Syria Not Ready for Peace

When the United Nations announced a cessation of the Syrian Peace talks in Munich until the end of February it came with little surpirse. Announcing the collapse of the talks, the United Nations Special Envoy Staffan de Mistura took great pains to assert that the negotiations had not failed but were simply experiencing a hiatus until the 25^th of February 2016.

While admitting that "there's more work to be done", Mr de Mistura assured the press that this "is not the end…..They came and they stayed. Both sides insisted on the fact that they are interested in having a political process started" he said.

 But he noted that “I have concluded, frankly, that after the first week of preparatory talks there is more work to be done, not only by us but by the stakeholders,”. According to the New York Times, Mr De Mistura then suggested that the Assad government’s failure to alleviate the humanitarian crisis in Syria by allowing food and medicine into rebel-held towns had prevented any serious discussions.  A sentiment echoed by the Secretary General Ban Ki Moon who in a letter to the United Nations Security Council declared,

 “The latest shelling and bombardments have destroyed many more Syrian lives, as well as schools and hospitals, and have created large numbers of internally displaced persons, many of whom will become refugees….. . ..The escalated military activity by several parties, and the threats to resort to further use of force, risk derailing efforts to find a sustainable political solution,”

 A Long Road

But it was always going to be a long and difficult road to get to a peace deal. Domestically both the Assad Regime and the Democratic Opposition are nowhere near ready to sit down and play nice. During the past five years the Assad regime has persistently showed a lack of respect for the peace process by focusing its military campaign on those seeking a more democratic political situation rather than terrorist groups like ISIS and Jabhat al-Nusra.  The recent Russian bombing of Aleppo, a rebel held city, during the latest talks is one such example.

 The opposition forces are understandably unwilling to sit down and talk. They are adamant that Assad is simply wasting their time, as their demands that sieges be lifted on rebel-held towns, airstrikes halted and political prisoners released have not been met. The leader of the democratic opposition’s High Negotiating Committee, Riad Hijab, stated that “The regime is trying to buy time without doing anything,” and over twitter the HNC announced it would not return to Geneva “until it sees progress on the ground.”

Another issue with the negotiations is the plethora of opposition groups. At present there are over 20 recognised opposition groups to the Assad regime, which can create issues in negotiations. Last year Kazakhstan hosted a series of talks to allow over 30 representatives from various Syrian opposition groups to meet and chart a road map for their vision of Syria’s future. The problem is, they are not the only ones involved.

International Interference

Compounding these issues is the involvement of nations such as Russia, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and the United States. Meeting last week in Munich these countries hashed out a ceasefire agreement which is due to start on the 1^st of March.

But will it be enough? Probably not, Russia is certainly not slowing down its campaign in Syria, if anything it has escalated its air campaign. In Aleppo Russian cluster bombs have destroyed large sections of the city, including schools and children’s hospitals all because it was controlled by the moderate opposition forces.  Clearly, Russia is hoping to provide the Assad regime with a stronger grasp on Syria prior to the renewal of peace negotiations on the 25^th of February.  

Perhaps though Russia is merely afraid that if it does not continue aiding Assad that America will revert to its supposed original plan which was to let ISIS take over the country. According to some sources America had  planned on the rise of a salafist (ultra-conservative Islamic group) in eastern Syria and was hoping to use this group to defeat Assad. But Russia's involvement in the war has complicated this and now many are admitting Russia is winning the war against ISIS.

Saudi Arabia is also keen to enter the Syrian conflict in more a tangible way. At a recent meeting at NATO Headquarters, Saudi Arabia announced that it wishes to form a coalition force and engage on the ground in Syria and Iraq in the fight against ISIS. However, there is a prevalent concern among other nations that troops from the countries, which are predominantly Sunni Muslim, would cause a rise in sectarian violence by supporting the Sunni opposition which is losing ground to Assad’s Hezbollah and Iranian Shia fighters.

Turkey has also been accused by Russia of masterminding an incursion into Syria.  According to Russian sources Turkey has been building up infrastructure along the borders with Syria consistent with what is required for a large scale movement of military vehicles.  Considering the recent bombings in Turkey by Kurdish separatists it would be safe to assume that Turkey would be considering movements against these groups in Syria.

Is Peace Possible?

Probably not as all the signs point to the Syrian and Iraqi conflict being a protracted one. The deadline for a ceasefire of March the 1^st is under question due to the multitude of opposition and regime groups that must agree during the negotiating period.It will also be complicated by the current international environment, as Russian Prime Minister Medvedev pointed out in an interview,  

"The Americans and our Arab partners must think well: do they want a permanent war?" It would be impossible to win such a war quickly, especially in the Arab world, where everybody is fighting against everybody. All sides must be compelled to sit at the negotiating table instead of unleashing a new world war."

The current massing of 350,000 soldiers, 20,000 tanks, 2,450 warplanes and 460 military helicopters in northern Saudi Arabia for the region’s largest ever military exercise  “Northern Thunder” places doubts on the international community’s willingness to negotiate through this crisis. Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Jordan, Bahrain, Sudan, Kuwait, Morocco, Pakistan, Tunisia, Oman, Qatar, Malaysia and several other nations look more like they are preparing for military engagement and if Russia decides to support Assad and picks a fight with coalition forces, America will likewise be drawn into the conflict. Meanwhile in Europe, counties will continue to suffer under the strain of thousands more refugees escaping the conflict.

This post was published in a modified version in The Vision Times

Why the EU is Syria's next Casualty

As the bombs continue to drop in Aleppo and another estimated 70, 000 people flee Syria, an additional and surprising casualty of the war has emerged. The European Union, established over 50 years ago as a brave new way to stop the recurring conflicts that had plagued the continent in the past, is perilously close to crumbling.

Originally conceived in the aftermath of World War II as a way to stop the destructive fighting that had ravaged Europe over the 19^th and 20^th centuries, the European Union started life as an economic union. Designed specifically to tie together the diverse nations of Germany and France, the forefathers of the EU believed that if these nations were economically tied to one another the continual belligerent behaviour would cease to exist.

 Representing a unified yet diverse federal state, for the better part of 20 years the European Union has being a border-free, single currency, European economic zone. In creating this unique space Europe established one of the strongest and largest economies. In addition,  the European Union’s political integration has meant that member states have not been in conflict with one another for over 50 years.

Under the constant wave of migrants seeking humanitarian aid, it has become apparent that the structures and cornerstones of the European Union are not designed well at all. The recent Euro currency crisis created cracks in the European Union’s infrastructure, but Europe was slowly recovering. However, with the recent humanitarian crisis these cracks have become holes in the Union, with many of the 28 member states now suspending key components of the EU treaty to cope with the refugee emergency.

Open Borders Now Closing

Established 20 years ago in Schengen Luxemburg 1985, a borderless Europe was hailed as a cornerstone of the European Union and enabled people to work and move freely throughout the region. It created a sense of unity and common ground throughout the many diverse European nations.

In September 2015 Germany decided it would close its borders as a way to deal with the human sea that was crossing into their territories, thus suspending this key component of the EU; a region without borders. Germany was  soon followed by Hungary, Slovakia, Poland, Netherlands, Austria, the Czech Republic, and most recently Finland, Denmark and Sweden.  This suspension had many flow-on economic effects as business experienced supply delays and workers were hinder from travelling freely in the union due to the reimposed international border controls. Likewise, governments had to spend fortunes on re-establishing border controls.

As the Finnish Finance Minster Alex Stubbs stated “one of the fundamental freedoms of the European Union is under threat and that is the free movement of people and the whole Schengen Agreement.”

External Controls

In an attempt to re-establish territorial control, last week EU ministers urged Greece, the primary entry point for Syrian refugees, to do more to control the huge influx of migrants. Threatening to exclude it from the continent’s prized passport free zone, which would have wide ranging economic consequences, EU ministers said Greece needed to put stronger controls into place.

This is easier said than done. According to Greece’s Immigration Minister Yannis Mouzalas,  the EU has been dragging its feet in providing Greece with aid to combat the tide of refugees. Monetary funds, finger printing equipment, border guards and medical staff have been slow in reaching Greece.   This has hampered the ability of Greek officials to process the estimated 3000 refugees that are entering its territory every day. 

Rising Ethno-nationalism

Disconcertingly, the biggest threat to the EU has been the rise of right wing nationalism and xenophobia among many of the member states since the attack on Paris in 2015. In Austria, Poland, Sweden Finland and Denmark right wing nationalist parties who have campaigned on an anti-immigration platform have gained a large proportion of the vote in their respective countries.

In each case these parties have then strengthened their anti-EU stance. Arguing that the EU is ineffective and domineering due to its inability to take real action.  The right wing movement claims nations need less involvement in the EU and should return to a less integrated Europe.  Leading the charge in this debate has been Britain’s Prime Minister David Cameron who is in the process of holding a referendum on whether Britain should remain a EU member in 2016.

While no nation has yet called time on their EU membership, it is apparent from this crisis that the EU needs to change. It is argued that many would leave if it was financially viable. Its bureaucracies and institutions are bloated and slow to react. The 28 members are constantly having trouble working together, ironically indicating that while the EU was created to end constant bickering and conflict 50 years ago, little has changed.

 Billionaire George Soros has also warned that Europe is on the ‘verge of collapse’. In an interview with the New York Review of Books he stated that Merkel “correctly predicted the EU is on the verge of collapse. …Merkel correctly foresaw the potential of the migration crisis to destroy the European Union. What was a prediction has become a reality. The European Union badly needs fixing.”

The Worsening Plight of Refugee Women and Children

As Europe continues its conversation over the sexual assaults by male refugees on New Year’s Eve in Germany, Sweden, Finland and Norway, female refugees around Europe are facing the fear of sexual assault and attacks everyday in refugee shelters and camps around the continent.  

In 2015 reports from German social work organisations spoke about how women and children in German refugee centres are being raped, assaulted and even forced into prostitution by male refugees who deem them to be ‘wild game’.

In August last year four social work organisations and women’s rights groups in Hesse, Germany wrote a two page letter requesting help for women in mixed gender shelters.

"The ever-increasing influx of refugees has complicated the situation for women and girls at the receiving centre in Giessen (HEAE) and its subsidiaries. The practice of providing accommodation in large tents, the lack of gender-separate sanitary facilities, premises that cannot be locked; the lack of safe havens for women and girls — to name just a few spatial factors — increases the vulnerability of women and children within the HEAE. This situation plays into the hands of those men who assign women a subordinate role and treat women travelling alone as 'wild game'. The consequences are numerous rapes and sexual assaults. We are also receiving an increasing number of reports of forced prostitution. It must be stressed: these are not isolated cases."

Women’s Rights Not a Priority  ?

This situation has now spread across many European nations where female refugees and children are travelling. Jina  More, a reporter for Buzzfeed  argues that many of these women and children are not aware of the dangers and aid agencies are not taking the problem into account. According to an interview with the Senior Public Information Officers for the UNHCR Melita Šunjiæ,

“ I’m fully aware of what you’re talking about, but these issues happen when you register women in refugee camps, when certain people get privileges and aid and others don’t, things like that. … At the moment this, [sexual assault or exploitation] is definitely not the problem”

But the problem is, it is.

From forced marriages, domestic abuse to the trafficking of women, female refugees are facing a brutal gauntlet to seek a better life and due to a culture that hides sexual assault and violence, much of what these women suffer is kept hidden from the public eye.

Backlash

Many female refugees fear a backlash if they report these abuses. From being rejected by their husbands or relatives to death threats and honour killings, the repercussions for many female refugees who are perceived to have destroyed their families’ honour by being victims is very real.

Take the case described by one psychologist in Germany , who told of a female refugee she was treating whose husband had prostituted her to their smugglers to pay for their way to Europe. He had then attacked her himself for damaging his honour. They are now separated and her husband has been subjected to a restraining order, but she lives in fear of an attack.

A very real fear given that in October last year Germany witnessed an honour killing of a young Syrian migrant who is only known as Rokstan M. She had been attacked by three men in Syria and had fled to Germany with her family gaining asylum and working as an interpreter for the German government.

 In October 2015 her body was found with stab wounds in her family’s garden in the German city of Dessau while she had been visiting her family. In the days before her death she posted on her Whatsapp profile that  “I am awaiting death. But I am too young to die.” 

Europe’s Response

The governments in Europe agree that they need to do more for refugee females and children. The UNHCR in a statement in October 2015 asked,

“All concerned national authorities in Europe to take measures to ensure the protection of women and girls, including through providing adequate and safe reception facilities. UNHCR also asks authorities, as a matter of urgency, to find alternatives to the detention of children.“

However, due to the extensive nature of the refugee crisis many shelters are overwhelmed. Furthermore, westernisation of refugees will take time. The concept that women should be treated in accordance with western mores, will still be an anathema to many of these young men who have been raised in an environment which secludes women.

 Women rights although a burgeoning area of discourse are often abrogated in the Middle East and North Africa and it is not just men who must be educated but the women themselves who need to know their rights.

Why tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran could Destroy the Middle East

Iran has chosen to escalate its ongoing war of words with Saudi Arabia this week’s by accusing the Saudis of bombing the Iranian Embassy in Yemen on Thursday night.


Iranian state run media, IRNA, announced the attack stating that the Saudi Arabian Airforce had targeted the embassy and injured several staff members. Later reports downgraded this bulletin stating missiles fell in the vicinity of the Embassy and a few were injured by shrapnel. According to Reuters, eye witnesses from the Yemeni capital of Sana’a indicate this may not be the case, stating that a missile had exploded 700 meters from the embassy with shrapnel and rocks landing near the building.


Warmongering


So is this simply a case of overzealous Iranians stirring up trouble with their Sunni neighbours?Perhaps, the Iranians are deeply upset over the beheading of the Shia cleric Ayatollah Sheik Nimr al-Nimr who was a staunch critic of the ruling Saudi and Bahraini monarchies. From the President of Iran, Hassan Rouhani stating “One does not respond to criticism by cutting off heads” and ceasing 172.5 million dollars worth of trade, to the statements by the Supreme Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, declaring “divine retribution”, Iran’s leaders are visibly upset. The Iranians themselves have also demonstrated their ire with the destruction of the Saudi Embassy in Tehran and a consul in Mashhad.


Saudi Arabia likewise is understandably cooling its relations with Iran with equal vigour. Iranian diplomats were given 48 hours to leave Saudi Arabia and all diplomatic ties have been severed. In a recent report from the Economist the Saudi Deputy Crown Prince, Prince Mohammed bin Salman stated that the Saudi’s were not intending to make this a hostile confrontation.


"It is something that we do not foresee at all, and whoever is pushing towards that is somebody who is not in their right mind. Because a war between Saudi Arabia and Iran is the beginning of a major catastrophe in the region ... For sure we will not allow any such thing."


Perhaps this is because there are alternate proxy theatres where the tensions can be discharged.


Yemen , Syria and Iraq


Since 2011 Saudi Arabia has been engaged in the Yemeni civil war which it believes is being driven by Iranian support of the Houthis.


Ansar Allah, or the Houthis, as they have become known are a Zaidia Shia group from Sa’dah. Originally formed in 2004 during the insurgency against the former President Saleh they are said to have received weaponry and training from Iran and are regarded by the Saudis as a proxy for Iran in the region.


In the aftermath of the 2011 Yemeni Revolution the Houthis became dissatisfied with the Saudi run peace accord refusing to recognise the Saudi backed government of Abd Rabbuh Mansur Hadi. In 2014-15 they seized the Yemeni capital Sanaa and the southern city of Aden, taking control of the government and forcing President Hadi to flee to Saudi Arabia. In an attempt to reinstate Hadi to power, Saudi Arabia and its allies since this time have been bombing Yemen in an attempt to force the Houthis into retreat.


In Syria the original rebellion against Assad was turned into a sectarian conflict when the Saudis armed hard-line Sunni militias to fight against the Iranian supported regime of Assad, one of which was ISIS. As ISIS spread throughout Syria, Shia women and children were slaughtered and the group soon spread to neighbouring Shia led Iraq destabilising another country.


Sectarianism or Defence


Iran and Saudi Arabia have long been rivals in the Middle East. As the recognised leading proponents of the Sunni and Shia Islamic sectarian traditions, both have a history of trying to extend their influence over the Middle East since the 1970’s.


In 1978 Iran went through a theology based revolution and started supporting Shia militant groups throughout the Middle East. From Hezbollah in Lebanon to Hezbollah al-Hejaz in Saudi Arabia, Iranian supported groups have initiated several domestic conflicts across the Middle East since the late 1980’s.


In an effort to combat this domestic disturbance and meddling, Saudi Arabia has countered the Iranian destabilisation efforts by creating the Gulf Co-operation Council and supported Sunni based groups and governments throughout the region


Far Reaching Effect


The effect of the zero sum policymaking is that the entire region is often littered with conflicts based along sectarian divisions. Lebanon, Yemen, Syria and Iraq are all undergoing severe civil conflicts based around sectarian divisions which have their roots in the Sunni Shia Cold War.


The recent cooling of relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia has ruined the pending ceasefire in Yemen and has derailed the peace negotiations in Syria and Iraq. It has set back the fight against ISIS which will require all surrounding states to cooperate together and may cause further chaos as Iran ramps up its support of Shia militants in the region.

ISIS in Retreat

By Victoria Kelly-Clark


The expansion of ISIS in Iraq and Syria seems to have reached a turning point in the past 24 hours. In Iraq the Iraqi Security Forces (ISF) in coalition with the Popular Mobilisation Unit (PMU) took back the Iraqi city of Ramadi which was just one hour from the Iraqi capital Baghdad. Lost in May 2015, ISF troops along with US air support have besieged the city for the past two months but were only able to enter the city in the past 24 hours routing the 500 or so ISIS fighters that controlled the city.

On the Syrian side of the Islamic State’s territory, the Syrian Defence Forces (SDF) in coalition with the moderate FSA and the Kurdish YPG have captured a large swathe of territory south of Kobani, including the strategic Euphrates River crossing point of Tishrin Dam. This means that ISIS control over Syrian territories west of the Euphrates is now under threat and there are indeed reports that towns on that side have already fallen.

All of this would not have been possible without the significant actions of the Kurdish minorities in Syria and Iraq who form the largest component of the SDF and ISF infantry.

The Kurds on Top

According to military think tank IHS Janes, in a recent study the Islamic State has lost approximately 14% of its territory in Iraq and Syria, with its territory shrinking from 90,000 square kilometres to 78,000 in the past year. 12,800 km2 of that territory has returned to the hands of the Kurds of Iraq and Syria. Rudaw.net, a Kurdish news site stated that in the past year alone the Kurdish autonomous forces have been able to triple the size of their fledgling autonomous territory since they broke the siege on Kobani and thanks to their actions ISIS has also suffered financial difficulties.

According to IHS Janes senior Middle East analyst Columb Strack there has been “a negative financial impact on Islamic State (ISIS) due to the loss of control of the Tal Abyad border crossing prior to the recent intensification of air strikes against the group's oil production capability,".

This financial loss will now be compounded with the return of Tishrin Dam to the SDF. But ISIS may have already reached its limits; Janes also noted that its gains in Iraq came at the expense of the Kurdish territories as it reportedly pulled fighters from one area to the other indicating it was overstretched.

Roadblock Turkey

The biggest threat to the defeat of ISIS at present is Turkey. Turkey has allowed their border to be somewhat permeable to ISIS supporters and since it views the Kurdish YPG, who make up the bulk of the SDF, as aligned with a Turkish terrorist group called the PKK this is unsurprising.

Some theorists have speculated that Turkey is utilising the war against ISIS to try and hinder the development of an autonomous Kurdish area on their border. Supporting this theory was the turkish bombings of areas near the Kurdish town of Zargala, in August 2015 .

The Turkish PM Davutoğlu has also said that Turkey will not allow any “hostile groups” to cross the Euphrates, something which appears to be a thinly veiled threat against the YPG and SDF.

However, Turkey has yet to close their borders or create a buffer zone towards Syria and Iraq. This may be a good sign as a hostile Turkey determined to hinder the Kurdish Syrian forces is not a positive outcome for the war against ISIS.

 This article appeared in The Vision Times In Focus on the 4th of January 2016

http://www.visiontimes.com/2016/01/01/isis-is-fast-losing-ground.html

The Winter of Chinese Discontent

As the world focuses on the current crisis in the Middle East, the Communist Party in China (CCP) has again illustrated its incompetence. Last week Chinese authorities’ sentenced Pu Zhiqiang, one of China’s most prominent human rights lawyers and an advocate for internal change in the CCP, to a three year suspended sentence over a series of tweets.

Demonstrating the decision making of a despotic power desperate to maintain its grip on power the Communist authorities appear to be determined to crack down on all dissent. Given the current state of China, it is probably like trying to stop the tide.

No Legitimacy

In recent months the Chinese Communist Party has lurched from one crisis to another, constantly under pressure to demonstrate its ability to govern. The current leaders’ mismanagement of the economy this year has created potential conditions for a financial collapse in China, With the recent exposure of high level government corruption ( one state official had amassed 30 billion dollars) and the CCP’s inability to allow any accountable recourse the public’s trust in the CCP’s management has eroded.

Coupled then with constant failure to ensure public safety is the inability of the government to deal with the environmental disaster that is unfolding in China. Air pollution in the northern cities like Beijing is 20 times worse than what the World Health Organisation deems safe. At present the levels of PM2.5, the finest and most dangerous particles of pollution due to their ability to be stuck inside the respiratory system, in Beijing was at 331ppm (particles per million), safe levels are 50-100ppm.

The most recent Red Alerts in Beijing have only highlighted what people have known for months, that China’s environment is a ticking time bomb. The situation is so bad that in Beijing many people have resorted to buying clean air from overseas. Parents of inner Beijing city school children are fighting to allow the government to let them buy air purifiers for the cities many schools. Furthermore with industrial pollution in the rivers also so rampant that potable water supplies are now undrinkable. Ten percent of all farmland is unsafe for crop cultivation and the crisis is only going to get worse. As a result of this many of the younger generations are now openly questioning the legitimacy of the CCP to run the country.

Has China outgrown the CCP ?

Whilst China’s growth, economically and socially, has been massive, like many countries that have a dictatorial regime, the Communist Party has not been able to develop along with these changes. At present the CCP sits like a pimple on top of a seething mass of corruption, red tape and bureaucracy that represents the state. It takes years for practical decisions to be made and new ideas are constantly pushed to the margins as the regime seeks to maintain its power instead of looking after its citizens.

Consequently many netizens are releasing their frustrations with the CCP via the Internet. Making fun of the government in obscure ways on social media forums has become a rite of passage for many the younger generations, who feel empowered to freely criticize the government in blogs, tweets and social networking sites. As Larry Diamond explained in his recent article entitled Liberation Technology in the Journal of Democracy,

In order to spread defiance [against the CCP], the Chinese have an array of digital tools. Twitter has become one of the most potent means of political and social networking and the rapid dissemination of news, views and withering satire.

Democracy Needed?

While this social discontent bubbles along beneath the surface of Chinese society, the state and society are becoming more detached from one another. According to economist David Dollar, countries that industrialise quickly into what he identifies as a middle–income country, which China now is, often find themselves entering this phase where the government and the economy stagnate.

To move forward these countries need to undergo a transition to become democracies with strong civil liberties and independent judiciaries. If China is to move forward and solve its increasing social discontent it cannot just rely on repression. It needs to transition away from the dictatorial party and towards democracy.

This article appeared in The Vision Times In Focus Section on the 4/1/2016

http://www.visiontimes.com/2016/01/01/the-winter-of-chinese-discontent.html

Putin's Bluster

As Russia and Europe slowly make inroads against ISIS this week Vladimir Putin demonstrated why he is a force to be reckoned with. During a meeting with the Russian Defence Minister, Sergey Shoigu, Putin was captured stating,

“We must analyze everything happening on the battlefield, how the weapons operate. The Kalibrs (sea based cruise missiles) and KH-101 (airborne cruise missile) have proved to be modern and highly effective, and now we know it for sure - precision weapons that can be equipped with both conventional and special warheads, which are nuclear,” Putin said.

“Naturally, this is not necessary when fighting terrorists and, I hope, will never be needed,” the president added.

Reality or Just Machismo

The question on everyone mind was; Is Putin serious? Certainly as the war against ISIS continues, it is routine for weaponry to be analysed, but rarely will this be done on camera for all to see. Putin’s meeting with the Defence Minister was recorded live before an audience of journalists, like a piece of well choreographed theatre. So it is possible that this was merely fear mongering against ISIS, or was it for another audience entirely?

According to Natalia Antonova from the International Business Times, Putin’s casual dropping of the nuclear option was more about cultivating Russia’s image as a superpower at home and abroad. Currently Russia is in the trenches of an economic depression with poverty and inflation on the rise, so in utilising these old methods of redirection Putin is attempting to divert attention away from the domestic crises and install a renewed sense of nationalism. Furthermore, by demonstrating a calm decisiveness with his weapons of last resort, Putin appeals to the demagogues at home and abroad seeking to find a new superpower who can deal with the pressing threat posed by ISIS more quickly than the measured American led alliance.

Ending Isis

But while all this bluster may further cultivate Putin’s macho image, in reality Russia has never utilised its nuclear arsenal on an enemy at home or abroad and, given the international co-operation on ISIS, it is highly unlikely that it will utilise these weapons.

Rather, ending ISIS‘s reign of terror will be done through a good old-fashion siege. Currently Global Research reports that ISIS’s strongholds in Syria and Iraq are able to utilise permeable borders in countries such as Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Turkey to support their regime. Germany’s international broadcaster Duetsche Weller supported this claim with a recently released article that contained a video that comprehensively demonstrated that ISIS is not surviving off black market oil exchanges or hostage ransoms. Instead it appears that ISIS is utilising support groups from inside countries like the Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey to facilitate all its needs.

This is where the problem in destroying ISIS lies. To completely starve ISIS out, the NATO powers are going to have to secure all the borders around Iraq and Syria in a concerted effort. This means that current tensions between the opposing states of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Israel, Lebanon and Turkey would have to be overcome. They would then have to join forces and allow each other access to borders and share military information and data in a show of goodwill. However without this cooperation on all fronts ISIS will be able to play a game of cat and mouse exhausting all those who try to end its existence.

This appeared as 'Did Putin just put the world on Notice?' in The Vision Times In Focus Section on
Dec 14 2015

http://www.visiontimes.com/2015/12/14/did-putin-just-put-the-world-on-notice.html

While Turkey Blusters, Russia quietly backs down

While Turkey Blusters, Russia quietly backs down

By Victoria Kelly-Clark

In the 17 seconds the Turkish Airforce utilised to take down a Russian bomber, a 63 year peace between Russia and NATO was destroyed. As the tentative alliance between Russia and the NATO powers splinters, many have been surprised by the restraint Russia has shown in simply placing economic sanctions on Turkey rather than taking military action.

Declaring that Turkey’s attack was a ‘stab in the back’ Russia announced that as of January the 1^st 2016 Russia would end charter flights between the two countries; place a ban on hiring any new Turkish nationals and place import restrictions on certain Turkish goods.

It Could Have Been Worse

Certainly it could have been worse; Russia in previous years would have resorted to military action as they did in Georgia. However, extenuating circumstances appear to have caused Russian President, Vladimir Putin, to exercise restraint.

At present Russia is overextended, engaging in two theatres of war. Concurrent with the ISIS campaign, Russia is continuing its activities in the Ukraine where this week it suffered a setback thanks to Ukrainian nationalists.

On Tuesday while Turkey was downing the Russian plane, Ukrainian nationalists blew up several Ukrainian power transmission towers which were providing the bulk of electricity for the breakaway Crimean republic. Although now an independent province, the region still receives all its electricity from the Ukrainian power grid. This resulting state of emergency has caught the Russian government of guard as it cannot afford another incursion into Ukrainian territory to fix the problem.

Russia’s Impotence

Russia now faces a challenge; militarily it cannot respond to the Crimean crisis because sending troops in will cause a backlash from western powers, endangering any alliance in the Syrian campaign. Likewise, it will only do so much to Turkey, who, as a NATO member, has the support of 28 European allies and is Russia’s second biggest consumer of gas and oil due to the current energy climate. As Mikhail Kruitkin, a partner in the RusEnergy consulting firm, told Reuters.

 ‘The loss of such a big market as Turkey would be very sensitive for both the (Russian) state budget and for Gasprom (government owned oil and gas company)’.

A Wayward Turkey?

Turkey is also not getting off the hook. According to recent reports, many of its NATO allies are aghast at its actions this week.  France, Germany, Serbia and Greece have all made negative statements about Turkey’s recent behaviour, with RIA NOVISTI reporting that France at Wednesday’s emergency meeting of NATO allies declared that ‘Turkish activities were undermining the operation against the Islamic State militant group.’

But Turkey’s recent behaviour is more about protecting their domestic security and its current frustration with Russia’s involvement in Syria. In recent months Turkey has been successfully playing its own domestic security game in northern Syria. Aiding Washington in its war on ISIS, Turkey has utilised its access to United States military installations to destroy its own enemies who are fighting ISIS in northern Syria, the Kurds.

Currently engaged in an open civil conflict with the 20 million Kurds inside Turkey, the Kurdish forces in northern Syria are regarded by Turkey as a serious threat to their domestic stability. Kurdish separatist have attacked Turkey on numerous occasions and, now allied to Russia, the Kurds are no longer an easy target. Moreover, they are being armed by the United States and Russia and Turkey worries that these weapons may end up in the hands of their domestic terrorists instead of the anti-ISIS militia. If this is the case, Turkey fears it to may have a civil war on its hands causing further instability in the region.

 While Turkey Blusters Russia quietly backs down was published in The Vision Times on

Dec 1 2015

http://www.visiontimes.com/2015/12/01/while-turkey-blusters-russia-quietly-backs-down.html

The Next Causalities of ISIS

The Next Casualties of ISIS

In the aftermath of the attacks and bombings in Beirut, Nigeria and Paris and the bombing of the Russian Passenger Plane, it has become apparent that Isis is desperate to strike at the heart of those who are eradicating their hold over Iraq and Syria.

ISIS has stated that it is seeking to initiate a global war between Muslims and the rest of the world. They believe this is possible if they utilise small terrorist cells whose attacks will strike fear into western society and cause the estimated 44 million Western Muslims to be vilified and radicalised. To this end we see the Parisian terrorists utilise a stolen Syrian passport and travelled from Turkey, through to Greece and the Balkans and then on to Western Europe.

This news quickly exacerbated an already tense environment and, as planned, created a backlash against Muslims in countries like Australia and America. In Europe the attacks have had a much larger consequence for the hundreds of thousands of refugees who are fleeing war torn Syrian and Iraq.

The Backlash

In October alone it was estimated that 218,000 Syrian and Iraqi refugees arrived in Europe from across the Mediterranean while another estimated 500,000 refugees (mainly women and children) have arrived in Lebanon and Turkey over the past year. While the actual figures are expected to be much higher (as many pass through undetected), it is clear that these people now face being locked out of Europe.

In Poland for example, less than 24 hours after the Parisian attack the incoming European Affairs Minister Konrad Szymanskic stated,

"In the wake of the tragic events in Paris, Poland doesn't see the political possibilities to implement a decision on the relocation of refugees," he said. "The attacks mean there's a need for an even deeper revision of the European policy regarding the migrant crisis."

Hungary has also rolled out thousands of meters of barbed wire around its borders in an effort to stop refugees entering. Far-right politicians in Britain, Paris, Belgium, and the Netherlands have called for a closure of their borders in the past few days. Sweden, a country usually seen as progressive and peaceful, saw racism taken to a new level with two schools that were being converted into refugee shelters burned to the ground over the last weekend. In Germany a leading Mayoral candidate who supported refugee resettlements was stabbed in the neck by an anti-immigration activist.

Is ISIS the Winner?

So as the xenophobia runs rampant across Europe an estimated 700,000 refugees are seeking a new home. Who, if anyone, benefits? According to Shadi Hamid, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institute and author on Islamist politics, in the case of France it is ISIS.

“Anti-Muslim and anti-refugee sentiment really play into ISIS's hands. The more that happens, the more French Muslims feel alienated and are susceptible to extremist recruitment. France has long had a problem with integrating its Muslim population, and France does have a disproportionately high contribution of foreign fighters to ISIS. So there’s a deeper issue here and it hasn’t gotten better, it’s only gotten worse.” Shadi Hamid stated to The WorldPost

The Real Losers

So as ISIS goes full steam ahead with its plan to set the west against the Muslim world it is the refugees that are going to pay the price. Locked out of decent shelter and food as the brutal European winter approaches, refugees shunned from countries will have to be housed by other less prepared or equipped nations. In places like the German-Austrian border where many refugees have gathered a police spokesperson told the Guardian that “We’re doing our best to get the people out of the cold as quickly as we can,” he said. “But it will not be long before a child freezes to death.”

The Next Casualties of ISIS appeared in Vision Times on Nov 22 2015

http://www.visiontimes.com/2015/11/22/the-next-casualties-of-isis.html

The Birth of the Eurasian Dragon
By Victoria Kelly-Clark

Since the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008, America’s global leadership has been under fire. Many countries, including China and Russia, have expressed their belief that the prolonged global dominance of the United States through the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank is not acceptable.

This has made the Unites States understandably nervous. For in the current foreign policy climate, America is far too entrenched in the Middle East to effectively deal with threats to its financial dominance. This has given China and Russia the opportunity they need to lay the groundwork for a new economic order where they can operate on equal terms with America.

Bretton Woods the Chinese Way?

This has previously been impossible thanks to the 1943 Bretton Woods agreement. Essentially this deal allowed the US dollar to be used as the global reserve currency from the end of World War II onwards. For the United States this has ensured longevity to its role as the global superpower because the world cannot do without its currency as long as nations wish to trade internationally. Challenging the American led system is a very difficult challenge; however, China appears to have found a way.

The Chinese, already frustrated with the failure of the international order to accommodate its rising wealth and economic needs, have reached out to its ‘frenemy’ Russia. Russia, hit with disciplinary economic sanctions after the 2014 involvement in the Ukrainian crisis and after the huge drop in the price of oil, has seen its economy faltering dramatically. Rapid loss of profits from its hydrocarbon trading programs, thanks to an increase in American oil supply, and the dramatic plunge of the rouble have caused the Russian economy to implode.

China, observing this in 2014, saw an opportunity to create a new international monetary system based around the Yuan via an economic bloc formed with the Russians..China decided to provide its ‘big brother’ with as much aid as Russia needs. China and Russia started to bypass the dollar in all hydrocarbon exchanges, developing their own system that traded in their own currencies. In doing this China took a step toward creating a new system for international exchanges. As argued by Russian President Putin at APEC, ‘Switching to settlements in domestic currencies can largely contribute to balancing the global economy by reducing the impact of the dollar on the world financial and energy markets.’

The success of this Eurasian hydrocarbon trading scheme has meant trade between the two countries has increased dramatically according to Lin Zhi, head of the Europe and Central Asia Department of the Chinese Ministry of Economic Development. According to RT.com, Mr. Lin argued that the use of the Yuan in trading settlements increased ninefold in 2014 from 2013 when it was at 2%.

The Rise of the Eurasian Dragon

Building on this successful economic integration, Russia and China have forged ahead developing their vision for a Eurasian Economic Union which will be linked by a single currency like the Euro. Furthering this union is the Chinese establishment of the Silk Road Belt Economic Initiative which will establish infrastructure to link China with Europe across Central Asia. Argued to be Central Asia’s version of the Marshall Plan, it appears that China is trying to create a Eurasian Dragon state that can rival Europe and America.

Backed by China’s New Development Bank with its BRICS partners Brazil, Russia, India and South Africa and its 100 billion dollar alternative to the World Bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank or AIIB, China has set a course for changing the international monetary community. With this financial clout, China and its closest partners, like those in an Eurasian Union, will become financially powerful entities on the back of the Yuan, thus turning Eurasia into a new global hegemon.

Global Expansion

China is in an ideal position for this challenge as it is flush with the world’s largest reserve of foreign currencies and it must find a way to utilise it. However, China is clearly doing more than just angling for a bigger share of the global financial pie.

Take, for example, China’s recent expansionist moves in the South Pacific. Utilising every means possible China is expanding its maritime claims in the oil rich South China Sea. According to the Commander of the United States Pacific Fleet, Admiral Harry Harris, China is even going to the extent of dredging sand over reefs and then concreting over the newly formed land so it can build military structures on them to protect its interests in the region. At present it is estimated that they have create 4 kilometres of extra Chinese coastline. Arguing that China is “creating a great wall of sand with dredges and bulldozers” Admiral Harris highlighted how concerned the United States is over this recent behaviour.

America’s Predicament: To Ignore or To Engage?
The United States now faces the question of how to deal with this rapidly developing Chinese led power. Certainly the United States must maintain its presence in the Middle East as it continues to referee the latest Sunni-Shiite rivalry and hinder the rise of the Islamic State. However, it cannot afford to ignore the nascent Eurasian Dragon that is on its door step. As Gordon Chang recently argued in Global Affairs, “if this challenge is not checked the world will again be divided into spheres of influence and this will create the optimum environment for conflicts”.

Maintaining economic pressure on Russia will certainly go a long way to contain China’s development of a Eurasian Union. China, although currently cashed up, will not wish to hitch their wagon to a failing Russian economy that it needs to prop up. Likewise, engaging with China in the AIIB will enable the US to provide a guiding hand in its development.

Putin's Power Play

This is an extended version of my recent article in The Epoch Times

Putin’s Power Play

In the past months since the unrest in the Ukraine led to Russia’s unofficial occupation of eastern areas and the Crimean region, the international community has appeared shocked and appalled. Many have argued the world is entering a new era. Phrases like ‘a new Cold War’ have been suggested and many countries have been struggling to respond coherently, seemingly stunned by Vladmir Putin’s audacity to openly take advantage of neighbouring political instability. The lack of real world consequences for Russia has meant that Putin has no plans to withdraw any time soon. If anything it appears he only plans to consolidate his initial acquisition.

But is Russia merely being a peacekeeper or mirotvorchestvo in the region[1]. Or is it the latest move by Russian authorities, in a territorial game of Hungry Hippo with the European Union? The goal of course being that you grab as much territory bordering Europe as possible in the hope you will stop the EU and NATO encroaching on your economic and political interests. Alternatively is this a hard-line Putin keeping his precious Russia safe and protecting Russians lost during the dissolution of the Soviet Union? Or is this the start of the creation of a Eurasian superpower to rival China and the United States?

Russia the Eurasian Bear

Bridging both East and West, Russia has never viewed itself as a ‘western power’. Hemmed in by European powers to the west, Russia has often engaged in an eastern facing foreign policy. Clearly identifying its eastern territory’s and its soft underbelly of strategic importance. Thus by the time of the 20th century and the Soviet Union, the empire of mother Russia stretched from the Pacific to the Baltic and had control over territories bordering Iran and Pakistan.

But in creating such an empire and then the soviet experiment it became apparent that ethnic Russians were often regarded as the ‘body of loyal servants’[2], who could assist in governing the vast land. So despite its 1920-1930’s nativisation policy and the attempt to create a soviet man, the Russian Soviet authorities still took the advice of Machiavelli, elevating their own trusted agents, mobilising their own people to monitor other populations and integrating Russian communities into other regions in an attempt to enhance the unification of the state and society.

As a result, historically Russian regions like the Crimea [3] and Donetsk were attached to another country and territory. While this was not a problem under the Soviet Union, the dissolution of the Union meant that many of these former Russian territories and populations were suddenly an ethnic minority and small enclaves and Russian regions formed creating a network of communities that longed to return to the ‘motherland’.

In Kazakhstan, for example, in the early years of independence many predominantly ethnic Russian territories wanted to return to Russia’s fold. In 2000 ethnic Russian leaders from northern regions met with the newly elected president Vladmir Putin to discuss the pressures they faced and strategies for their return to Russia. This meeting resulted in a proposal of a mass immigration of the remainder of Russians from Kazakhstan and the plan was to use these returning Russians as a revitalizing force for the depopulated areas of central Russia[4].

RUSSOPHOBIA

But do ethnic Russians in the states bordering Russia facing the daily grind of ethnic abuse? The presence of ethnic Russians within the former soviet states has been a cause of tension within many of the former soviet republics. In Latvia for example, many ethnic Russians consider themselves to be second class citizens as they were not granted immediate citizenship upon the creation of the new state. Currently it is reported that 270, 000 Latvians do not carry citizenship and many are living in areas that border Russia[5]. Being unable to vote or gain entry to the public services and various other benefits has left many disgruntled. Calling themselves second class citizens, many Russian speaking Latvians have endured being called occupiers and argue that racial abuse is a real problem in the former soviet states.

In 2006 for example, many Russians in Central Asia argued that they faced racial discrimination in Kazakhstan due to the implementation of the national language policy as a requirement for employment in government. Effectively this excluded many ethnic Russians from holding positions of power and the nationalism established from this policy made these Russians easy targets for Kazakhs who felt justified in shaming the Russians for their years in privilege.

I myself experienced this when on my fourth day in Kazakhstan I was entering the national library in Almaty and was told it was closed. Not immediately being familiar with Kazakh I replied in Russian only to be told in Russian that I should not speak Russian as I was in Kazakhstan and that the gentlemen was speaking Kazakh and I was extremely rude for not knowing the language of the country. While I was not beaten or attacked, the vehemence with which I was told off was quite surprising. Likewise many young Russian men I met were regularly attacked when they went out with friends due to their inability to integrate themselves into the status quo. Kazakhstan is not the only post-soviet state where such acts of aggression have occurred.

In the Ukraine, according to a report by Luke Harding in the Guardian on the 21st of March 2014 there have been several serious attacks on pro-Russian supporters in the different regions. Harding reports that in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kharkhiv pro-Russian supporters clashed with the Patriots of Ukraine leaving two confirmed dead. While in the Russian speaking cities of Kharkiv, Donetsk and Luhansk the Russian media has reported a swathe of attacks by, neo- nationalist supporters[6].

Unquestionably public sentiment towards ethnic Russians in the Western parts of the Ukraine has also been decreasing. According to a poll taken in 2010 by the Institute of Sociology of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, positive attitudes towards Russians have continued to decrease since 1994. In response to a question gauging tolerance of Russians, only 15% of Western Ukrainians responded positively. In Central Ukraine, only 30% responded positively (from 60% in 1994); 60% responded positively in Southern Ukraine (from 70% in 1994); and 64% responded positively in Eastern Ukraine (from 75% in 1994). Furthermore, 6-7% of Western Ukrainians would banish Russians entirely from Ukraine, and 7-8% in Central Ukraine responded similarly. This level of sentiment was not found in Southern or Eastern Ukraine.[45]

While these attacks in the Ukraine have formulated the backbone of Putin’s main argument for his reclaiming of the Crimea, all is not as it seems. Many Ukrainians have heaped derision upon the Russian assertions. According to many Ukrainians all the pro-Russian protests and attacks have been orchestrated by the Kremlin. In Kharkiv, 20-40 buses of Russian activists were brought in to protest from the nearby Russian city of Belgorod. The new Ukrainian government has stated that these protestors were paid provocateurs. An argument supported by a Kharkhiv journalist and pro-Russian Andrei Borodavka who admitted ‘around 200’ Russian citizens had been bussed in to support these rallies[7].If the Russians are actually agitating in the eastern and southern areas of the Ukraine, is this part of a new direction in foreign policy?

Just another Case of Protecting Russia from its near Abroad

So while there is some merit to Putin’s assertion that he was keeping ethnic Russians safe, there is also a shadow of doubt that this is all part of a more orchestrated strategy for territorial dominance. According to Jonson and Archer, since 1993 Russia has had an aggressive foreign policy mandate. In 1993, for example, the then Foreign Minister, Kozyrev, argued that the entire former Soviet Union was understood to be Russia’s sphere of influence and that it was therefore Russia’s responsibility to maintain peace and security within its former empire. Any other incursion by a foreign player into this sphere was unacceptable. Primarily it argued that this was because a third party intruding in this sphere could create the conditions for a large scale conflict[8]. As a result Russian foreign policy engages in conflicts outside its homeland in an effort to protect said homeland from outside forces influencing its satellite states.

This reasoning was the motive behind stationing Russian forces outside of their home territory. Likewise it was the motivation for Russian involvement in Abkhazia and Ngorno-Karabakh (Azerbaijan) conflicts. In Azerbaijan for example, the Russians became concerned by the election of the Leader of the anti-Russian pro-Turkish Azerbaijan Popular Front Elchibei. Seeing the possibility that Turkey and Iran could enter into its zone of interest Russia tried successfully to manipulate the domestic political environment in both Azerbaijan and Armenia. This direct involvement in Azerbaijan resulted in the 1993 coup that removed then President Elchibei and brought Aliev to power.

With Aliev in power Russia brought Armenia and Azerbaijan to the mediation table and Azerbaijan joined the new Russian led economic union the Commonwealth of Independent States or the CIS. It is speculated that, as a result of this interference, Russia also managed to renew an agreement to station it troops in the territory and receive a share of Azerbaijan’s offshore oil profits[9].

Further proof that Russia likes to keep everyone out of its backyard came from the Abkhazia conflict in Georgia. Abkhazia has traditionally held close ties to Moscow to offset the power of its Georgian rulers. But in 1993 Russia utilised the conflict between the two states to move forward its defensive line. Supplying Abkhazia with military personnel and weaponry Russia undertook a series of destabilizing actions (including not stopping the military incursions by the Abkhazians on the 17 of September 1993) which forced the Georgians to accept a peace deal that brought them into the CIS and gave Russia special base rights and other military privileges[10].

Interestingly it appears that the Russians have utilised this tactic time and time again to secure sections of their outer rim which they fear are being coerced by foreign powers. Using a variety of military and domestic agitation Russia in each of these scenarios and various others, like Transdniestr in Moldova, have managed to create a conflict through which they could then ‘enforce and secure a peace’ and leave them firmly in Russia’s zone of influence.

Putting the Ukraine in their Place

In terms of the Ukraine it could be argued that Russia has entered into different territory. Far more aggressive tactics have certainly been applied, for the annexation of an entire region is not their usual modus operandi. But then again in each of the above conflicts there has never been a large Russian speaking minority. Nor was there a historical belief that the territory was and is ultimately a part of the Russian Federation as was the case with Sevastopol the Crimean capital[11].

Thus, the annexation of the Crimean peninsula is simply another step in the Russian ‘peacekeeping’ mission. Certainly this does fit in with both Russian 21st century foreign policy but it also provides a resolution to the Russo-Ukrainian decade’s long dispute over the former soviet military assets.

Unlike various other states that agreed to participate in the joint CIS military the Russians wanted to create, the Ukrainians had always had the resources, economic power, and strategic location to challenge Russia’s sphere of influence. Certainly the Ukrainian governments claim to the majority of the Black Sea naval fleet has always been a barb in the craw of the Russian Navy which has always highlighted the protection of the country’s southwest flank[12].

Thus deposing the corrupt pro-Russian president Yanukovich, while a necessity, was certainly waving a red flag to the Russian bull. Strategically, economically and politically Russia has simply acted in accordance with its nationalistic foreign policy and protected what it considered to be its own by historical right. Thereby putting the Ukraine, but particularly the European Union, on notice that it will not tolerate further European encroachment into its territory.

Western Impotence Vs Russian Impudence = Civil War

So as the Ukraine heads deeper into the territory of civil war, it appears for all to see how impotent the western powers are to help the Ukrainians. Certainly it would appear that while the western nations supported the protestors on the Maidan, the whole conflict could have been avoided had Brussels and Washington not been so intent upon forcing the Ukraine to choose between the East and the West. Knowing as they did how Russian foreign policy plays out it seems negligent that both the European Union and America were not prepared for this latest development. Regardless of the events leading up to this can the west help the Ukraine in what appears to be a conflict that the Russians are fully prepared to manipulate as they did in Georgia, Moldova and Azerbaijan.

Unfortunately the Western powers have a poor track record aiding countries within Russia’s sphere of influence. The lack of aid given to Georgia, Armenian and Azerbaijan and Moldova is illustrated clearly by their capitulation to Russian demands in the end. It has also illustrated clearly to Putin that he may do as he sees fit in his sphere of influence.

Thus, unless NATO is prepared to provide military and economic aid to the Ukraine to counter the Russians domestic manipulations, and demonstrate that they are willing to engage Russia on behalf of the Ukrainians, the Ukraine may enter into a protracted period of civil strife and even war against agitators that are not domestic but are channelled from across the border. This period of instability is sure to create much difficulty for the eastern territory’s and drive them further into the arms of mother Russia forcing the Ukrainian government to cede the eastern half of the state.

In doing so the Ukraine secures peace for its western half but Russia will gain more control over Europe’s gas and oil rents and enable Putin to create his dream of a New Eurasian Empire.

Putin’s New Economic Empire
Putin’s new goal for his next term in office is for the creation of a new Eurasian Economic Empire. Wanting to rival the European Union and Asia, Putin has outlined a plan to establish a Russian led Eurasian Union by 2015. This year was set as the deadline Nicklas Gvosdev argues because until 2015 the United States and NATO are tied up strategically in Afghanistan. But after this period they will again be free to focus on the European situation. He stated that

‘With the eastward expansion of Euro-Atlantic institutions sputtering to a close, and with China still primarily focused on South and East Asia, Moscow feels it has the window to begin consolidating a new Eurasia. Rather than have the territory of the former Soviet Union effectively "partitioned" into European and Asian "spheres of influence," Russia instead can re-emerge as a leading global power by creating a new bloc of states that will balance the European Union in the West and a Chinese-led Asia in the East.’[13]

Putin’s goal appears to be to establish a mighty Russian run Eurasian economic empire which creates another economic bloc to rival Asia and the West. To do so he needs to convince his surrounding neighbours he has the bravado to defend this new economic union as he is currently demonstrating with the Ukraine.

Certainly it would appear that Putin’s government is becoming increasingly active in the protection of their petroleum interests in Europe. According to the former Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen the environmental movements in countries like Britain have been infiltrated by Russian sources. Mr Rasmussen declared at a briefing for the Chatham House Foreign Affairs think tank that,

“I have met allies who can report that Russia, as part of their sophisticated information and disinformation operations, engaged actively with so-called non-governmental organisations - environmental organisations working against shale gas - to maintain European dependence on imported Russian gas.[14]

While derision has been heaped upon this suggestion from British environmental groups, it does demonstrate the wariness that many in NATO feel towards the Russian government. Such wariness is also a major obstacle to the completion of Putin’s grand. For as the European Union views Russia with increasing derision its desire to infiltrate the territories around Russia will increase exponentially. Creating the potential for a new geopolitical race that may engulf the Eurasian continent.

The Possibility of a Bridge too Far
The most likely scenario though is that the extension of Europe into Russia’s will create a situation that breaks the proverbial Russian foreign policy camel’s back. For if Russia follows its usual tactics of arming, or even supplying ‘rebels’, the Ukraine will push back and given its military capability it may even succeed in driving these militant forces into making a mistake that will destroy the movements support within the Ukraine . But the cost to Russia’s standing may be huge.

Previously Russia has only played these black op destabilisation games with smaller less significant nations. If mistakes occurred it was not played out in an open international context. But within the Ukraine this is no so. Western Ukrainians are highly motivated to draw the Ukraine and other Russian satellite states into the E.U’s. sphere, and this is reciprocated by the European Union which wants to capitalise on gas and oil accessibility of many of these states.

If Russia is proven to have had a hand in any major international incidents within the Ukraine this could incite many European nations to seek direct intervention in the Ukrainian conflict. Peacekeeping missions or even the arming of western Ukraine could become a reality. When faced with the combined fire power of Europe, NATO and the United Nations Putin would be forced to shelve his plans of a creating a Russian led political and economic empire.


[1] Jonson,L & Archer C, 1996, ‘Russia and Peacekeeping in Eurasia’, in, Peacekeeping and the Role of Russia in Eurasia, eds. L.Jonson and C. Archer, p.3-32 Westview Press.


[2] Machiavelli, 2012 , p.43


[3] Crimea was made part of the Ukrainian territories in 1954s by Nikita Khruschev a former head of the territory.


[4] Peyrouse, "Nationhood and the Minority Question in Central Asia," 495-96


[5] Krutaine, A & Mardiste, D, 2014, ‘Disquiet in Baltic’s over Sympathies of Russian Speakers’, Reuters.


[6] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/20/ukraine-nationalist-attacks-russia-supporters-kremlin-deaths


[7] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/20/ukraine-nationalist-attacks-russia-supporters-kremlin-deaths


[8][8] Jonson and Archer, 1996, 10-11.


[9] Jonson and Archer, 1996, 14-15


[10] Jonson and Archer 1996, 16-17.


[11] This belief was enshrined in 1993 by a resolution of the ex-Supreme Soviet that Sevastopol was and is a fundamental part of the territories of the Russian Federation. (Tuminez, A, 1996, Nationalism and the Interest in Russian Foreign Policy, in The Sources of Russian Foreign Policy After the Cold War,eds. C.A Wallander, Westview Press, pp.41-68.


[12] Russell, W, 1995, Russian Relations with the Near Abroad, in Russian Foreign Policy Since 1990, ed. P. Shearman, Westview Press, pp. 53-70.


[13] Gvosdev, 16/4/2012, The National Interest, http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/the-new-ussr-6783


[14] A. Rasmussen , 19/6/2014 , ‘Nato boss claims Russia has secretly infiltrated green groups fighting fracking’, in the The Independent, http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nato-boss-claims-russia-has-secretly-infiltrated-green-groups-fighting-fracking-9549975.html

The Growing Influence of China in Central Asia

Central Asia has over the years often been regarded as a backwater in the international community. Yet since September 11, 2001 Central Asia has become a darling to the movers and shakers in the international community.

The United States until very recently was pouring tens of millions of  dollars into the coffers of Central Asian leaders and utilizing military bases throughout the region for its War on Terror. Russia likewise still seeks to enforce its big brother role in the region through either economic or military initiatives in each of the five states.

Yet the all out star of the rush for Central Asia has been China. Across the board Central Asian states are drawing closer to their communist neighbour through deepening economic and political ties.  In 2005 Kazakhstani officials confirmed that the state’s Canadian-based oil company 
PTROKAZAKHSTAN had been sold to China’s national oil company China’s National Petroleum Company (CNPC). In the $4.18 billion dollar deal CNPC International agreed to pay $55 per share for complete ownership of PTROKAZAKSTAN. According to Paul Sampson, senior correspondent for London-based Energy Intelligence Group the willingness of China to pay such a high price reflects China's desire both to secure energy and to cement ties within Central Asia.[1]

Certainly Kazakhstan and China’s bilateral relations are deepening. According to figures released last year Kazakhstan has become China second biggest trading partner in the CIS following Russia with a record US$ 6.8 billion dollars worth of trade in 2005[2]. This will of course only intensify with the establishment of a signed agreement for a "strategic partnership” which seeks to extend the already extensive regional security, energy, high-technology, transportation, agriculture and telecommunications co-operation[3].

One illustration of the increasing relations in the year 2006 is the opening of the Kazakh –China oil pipeline which although not fully operational until 2007-2008 will deliver an estimated 20 million tonnes of oil per annum  to China’s Xinjiang refineries. Kazakhstan’s foreign minister, Kasymzhomart Tokaev, has recently announced that Kazakhstan also plans to deepen its commitment to fuelling China by developing a gas pipeline with Turkmenistan thereby providing much needed gas and oil to the Chinese economy[4].

However, Kazakhstan is not the only Central Asian nation linking itself to China. Across the five states all are choosing to move towards China and the economic rewards it can bring. Likewise China is also pushing for increasing ties to this neighbouring region.  From consumer infrastructural projects like shopping complexes built by Chinese nationals to financial aid programs which allow Central Asian governments to purchase large amounts of Chinese consumer goods with Renminbi. Or infrastructure projects like the new Eurasian railway and loans for governments like Uzbekistan, ostracised from the western world due human rights abuses, China is investing heavily in each of the Central Asian states and as this economic power grows so to does the political leverage.

Shanghaied

Theorists like Niklas Swanstrom argue that

“The Sinofication of the Central Asian economy has gone so far that the Central Asian states have become dependent on Chinese investments and Beijing has in turn been able to dictate the Central Asian states policies toward ‘terrorists’ ie Uyghur rebels from Chinese Xinjiang.” [5]

This influence has not been an overnight phenomenon. Starting early in the first rough years of Central Asian independence China  initiated a regional co-operation framework which has become known as the SCO or the Shanghai Co-operation Organization.

Colloquially called the Shanghai Six it has enabled China to push for the region’s international affairs perspective to be in alignment with its own. One example of course was last year’s SCO reprimand of the United States military presences in the region. The ejection of US forces from Uzbekistan highlighted that this reprimand was no idle threat and has forced the US to rethink its strategy toward Central Asia and the Shanghai Six.  The United States has also been seeking, unsuccessfully, to gain observer status in the SCO who at present have allowed four other countries observer status including Mongolia, Iran, India and Pakistan. 

Nevertheless Central Asian leaders are not without a hand in the matter. Many of them view China as a balancing force to Russia and the United States. They also welcome the billions of dollars China can throw at the region raising the standard of living for many in these developing states. Radio Free Asia reports indicate recently that many Kazakhstanis are also pleased with the Chinese involvement in their economy due to the new job opportunities which are opening up from this influx of investment[6].

However many Central Asian elites are concerned with the growing Sino-Central Asian relationship. Many are apprehensive of the growing numbers of Chinese merchants and businessmen in each of the states. Some are concerned that like Indonesia or the Solomon Islands and many other South East Asian countries the strong Chinese diaspora will create competition for the  native merchants to gain access to the establish paths to economic resources and political power..

They argue that in states where patronization is a key part of everyday life and economic resources are utilized as part of such dealings.  Thus the sinozation of the economy would also allow ethnic Chinese unprecedented access to political elites, thereby hindering the local patron-client relationships and giving the Chinese influence over national political affairs.

Yet , it appears that Central Asian leaders are aware of the danger of allowing China too much access.   As Kazakhstan’s Foreign minister Kasymzhomart Tokaev enunciated in a recent interview with online journal Eurasianet.org

“China plays a very important role [in the region]. A number of enterprises operating in Kazakhstan are Chinese. They are expanding their status and sustain the balance of major powers. However, we also would like to see other countries [coming in to the region]. For example, we are negotiating with India. The general balance of interests must be thoroughly sustained.” [7]

As such it appears that Central Asian leaders have realized that reliance upon one dominant superpower is not a favorable situation for development. Instead a system of multiple alliances with international players provides more scope for their own growth.

Security the Real Issue?

Suspicion is growing though, that China’s interest in the region is far from just economic and resource based. Political security is another motivating factor for Chinese Communist authorities. A recent article from the Washington Times entitled China’s Color Coded Crackdown argues that Central Asia is now a target for Chinese authorities due to the recent democratic revolutions have swept across the Caucasus and Central Asia[8]. In the article it is claimed that  in the Hong Kong based Open magazine ’a report by Chinese President Hu Jintao, titled "Fighting the People's War Without Gunsmoke", is guiding the Chinese Communist Party's "counterrevolution" offensive. The report, disseminated inside the party, outlines a series of measures aimed at nipping a potential Chinese "color revolution" in the bud.”[9]

According to Yuanbing author of the article China’s Colour Coded Crackdown from Foreign Policy. com President Hu has asked that ‘experts be dispatched to Central Asia to study how those colour revolutions first sprung roots.’[10] Thus it appears that China’s CP authorities are concerned that these coloured revolutions which have swept into power opposition leaders will permeate the border and encourage open acts of dissention in repressed areas like Xinjiang. 

If this is the case then China’s involvement in Central Asia is not just driven by the need for oil or economic resources. It is part of a longer term strategy for Chinese political security. That is by keeping their neighbouring states entwined through regional bodies, bilateral trade agreements and commercial enterprises they are assured of their western flank’s security and their own political position.

---

[1]Macdonald, J, 2005, ‘China has Deal to Buy Kazakh Oil Firm’ in The Seattle Times Online Edition,     http//seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2002449060_chinaoildeal23.html, last accessed on 20/05/06.

[2] China.org, 2006, “Bilateral Trade Relations’,  China.org Online Newswire,

http://service.china.org.cn/link/wcm/Show_Text?info_id=165943&p_qry=kazakhstan last accessed on 20/05/06

[3] Hu Qihua, 2005, ‘Sino-Kazakh Strategic Partnership set up’ , China Daily Online Edition, http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-07/05/content_457018.htm 2005-07-05 06:02, last accessed on 20/05/06.

[4] Mevlut Katik , 2006, ‘Kazakhstan has "Huge Plan" To Expand Energy Links with China’, Eurasianet.org Online Journal, http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/recaps/articles/eav031306.shtml , last accessed on 20/05/06.

[5] Swantstom, N, 2001, ‘China conquers Central Asia through Trade’, The Analyst Online Journal, http://www.cornellcaspian.com/pub/0104swanstrom_china.htm  last accessed 20/05/06

[6] Radio Free Asia, 2004, China’s Growing Influence in Central Asia, Part 1 A Major Player in Need of energy’, in Radio Free Asia Online Journal,  http://www.rfa.org/english/news/in_depth/2004/11/19/central_asia/, last accessed 21/05/06.

[7] Mevlut Katik , 2006, ‘Kazakhstan has "Huge Plan" To Expand Energy Links with China’, Eurasianet.org Online Journal, http://www.eurasianet.org/departments/recaps/articles/eav031306.shtml , last accessed on 20/05/06.

[8] Engdahl, F. W, 2005, China Lays Down the gauntlet on the Energy War’ , Asia times Online, http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/GL21Ad01.html , last accessed on the 21/05/06

[9] Yongding, 2005, ‘China’s Colour Coded Crackdown’, Foreign Policy. com, http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3251 , last accessed on the 21/05/06.

[10] Ibid