Definitely. That's why China needs Central Asia to be on her side instead of falling towards NATO. The latter scenario must never be allowed to happen.H20s could use that route in reverse.
Last edited:
Definitely. That's why China needs Central Asia to be on her side instead of falling towards NATO. The latter scenario must never be allowed to happen.H20s could use that route in reverse.
To-be-honest, many layman in the public usually don't understand the importance of Central Asia, mainly because they are mostly known in history textbook as former Soviet states that got their independence after the disintegration of the USSR.
Other than energy (uranium ore and oil & gas) and food (grain), there is one other yet important thing that I believe is crucial for China - defense.
For one thing, as long as Central Asia is securely under the influence of China and a pro-China Russia, China has little to worry about her western frontier. However, since the attempted colour revolution in Kazakhstan early last year plus the worsening Russian influence in Central Asia due to the war in Ukraine and Moscow's recent beef with Astana, China must be prepared to step in and fill the void left by Russia in Central Asia in order to secure and defend her western rear from any attempts of coercion and subjugation by the US-led NATO.
Apart from preventing NATO from having any significant military and political presence in Central Asia (military bases, observation (read: spying) stations, training grounds for Muslim extremists WRT Xinjiang and the BRI, etc), Central Asia is also very useful as per below:
View attachment 107576
US strategic bombers based in Western Europe can reach western China to conduct strategic bombing against Chinese military and civilian infrastructures and industries from that direction.
For the defense of China further out to the west:
1. Turkey is a NATO member and is harboring Xinjiang extremists and seperatists, hence they are unreliable;
2. Azerbaijan is allied to Turkey and has close relations with NATO, so they aren't really dependable either;
3. Georgia is pretty much a de-facto NATO member since 2008; and
4. Armenia, despite being a Russian ally, can be easily bypassed.
Going up north to Russia is certainly a no-go, and the same goes for Iran down south. Hence, the only way that US bombers could ever reach China's western frontier would be through Central Asia.Therefore, Central Asia should play its role as a geopolitical and military barrier in order to prevent NATO from conducting long-range attacks into China's interior from the west.
This would very much require China to significantly beef up her involvement and influencing efforts in the region in the coming years.
I agree. I also add that SCO need to beef up their cooperation and become like 5 Eyes. It means a cooperation in intelligent and counter-intelligent operation.Central Asian countries have just been at the SCO technology transfer forum where they got all kinds of technology given to them. It’s mainly agriculture but I would imagine it also involves security and military technologies.
I suspect that Chinas plans for Central Asia go far beyond what some here are saying.
CA has trade agreements with the EU, Russia and China, it’s connected to the INSTC and the China-Europe railway. This makes it an excellent place to manufacture goods for export to the entire Eurasian landmass.
In order for this to happen, the region must be secure, and that means internal security mostly to prevent coups etc.
Militarily speaking the region must be able to defend itself, a key tenet of the SCO I think. In this regard I hope military discussion is very important to the SCO, and we should be able to discuss it.
If China will be helping build industrial parks with gigafactories powered by solar and hydro then these areas need be be militarily secured.
To me this means air defense, anti-stealth, anti-drone, and other defensive technologies should be shared between SCO members.
Ultimately it’s not enough though, because each SCO member should be able to conventionally deter any non-SCO country.
So, even generally speaking, is there some technology that China can share with SCO that can deter conventional (e.g. from the USA) attacks on them? Could it be quickly and widely produced and shared? I think the answer is yes.
We have multiple threads for this topic. This was created to discuss China's relationship with SCO and the global south. Sure, if they sell something to another country to strengthen relationship, would that be something good to discuss here? Sure.Central Asian countries have just been at the SCO technology transfer forum where they got all kinds of technology given to them. It’s mainly agriculture but I would imagine it also involves security and military technologies.
I suspect that Chinas plans for Central Asia go far beyond what some here are saying.
CA has trade agreements with the EU, Russia and China, it’s connected to the INSTC and the China-Europe railway. This makes it an excellent place to manufacture goods for export to the entire Eurasian landmass.
In order for this to happen, the region must be secure, and that means internal security mostly to prevent coups etc.
Militarily speaking the region must be able to defend itself, a key tenet of the SCO I think. In this regard I hope military discussion is very important to the SCO, and we should be able to discuss it.
If China will be helping build industrial parks with gigafactories powered by solar and hydro then these areas need be be militarily secured.
To me this means air defense, anti-stealth, anti-drone, and other defensive technologies should be shared between SCO members.
Ultimately it’s not enough though, because each SCO member should be able to conventionally deter any non-SCO country.
So, even generally speaking, is there some technology that China can share with SCO that can deter conventional (e.g. from the USA) attacks on them? Could it be quickly and widely produced and shared? I think the answer is yes.
Looks like China is making quite the play in Iraq recently.The Central Bank of Iraq will allow trade with China to be settled directly in RMB.
so PetroChina now has access to a vast reserve of oil that can be produced at really low cost.PetroChina is set to take over as the sole lead operator of Iraq’s supergiant West Qurna 1 oil field as the U.S.’s ExxonMobil is finally close to being able to sell its 32.7 percent stake in the site.
Originally West Qurna 1 was thought to have around 9 billion barrels of these reserves, but early in 2019 Iraq’s Oil Ministry said the field had recoverable reserves of more than 20 billion barrels. The Ministry added that the plans were to boost the field’s crude oil production capacity to more than 700,000 barrels per day (bpd) by the end of 2025, from the then-(and now) 450,000-500,000 bpd level. As with all of Iraq’s major oil fields, West Qurna 1 crude oil has an average lifting cost of around US$1-2 per barrel (operating cost excluding capital expenditure), the lowest development cost in the world, along with Iran and Saudi Arabia.
Before this award to CPECC on Majnoon, though, two other game-changing contracts had been signed for the supergiant field. One was with China’s Hilong Oil Service & Engineering Company to drill 80 wells at a cost of US$54 million, and the other was with the Iraq Drilling Company - - to drill 43 wells at a cost of US$255 million. Soon after these awards, China’s Anton Oil entered the picture, on a ‘project management and development services’ contract. The plan for Majnoon, with an estimated 38 billion barrels of oil in place, is to increase oil production from the current circa-240,000 bpd Majnoon oilfield to 600,000 bpd by 2026.
so basically Chinese oil players pushed ExxonMobil out pretty aggressively, so they can make more money on oil sales out of Iraq. Pretty Machiavellian moves all around.“What the Chinese wanted was to push ExxonMobil out of Iraq, so it could have first refusal on all other major oil and gas fields in the country, and these could then be linked in to what it was doing in Iran, and with ExxonMobil’s withdrawal that is what it’s achieved,” the Iran source told OilPrice.com.
Looks like now that they have full access here, they can make a lot more revenue.The reason why China wanted to have the West Qurna 1 field to itself, according to the Iran source and to a senior source who worked closely with Iraq’s Oil Ministry at that time, both exclusively spoken to by OilPrice.com, is that the understanding that China originally reached with the then-Iraq government was absolutely in line with the deal it had agreed for Majnoon at the outset. The original Majnoon deal, and by extension the deal for West Qurna 1, involved a 25-year contract but – critically – one that would only officially start two years after the signing date, so allowing China to recoup more profits on average per year and less upfront investment. The per barrel payments to China would be the higher of either the mean average of the 18 month spot price for crude oil produced, or the past six months’ mean average price. It would also involve at least a 10 percent discount to China for at least five years on the value of the oil it recovered and, in addition, whichever Chinse developer that took the lead would receive a 30 percent discount to the lowest mean one-year average market price at the key gas pricing hubs for the gas it captured.
800 million standard cubic feet = maybe 80 million cubic meter per day. 0.08 * 365 = 29 bcm. That's quite a decent amount of natural gas actually.Iraq Oil Minister Hayan Abdel-Ghani was cited by Reuters as saying that the new contracts are expected to help produce over 800 million standard cubic feet per day of natural gas.