The strategic rivalry between China and the US is becoming more pronounced. The most recent example of this is Uzbekistan telling the US to close a military base used for operations against Afghanistan within six months. The move came soon after a meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) -- which includes China, Russia, Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan -- sought eviction of Western (principally US) forces in Central Asia.
Both China and Russia are keen to get the US out of Central Asia, and both regard its presence there as a threat to their security. The region has assumed even greater importance since it was found to be rich in oil.
The trigger for the eviction order from Uzbek President Islam Karimov was US pressure for an independent inquiry into an anti-government uprising in the country that resulted in a large number of deaths. Beijing has sided with the regime, which regards the protesters as terrorists.
China is stepping into the region as a political and economic benefactor. Beijing seems to be setting the agenda in Central Asia, with Moscow giving the impression of being the dutiful deputy. This would not be a healthy development for the two countries in the longer term. But that is another story. At present, both China and Russia are keen to get the US out of the region before it gets too comfortable.
For the oligarchs of these former Soviet republics, the experience of Georgia and Ukraine, where democratic regimes have been ushered in with US encouragement, is quite disturbing. China and Russia favor the political status quo, thus posing no threat to existing regimes.
Political stability in Central Asian republics is important for China to keep Xinjiang insulated from regional turbulence. A separatist movement has been active in Xinjiang for a long time.
The Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the US brought China closer to the US, enabling it to liken Uighur separatism with al-Qaeda. Flushed with China's apparent cooperation against global terrorism, Washington placed the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an otherwise obscure organization, on its list of terrorist organizations. Washington thus gave legitimacy to China's repression of Uighur nationalism, as it did with Russia in Chechnya in the wake of Sept. 11.
Chechnya's tragedy has been in the public eye for many years now. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia could not cope with the restless, independence-seeking Chechens. But the Uighur cause is not as well known because the Chinese empire, with all its repressive apparatus, is still intact. Amnesty International, for instance, has called Xinjiang the death-penalty capital of the world.
China has also been busy changing Xinjiang's demographics. In his essay "Repression and Revolt in China's Wild West," Joshua Kurlantzick, the foreign editor of New Republic, says, "While Uighurs made up more than 80 percent of Xinjiang's population in 1941, by 1998 they comprised less than 50 percent, and China's 2000 census showed the Han Chinese population growing twice as quickly in Xinjiang as the Uighur population."
It would seem that Washington is now backing off from supporting blanket repression in Xinjiang and Chechnya. Interestingly, as part of its policy to return most of the detainees at Guantanamo Bay to their own countries, the US is making an exception in the case of Uighurs. It is reportedly seeking to find a European country that might accept them.
In other words, the US is not willing to go all the way with China and Russia to make Uighur and Chechnya separatism part of the global terrorism crusade.
For China, therefore, the SCO is an important forum to keep the region stable and the US out. The SCO is a conglomerate of like-minded countries keen to maintain political oligarchies at any cost. For the most part the political remnants of the collapsed Soviet empire still rule these republics. Washington wooed them after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks to smooth military operations against the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Some of these regimes were already under attack from their own insurgents. In the US war against terrorism they too were branded terrorists. Which gave despots like Karimov a new lease of life.
At the same time, China and Russia are working on making the SCO a much more tightly knit forum with an interlocking political, economic and security agenda. As the Indian analyst Siddharth Varadarajan points out, "It [the SCO] is the vehicle China favors for elaborating its own strategic vision for the Eurasian landmass."
And this strategic vision is going to clash increasingly with the US, which is keen not only to maintain but expand its foothold in the area. It is a strategically important region not only because of its geography, but as a new source for energy amid dwindling global resources.
But unless the US is prepared to underwrite these repressive regimes in Central Asia, it might find itself severely constrained in maneuvering against China and Russia.
It will find it difficult to do this because of the affront to democracy that these regimes represent. Therefore, Washington will have to up the ante on democratic change and respect for human rights, not only in Central Asia but also within China and Russia.
In other words, the US will find itself increasingly at odds with Russia and China over democratic political change. The latter nations will regard the US call for democracy as a political tactic to entrench and expand US global supremacy. And therein lie the seeds of an ever-increasing strategic rivalry.
Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
A return to power for former US president Donald Trump would pose grave risks to Taiwan’s security, autonomy and the broader stability of the Indo-Pacific region. The stakes have never been higher as China aggressively escalates its pressure on Taiwan, deploying economic, military and psychological tactics aimed at subjugating the nation under Beijing’s control. The US has long acted as Taiwan’s foremost security partner, a bulwark against Chinese expansionism in the region. However, a second Trump presidency could upend decades of US commitments, introducing unpredictability that could embolden Beijing and severely compromise Taiwan’s position. While president, Trump’s foreign policy reflected a transactional
There appears to be a growing view among leaders and leading thinkers in Taiwan that their words and actions have no influence over how China approaches cross-Strait relations. According to this logic, China’s actions toward Taiwan are guided by China’s unwavering ambition to assert control over Taiwan. Many also believe Beijing’s approach is influenced by China’s domestic politics. As the thinking goes, former President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) made a good faith effort to demonstrate her moderation on cross-Strait issues throughout her tenure. During her 2016 inaugural address, Tsai sent several constructive signals, including by acknowledging the historical fact of interactions and
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has prioritized modernizing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to rival the US military, with many experts believing he would not act on Taiwan until the PLA is fully prepared to confront US forces. At the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Party Congress in 2022, Xi emphasized accelerating this modernization, setting 2027 — the PLA’s centennial — as the new target, replacing the previous 2035 goal. US intelligence agencies said that Xi has directed the PLA to be ready for a potential invasion of Taiwan by 2027, although no decision on launching an attack had been made. Whether
HSBC Holdings successfully fought off a breakup campaign by disgruntled Asian investors in recent years. Now, it has announced a restructuring along almost the same east-west lines. The obvious question is why? It says it is designed to create a simpler, more efficient and dynamic company. However, it looks a lot like the bank is also facing up to the political reality of the growing schism between the US and China. A new structure would not dissolve HSBC’s geopolitical challenges, but it could give the bank better options to respond quickly if things worsen. HSBC spent 2022 battling to convince shareholders of