SMALL WARS COUNCIL
Go Back   Small Wars Council > Conflicts -- Current & Future > Other U.S. GWOT > OEF - Afghanistan

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-23-2012   #1
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 7,916
Default China's role in Afghanistan

We've touched upon China's investments in mineral exploitation in Afghanistan and IIRC their security interests - so along comes this rather unusual sign:
Quote:
China has signed security and economic agreements with Afghanistan during a rare trip to Kabul by a top Chinese official....Zhou Yongkang, China’s domestic security chief and a member of the ruling Communist Party’s central Politburo, made an unannounced visit to the Afghan capital late on Saturday, holding talks with Afghan President Hamid Karzai at his garden palace.

Zhou’s visit was the first to Afghanistan by a senior Chinese leader since 1966 and followed a visit by Karzai to Beijing in June when both countries agreed to cooperate on combating extremism in the region... Zhou signed agreements on increased security and economic cooperation, including a deal to help “train, fund and equip Afghan police.”
Link:http://gulfnews.com/news/world/other...s_DdcQ.twitter and a slightly different report:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-19693005

I thought we had problems with the archaeologists, no Afghanistan does too:
Quote:
Chinese state-owned miner China Metallurgical Group (MCC) operates the $3 billion Aynak copper mine in eastern Logar province, which has been subject to rocket attacks and other raids by insurgent groups looking to disrupt operations. MCC won the contract to develop Aynak in 2008 and it was originally scheduled to begin production in 2013, but work has been delayed by the discovery of a huge and significant archaeological site in the area.
__________________
davidbfpo

Last edited by davidbfpo; 09-23-2012 at 07:17 PM.
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-24-2012   #2
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 7,916
Default Background

Rediscovered two recent articles by a China-based analyst, Raffaello Pantucci on this matter:http://raffaellopantucci.com/2012/06...-neighborhood/ and http://raffaellopantucci.com/2012/08...n-afghanistan/
__________________
davidbfpo
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-08-2012   #3
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 7,916
Default Beijing's policy shifts

Raffaello Pantucci's latest column on China's role in Afghanistan:http://raffaellopantucci.com/2012/11...om-the-ground/

A taster:
Quote:
Whilst it is clear that China sees the importance of Pakistan in any long-term solution in Afghanistan, it is also increasingly clear that Beijing is concerned about how security in Pakistan continues to deteriorate. It thus seems likely that China’s growing focus on Afghanistan is at least in part out of recognition that it can no longer simply abrogate its strategy toward Kabul to Islamabad—a default setting Beijing previously employed. As the security situation in Afghanistan (and Pakistan) continues to muddle along in a negative direction, Beijing now has realized that it must do more to stabilize its restive neighbor.
It would have been interesting to have been a "fly on the wall" at this event:
Quote:
In May, China and the United States jointly hosted a two-week training session for a group of some 15 young Afghan diplomats
__________________
davidbfpo
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012   #4
davidbfpo
Council Member
 
davidbfpo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 7,916
Default China in Afghanistan, a tale of two mines

Quote:
Beijing clearly has to re-think what it is going to do once 2014 passes. Afghanistan’s proximity to China and the potential knock-on implications in central Asia where China has invested a great deal make it is impossible to ignore.

China may not want to be dragged into Afghanistan’s interminable problems, but it seems impossible to imagine that they are not going to play some role. What this role ends up being is something that the new administration needs to calculate sooner than it wants.
Link:http://blogs.ft.com/beyond-brics/201...-of-two-mines/
__________________
davidbfpo
davidbfpo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-04-2012   #5
Dayuhan
Council Member
 
Dayuhan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Latitude 17° 5' 11N, Longitude 120° 54' 24E, altitude 1499m. Right where I want to be.
Posts: 3,122
Default

From the article cited above...

Quote:
With the news that the field in Afghanistan is now producing, it looks like CNPC has cemented its position as a key investor in Afghanistan. The 25-year contract the company has signed has it extracting 1.5m barrels per year, and it is currently looking to extract 1,950 per day.
Key for Afghanistan perhaps, but 1.5 million barrels a year isn't exactly key for China, which in 2011 imported roughly 5 million barrels a day. 1.5 million per year would barely be a half drop in a bucket.
__________________
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary”

H.L. Mencken
Dayuhan is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
afghanistan, china

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Defending Hamdan jmm99 Law Enforcement 35 05-22-2011 06:36 AM
Afghanistan: A Silk Road Strategy gbramlet Blog Watch 1 03-15-2011 06:17 AM
Afghanistan troop surge could backfire, experts warn jkm_101_fso OEF - Afghanistan 69 09-06-2008 10:43 PM
NATO's Afghanistan Challenge Ray OEF - Afghanistan 38 05-30-2007 09:10 AM


All times are GMT. The time now is 01:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8. ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Registered Users are solely responsible for their messages.
Operated by, and site design © 2005-2009, Small Wars Foundation