China, Russia and the Balance of Power in Central Asia. Strategic Forum, Number 223, November 2006

Abstract

Russia and China increasingly seek to offset U.S. influence in Central Asia through enhanced cooperation conducted under the banner of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). While its impact is often exaggerated, the SCO does offer certain benefits to the states of the region, as well as to Moscow and Beijing, that the United States can ill afford to ignore.The United States and its North Atlantic Treaty Organization allies play a critical role in Central Asia through their stabilizing presence in Afghanistan, something that neither Russia nor China can match. Central Asia's geostrategic qualities keep America strongly interested in retaining access and building cooperative, stable relations with regional states.Russia and China oppose U.S. democracy promotion as naïve or subversive (or both). Yet neither has articulated a vision for systemic change and long-term stability in the region. Russia's influence is a matter of its imperial past, economic interdependence, and trading routes. Russia depends on Central Asian energy resources and labor, but its control over both gives it leverage over the region. China's influence has been growing due to expanding trade, acquisition of energy resources, and overall rise as a major power.China and Russia will remain significant actors in Central Asia, and advancing U.S. interests in this region will become more complicated if Russia and China are ignored. Dialogue and limited cooperation with both countries in areas of mutual interest should be important elements of a successful U.S. strategy for the region. The SCO RecordSince the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) called upon the United States to commit to withdraw its military personnel from Central Asia at its July 2005 summit, the SCO has acquired the reputation as a significant obstacle to U.S. policy. However, this reputation obscures the real state of affairs. Notwithstanding press reports about the challenge posed by the SCO to U.S. policy in Central Asia, a close look at the organization, the behavior of its members, their motivations, and the practical impact of their declarations suggests that the SCO's challenge to U.S. interests and policies in Central Asia is less than meets the eye.But ignoring the SCO simply because of its limited capabilities for action and concrete results would be a mistake; it is more than a paper tiger. As a political organization, it is an important vehicle for Russian and Chinese diplomacy aimed to counter U.S. influence in the region. The SCO also provides a forum where Central Asian states, dwarfed by their giant neighbors, can sit at the table with them as equals, at least nominally. For all these reasons, the SCO is worth the attention of the United States. The question is what kind of attention we should pay to it.The SCO has its origins in the April 1996 meeting of the heads of the Shanghai Five states-China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan-to address border management issues, enhance cross-border cooperation, and promote confidence-building measures....

Forging a New Security Order in Eurasia: China, the SCO, and the Impacts on Regional Governance

“…While Beijing saw its role as a leader in the endeavor given its sheer economic and political weight compared to its weak neighbors, it has also been sensitive and attentive to Moscow's view of its status in what it has always considered as its backyard and sphere of influence. In effect, a delicate and carefully nurtured co-management of the organization by Russia and China has kept the region in relative stability and the SCO viable and even thriving (Rumer 2006;Lo 2017).…”

Sequencing in Customs Union Formation : Theory and Application to the Eurasian Economic Union

“…Differences in factor endowments of capital and labor promise further integration gains to creating a single economic space. Additional arguments behind regional integration are transport, mainly in the interest of the landlocked countries of Central Asia, border security (Rumer 2006), and Russia's pre-eminent position in Central Asian energy networks (Wishnick 2011). Despite its economic benefits, the Eurasian Economic Union is often seen as a project that, from Russia's perspective, is mainly political and strategic (Rumer 2006 andLibman 2015): Russia is interested in stability along its borders, containing US influence, counterbalancing the influence of China in the region, and projecting itself as a global power.…”

The Lisbon Strategy and Its Implementation in Bulgaria as Applied to the Education Sector

“…As mentioned before the OSCE's condemnation of Kazakhstan's 2001 local elections and its note of a slide towards authoritarianism do not ingratiate the European community with the regime, especially when regional powers China and Russia have no qualms about the lack of democratic institutions in the country. 91 As such, the extent to which the EU's influence as a normative power is checked, severely limiting the level of political influence it can wield in the country. Economically, programmes such as TRACECA which concentrate on infrastructure are not as influential as the cash flows from China or the highprofile American delegations and military presence in the region.…”