China, Iraq, Russia - Oil and Separatism

China and Russia having a spat?
I wonder why? [url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Iraq_opens_important_oil-field_... because of oil?[/url] China needs oil, and wants to diversify its markets beyond Russia, which does indeed play a game of energy diplomacy. This move into [i]Iraq[/i] is quite interesting given that Chinese-Iranian relations aren't exactly at their best right now - particularly since [url=http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JG29Ak02.html]China[/url] was the big [url=http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/28042]snub[/url].

quote:

---

“Iran cannot be an associate member as there is no such status at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation. There is a position of observer state and Iran holds this at the SCO,” Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said.

Iran, being an observer state since 2005, has sought full membership in the bloc.

---

Sergey Lavrov's quote is of keen interest to the outside observer. It shows the ossification and hardening of traditional hierarchal structures of the SCO. Such reform, as the creation of associate membership status, would spread out influence, as well as allow another energy maven to enter the ring with Russia. Allowing two energy powers to hold hands internally in a group where China and Russia vie for power in Central Asia separately (especially with a United States that is aggressively pursuing the emplacement of forces in: Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, etc.) would seriously hamper energy hungry China. This allows China to keep Iran in a junior position, thereby giving it more room and a carrot to extract concessions that the Iranians may find unpalatable.

And back to China in Iraq. China is clearly sending signals to the United States, be it less than gushing support for Russian supported separatists (remember, China wasn't happy about Kosovo because of the precedent sent vis a vis its separatists), or the willingness to diversify energy sources into a Washington stronghold. Although this can be interpreted as a standalone action on the part of Beijing, it clearly means that China now has an increased interest in America staying in Iraq. Without the United States China will have to spend burgeoning amounts of money to secure its sites. With the US stomping around Iraq, China is a touch safer. The US wants to turn on the Iraqi spigot to relieve its own energy woes. This is the magic of energy politics, though. A Chinese company will reap the windfall here, however, it will show confidence in investing in this area. China shouldn't be too phased by the situation in Iraq, given its experience in dealing with less-than-palatable security situations in African oil sites.

Remember, there is a historical point of the US coddling China when they need a foil against Russia. To China, the US is a major market and their global goals are fairly insync. China has bested the United States in much of SE Asia, and there is nothing the United States can do. They both mutually share a headache with their friend Pakistan. And although the US is currently flirting with India, that infatuation may be fairly short-lived. The US [i]and[/i] Russia are becoming mutually isolated because of this conflict. The Cold Warriors on both sides have shown that their world views are a little too 1980s to work in the 21st century.

edit, stuff I wrote, but forgot to post::

China may be seeing Iran as a strong, and important, market to buy energy. Iran looks to China to continue this. However, China knows that relying on increasingly besieged partners will only hamper its continued ascendancy within the standard world order, which is what China truly desires - the peaceful rise. Given Tehran's set back in the SCO, the prospect of a new Cold War, China's interests are best served as maintaining an aloof and none-too-committal attitude. Hoping into Iraq may initially bother some US interests, but in the end it strengthens the tie between two countries who are superficially adversarial, but too intertwined to do anything other than grit their teeth and bear it.

[ 28 August 2008: Message edited by: Papal Bull ]