the Crimean crisis. A few days into the crisis, the Russian foreign ministry announced that the Chinese and Russians shared “broadly coinciding points of view” on the situation.

Looking at China for comfort is driven by many factors. The rise of Chinese power is just one. In international public opinion China is often seen as a sort of ‘swing’ power, capable of tipping the political balance between entrenched political warriors whose preferences are already well known. On a crisis like the one in Crimea – which elicits completely different narratives from Russia, on the one hand, and the EU and US on the other – the Chinese are seen by some as a potentially less subjective or biased source of opinions. In this sense, China can offer surprises. After the 2008 Russia-Georgian war the Chinese maintained public politeness towards Russia but, in private, were clearly against the recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia – thereby helping Central Asian countries resist alleged Russian pressures to recognise the independence of those entities.

Hence the rush by Russia to claim Chinese support for its actions in Ukraine – as an effort to claim greater legitimacy for its military invasion of a post-Soviet state. However, the claim that China is on Russia’s side is spurious.

China and the EU

The Chinese approach to the situation in Ukraine is driven by competing pressures. Its overall approach to the post-Soviet space is quite similar – or rather parallel – to that of the European Union as it is based on two equally important pillars: an evident desire to have good relations with Russia and a strong interest in not seeing the resurgence of a Russian empire and in supporting the independence of post-Soviet states. The difference here is that, for the EU, the Eastern Partnership states are of primary importance while, for China, the Central Asian countries are. In this respect, Brussels’ and Beijing’s interests and views regarding the post-Soviet states are both close and complementary. China would also like to see Central Asia become a higher priority for the EU – and it has been in principle favourable to the EU’s Association with countries like Ukraine.

Even their toolboxes are not dissimilar in that they mainly rely on political dialogue and economic integration. The EU offered Russia and other post-Soviet states trade integration. Russia has de facto, though not formally, rejected the offer which has been on the table for over a decade. China made a similar offer: it proposed the creation of a Free Trade Area within the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, but Russia has refused that too. And now China is suggesting the creation of a ‘Silk Road Beltway’ through Central Asia as a vehicle for economic integration.

In both cases, Russia refused to go along with EU and Chinese initiatives, preferring to launch its Customs Union. The problem is that the Russian-led Customs Union would complicate the existing trade relations between the EU, China and the post-Soviet countries. This is not irrelevant since the EU is the biggest trading partner for Ukraine, Moldova, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan – while China is the biggest trading partner for Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan.

As is the case for the EU approach to Russia, it is not uncommon for China’s binary objectives (having good relations with Russia and supporting the independence of post-Soviet states) to clash each and every time Russia tries to assert its influence through economic, political or even military coercion. The Chinese think the crisis in Ukraine as a “headache” . It creates new problems in their relations with Russia since they cannot say either yes or no to their request for diplomatic support.

China and Ukraine

The Chinese strongly disapprove the Russian military intervention in Ukraine at several levels. Russia is an opportunistic supporter of the principle of state sovereignty: it resists military or political interventions in Kosovo, Iraq, or Syria, but practices such interventions in Georgia and Ukraine, while piling up pressure on other post-Soviet states. China is more consistent in its respect of sovereignty as it does not support or practice open military interventions, though it can still be tough with its neighbours.

The easy recourse by Russia to military means of power projection is also worrying for the Chinese with regard to Central Asia. It is not unimaginable that a country like Kazakhstan or Uzbekistan face a messy succession when their current ageing leaders have left the political stage. The question from a Chinese perspective is then: if such an intervention can take place in Ukraine, why should it not happen in Kazakhstan, too, provided there is a pretext for that?

There also are a number of Ukraine-specific reasons for China to be less than enchanted with Russia’s military behaviour. To begin with, China has just engaged in a 10 billion USD project to build a deep-water port in Crimea, the function of which would be to redistribute cargo flows from the East to Europe. Any uncertainty in Crimea thus affects this project, especially in the event of a de facto secession.

China also had a general preference for Ukraine to have closer links with the EU. The Chinese are inclined to think that Ukraine was moving closer to the EU, even under Yanukovich. They believe that the main debate within Ukraine was on how fast – and Yanukovich was in favour of a slower path. Yet, the direction towards the EU was still clear for the Chinese. In fact, a Ukraine embedded in a free trade area with the EU and with an improved business climate could offer extra advantages to Chinese business, especially if the new ‘silk road’ project takes shape. Ukraine would then give China a direct inland access to the European market.

On the other hand, while the strategic objectives of China overlap significantly with those of the EU, Beijing strongly rejected the tactics of the Ukrainian revolution. On that, China’s view is much closer to Russia’s: the overthrow of an autocratic regime by popular protesters is not something to its liking. And Yanukovich’s attempts to supress the Kiev revolt Tiananmen-style were also unlikely to provoke Chinese ire. Just like Russia, China hoped the 21 February agreement between the opposition and the President, giving him a lease of political life until December, would hold. Suspicion of US meddling is another factor bringing Russian and Chinese tactical views of the situation closer to one another.

In sum, sympathy with the European strategic interests in the post-Soviet space coupled with sympathy with the Russian assessment of the tactics of the revolution. None of these instincts is likely to be expressed in public. The China-Russia relationship is hidden under a much thicker layer of smiles, politeness and hypocrisy than the Russia-EU relationship – which often slides into impolite and ‘frank’ exchanges.

Chinese president Xi Jinping, over the phone with American president Obama, has “urged for a political and diplomatic solution to the Ukrainian crisis” says XinHua news agency. However, Chinese interests in Eastern Europe remain too small for Beijing to take an open and vocal stance – at least for now, and as long as Russia’s aggressive actions do not reach into Central Asia.

Nicu Popescu is senior analyst at the EU Institute for Security Studies in Paris, where he deals with the EU's eastern neighbourhood and Russia.

[...] He [Putin] cannot hope to escape financial suffocation by US regulatory muscle, should he send troops into Eastern Ukraine or even if he tries to stir up chaos in the Russian-speaking Donbass by means of agents provocateurs.

Nor can he hope to turn the tables on the West by joining forces with China to create a Eurasian bloc, a league of authoritarian powers in control of vast resources. Such an outcome is the obsession of the 'Spenglerites', the West's self-haters convinced that the US is finished and that dollar will soon be displaced by the Eurasian Gold Ducat -- odd though that may seem at a time of surging oil and gas output in the US, and an American manufacturing revival.

The reality is that China is breaking Russia's control over the gas basins of Central Asia systematically and ruthlessly. Turkmenistan's gas used to flow North, hostage to prices set by Gazprom. It now flows East. President Xi went in person last September to open the new 1,800 km pipeline to China from the Galkynysh field, the world's second largest with 26 trillion cubic meters.

It will ultimately supply 65 BCM, equal to half Gazprom's exports to Europe. Much the same is going on in Kazakhstan, where Chinese companies have taken over much of the energy industry. The politics are poignantly exposed in Wikileaks cables from Central Asia. A British diplomat is cited in a 2010 dispatch describing the "Chinese commercial colonization" of the region, saying Russia was "painfully" watching its energy domination in Central Asia slip away.

Yet more revealing is a cable quoting Cheng Guoping, China's ambassador to Kazakhstan, warning that Russia and China are on a collision course, and China will not be the one to yield. "In the future, great power relations in Central Asia will be complicated, delicate. The new oil and gas pipelines are breaking Russia's monopoly in energy exports."

Mr Cheng not only expressed "a positive view of the US role in the region" but also suggested that NATO should take part as a guest at talks on the Shanghai Cooperation group -- allegedly the Sino-Russian answer to EU/NATO -- in order to "break the Russian monopoly in the region." That word "break" again. So there we have it in the raw, what really goes on behind closed doors, so far removed from the pieties of a Moscow-Beijing axis.

There was much anguish about such an axis in the 1960s, then based on Communist fraternity. Henry Kissinger saw through it, suspecting that the two hostile cultures were at daggers drawn along their vast borders -- "Four Thousand Kilometres of Problems" to cite the title of a 2006 opus by Moscow writer Akihero Ivasita.

George Walden exposes deep roots of this mistrust in his superb little book "China: A Wolf in the World?". As a diplomat in Russia and then in China -- one of the tiny handful of Westerners in Beijing through the Cultural Revolution -- he saw first-hand how the Marxist brotherhood had come to loathe each other. Indeed, they came close to nuclear war. The CIA and State Department were dumbfounded by his accounts at a debriefing in Washington. They had no sources on the ground in Mao's era.

Mr Walden says the Chinese have never forgiven Russia for seizing East Siberia under the Tsars, the "lost territories". They want their property back, and they are getting it back by ethnic resettlement across the Amur and the frontier regions, much as Mexico is retaking California and Texas by the Reconquista of migration.

The population of far Eastern Siberia has collapsed to 6.3m from over 8 million twenty years ago, leaving ghost towns along the Trans-Siberian Railway. Russia has failed to make a go of its Eastern venture. With a national fertility rate of 1.4, chronic alcoholism, and a population expected to shrink by 30m to barely more than 110m by 2050 -- according to UN demographers, not Mr Putin's officials -- the nation must inexorably recede towards its European bastion of Old Muscovy. The question is how fast, and how peacefully.

[...]

The end. Full stop. Period.

At the end of the day, who do you hate more?

I hate Russia more, obviously. I know what my material interests are, and they are non-Russian interests.

I don't know if you've been watching the Ukraine thread, but this should not be surprising to you. Stop trying to convince me to support Eastern Slav interests. It's not going to happen. If you guys like those people, go ahead and like them, just don't try to get me in on it since the things that animate you guys, are things that I don't care about at all.

Also, regarding 'political identity', my 'political identity' is whatever does what needs doing. I'm not going to be pro-Russian just to look trendy for you. So just accept it, and stop questioning me on it.

[Typhoon]

Reading too closely the bolding of the articles and one might miss the whole picture, what they suggest is not a Chinese takeover but a deepening of the already complex web of associations in the region. The central Asian countries are wary of China despite their willingness to accept Chinese money and its not buying the Chinese universal love.

Kyrgyzstan’s government has suspended work at a brand new Chinese-built oil refinery, the prime minister has announced, after local protestors demanded the polluting plant clean up its act. A lack of coordination with the community, and suspicion about Chinese intentions, are likely to turn the dispute into another cautionary tale about doing business in the protest-prone Central Asian country.

http://www.eurasianet.org/node/68061

With Russia’s influence in the region at a historically low ebb and the widespread perception across Central Asia that the United States will strategically abandon the region once most combat troops have withdrawn from Afghanistan, Beijing has carved out an inadvertent empire.

Eh, historically low ebb? Is the author living in the 1990's, when the Americans vacate Manas airbase the Russian's will still be operating in Kant.

according to UN demographers, not Mr Putin's officials -- the nation must inexorably recede towards its European bastion of Old Muscovy. The question is how fast, and how peacefully.

Why will Russia recede? The demographic losses will have to be pretty severe before it cuts into the say few thousand people who manage the far east from Moscow.

While China is undoubtably a rising player in central Asia due to its economic fortunes, it is unlikely to have it all its own way, just as Russia did not when it was the sole player. The area does not exist in a vacuum either, China's conflicts of interest with Russia will always be balanced against its conflicts of interest with the US!

In short welcome to the multipolar world.

[Rei Murasame]

At least you are willing to acknowledge that China and Russia's interests are not identical and that the US is also balancing against both of them. That is something that no one on PoFo would admit to until just now this moment.

You, Typhoon, are the first person on PoFo to actually acknowledge that China and Russia are two poles within one region, and not a single united intertwined fictional pole called "Chrussia". So I'm just pleased to hear some agreement at least basic facts.

[Solastalgia]

Globalresearch.ca are as usual out of their minds and amateurish.

The author of that article on Global Research is a high-level economist who used to work with the World Bank (and now rejects it). Hardly an amateur as you're trying to pass it off as. Conversely, most of your articles are a bit amateurish, as they aren't written by actual economists. Anyways, Typhoon took them to task...

fact that the purpose of the 'Silk Road' is not to have Chinese and Russian collaboration

This is ridiculous. A good chunk of the Silk Road is in Russia. There will most definitely be continued collaboration between China and Russia when it comes to the Eurasian land bridge.

At least you are willing to acknowledge that China and Russia's interests are not identical

I don't think anyone was arguing that in this thread. Of course Chinese and Russian interests aren't identical. Anyone arguing such an absurdity should be laughed at. There definitely are, though, many mutual interests between these countries, and I think your portrayal of their relationship as antagonist is just plain false.

I understand you're pro-China, and anti-Russian, ReiMurasame, so I get where you're coming from...I just don't believe it's representative of reality. You're only looking at the Chinese perspective of the Silk Road, and not the Russian.

[Rei Murasame]

Well, you don't agree with reality then. We'll see what happens, and I guess the pro-Russian people are just going to have to be proven wrong by the facts as they unfold.

Also, the Silk Road does not have to pass through Russia.

[Solastalgia]

Also, the Silk Road does not have to pass through Russia.

That China-Turkey-Bulgaria rail deal doesn't rule Russia out of the new silk road. They will certainly still hold their place in the eurasian land bridge, as they have for the past hundred years.

China's western silk road endeavors are not about containing Russia as you say. If China were trying to contain Russia then they would be cutting back on trade instead of intensifying it. The only country trying to contain Russia, is the US.

[Rei Murasame]

I don't understand why you are unable to understand what is happening. I also am getting a bit tired of seeing people write really beautiful English prose that doesn't actually contain anything substantial. You wrote, that Russia "will certainly still hold their place in the eurasian land bridge, as they have for the past hundred years". What does that mean?

Can you guys understand why it is frustrating to me, that you all continually assault me with really flowery language that is too vague to be argued with? There is no time factor, there is no magnitude, there is nothing in that statement that I can agree or disagree with, because it doesn't tell me anything. What is Russia's 'place', in the land bridge? And if the New Silk Road existed 'for the past hundred years', then why is China now building it?

Why do you think that containing someone requires cutting trade?

Why do you think that after establishing two routes, China would go to the effort of building a third and even more roundabout southern route to go through Central Asia, Turkey and Bulgaria and then into Europe without going through Russia, if China's intent was not to hedge against Russia? If they didn't want the option to go around Russia to get to Europe under some future circumstance, they'd just stick with the trans-Siberian route and not bother wasting everyone's time. Yet they are building a route that goes around Russia and connects China to Europe without passing through Russian-controlled territory. The reason for that should be obvious.

They want the option to go around Russia. Occam's razor.

Also, geopolitics is war by other means. And in war, 'the will is directed at an animate object that reacts'. I feel as though everyone is forgetting that.

[Varax]

At least you are willing to acknowledge that China and Russia's interests are not identical and that the US is also balancing against both of them. That is something that no one on PoFo would admit to until just now this moment.

You, Typhoon, are the first person on PoFo to actually acknowledge that China and Russia are two poles within one region, and not a single united intertwined fictional pole called "Chrussia". So I'm just pleased to hear some agreement at least basic facts.

I'm pretty sure I've been pointing out that China and Russia are "not natural allies" and the dynamics of power balance between the US, Russia and China for awhile now. Not to mention duh for anyone who's been paying attention to developments and disputes between the three for the last couple of centuries.

But yeah, to reiterate myself Russia and China have a geopolitical interest at present to work together economically for their own growth and politically to counter the west but they are also geopolitical rivals themselves. The recent events in Ukraine and the threat of sanctions has pushed Russia east and China can always use Russian resources so that trade naturally takes place. However, it also limits how much Russia can maneuver economically if it antagonizes the west too much (their economy is already sluggish) and it makes trade deals with China that much more valuable. China for its part wants to reach out expand its own trade in different directions to increase their options and avoid dependency on any one source. So this also means not giving too much influence to Russia. China is constantly diversifying its markets and using a strategy of economic co-operation and development with many countries and yes the rail link is aimed at more directly linking China with Europe (and others along the way) without having to take routes through Russia.

[OnTPath]

Geo-Politically, Russia absolutely certain and China very likely know very well, how the game works.
In oder to be big cat in Eurasia the US MUST be dealt with first, that is as CERTAIN as 1 + 1 = 2. The only divergence is in timing.
The US from it's perspective MUST contain the EU (which it extremely succesfully did with the 'Greece, Spain, Portugal' operation), China and Russia (and to some extent India). All four are runaways, the weakest obviously is dealt with first, while then the second (Russia) and last (preparation going on) China.

If the US allows a hegemonial Eurasian bloc emerge it will automatically become peripherial and therefore a third power as detailed by Brzeziński's geo-strategical analysis. The US therefore must contain any aspiring contender and gain a significant foothold and then if ever possible to dominate it once and for all.
And of course the US follows this contaiment and expansion strategy to the point by their ACTIONS obviously not advertising it at every corner.

China is not stupid, it WILL not allow Russia to be significantly hurt, but instead as sure as hell will shield it largely from Western bloc sanctions to buy time (which works for them). Russia would prefer an Eurasian Federation (Putin literally said on Thursday for him Europe starts in Portugal and ends in Wladiwostok, but of course the Euros are Idiots and cannot hearken anything anymore, they are in a delirium tremens with the US on their gorge), but this week Lavrov will go to Bejing and come back with his back strengthend. China knows it is the strongest player and therefore tries to use Russia as buffer against the US as long as possible (and a very formidable I might add...).
China, Russia and India will now just accelerate their unhooking from the dollar (which has tremendously accelerated in the last 5 years and at current rate will be 100% in another 5 - 7 years), if completed, the dollar will then be almost exclusively a Western bloc currency all perepherial countries in it will sink with the dollar and finance it's collossal depth. If this is achieved around 20 - 30% of the US military machine will run dry and become impossible to finance unless the buffer zone is recklessly pressurized and fracked (Africa, EU, ME).
It will be interestingly to see how the US will effectively engage China in the next months, years, because she cannot sit idle and must fight those tendencies as good it can. In Asia, the Chinese Sea very, very soon the Chinese will have the upper hand and it will be very costly for the US to challenge it.

Of course for the Euros the situation is nearly hopeless because in order to be a real partner for Russia (and China) it needs to stand on it's own feet, which up until now it couldn't mostly because of the slowness of the integration process and utter lack of strategic far view and of course the seemingly cheap NATO umbrella the US offers them. But as things have dramatically accelerated the last five years it finds itself in a very, very difficult position now. Of course Putin will keep his invitation open, but knows that the Euros would then AGAIN immediately being targeted by the US which the EU can do absolutely nothing against. The Greece catastrophe and now NSA-scandal handling by Germany shows that impressively, it's like in a chicken farm really.
The sanctions will largely backfire on the EU (and paymaster Germany) the Russians currently exporting for around 150 bill. E while importing around 250 bill. E with the EU. This 250 bill. will hurt tremendously, and CANNOT be compensated for, while Russia can compensate with Asia both exports and imports much more easily. The Kiev thing exploded right into the face of the Euros, while the Boss is largely untouched.

[Typhoon]

At least you are willing to acknowledge that China and Russia's interests are not identical and that the US is also balancing against both of them.

Certainly but it must also be aknowledged that both have mutual interests and will be forced to align in response to the activities of the US and to a lesser extent Europe. China would be foolish to allow the US military into central Asia and land bridges bring benifits to most of Asia including Russia.

China's desire to expand beyond existing links can be interpreted as seeking to improve capacity, reach new markets and expand influence in addition to redundancy for the routes through Russia.

[Csareo]

Read this article the other day and decided it would be worthy of discussion here.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/russias-pe ... sian-trade

China will re-open the old Silk Road as a new trading route linking Germany, Russia and China

Russia has just dropped another bombshell, announcing not only the de-coupling of its trade from the dollar, but also that its hydrocarbon trade will in the future be carried out in rubles and local currencies of its trading partners – no longer in dollars – see Voice of Russia

Russia’s trade in hydrocarbons amounts to about a trillion dollars per year. Other countries, especially the BRICS and BRCIS-associates (BRICSA) may soon follow suit and join forces with Russia, abandoning the ‘petro-dollar’ as trading unit for oil and gas. This could amount to tens of trillions in loss for demand of petro-dollars per year (US GDP about 17 trillion dollars – December 2013) – leaving an important dent in the US economy would be an understatement.

Added to this is the declaration today by Russia’s Press TV – China will re-open the old Silk Road as a new trading route linking Germany, Russia and China, allowing to connect and develop new markets along the road, especially in Central Asia, where this new project will bring economic and political stability, and in Western China provinces,where “New Areas” of development will be created. The first one will be the Lanzhou New Area in China’s Northwestern Gansu Province, one of China’s poorest regions.

“During his visit to Duisburg, Chinese President Xi Jinping made a master stroke of economic diplomacy that runs directly counter to the Washington neo-conservative faction’s effort to bring a new confrontation between NATO and Russia.” (press TV, April 6, 2014)

“Using the role of Duisburg as the world’s largest inland harbor, an historic transportation hub of Europe and of Germany’s Ruhr steel industry center, he proposed that Germany and China cooperate on building a new “economic Silk Road” linking China and Europe. The implications for economic growth across Eurasia are staggering.”

Curiously, western media have so far been oblivious to both events. It seems like a desire to extending the falsehood of our western illusion and arrogance – as long as the silence will bear.

Germany, the economic driver of Europe – the world’s fourth largest economy (US$ 3.6 trillion GDP) – on the western end of the new trading axis, will be like a giant magnet, attracting other European trading partners of Germany’s to the New Silk Road. What looks like a future gain for Russia and China, also bringing about security and stability, would be a lethal loss for Washington.

In addition, the BRICS are preparing to launch a new currency – composed by a basket of their local currencies – to be used for international trading, as well as for a new reserve currency, replacing the rather worthless debt ridden dollar – a welcome feat for the world.

Along with the new BRICS(A) currency will come a new international payment settlement system, replacing the SWIFT and IBAN exchanges, thereby breaking the hegemony of the infamous privately owned currency and gold manipulator, the Bank for International Settlement (BIS) in Basle, Switzerland – also called the central bank of all central banks.

To be sure – the BIS is a privately owned for profit institution, was created in the early 1930’s, in the midst of the big economic melt-down of the 20th Century. The BIS was formed precisely for that purpose – to control the world’s monetary system, along with the also privately owned FED and the Wall Street Banksters – the epitome of private unregulated ownership.

The BIS is known to hold at least half a dozen secret meetings per year, attended by the world’s elite, deciding the fate of countries and entire populations. Their demise would be another welcome new development.

As the new trading road and monetary system will take hold, other countries and nations, so far in the claws of US dependence, will flock to the ‘new system’, gradually isolating Washington’s military industrial economy (sic) and its NATO killing machine.

This Economic Sea Change may bring the empire to its knees, without spilling a drop of blood. An area of new hope for justice and more equality, a rebirth of sovereign states, may dawn and turn the spiral of darkness into a spiral of light.

[/quote]

That would be true if Russia or the US needed more inflation, which we don't. Even most conservative economists agree that we need a short term hyperdeflation of the USD. Russia does also, as its inflation is only the result of the rich getting richer. Hear the sound of that deficit rising, and that middle class falling? Do you seriously think that Moscow's already poor citizens can afford higher prices?

Russia's regressive tax system is an abomination, and the riches 15% flat rate gets lower as their income raises. It bewilders me how anybody could think their economy is well off. Its GDP growth rate has fallen 2.20% since the annexation of Crimea, and Putin announced a negation of the budget in order to boost his Fascist mililtary force, and to further develop the oligarchs corporations. Not even going into how much they spend on state run media. Any of this sound fammilaiar. This is often what becomes evident in totalitarian societies. Maybe you'll get a better freedom index next year land of post serfdom