Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) and Global South strategic cooperation

Economic Clash With West Requires

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Syrian President Says​

Confrontation with the United States and the West in general has been taking place mainly in the economic field and that makes it increasingly necessary to ditch the U.S. dollar as a currency for global transactions, President Bashar Assad of Syria was quoted as saying by Sana, the Syrian state-controlled news agency.

Click to expand...

Assad emphasized that the

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

bloc, through the adoption of the Chinese yuan for trade transactions between nations, can play a leading role in that regard. He made the comments during a meeting with the Chinese government’s Special Envoy for the Middle East, Zhai Jun, whom he received on Saturday.

Click to expand...

The Syrian leader also praised the Chinese mediation that resulted in the rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran, both of which are applying for membership in BRICS. He believes the improvement of their relations will positively impact the stability of the whole region.

Click to expand...

According to Assad, the entire world today needs the Chinese presence, politically and economically, to rebalance the global situation. The BRICS alliance constitutes a strong international space capable of creating an international multipolar order, he added. His comments come after his foreign minister recently

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

the United States of imposing sanctions on Syria in order to steal its assets and keep it under its hegemony.

Click to expand...

The Chinese official assured Bashar Assad that Beijing will continue to support Damascus in international forums and “it’s battle against hegemony, terrorism and external interference.” Zhai Jun also said that China backs the rapprochement between Syria and the other Arab countries.

Click to expand...

montyp165 said:

During the 1970s the Shah of Iran had intended to build up the Imperial Iranian Navy to be able to power project into the Indian Ocean; as such 4 DDGs (Kidd class) and 8 FFGs (Kortenaer class) were planned before the revolution prevented that from happening. If Iran were to be strong enough in terms of naval firepower to provide strategic support for China, then completing that program would go a long way in that respect (e.g., 4 Type 52Ds plus 8 Type 054As plus a Type 903 replacement for the sunk IRIS Kharg).

Click to expand...

Have you seen any evidence that Iran is willing to buy whole naval ships from China or that China is willing to sell them who ships (due to sanction concerns)?

Now the second part is probably more important. what makes you think that level of sale is enough?

Overbom said:

The reason why historically, nations have avoided strengthening so much other (non-vassal) countries' navy/army is that they then start becoming emboldened to control their region if they are military superior.

I think bases is the most safe option even if its more expensive. That way you don't strengthen other countries which might come to bite you back in the future. Now where the bases should be, that's another question


At some point someone needs to protect maritime trade lanes. You can't just leave them alone because that way other people start getting dangerous thoughts about them and the risk of accidents will start raising

Click to expand...

In order for China to protect "SCO trade lanes", it would need at least one base around UAE, 1 in Pakistan, 1 in Myanmar.

I'm not against exploring or starting to build bases, but China doesn't yet have the fleet needed for a sustainable oversea network of basses yet

More importantly if i'm in PLA leadership, I'd concern myself more with Sea of Japan first so that ESPO crude can come through safely from Vladivostok area

Minm said:

Yes, that's how it works when smaller countries want to work with bigger countries. The superpower provides security, the middle powers offer their markets in return. That's the Euroatlantic model. When America intervened in Korea that was also a big commitment, but they gained a client state.

The only question is if China is ready and what it can get in return. Putting bases there might be too much. But escorting commercial ships through piracy infested waters could work. Putting Chinese flags on tankers would make them safe as well and make Chinese shipping regulations more international. The American pirates of the 5th fleet are based in Bahrain, but they don't have bases in the rest of the Eastern Indian Ocean. So an escort through the Persian gulf would be enough. Initially this could only apply to shipments bound for or coming from China

Click to expand...

keep in mind there is Diego Garcia. There are real logistical issues trying to sustain maritime shipping lane when India is likely not going to cooperate. And you would need other infrastructure in the region to support better ISR. Again, how do you accomplish any of this without military bases where your ISR drones can take off to monitor the region and you have some naval ships and submarines and long range aircraft stationed to assist things?

taxiya said:

The American solution (having US base everywhere) isn't the only solution, nor the best. Strengthening cooperation such as standardised training and communication, intel exchange, equipment supply and ammunition storage is enough. Instead of making a puppet navy, make the Iranian and Pakistani Navy strong enough to be responsible for the most of the time in their area while PLAN can regularly visit their ports and cruise the region without making a Chinese base.

On a more general level, China hasn't asked Pakistan to make Guardar a PLAN base, why press Iran to do so? And I believe China would never need to do so. There is always the risk of being dragged into the dispute of one country to another if you have a military base in one country, a risk that you want to avoid. You have by many times worried about Iran doing something to SA, putting a PLA base in Iran is going to raise the concern of Arab countries.

Click to expand...

tphuang said:

where did I say that China should have a base in Iran? Can you find where I said that?

I'm pretty annoyed that you are insinuating this

I'm actually quite uncomfortable about the idea of China providing maritime security blanket for other countries far away from its home base. It's not even possible to do so before it has nuclear submarines.

Now tell me, how do you think Iranian navy can get strong enough to actually defend itself? And if you cannot think of a reasonable path, then what can China actually provide for them to change that situation?

Click to expand...

Instead of a permanenet PLA-owned-&-operated naval base in Saudi Arabia and/or Iran, why not take a page from Changi Naval Base (CNB) in Singapore?

Legally speaking, CNB cannot be considered an American military base because the base itself isn't owned by the US military. However, CNB does offer supporting facility access to the US Navy, mainly for logistical-related refueling and resupply.

I think China can do the same WRT Saudi Arabia and Iran on the matter. Sign memorandums and/or cooperative agreements with Saudi Arabia and Iran by designating one or two naval bases from each of the two to allow resupply and refuel of visiting PLAN warships in the region.

Preferably, this should be done with BOTH Saudi Arabia and Iran in order to reduce the susceptibility of support bias for either of the two countries by China.

This means that the PLAN can expand its presence in the region, while not actually stationing more soild assets in the region other than the ones in Djibouti that would render China being judged as "expansionists" and "imperialists" by the Murican warhawks and Jai Hinds.

Speaking of which, China already has a fully PLA-owned PLAN resupply base in Djibouti, which isn't really far from Saudi Arabia and Iran. So I don't think there is really a need for another PLA-owned naval base in both countries.

Instead, I'm more inclined towards opening a PLA-owned/co-owned military airbase that would allow PLAAF planes to operate from, taking lessons from the recent citizen evacuation from Sudan.

alright, this has happened now

there are also videos of this online, but clearly warming relationship between the two countries

things are getting dangerous for Iran

tphuang said:

Have you seen any evidence that Iran is willing to buy whole naval ships from China or that China is willing to sell them who ships (due to sanction concerns)?

Now the second part is probably more important. what makes you think that level of sale is enough?

In order for China to protect "SCO trade lanes", it would need at least one base around UAE, 1 in Pakistan, 1 in Myanmar.

I'm not against exploring or starting to build bases, but China doesn't yet have the fleet needed for a sustainable oversea network of basses yet

More importantly if i'm in PLA leadership, I'd concern myself more with Sea of Japan first so that ESPO crude can come through safely from Vladivostok area

keep in mind there is Diego Garcia. There are real logistical issues trying to sustain maritime shipping lane when India is likely not going to cooperate. And you would need other infrastructure in the region to support better ISR. Again, how do you accomplish any of this without military bases where your ISR drones can take off to monitor the region and you have some naval ships and submarines and long range aircraft stationed to assist things?

Click to expand...

You don't need a force that can defeat the local American forces. You don't even need to do much ISR. A single boat escorting a tanker would be enough. The US won't dare to fire the first shot and if they do, then China can retaliate in the Pacific without being seen as the aggressor.

And if the US focus can be brought back to West Asia, then shouldn't China support that and give Iran the means to sink as many American ships as possible? If China opposes the US on the safety of Iranian oil imports, then the US will have to invest in bases there rather than close to China. Isn't that a good thing? If you allow the US to impose its will with no consequences, China loses. Even if it's not worth it to block American desires, China should extract a price

Minm said:

You don't need a force that can defeat the local American forces. You don't even need to do much ISR. A single boat escorting a tanker would be enough. The US won't dare to fire the first shot and if they do, then China can retaliate in the Pacific without being seen as the aggressor.

And if the US focus can be brought back to West Asia, then shouldn't China support that and give Iran the means to sink as many American ships as possible? If China opposes the US on the safety of Iranian oil imports, then the US will have to invest in bases there rather than close to China. Isn't that a good thing? If you allow the US to impose its will with no consequences, China loses. Even if it's not worth it to block American desires, China should extract a price

Click to expand...

how many oil tankers do you think are out there? Do you know how many ships you would need to year round escort every tanker coming from the middle east to China? Now, if we are to run such an operation, Djibouti would certainly not be enough of a base and they will need other ports where they can access that can supply. So, they will need to look into agreements for that. I'm not against that part at all.

If you are saying that China should arm Iran as retaliation for America arming Taiwan, then that would be a reasonable argument. But Iran has not purchased any major system from China in the past and you can try speculating on why that is. Is it an Iranian decision or a Chinese one or both? Would that upset your relationship with Saudi Arabia? All things to keep in mind.

If China is getting into the businesses of offering protection for money & influence, then it needs to make sure it still has enough force back at home. It needs to think about how to keep its ships safe in the event things go in the wrong direction. These are all things that China have not got into before. And if it were to get into something like this, Persian gulf is kind of far away and a troublesome region. It's not exactly a place you want to get into for your beginner lesson.

tphuang said:

where did I say that China should have a base in Iran? Can you find where I said that?

I'm pretty annoyed that you are insinuating this

I'm actually quite uncomfortable about the idea of China providing maritime security blanket for other countries far away from its home base. It's not even possible to do so before it has nuclear submarines.

Now tell me, how do you think Iranian navy can get strong enough to actually defend itself? And if you cannot think of a reasonable path, then what can China actually provide for them to change that situation?

Click to expand...

there's a few things:

1. ISR data sharing
2. sell midget SSKs, frigates, corvettes, shore based ASM batteries, vehicle based long range ATGMs, MRLS, etc.
3. investment to get them hooked on Chinese components and tools in exchange for RMB denominated oil.

tphuang said:

Have you seen any evidence that Iran is willing to buy whole naval ships from China or that China is willing to sell them who ships (due to sanction concerns)?

Now the second part is probably more important. what makes you think that level of sale is enough?

In order for China to protect "SCO trade lanes", it would need at least one base around UAE, 1 in Pakistan, 1 in Myanmar.

I'm not against exploring or starting to build bases, but China doesn't yet have the fleet needed for a sustainable oversea network of basses yet

More importantly if i'm in PLA leadership, I'd concern myself more with Sea of Japan first so that ESPO crude can come through safely from Vladivostok area

keep in mind there is Diego Garcia. There are real logistical issues trying to sustain maritime shipping lane when India is likely not going to cooperate. And you would need other infrastructure in the region to support better ISR. Again, how do you accomplish any of this without military bases where your ISR drones can take off to monitor the region and you have some naval ships and submarines and long range aircraft stationed to assist things?

Click to expand...

Sea of Japan is dead. There's no way to control it due to South Korea existing and being a core US ally.

IOR is much more contestable and is the bigger prize anyhow.

FairAndUnbiased said:

there's a few things:

1. ISR data sharing
2. sell midget SSKs, frigates, corvettes, shore based ASM batteries, vehicle based long range ATGMs, MRLS, etc.
3. investment to get them hooked on Chinese components and tools in exchange for RMB denominated oil.

Click to expand...

None of the first 2) really have range. Iran has a very coastal defense network. I'm not opposed to selling Iran more advanced weapon system provided that you are willing to deal with the blow backs and don't scare off the Saudis or UAE

China's ability to conduct long range ISR is a mile ahead of everyone aside from America. Iran doesn't bring anything to the table if you want to extend protection further out

FairAndUnbiased said:

Sea of Japan is dead. There's no way to control it due to South Korea existing and being a core US ally.

IOR is much more contestable and is the bigger prize anyhow.

Click to expand...

Nah, SK isn't going to do anything or else NK will attack them. I hear that Chinese fleet should be able to find SSNs in sea of Japan, so they basically can move around safely from sea of Japan all the way down to Malacca straits. That allows them to pretty much blockade everyone in east Asia

tphuang said:

None of the first 2) really have range. Iran has a very coastal defense network. I'm not opposed to selling Iran more advanced weapon system provided that you are willing to deal with the blow backs and don't scare off the Saudis or UAE

China's ability to conduct long range ISR is a mile ahead of everyone aside from America. Iran doesn't bring anything to the table if you want to extend protection further out

Nah, SK isn't going to do anything or else NK will attack them. I hear that Chinese fleet should be able to find SSNs in sea of Japan, so they basically can move around safely from sea of Japan all the way down to Malacca straits. That allows them to pretty much blockade everyone in east Asia

Click to expand...

the whole point is that you give Iran the weapons systems it needs to control the Persian Gulf yet would be of limited use for threatening the UAE or Saudi Arabian homelands.

The Persian Gulf has geography that heavily favors short/medium ranged systems.


Immediately you notice the Straits of Hormuz are a major chokepoint for anyone that has a forward base only inside the Gulf, there's mountain ranges in Iran right up to the coast. It is an environment with easy ISR of targets: shallow water, no cover or concealment on the southern bank, constricted movement in all 3 dimensions.



Neither UAE nor Saudi are severely threatened if Iran has an advantage in the Persian Gulf, since and .

ISR: There can be potentially supply of data (to identify forces in the gulf), early warning radars or even radar bases, and in exchange local partners gives datasharing for those radars. These radars conduct early warning of fleet movements and missile launches in the entire western IOR. Again, Saudi and UAE shouldn't be threatened by this, as they're not going to be launching missiles or moving large fleets against Iran.

FairAndUnbiased said:

the whole point is that you give Iran the weapons systems it needs to control the Persian Gulf yet would be of limited use for threatening the UAE or Saudi Arabian homelands.

The Persian Gulf has geography that heavily favors short/medium ranged systems.

Immediately you notice the Straits of Hormuz are a major chokepoint for anyone that has a forward base only inside the Gulf, there's mountain ranges in Iran right up to the coast.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

It is an environment with easy ISR of targets: shallow water, no cover or concealment on the southern bank, constricted movement in all 3 dimensions.

Neither UAE nor Saudi are severely threatened if Iran has an advantage in the Persian Gulf, since

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

.

ISR: There can be potentially supply of data (to identify forces in the gulf), early warning radars or even radar bases, and in exchange local partners gives datasharing for those radars. These radars conduct early warning of fleet movements and missile launches in the entire western IOR. Again, Saudi and UAE shouldn't be threatened by this, as they're not going to be launching missiles or moving large fleets against Iran.

Click to expand...

The oil needs to go far beyond Persian gulf. It needs to get to Malacca straits. For this to actually work, they will need to be able to station long range ISR in multiple places along the way