18.12.2014APEC SUMMIT SHOWED THAT THE AGE OF ASIA HAS ARRIVED
General Director, The Centre of Strategic Estimations and Forecasts (Moscow)
Sergey Grinyaev, General Director of independent NGO Centre of Strategic Estimations and Forecasts commented on the APEC summit held in the Chinese capital during an interview with Pravda.Ru reporter.
- Assessing the Beijing summit of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) from the geopolitical perspective, what directions of confrontation and cooperation would you point out?
- First of all, the summit showed that the 21st century is indeed a century of Asia. Currently the APEC summit appears to have reached the same level, if not surpassed the Davos Economic Forum, which has traditionally represented the Western civilization and Western economy.
The summit was held in a rather complicated geopolitical situation. First time in the history of democratic states the institute of economic sanctions has been applied against a country, which is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and such thing never happened before.
This circumstance underlay the agenda as it was then and is now. The continuation and strengthening of relations between Russia and China can be viewed as breaking and cooperation lines. I believe these two geopolitical centers, Russia as the base of the Eurasian Union and China as an autonomous geopolitical center, determine the agenda of at least the first half of the 21st century. Life will show what happens next. Again, this depends on strengthening of relations between Russia and China, as well as the problems awaited for Europe first of all regarding reorientation of Russian energy exports towards Asia.
- Has the American project of transpacific partnership exhausted itself? Why?
- I would not say that the project has exhausted itself. We are at the peak of a geopolitical struggle as we speak, and the United States understands well that if they show weakness and try to abandon any geopolitical project now, then it would be very difficult to return to it in future.
That is why they are ready to grant preferences to their partners and allies in the Pacific. However, in my opinion the situation in global economy and the world at large is such that paradigm change occurs and the Western culture cedes positions to the Eastern one. This determines everything.
In the near future the tensions will continue. Undoubtedly, militarization will carry on, including in Asia Pacific. It is also certain that confrontations between China and Japan, China and the USA, and other states exist and will endure for the coming years.
- Putin offered the APEC countries to participate in two grandiose investment projects. One is the trans-Asian transport hub, which includes modernization of the Trans-Siberian Railway, Baikal-Amur Mainline, construction of dry-dock and regular port complexes, and GLONASS system installation. The second one is infrastructure development for the Northern Sea Route. How do you evaluate the capabilities of these projects in terms of integration of Asian countries under a Russian umbrella?
- These two projects have an enormous historical significance and are cornerstones of Russia’s Eurasian project. I would add a third one to those; the economic logistic hub in Crimea, which would allow directing the commodity and material flows not only through Black Sea straits of Bosporus and Dardanelles to the Mediterranean, but also farther to Middle East and North Africa, as well as provide routes for delivering goods to the West.
Crimea will be the end-point of the Great Silk Road that starts in China; it will pass through Trans-Siberian Railway, Baikal-Amur Mainline, Central Asian countries and into Crimea, after which it may continue towards the west or by the sea to North Africa. And of course, the Northern Sea Route is through the Arctic, which means direct and short deliveries of cargo from Southeast Asia to the European markets, bypassing the tension zones near the African coasts, Suez Canal, Red Sea and elsewhere on the way.
The Northern Sea Route shipping is about 30% less expensive that the traditional one from the Japanese Port Yokohama to Amsterdam. In addition, China is very interested in access to the Northern Sea Route, because the country currently invests a lot in mining of mineral deposits in Greenland and wants to receive iron and copper ore from Greenland through the Northern Sea Route where the US Navy cannot block sea shipping to China (currently 90 percent of all resources supplied to China are shipped by sea).
- Can these projects be considered as an integration of Asian countries under a Russian umbrella?
- Without Russia these projects certainly will make no sense and have no significance, because regardless of anything, one-sixth of the world land mass is even geographically controlled by Russia. This concerns the Northern Sea Route, the Great Silk Road, including the Trans-Siberian Railway, as well as the logistic hub in Crimea I mentioned.
These three projects, plus St. Petersburg and Arkhangelsk as Northern Arctic gates, entrance into the Northern Sea Route, Vladivostok and Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky as Asian centers, and Sevastopol and Crimea as Black Sea – Mediterranean centers. These three hubs are the foundation of the power for the Eurasian Union and integration of Asian countries among the others together with Russia in common projects.
Return