China’s View of South Asia and the Indian Ocean

[bourbon]

What is there to harvest in Afghanistan, beyond misery and headaches that make Xinjiang look pale by comparison?

I see no reason for China to be even remotely interested in moving into Afghanistan, and many reasons why they would not. Why would they want to bite off the same gnarly lump that the Russians and Americans choked on?

That's not the question to ask. The question to ask is what is there for China to harvest in Central Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East? And the answer that is - a lot. Afghanistan can be a spoiler in any of those endeavors.

No empire actually wants to go into Afghanistan, but they are forced into doing so in pursuit of greater objectives.

[Ken White]

No empire actually wants to go into Afghanistan, but they are forced into doing so in pursuit of greater objectives.

Or is that simply a way to appear to have an ability to harvest (or something...). Many empires have gone there, most discovered, belatedly, that it really wasn't worth the trouble and then went elsewhere to achieve their goals...

There are many better ways to attain objectives than by stirring up folks who live in mountains. That is always a bad idea.

[Dayuhan]

That's not the question to ask. The question to ask is what is there for China to harvest in Central Asia, South Asia, and the Middle East? And the answer that is - a lot. Afghanistan can be a spoiler in any of those endeavors.

No empire actually wants to go into Afghanistan, but they are forced into doing so in pursuit of greater objectives.

Agree with Ken. Afghanistan has little or no bearing on Chinese engagement in Central Asia and South Asia and none on the Middle East. There's no incentive for China to go in and every reason to stay out.

There are many better ways to attain objectives than by stirring up folks who live in mountains. That is always a bad idea.

Bein' one of them folks who live in the mountains, I have to agree...

[bourbon]

Afghanistan has little or no bearing on Chinese engagement in Central Asia and South Asia and none on the Middle East.

Really?

China wants a stable Central Asia, not least of all for the purposes of energy security, and domestic stability vis-a-vis Xinjiang. Afghanistan was a sanctuary and source of funding (via narcotics) for insurgencies in both Tajikistan and Uzbekistan during the 1990's. Instability in Afghanistan feeds instability in the CARs.

China wants to connect Pakistani ports (Gwadar) to western China through rail, road and pipeline. But Pakistan has no strategic depth with regard to its India front. Those connections would be disrupted in the advent of war with India since they are within easy striking distance. And this is to say nothing of Pakistan's own goal of maintaining control of Afghanistan for strategic depth. As the Sino-Pak partnership strengthens – so to will China's interest in Afghanistan.

With regard to the Middle East, China's principle interest is hydrocarbons and securing their transport. China aims to secure transport by opening up alternatives to Indian Ocean routes – namely through Central Asia and Pakistan (see above).

[Ken White]

China wants a stable Central Asia, not least of all for the purposes of energy security... Instability in Afghanistan feeds instability in the CARs.

...spluttered Vlad, "that might interfere with my plans..." (LINK).

China wants to connect Pakistani ports (Gwadar) to western China through rail, road and pipeline. But Pakistan has no strategic depth with regard to its India front...As the Sino-Pak partnership strengthens – so to will China's interest in Afghanistan.

Does China want that or does Pakistan suggest that China wants that? Does Pakistan want that (to include routing through Afghanistan, thereby...) and receive lukewarm Chinese support? IIRC, China has already backed down on adding Naval facilities at Qwadar...

With regard to the Middle East, China's principle interest is hydrocarbons and securing their transport. China aims to secure transport by opening up alternatives to Indian Ocean routes – namely through Central Asia and Pakistan (see above).

Do you know that is fact or is that simply a logical supposition that may be bruited by some commentators (to include Chinese). My check of the map indicates your inclusion of Pakistan makes little sense due to the difficulties terrain will impose routing either rail or pipelines through Afghanistan or Pakistan -- not to mention that India would likely object to any construction by either China or Pakistan in Kashmir. Better and cheaper a straight shot to Iran which supplies about 12% of Chinese oil, a figure likely to rise. There's already a large Ahwaz-Tehran line and a smaller one goes on up to Neka on the Caspian and plans to extend it into Turkmenistan are underway. The Shiraz line could be extended to Chah Bahar but the terrain is horrendous -- probably be cheaper to run a new line through the desert from Neka. Such routing also offers some 'protection' from any possible future Indian bellicosity, a line through Pakistan could and likely would be interdicted; one in Iran is far less likely to be trifled with.

Yemen and Oman provide almost 25% of China's oil and sea shipment is thus obviously required but Qwadar offers no significant military and only slight commercial advantage. Not to mention the Baluchis are not one bit favorably disposed. Of course, Baluchs can be bribed -- but like the Afghans, they don't stay bribed...

For that matter, Chah Bahar -- where the Chinese are also involved in port construction and operation -- is even closer.

Speculation is fine -- but it isn't fact. Stage management is a worldwide skill.

[Steve the Planner]

Harvey Corman, Blazing Saddles:

All that stands between us and that valuable property are the rightful owners.

Gwadar is intrinsically valuable as a port. It's trade area does not change by national status/control factors.

China's interest in basic Afghan resources is low-grade/future oriented. The railroad they will build will do the job. They will be happy as long as no one f----s with it.

Why would China want more hassles that produce no results. It ain't oil, gas or high grade ores.

[Dayuhan]

Gwadar is intrinsically valuable as a port.

Gwadar's value as a port is actually fairly limited. It has good sea access to numerous ports, but on land it's nowhere: there's nothing for anyone to ship goods to and nothing there to ship out. As a point of transit it's too close to other established and much better equipped ports to have much relevance. Commercially viable, probably, but in no way the next big thing.

I think the talk of a Gwadar-China link is much overblown. Possible, yes, but of fairly marginal significance and nothing to get all fired up about. I very much doubt that the Chinese would wade into Afghanistan to advance that idea; it would be miles outside the parameters of any cost-benefit analysis.