China to invest $400 billion in Iran, station 5000 troops

[Viet]

It's a hard fact, China killed hundreds of thousands US soldiers in Korean war so the animosity was overbearing, Nixon yet was so determined to normalize relations with PRC even at cost of dumping decades old ally Taiwan, they made such a big concession and his aide Kissinger traveled multiply times to China expressing Nixon's wish to be invited to visit China, China is a sensible country , we respond to good wills and gestures.

China lost 600,000 men, the US lost 36,000. Just admit you are shameless so we can move on!

 

[haidian]

China lost 600,000 men, the US lost 36,000. Just admit you are shameless so we can move on!

We lost more but we also killed so many of them and pushed them from the Chinese border all the way through half Korea, in Vietnam war Vietnam lost way way more people than US, do you call that a US win? Russia lost more soldiers than Nazi Germany, but a war is determined by where they started and where they ended.

 

[rott]

There is no such thing as shame in international relationship. What is that? Nations care of national interests not shame.

I find it hilarious a chinese is talking about shame. You don’t know what the meaning of it.

Really? Wtf are you even making any sense? No SHAME IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS? I sugges you get your head checked. Funny you should say it. You've already been made a mockery hundreds of times in this forum. Yet you say otherwise.

China lost 600,000 men, the US lost 36,000. Just admit you are shameless so we can move on!

Told you, you're a joke. I hope you're not a joke in RL or are you too?

 

[mike2000 is back]

China lost 600,000 men, the US lost 36,000. Just admit you are shameless so we can move on!

Actually the biggest lost for China(and which still affects the country today) was Taiwan. Mao gave up invading Taiwan and reunifying China completely once and for all to instead help North Korea and stop U.S and other Western powers from removing Kim dynasty and unifying Korea. From there on after the Korea war,the US swore to defend Taiwan and solidified the KMT rule over the island against the communist.
So Mao lost Taiwan to save North Korea. Some will say he was right others not. Depends on how you look at it.

 

[haidian]

Actually the biggest lost for China(and which still affects the country today) was Taiwan. Mao gave up invading Taiwan and reunifying China completely once and for all to instead help North Korea and stop U.S and other Western powers from removing Kim dynasty and unifying Korea. From there on after the Korea war,the US swore to defend Taiwan and solidified the KMT rule over the island against the communist.
So Mao lost Taiwan to save North Korea. Some will say he was right others not. Depends on how you look at it.

Taiwan will come back to China eventually, as it did many times in the Chinese history.

 

[mike2000 is back]

Taiwan will come back to China eventually, as it did many times in the Chinese history.

Ok

 

[Clutch]

This makes CPEC look like peanuts... I wonder what would be America's response to China's $290 Billion dollar investment in Iran???

I wonder if the firing of John Bolton and Trumps recent overtures to Iran have anything to do with this????..... Because it seems like the Americans kind of played "nice" with Pakistan to lessen or slow down CPEC through Imran Khan... I wonder America now reaching out to Iran is for the same reason... I.e don't allow Iranians to make a big deal with China.


America is now maybe using the carrot for both Pakistan and Iran... Just because the stick didn't work... All to contain China.

Hmm

 

[khansaheeb]

No offense. As long as Iran sticks to religious fanaticism and habors anti US sentiment, the country has no future. The only thing it gets is more sufferings. I will see if the chinese will commit economic suicide if investing large forex reserves and increasing tension with America. Instead, Iran should swallow the pride and make a deal with the US, Israel, Saudi Arabia.

Who can be more religiously fanatical than Indians ?

This makes CPEC look like peanuts... I wonder what would be America's response to China's $290 Billion dollar investment in Iran???

I wonder if the firing of John Bolton and Trumps recent overtures to Iran have anything to do with this????..... Because it seems like the Americans kind of played "nice" with Pakistan to lessen or slow down CPEC through Imran Khan... I wonder America now reaching out to Iran is for the same reason... I.e don't allow Iranians to make a big deal with China.


America is now maybe using the carrot for both Pakistan and Iran... Just because the stick didn't work... All to contain China.

Hmm

It will have to be one big carrot.

 

[vi-va]

Actually the biggest lost for China(and which still affects the country today) was Taiwan. Mao gave up invading Taiwan and reunifying China completely once and for all to instead help North Korea and stop U.S and other Western powers from removing Kim dynasty and unifying Korea. From there on after the Korea war,the US swore to defend Taiwan and solidified the KMT rule over the island against the communist.
So Mao lost Taiwan to save North Korea. Some will say he was right others not. Depends on how you look at it.

No. The fact is Taiwan was supported by US and US blocked Taiwan Strait before Korean War.

With or without Korean War, as long as China allied with USSR, US will not give up Taiwan easily.

Who can be more religiously fanatical than Indians ?


It will have to be one big carrot.

Big carrot under Trump administration's "America First" doctrine is not likely. Give big carrot to Iran? smh.

 

[mike2000 is back]

No. The fact is Taiwan was supported by US and US blocked Taiwan Strait before Korean War.

With or without Korean War, as long as China allied with USSR, US will not give up Taiwan easily.

Nope. You should read history. Originally, then-President Harry Truman had declared a military nonintervention policy for Taiwan, effectively signaling that should the newly-formed People’s Republic of China launch a full-scale invasion, the United States would not interfere. The US at the time didn't have much enmity with the newly formed PRC or Mao, in fact many US military officials knew Mao since they had regular contacts during their training of Chinese(both KMT and CCP) forces against the Japanese during WWII.
That policy all changed with the advent of the Korean War, which brought the U.S. and the PRC into conflict. Truman deployed the U.S. Seventh Fleet to the Taiwan Straits to signal new U.S. opposition to a PRC military strike against the island.
But with the Korean War ending, there was some uncertainty over what would become of the U.S. commitment to Taiwan. Eisenhower lifted the U.S. naval blockade of the straits in 1953(by the end of the Korean war). Both the Nationalists and the PRC took advantage of the opportunity to restart hostilities. In particular, the PRC began to bomb the outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu, where Nationalist troops were massing, sparking what came to be known as the First Taiwan Strait Crisis.
In response, the U.S. under Eisenhower(NOTE THAT he is still loved by Taiwan even today since they consider him the one who saved them from PRC) made clear for the first time that the United States was formally committed to defending Taiwan from armed attack. The Mutual DefenCe Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of China was signed in 1954, with both sides pledging to aid each other in the case of a military attack and that was later adopted by U.S senate.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/taiwan-strait-crises

So as you can see, Mao lost the opportunity to invade Taiwan earlier by choosing to aid the Kim dynasty first. It's a known fact that many people agree with. However some think it was a mistake by Mao, some think it was not. Personally I think it was a big blunder by Mao. But it depends on how we all see things.

 

[M.Kamran_Pak]

China strikes back

Munir AkramSeptember 15, 2019
Facebook Count17
Twitter Share
1

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.
THE Petroleum Economist of Sept 3 reported that China has agreed to invest up to $290 billion in the development of Iran’s oil, gas and petroleum sectors, and another $120bn in its transport and manufacturing infrastructure. This is a calculated kick aimed at America’s strategic objectives.

According to the report, China will have the first right of refusal on all projects in Iran and a 12 per cent guaranteed discount on energy imports from there. China will provide the “technology, systems, process ingredients and personnel required to complete such projects” including “up to 5,000 Chinese security personnel on the ground to protect Chinese projects….”

China’s agreement to so massively finance Iran’s development is an extension of its Belt and Road Initiative. It is also an ‘in your face’ response to America’s aggressive trade, technology and military moves against China over the last year. It will prick the balloon of the US strategy of ‘maximum pressure’ against Iran designed to bring the latter to its knees economically and oblige it to accept additional constraints on its nuclear and missile programs (beyond the JCPOA) and curb its politico-military ambitions in the Middle East. In entering this agreement, China has announced that it is not intimidated by the “secondary sanctions” which the US has threatened to impose on companies and countries which continue economic relations with Iran in defiance of America’s unilateral sanctions against Iran.

China can import virtually all of Iran’s oil and gas production. This could increase Iran’s oil exports manifold from 200,000 barrels per day at present to its full capacity over 4-5 million bpd. China’s energy giants — CNPC, CNOC, Sinopec — can rapidly expand Iran’s oil and gas production from existing and new fields. Iran will not need other markets, such as India which has halted oil imports from Iran in compliance with US sanctions.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD
China’s agreement to massively finance Iran’s development is an extension of its Belt and Road Initiative.

A considerable part of Iran’s gas could be exported via the existing Turkmenistan-China gas pipeline and new oil pipelines can be constructed on the same route. This will significantly diminish the threat of a US/Western maritime energy blockade against China or Iran. Further, China’s reliance on US-friendly energy suppliers in the Gulf (Saudi Arabia, UAE) and East Asia (Indonesia, Brunei) will be dramatically reduced since it could meet all or most of its requirements from Iran and Russia.

The transport infrastructure which China plans to build in Iran, including high-speed rail on several routes, will provide Beijing with additional avenues for its trade — overland trade through Iran and Turkey to and from Europe and maritime trade through Iranian ports (including, ironically, the hitherto Indian-sponsored port of Chahbahar) to the Middle East, Africa and beyond.

Iran’s economic partnership with China will supplement its current close security ties with Russia and alter Middle East power equations. China will acquire considerable influence over Tehran’s nuclear and security policies, adding to its leverage with the West including the US. On the other hand, Iran’s reinforced ‘strategic’ partnership with China will considerably enhance its capacity to promote its policy objectives in Yemen, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Afghanistan. Iran may also feel sufficiently emboldened to retaliate robustly to Israel’s frequent strikes on its military assets and militia affiliates in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.

In Yemen, Iran is now playing a more open role to promote a political settlement which accommodates the Houthis. The Arab coalition has been weakened by an unsuccessful military campaign, internal differences and US and Western criticism of the human cost of the conflict.

In Syria, President Bashar al-Assad has clearly won the civil war against the Western Gulf coalition with the support of Russia and Iran. Once its economy is stabilised, Iran could play an even more robust role not only in Syria but also Iraq and Lebanon.

Iran and China may also enhance their influence in Afghanistan. Donald Trump has declared that the agreement with the Taliban is ‘dead’ — at least for now. The most significant provision of this agreement was not the withdrawal of 5,000 American soldiers but the Taliban’s acceptance of the continued presence of 8,600 US ‘counterterrorism’ forces. These troops would prolong US capacity for force projection within and across Afghanistan’s borders. Now, it is possible that the Afghan Taliban, perhaps at Iran’s instance, may no longer accept the rump US presence in a revived deal.

China’s Iran partnership would supplement and reinforce its long-standing strategic participation with Pakistan. Obviously, Beijing wants strategic relationships with both. However, the Iranian partnership offers China another strategic ‘window’ besides CPEC and insurance against possible US or Indian disruption of the China-Pakistan corridor. Moreover, over time, the Sino-Iran economic partnership could add a security and military dimension.Western pundits often speak of a Chinese naval base in Gwadar. In fact, it could well appear in Chahbahar.

Time is running out for India to make a strategic choice between an ‘Asian Order’, combining China, Russia, Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and Central Asia under the SCO and the BRI, or an alliance with the US and participation in its ‘Indo-Pacific’ strategy. So far, India has had the best of both worlds. It is building an alliance with the US to emerge as China’s Asian ‘equal’ and establish its domination over South Asia and the Indian ocean. Yet, India pleads for US ‘strategic altruism’ to enable it to preserve its traditional arms supply relationship with Russia and its growing trade and investment cooperation with China. As the Sino-US global confrontation intensifies, the strategic space for India, and others, to manoeuvre between the two global powers will become progressively narrow. China’s forthright support to Pakistan on occupied Kashmir is an early indication of the emerging alignments.

So far, despite Trump’s hostile trade tariffs, technology restrictions and military pugnacity, China has kept open the option of reverting to a ‘win-win’ cooperative relationship with the US. But, a firm consensus seems to have emerged in Washington that China is America’s primary rival and threat to its century of global dominance and that China’s further rise can and must be stopped by a ‘whole-of-government’ strategy of comprehensive containment and confrontation. China appears to have picked up the gauntlet. A titanic clash is in the offing across the world.

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

Published in Dawn, September 15th, 2019

CPEC is just not roads/rail infrastructure.... It is corner Stone for integration of EuroAsia.
Also an integral part to connect Central Asian countries with South Asia and China. However only hurdle is conflict in Afg and presence of US.
Now that US has stopped peace process in Afg and for last couple of years trade war, tariff war is going on between China and US. China now regardless of CAATSA partnering with Iran to integrate Central Asia, access to Caspian Sea maybe offshore drilling in Caspian and achieve EuroAsia (ancient silk road) through Iran.

 

[riscol]

From my own perspective, it was the right decision to liberate the Northern part of Korea. As the number of countries which are insignificant on the political scale when we are discussing about influence who recognizes Taiwan as the rightful government of China is dwindling. As the Chinese military power is vastly expanding especially the Naval strength and capacity it could decide to force Taiwan to return back in a couple of decades. Looking at the Korean peninsula, there's no hope for US and South Korea to swallow up the North.

 

[WinterNights]

You give your country’s fate into the hands of Beijing, you haven’t just noticed.

Are you suffering from paranoia or something?

Cheap oil, cheap assets, certainly if I was chinese, I won’t say no.

Go re-read my previous comment. I already told you why China getting cheaper oil from Iran is more than welcomed given the help they're giving Iran. Try to be a little more strategic in your thinking.

History? China closed borders for almost her history. Even Vietnam as direct neighbor, we were allowed to trade with them one per year. Forget other countries. China opened borders for trades just 40 years ago. In comparing to 3,000 years history, that 40 years count nothing.

Have you even received history lessons? Why are you so restricted in your views in this topic?

 

[riscol]

The Vietnamese members here are irrational and vicious in their verbal attacks. Trust me i have first hand experience from the very beginning. I received unfair treatment and hostility from them when i was just asking some questions from a neutral standpoint. More often than not they were spreading false information and fake news which led me to believe they are here for propaganda purposes. Iranian people are not only intelligent but also friendly, the last thing they need is some ill wished advice from those willing to be slave to the US.

I was just reading about the silk road story, how can China opened up for trade 40 years ago while it has been doing it for thousands of years with the Arabian World and European continent? See another fake news.

 

[vi-va]

Nope. You should read history. Originally, then-President Harry Truman had declared a military nonintervention policy for Taiwan, effectively signaling that should the newly-formed People’s Republic of China launch a full-scale invasion, the United States would not interfere. The US at the time didn't have much enmity with the newly formed PRC or Mao, in fact many US military officials knew Mao since they had regular contacts during their training of Chinese(both KMT and CCP) forces against the Japanese during WWII.
That policy all changed with the advent of the Korean War, which brought the U.S. and the PRC into conflict. Truman deployed the U.S. Seventh Fleet to the Taiwan Straits to signal new U.S. opposition to a PRC military strike against the island.
But with the Korean War ending, there was some uncertainty over what would become of the U.S. commitment to Taiwan. Eisenhower lifted the U.S. naval blockade of the straits in 1953(by the end of the Korean war). Both the Nationalists and the PRC took advantage of the opportunity to restart hostilities. In particular, the PRC began to bomb the outlying islands of Kinmen and Matsu, where Nationalist troops were massing, sparking what came to be known as the First Taiwan Strait Crisis.
In response, the U.S. under Eisenhower(NOTE THAT he is still loved by Taiwan even today since they consider him the one who saved them from PRC) made clear for the first time that the United States was formally committed to defending Taiwan from armed attack. The Mutual DefenCe Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of China was signed in 1954, with both sides pledging to aid each other in the case of a military attack and that was later adopted by U.S senate.

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1953-1960/taiwan-strait-crises

So as you can see, Mao lost the opportunity to invade Taiwan earlier by choosing to aid the Kim dynasty first. It's a known fact that many people agree with. However some think it was a mistake by Mao, some think it was not. Personally I think it was a big blunder by Mao. But it depends on how we all see things.

you don't really understand the situation, I will explain later