My point in #msg-6580574 is that an attack on Iran will trigger severe repercussions from elsewhere. No country should be considered by itself or outside of the global community.
Joe Vialls writes..
It is but a small step for Iran from there to full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and overall protection by the Russian-Chinese Axis.
It has now been confirmed that the SCO is to give observer status to Pakistan, Iran and India, the first step to incorporating Iran into the SCO. #msg-6577918
On 10 November 2004, the India Daily reported that, "Russian President Putin is taking a lead role in the most powerful coalition of regional and superpowers in the world. The coalition consists of India, China, Russia and Brazil. This will challenge the superpower supremacy of America." … "He [Putin] wants to establish a long-term Russian footprint in Latin America in order to expand Moscow's geopolitical influence in the region. Brazil is very open to the coalition concept where these large countries support each other in term of trade, economics, international politics and defense."
Just this single strategic move means that the new coalition embraces just over three quarters of the world's total population, eighty percent of its natural resources, and a majority of technical and scientific experts. Nor does it end there, because the coalition automatically includes the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is presently comprised of China, Russia, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. Dangerously for America, the coalition will soon have another important member, Iran, currently due to enter informally in a few months time through the SCO "back door" because of a mammoth energy deal.
On 2 December 2004 the Asia Times published "China Rocks the Geopolitical Boat with Iran Oil Deal", which is probably one of the top stories of the century, but it was not repeated by the Australian media.
Heck no, because this was utterly devastating news for the energy-hungry west, and thus not fit for public exposure:-
"A mere two months ago, the news of a China-Kazakhstan pipeline agreement, worth US$3.5 billion, raised some eyebrows in the world press, some hinting that China's economic foreign policy may be on the verge of a new leap forward. A clue to the fact that such anticipation may have totally understated the case was last week's signing of a mega-gas deal between Beijing and Tehran worth $100 billion. Billed as the "deal of the century" by various commentators, this agreement is likely to increase by another $50 to $100 billion, bringing the total close to $200 billion, when a similar oil agreement, currently being negotiated, is inked not too far from now.
"The gas deal entails the annual export of some 10 million tons of Iranian liquefied natural gas (LNG) for a 25-year period, as well as the participation, by China's state oil company, in such projects as exploration and drilling, petrochemical and gas industries, pipelines, services and the like. The export of LNG requires special cargo ships, however, and Iran is currently investing several billion dollars adding to its small LNG-equipped fleet."
Though America officially refers to Iran as part of the "Axis of Evil," this does not stop it importing very large quantities of Iranian LNG through third parties. Now all that will come to a grinding halt, because Iran must naturally focus exclusively on filling its mammoth Chinese commitments. Thus on December 2. 2004, the block on external energy supplies to America started in earnest.
At the same time, Iran effectively came under China's protection, because any American attack on Iran will impact directly on Chinese National Security by severing its energy resources. It is but a small step for Iran from there to full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and overall protection by the Russian-Chinese Axis.
China is increasingly the focal point of American policymakers and strategic analysts. Despite former secretary of state Colin Powell's rather upbeat assessment last summer of the bilateral relationship between the two countries as being the best since president Richard Nixon's 1972 visit to China, the second George W Bush administration is constantly echoing congressional sentiments about the China problem, despite its avowed commitment to maintain a candid, cooperative and constructive relationship with Asia's rising power.
As seen in Washington, the China problem is manifested in several areas in which the two countries are increasingly at odds. Leading the pack is what US policymakers consider to be Beijing's deliberate attempt to keep the Chinese currency undervalued. Pegged to the US dollar since 1994, the undervalued yuan is blamed as an important contributor to America's economic ills: growing trade deficits and the loss of jobs.
Increasingly, American policymakers are also worried about China's growing power and expansion of influence at the US's expense. The soon-to-be released Pentagon report on China's military power once again characterizes China as a strategic competitor. Beijing is seen actively pursuing a regional agenda aimed at excluding Washington, from the Shanghai Cooperation Organization to the forthcoming East Asian summit toward the end of this year. Beijing is seen as more assertive in East Asia, as evidenced by the passage of the anti-succession law, which could see the US involved in military conflict in the Taiwan Strait.
In addition, China is also building relationships and consolidating ties in two regions of US negligence, Africa and the US's traditional sphere of influence, Latin America. Indeed, there are warnings that America's "war on terrorism" and its entanglement in Afghanistan and Iraq has allowed the unimpeded rise of Chinese power, which eventually will challenge American interests regionally and globally.
China is a growing and significant consumer of many resources. Its appetite for energy and the needs for feeding 1.3 billion people are bound to drive up prices and lead to fierce competition for limited deposits, reserves and supplies critical for sustained economic growth and comfortable lifestyles. Chinese companies are buying stakes and establishing partnerships in Africa, Central Asia, Latin America and even Canada.
Even where the two countries could actually show their cooperation, Washington is becoming impatient with Beijing's rather weak handling of the North Korean nuclear issue. With the kind of economic leverage that China now has, the US has been expecting Beijing to apply greater pressure - including reducing or even cutting off key supplies - on its wayward client to bring the North back to the six-party talks, a multilateral arrangement aimed at defusing and eventually resolving the peninsula's nuclear impasse.
The above descriptions are rather alarming to some. But they could also be misleading, by either exaggerating or distorting the realities. The Chinese currency is undervalued. But America's economic ills won't go away without it addressing some of its fundamental and structural problems, including lower saving rates. Chinese exports could well be replaced by lower-wage countries, just as China replaced the East Asian "little tigers" a decade ago.
Beijing's good-neighbor diplomacy, including the promotion of multilateral security institutions, is largely driven by its interests in dispelling "China threat" concerns and developing stable environments for economic growth. While it is true that China hopes these arrangements offer alternatives to US bilateral military alliances, it would be an exaggeration to argue that Beijing is deliberately challenging and balancing against US interests. Except for the Taiwan issue, Chinese anti-hegemony rhetoric is just that, and no more. China is not the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
China's drive for energy security only highlights its vulnerability, not its "insidious designs". Given the size of its population, rate of economic growth and domestic energy production, it is only natural that Beijing has an inherent interest in seeking to secure energy supplies and diversification. It would be strange and indeed irresponsible if it did otherwise. America's interest may be better served in assisting China to improve its energy efficiency and preservation, and in developing a partnership to deal with growing energy demands.
China's approach to the North Korean nuclear crisis is a reflection of its security policy, which balances stability, nuclear proliferation and its relationships with key powers in the region, including the one with Pyongyang. Beijing has less leverage than presumed, does not believe the validity of sanctions, and cannot understand why Washington refuses even to talk to Pyongyang
China is rising. That much is acknowledged and accepted. But must China be a problem? To borrow a famous line by an international relations scholar, anarchy is what states make of it; one can argue that Washington could make China a problem, and then formulate its policy accordingly.
But China is also an opportunity. A prosperous, responsible China playing a positive role in dealing with global and regional problems is what Washington should welcome and encourage. Make China a partner in peace, prosperity and responsibility. That would serve America's fundamental interests and those of the region and the world at large.
Dr Jing-dong Yuan is research director for East Asia Non-Proliferation, Center for Non-Proliferation Studies and associate professor of International Policy Studies at the Monterey Institute of International Studies.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
