China's Belt Road and Initiative gets full mention in the Western media as a China at the vanguard of globalisation while the US under Trump or Britain under Brexit is not. China has also with fanfare diversified its oil and gas supplies in simultaneously opening a China-Myanmar pipeline to avoid relying too much on sea routes.
One reason for China's 'March West' is development. But it is also part of a strategy to connect itself to Central and South Asia markets as well as the oil and gas reserves of post-Soviet republics and the Middle East. This is why Erdogan's Turkish state was warned not to try backing jihadist militants in Xinjiang just as he had in Syria.
The New Great Game is on. Unreported in the Western media, President Trump is planning to increase US troop numbers in Afghanistan in order to counter Chinese inroads as regards securing access to the copious mineral wealth. The Afghanistan War was always about geopolitics and securing, if possible, the TAPI gas pipeline.
The TAPI pipeline was often written off as a strategic interest by dim-witted commentators and so-called "journalists" as part of a conspiracy theory" explanation for Western forces entering Afghanistan after 2001. True, other goals such as destroying Al Qaida were far more important, but the pipeline was always an interest.
Long after the original reasons for the Afghanistan War had been forgotten, journalists remained incurious as to the idea that Afghanistan's strategic position between a rapidly developing South Asia and the gas rich Central Asian lands joined by a road and rail connection and a gas pipeline was a reason to "stay the course".
The Chinese 'Barf' is a successful version of what Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland championed as a New Silk Route Initiative ( NSRI ) back in 2012 as 'nation building' and 'democracy promotion' was downgraded in importance. Certainly, Britain's leaders never mentioned these geostrategic and economic motives.
At least in the US, the New Great Game is partially admitted as a reality in which the US should contend and vie for access to resources and to secure east-west flows of goods and energy. This was one reason for expanding NATO's reach by trying to secure the overthrow of Yanukovych in Ukraine in 2013 and bring in Georgia.
The rationale can never be admitted as purest geopolitics and the risks are justified by the usual hypocritical prating about 'our values' as a brand that means Western Power has more 'right' to be projected than Russia's or China's power. In Britain, mentioning energy geopolitics or resources is considered bad form.
In reality, Central Asia is the cockpit of a new struggle between the Global Powers in a new Great Game for control over what Mackinder called 'The World Island'. Afghanistan is a handy piece of strategic real estate for the US to have access to with its megabase at Bagram and strategic reach from the base.
The TAPI pipeline remains a difficult ambition because of insurgent activity from the Taliban in Helmland where most of the British soldiers died before withdrawal in 2014. But US advisers and trainers with the Afghan army are back there trying to ensure the security of the route of a pipeline that would connect with Gwadar.
This would downgrade both the relative strength and role of Iran and Russia as energy suppliers to lands to East Asia. With Iran being targeted again by the Trump administration, TAPI would become a revived rival project to IPI and knocking Iran out as a regional player would mean controlling a major energy supplier to China.
China would, however, be very hostile to a US war of aggression against Iran. It has already been hostile to Turkey's covert support for jihadists in Xinjiang and could retaliate by backing Kurdish PKK leftist-nationalist militias in Syria. Attacking Iran would downgrade Assad's security but destabilise the region and the world.
China's Belt Road and Initiative gets full mention in the Western media as a China at the vanguard of globalisation while the US under Trump or Britain under Brexit is not. China has also with fanfare diversified its oil and gas supplies in simultaneously opening a China-Myanmar pipeline to avoid relying too much on sea routes.
One reason for China's 'March West' is development. But it is also part of a strategy to connect itself to Central and South Asia markets as well as the oil and gas reserves of post-Soviet republics and the Middle East. This is why Erdogan's Turkish state was warned not to try backing jihadist militants in Xinjiang just as he had in Syria.
The New Great Game is on. Unreported in the Western media, President Trump is planning to increase US troop numbers in Afghanistan in order to counter Chinese inroads as regards securing access to the copious mineral wealth. The Afghanistan War was always about geopolitics and securing, if possible, the TAPI gas pipeline.
The TAPI pipeline was often written off as a strategic interest by dim-witted commentators and so-called "journalists" as part of a conspiracy theory" explanation for Western forces entering Afghanistan after 2001. True, other goals such as destroying Al Qaida were far more important, but the pipeline was always an interest.
Long after the original reasons for the Afghanistan War had been forgotten, journalists remained incurious as to the idea that Afghanistan's strategic position between a rapidly developing South Asia and the gas rich Central Asian lands joined by a road and rail connection and a gas pipeline was a reason to "stay the course".
The Chinese 'Barf' is a successful version of what Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland championed as a New Silk Route Initiative ( NSRI ) back in 2012 as 'nation building' and 'democracy promotion' was downgraded in importance. Certainly, Britain's leaders never mentioned these geostrategic and economic motives.
At least in the US, the New Great Game is partially admitted as a reality in which the US should contend and vie for access to resources and to secure east-west flows of goods and energy. This was one reason for expanding NATO's reach by trying to secure the overthrow of Yanukovych in Ukraine in 2013 and bring in Georgia.
The rationale can never be admitted as purest geopolitics and the risks are justified by the usual hypocritical prating about 'our values' as a brand that means Western Power has more 'right' to be projected than Russia's or China's power. In Britain, mentioning energy geopolitics or resources is considered bad form.
In reality, Central Asia is the cockpit of a new struggle between the Global Powers in a new Great Game for control over what Mackinder called 'The World Island'. Afghanistan is a handy piece of strategic real estate for the US to have access to with its megabase at Bagram and strategic reach from the base.
The TAPI pipeline remains a difficult ambition because of insurgent activity from the Taliban in Helmland where most of the British soldiers died before withdrawal in 2014. But US advisers and trainers with the Afghan army are back there trying to ensure the security of the route of a pipeline that would connect with Gwadar.
This would downgrade both the relative strength and role of Iran and Russia as energy suppliers to lands to East Asia. With Iran being targeted again by the Trump administration, TAPI would become a revived rival project to IPI and knocking Iran out as a regional player would mean controlling a major energy supplier to China.
China would, however, be very hostile to a US war of aggression against Iran. It has already been hostile to Turkey's covert support for jihadists in Xinjiang and could retaliate by backing Kurdish PKK leftist-nationalist militias in Syria. Attacking Iran would downgrade Assad's security but destabilise the region and the world.
No comments:
Post a Comment