Editorial: Chinese strategy in Central Asia aims to keep the west out, the Russians down, and everyone else on the margin

This editorial first appeared in the 18 April 2023 edition of our newsletter Central Asia Concise. If you would like to subscribe to Central Asia Concise, or any other of our newsletters, please click here.

Events of the past year have unleashed a new "Great Game" in Central Asia, writes commonspace.eu in this editorial. "The plan, it seems, builds on China’s “Belt and Road” programme, but there also now appears to be a much stronger political angle to China’s engagement. China is worried that Russia’s increasing weakness is creating a vacuum in Central Asia that others may be tempted to fill. It is determined to get there first. China’s approach seems to be to keep the west out, the Russians down, and everyone else on the margin."

“The Great Game” was the unfortunate name given to rivalry between Tsarist Russia and the British Raj in Central Asia in the 19th century. By all accounts the Russians won. The Raj has long disappeared, but the Tsar’s successors in the Kremlin maintained complete dominance over the region, first in the framework of the Soviet Union, and since 1991 as part of a privileged position in the near abroad. 

The relationship was never equal - Moscow was always the net beneficiary. It is true that Russia brought to Central Asia a measure of modernisation in the 20th century, which it badly needed, but in return Moscow expected complete subjugation and fully exploited the region. Central Asia’s rich raw materials became a necessary element of the Soviet economy.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, the constituent republics in the Baltic States, the Caucasus and Eastern Europe rushed to declare their independence, but Central Asian leaders hesitated, not quite knowing what to do next. For most of the last thirty years the situation changed little. Central Asia’s exports to world markets continued to go largely via Moscow, whilst politically the five republics were firmly within the Russian grip – even if Turkmenistan tried to insulate itself by hermetically isolating itself from global processes. Things started to change over the last five years, but change accelerated considerably in the last year, following the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The invasion laid bare the ambitions of Putin’s Kremlin, to limit the sovereignty of the post-Soviet republics, and risked sucking the region into Russia’s quagmire. The Central Asian republics have finally mustered the strength to resist. 

This has unleashed a new “Great Game”, one that is perhaps more subtle than the one that played out in the 19th century, and at least one of the players has changed. On the one hand Russia has remained, but challenging it, now in a big way, is Russia’s “friend without limits” - China. It is true that others are hovering around with different degrees of success - from the west: the EU, the Americans and the Turks all have their Central Asia agendas and ambitions; and from the South: the Gulf States, as well as India, are making some spirited inroads. But their efforts are mostly symbolic, or on a scale that can only give results in the long term. With the Chinese it is a different story. 

China’s leadership has dubbed the present moment of Chinese political and military resurgence as “the new era”. The “great game” in “the new era” is now going in full swing. It is true that Chinese overtures to the region have been ongoing since the collapse of the USSR. They were mainly in the fields of trade and investment. Co-operation in the more sensitive political, military and security spheres came later. But things are now accelerating fast.

Image
a
Kazakhstan-China railway. railways.kz.

Following the last congress of the Chinese Communist Party, and the consolidation of the leadership of Xi Jinping at the helm of the party and country, Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang declared last month that China had “pressed [the] acceleration button” in diplomacy. Nowhere is this being played out more visibly than in Central Asia. In 2022 President Xi chose Central Asia as the first region to visit on his first trip abroad after the Covid-19 lockdown. Next month Xi will host the first China-Central Asia summit. In a similar message to the five Central Asian nations on the occasion of the Nowruz Holidays, Xi invited the leaders to the summit in Xian, and said that China was preparing a “grandiose plan” for co-operation with the region.

In the meantime the Chinese political and diplomatic tools have been in overdrive. In the last days China and Kazakhstan have announced they are close to introducing visa free travel between them. Intriguingly, China in recent weeks has also used the leadership of its Xinjiang province, which neighbours Central Asia as part of its diplomatic effort. It sent Ma Xingrui, the Communist Party chief in Xinjiang on a four-day visit to the region in late March. Xinjiang is seen in the west as a troubled region, but its ethnic, religious and commercial affinities to Central Asia make it well placed to play a key role in China’s outreach to the region.

During a series of meetings with top leaders from Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, Ma reaffirmed Beijing’s commitment to cementing ties with Central Asia. Ma told Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, according to the Astana Times, “We consider Kazakhstan the top priority area for cooperation. In general, China’s cooperation with Kazakhstan is carried out through Xinjiang.”

Ma’s visit is however only a warming-up act. The real action is expected in May, when President Xi hosts the Central Asian leaders in China for the first China-Central Asia summit. In his invitation for the event sent out in March, Xi told the Central Asian leaders he is "eager to discuss a grand plan to develop relations". The plan, it seems, builds on China’s “Belt and Road” programme, but there also now appears to be a much stronger political angle to China’s engagement. China is worried that Russia’s increasing weakness is creating a vacuum in Central Asia that others may be tempted to fill. It is determined to get there first. China’s approach seems to be to keep the west out, the Russians down, and everyone else on the margin.

Image
a
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Global Markets.

There is little doubt that the big loser in this “great game in the new era” is Russia. But the Kremlin at this point has little choice but to try to cut its losses. It desperately needs China’s support - at least economically, politically and diplomatically, if not militarily - as it tries to sort out the mess it created for itself in Ukraine, and resist Western sanctions imposed after its invasion. Russia still has a number of levers over Central Asia. Large Russian minorities continue to live in the region, especially in Kazakhstan, and conversely, millions of Central Asians work in Russia bringing in important remittances, especially for Uzbekistan, and Tajikistan. 

The Russian language remains the lingua franca in the region, and is still important for education and commerce. And, at least until new projects currently being discussed are realised, the Central Asian countries remain heavily dependent on Russia for their communications and trade with the outside world. But these factors alone are no longer enough to ensure Russian monopoly in the region, and are likely to dent rather than resist China’s inroads.

The leaders of the Central Asian republics, most of them relatively new, understand they are walking on a dangerous tightrope. Their approach so far has been to increase contact and co-operation between each other and co-ordinate positions - in some cases not an easy thing to do given that some have lingering border disputes - and on the other hand diversifying their relationships beyond Russia and China with new partnerships with the EU, US, India, Japan and the GCC countries. This has provided an opportunity for a number of other countries and entities to engage with the region as never before, as can be seen by the stream of high level visits in both directions.

But managing Moscow remains a priority. It is not by coincidence that the first trip overseas of the newly appointed Kazakh Foreign Minister, Murat Nurtleu, was to Moscow. Astana simply cannot afford Moscow’s ire.

So, a region that some wrongly considered until recently as a backwater, has all of a sudden emerged as one of intense big power rivalry. Clever diplomacy by the Central Asian republics can turn this to their benefit, but they fully realise that the stakes are high, and the risks even higher.

source: commonspace.eu editorial team
photo: Kaztag
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners

Latest

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Monday Commentary: PEACE IN OUR TIME?

Making peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan was never going to be simple, nor easy, nor quick. It is taking time, writes Dennis Sammut in this Monday Commentary. “There is a sense of realism coming from the leaders of the two countries – President Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan and prime minister Nikol Pashinyan of Armenia, that frankly, is necessary and welcome”, he writes. At a time when conflicts are raging all over the world – from Ukraine to the Gulf, from Africa to South Asia, the prospect that Armenia and Azerbaijan had finally, after decades of conflict that left thousands of dead and many more displaced, decided on embarking on a journey of peace was welcomed. Peace between Armenia and Azerbaijan can be top-down up to a point. Both leaders have spent political capital preparing for a peace deal. But both are aware that their people are not ready for peace yet. In fact, in Armenia, most of the elite are negative toward a peace deal with Azerbaijan. Pashinyan needs time to persuade his countryfolk. That is why 2031 is realistic. Ilham Aliyev runs a tighter shop, but he is also not immune to public opinion. Every time someone hits a landmine in Karabakh, which unfortunately happens often, peace comes into question. Which is why Aliyev chooses to sound hardline, more often than not. In pursuing the peace agenda, both Aliyev and Pashinyan need to proceed cautiously. But they are right in making peace the central issue in their agenda. It is the main issue, and the one that will define them in history. So forward, cautiously but resolutely! In pursuing the peace agenda, Aliyev and Pashinyan need to be supported clearly and unambiguously. There are too many people in Baku and Yerevan who are sitting on the sides, waiting. The international community is not doing enough. It is time to be counted. Otherwise, the spoilers will win, and the region will go back to its bad habits. (Click the image to read the full commentary).
Editor's choice
News
Azerbaijan and UK sign Joint Declaration on Strategic Partnership

Azerbaijan and UK sign Joint Declaration on Strategic Partnership

On November 12, President of the Republic of Azerbaijan Ilham Aliyev met with Prime Minister of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Andy Burnham in Dublin. They first exchanged the “Joint Declaration on Strategic Partnership between the Republic of Azerbaijan and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.” During the conversation, it was emphasized that the adoption of the Declaration would formally elevate relations between the two countries to a qualitatively new level. They noted that even before the adoption of the document, relations between Azerbaijan and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland had already been characterized by a strategic partnership. Touching upon more than 30 years of successful energy cooperation between the two countries, the head of state said that the United Kingdom is the largest European investor in Azerbaijan. The sides noted that broad opportunities also exist for cooperation in renewable energy, high technologies and artificial intelligence. In this regard, the two leaders highlighted the importance of high-level official visits from the United Kingdom to Azerbaijan and discussions held in recent months. The meeting also included an exchange of views on issues on the international agenda.

Popular

Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Monday Commentary: European-Azerbaijan relations need an intensive and multifaceted dialogue that is frank and honest

Last week I visited Baku, Azerbaijan. My visit was relatively short, but very intensive, and had many meetings with stakeholders and colleagues. When I arrived in Baku first time in 1996,  Azerbaijan was a different country: weak, poor, and shaken by defeat in war. For thirty year the Karabakh issue dominated the agenda: the political agenda but also the popular mindset. Now, thirty years later, Azerbaijan has returned to Karabakh, and peace with Armenia is on the horizon. It is a new era for Armenia-Azerbaijan relations, for the South Caucasus, but also for Europe.  But we cannot be complacent: the Peace agreement has been initialed but not signed; borders remain closed; TRIPP is ambitious but remains an idea; and there are spoilers who want to turn the clock back. We must not allow them, and in this Europe and Azerbaijan must work together. Europe’ vanguard organization is the European Union – it is a free union of 27 member states; it is a strong global economic force, and increasingly a diplomatic and military force too. But it remains “work in progress” and can often appear dysfunctional. It often lacks collective and institutional memory. In its dealings with Azerbaijan the EU has made many mistakes – not least opening the delegation here late – in 2008. It sometimes appears condescending. Some utterances from the European Parliament and from some quarters in some member states are not understandable even for me. They irritate the Azerbaijanis, but serve no other purpose But Azerbaijan has also not handled relations with the EU well. It has failed to respond when the hand of friendship reached out; and it confused irritating actions, sometimes by well-meaning people; sometimes by outright spoilers, with strategic action. In short, EU-Azerbaijan relations have suffered from a lack of proper dialogue. This dialogue must be frank, honest and multi-faceted involving different segments of society on both sides.   Is Azerbaijan Europe? When Azerbaijan applied to join the Council of Europe in the 1990s, there were some who opposed, saying this was not Europe. I was one of the people who argued that Armenia and Azerbaijan may be on the periphery of the continent geographically, but were European in essence. Certainly their elites. During the discussion on 4 September in Baku, my friend Farhad Mammedov, mentioned that Azerbaijan is not interested in joining the EU, and was now close to the Central Asian countries in the 5 plus 1 format. Neither things mean that Azerbaijan is not Europe. There are several European countries that are not in the EU, and do not want to be, for example Norway and Switzerland. Iceland has recently voted to stay out of the EU. The UK was a member and left. Europe is bigger than the EU, and the holding of the European Political Community summit in Baku in 2027 proves that. Despite all the rhetoric, I never heard the president of Azerbaijan  saying that Azerbaijan is not Europe, nor have I heard any European president say it either. Not wanting to join the EU and forging close relations with neighbouring regions does not make Azerbaijan any less European. It is only logical that when Europeans talk to Azerbaijan they talk like family. The conversation is often frank. It must also be honest, and Europeans need always to remember this too. A frank, honest and multi-faceted dialogue A frank, honest and multifaceted dialogue will contribute to relations between Azerbaijan and the rest of Europe: it will avoid misperception, which unfortunately is very common on both sides; it will provide a forum where problems can be discussed and resolved, and it will increase mutual trust, so that together common problems can be addressed. (click image to read the full Monday Commentary)
Editor's choice
Monday Commentary
Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

Monday Commentary: “The barren rocks of Aden” and “These lands of Yemen are so ruthless”

There are two early 20th-century tunes that mark foreign attempts to occupy and “pacify” Yemen. The Scottish tune “The barren rocks of Aden” marks the mobilisation of Highland soldiers, enlisted to be deployed to the Yemeni port of Aden, that in 1837 became the last colony to be incorporated into the British Empire. The tune talks of the harshness of the terrain, but is celebratory, It was even played as a farewell tune to Sir William Luce at the parade in Sharjah celebrating his end as “British Viceroy” in the Middle East in 1966. The second tune is an Anatolian lament. As Ilker Sezer reminded us this weekend, in his weekly feature on “Turkiye Today”, it “mourns the tragic fate of Ottoman soldiers dispatched to the harsh, remote deserts of Yemen during the fall of the empire, young men who marched away from their villages and never returned home. Most of their names, and numbers, were never recorded. Yet, their fate left a mark on the Turkish psyche.” Subsequent invaders have discovered that Yemen is a grave that cannot be overcome by the strength of modern technology, and that whilst Yemeni society is splintered and divided, building a reliable alliance with Yemeni factions is difficult. These are the harsh lessons facing Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom faces its biggest challenge in its modern history. The leadership of the Kingdom now has to respond decisively. At stake is their very credibility. This is likely to be a long and messy conflict. Saudi military objectives need to be focused: to box in the Houthis rather than destroy them. This is likely to include: (a) regaining territory lost on the Red Sea coast; (b) control over Bab el Mandeb Strait; (c) some kind of cordon sanitaire on the Saudi-Yemeni border; and if things go well (d) the capture of Sanaa. All this would not eliminate the Houthi problem, but it will contain it. In the end the Saudis will have to continue managing Yemen with a mixture of carrot and stick. For the moment, the stick is likely, but the carrot cannot be forgotten either. (click the image to read the Monday Commentary in full)