User:Nabbas14/sandbox

The Chinese Question in Central Asia is a book by Marlene Laruelle and Sebastien Peyrouse which analyses various factors which influence aspects of relations between China on one hand and the Central Asian States on the other. The two authors explains how China’s relationship with its neighbours has evolved both bilaterally and through multi-lateral arrangements established in recent decades.

This book provides an analysis of the various factors which influence aspects of relations between China on one hand and the Central Asian States on the other. In clear prose, the two authors explains how China’s relationship with its neighbours has evolved both bilaterally and through multi-lateral arrangements established in recent decades.

The book is divided into two parts each of five chapters. Part I looks at how China and the Central Asian States have approached the issues of border relations, economic cooperation, investment and energy trade in a regional context. Part II brings in the bilateral dimension of those relations as each Central Asian state interfaces with China according to its own specific economic, socio-cultural and strategic perspective. The first point to recognize is that in the region, China’s power is a given reality that one needs to live with. The absence of any real competitors in the region allows Beijing to maintain the upper hand in Central Asia by use of an arsenal of ‘soft power’ which appears as ‘hard’ to the peoples and rulers in Central Asia due to the asymmetry of relations. For China, Central Asia is a modest market of 60 million people, which in 2009 had a combined GDP of around $160 billion, less than either Malaysia or Pakistan.

Main Arguement
The authors illustrate how regional dynamics have changed in the past two decades. Since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, China-Central Asia trade has gone through three principal phases: The first period between 1992 and 1996, was marked by the opening of border posts and the signing of multiple friendship treaties and cooperation agreements. Trade doubled during the second phase between 1997 and 2001. The third phase began in 2002 leaving the border issues behind. In 2010, Russia’s trade with Central Asia stood at under $15 billion compared to that with China which rose to $28 billion

Major Points
China initiated measures to pursue friction-free, reassuring and rewarding relationship with Russia on the one hand and with the five Central Asian States on the other. In April 1996, China launched the Shanghai Five mechanism, along with it its four immediate neighbours Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgystan and Tajikistan to strengthen confidence-building and disarmament in the border regions. By summer 2001 the forum grew to become of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to include indirect neighbours Uzbekistan as member and Turkmenistan as observer state to win (fuel- supplying) friends and influence their citizens (to buy Chinese goods). For energy-thirsty China, securing energy supplies from neighbouring Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan remains a top priority of its ‘Resource Diplomacy’ [p. 63]. It has lately also started making huge investments in the copper mines of Afghanistan which has been given an observer state status in SCO.

Following the establishment of SCO, China has been able to institutionalize its legitimacy in the region. It can set about playing on the weaknesses and contradictions of the SCO member states. In addition to being the new platform for discussion, SCO can act as a buffer, mediate differences and channel competition, particularly between Russia and China for mutually advantageous policies which they both pursue to counter Western influence. It is due to that reason that Beijing prefers the continuation of Russian influence in Central Asia rather than allowing US domination in the region [p. 5].   For the Central Asian governments, SCO membership offers them a framework to shore up their own legitimacy on domestic and international fronts. Rather than the Central Asian leaders taking up a common stance, each state is seen pursuing its own exclusive interests. The difference in prospects for economic development, the levels of domestic fragility and the divergence in geopolitical strategies all broadly influence the perceptions harboured by each state individually and their expectation from the SCO.

The Chinese leadership has been cognizant of the fact that the region embodies competition from different sides as many regional and external players are seeking to make economic inroads. Beijing has been using the bilateral relations and multilateral forums like the SCO to take the edge off domestic issues and for putting security issues to rest. Nevertheless, the book also points out some of the weaknesses of the SCO to date. On the matter of Afghanistan it has remained on the sidelines with no suggestions for potential solutions, collective actions or joint initiatives to be taken by the member states. For that reason, SCO’s deliberations have largely remained declarations of intent with little contribution towards solutions. The gap between narrative and collective action is immense, revealing a lack of capacity to offer any concrete measures. This hampers SCO effectiveness and risks its de-legitimization in the future.

The two authors conducted dozens of field-based interviews in China, Russia and Central Asia visiting these places for several months between 2008 and 2010 and backing up their research with further discourse analysis of relations among these states.

This book is rich in references along with the bibliography which reflects how the two authors took stock of the most noteworthy French, English and Russian contributions in the field.

For years there has been a need for a book to help readers develop a better understanding of the dynamics and dimensions of the relationships evolving between China and the Central Asian States. This book addresses that need.

Reception to the book
The book has received mainly positive reviews besides presentations by the authors made at the Harrimman Institute with the Weatherhead East Asian Institute