Will EU Block China Economic Silk Road?

Will EU Block China Economic Silk Road?

By F. William Engdahl

Ex: http://www.williamengdahl.com 

In the clearest sign to date, EU Ambassadors to Beijing have just released a document critical of China’s vast Belt, Road Initiative or New Economic Silk Road infrastructure project. All EU ambassadors excepting Hungary signed off on the paper in a declaration of growing EU opposition to what is arguably the most promising economic project in the past century if not more. The move fits conveniently with the recent Trump Administration targeting of China technology trade as tensions grow .

Twenty-seven of the 28 EU ambassadors to China have just signed a report sharply critical of China’s BRI development. Ironically, as if the EU states or their companies did not do the same, the report attacks China for using the BRI to hamper free trade and put Chinese companies at an advantage. The document claims that the Chinese New Economic Silk Road project, unveiled by Xi Jinping in 2013, “runs counter to the EU agenda for liberalizing trade and pushes the balance of power in favor of subsidized Chinese companies.”

Two Models of Global Development

Chinese President Xi Jinping first proposed what today is the Belt, Road Initiative, today the most ambitious infrastructure project in modern history, at a university in Kazakhstan five years ago in 2013. Despite repeated efforts by Beijing to enlist the European Union as a whole and individual EU member states, the majority to date have remained cool or distant with the exception of Hungary, Greece and several eastern EU countries. When China officially launched the project and held an international conference in Beijing in May 2017, it was largely boycotted by EU heads of state. Germany’s Merkel sent her economics minister who accused the Chinese of lack of commitments to social and environmental sustainability and transparency in procurement.

Now 27 of 28 EU ambassadors in Beijing have signed a statement suspiciously similar to that of the German position. According to the German business daily, Handelsblatt, the EU ambassadors’ declaration states that the China BRI “runs counter to the EU agenda for liberalizing trade and pushes the balance of power in favor of subsidized Chinese companies.” Hungary was the only country refusing to sign.

The latest EU statement, soon to be followed by a long critical report on the new Silk Road from the EU Commission in Brussels, fits very much the agenda of the Trump Administration in its latest trade tariffs against Chinese goods that alleges that Chinese companies force US partners to share technology in return for projects in China.

Moreover, the EU Commission has just released a long report on China in connection with new EU anti-dumping rules. The report declares that the fact that China is a state-directed economy with state-owned enterprises engaging in the construction of the Belt Road Initiative is in effect “the problem.” China answers that her economy is in the “primary stage of socialism”, has a “socialist market economy” and views the state-owned economy as the “leading force” of national development. The targeting of China’s state enterprises and of its state-directed economic model is a direct attack on her very economic model. Beijing is not about to scrap that we can be sure.

The latest stance of EU member states, led by Germany and Macron’s France, is an attempt to pressure China into adhering to the 2013 World Bank document, China 2030. There, as we noted in an earlier analysis, it declared that China must complete radical market reforms, to follow the failed Western “free market” model implemented in the West since the 1970’s with disastrous consequences for employment and stability. China 2030 states, “It is imperative that China … develop a market-based system with sound foundations…while a vigorous private sector plays the more important role of driving growth.” The report, cosigned then by the Chinese Finance Ministry and State Council, further declared that “China’s strategy toward the world will need to be governed by a few key principles: open markets, fairness and equity, mutually beneficial cooperation, global inclusiveness and sustainable development.”

As Xi Jinping established his presidency and domination of the Party after 2013, China issued a quite different document that is integral to the BRI project of President Xi. This document, China 2025: Made in China, calls for China to emerge from its initial stage as an economy assembling technologies for Apple or GM or other Western multinationals under license, to become self-sufficient in its own technology. The dramatic success of China mobile phone company Huawei to rival Apple or Samsung is a case in point. Under China 2025 the goal is to develop the next transformation from that of a cheap-labor assembly economy to an exporter of Made in China products across the board from shipbuilding in context of the Maritime Silk Road to advanced aircraft to Artificial Intelligence and space technologies.

Refusal to Constructively Engage

By its recent critical actions, the EU Commission and most EU states are, while not slamming the door shut on what is developing as one of the few positive growth spots outside military spending in the world today, doing everything to lessen the engagement of EU states in the BRI.

For its part, China and Chinese state companies are investing in modernizing and developing deep water ports to handle the new Silk Road trade flows more efficiently. China’s State Oceanic Administration (SOA) is responsible for developing the so-called “blue economy” maritime ports and shipping infrastructure, the “belt” in Belt and Road. Last year China’s marine industries, exploitation of ocean resources and services such as tourism and container and other transport, generated the equivalent of more than $1 trillion turnover. Little wonder that China sees investment in ocean shipping and ports a high priority

Sea lane shipping via the Malacca Strait and Suez is at present China’s life line for trade to EU states and vulnerable to potential US interdiction in event of a serious clash. Today twenty-five percent of world trade passes through the Malacca Strait. Creation of a network of new ports independent of that vulnerable passage is one aim of the BRI

The Piraeus Example

China’s Maritime Silk Road envisions directing state investment into key sectors such as acquisition of port management agreements, investment in modernized container ports and related infrastructure in select EU states.

At present the most developed example is the Greek port of Piraeus, operated under an agreement with the Chinese state company, COSCO, as port operator. Modernization and more than €1.5 billion investment from China has dramatically increased the port’s importance. In 2016 Piraeus’s container traffic grew by over 14 percent and COSCO plans to turn Piraeus into the fifth largest European port for container traffic. Before COSCO, it was not even in the EU top 15 in 2007. In 2016 COSCO bought 51% of Piraeus Port Authority for €280 million, and now owns 66%. Last year Piraeus Port, COSCO and Shanghai Port Authority, China’s largest container port, signed a joint agreement to further boost trade and efficiency at Piraeus. Greek Deputy Economy Minister Stergios Pitsiorlas said at the time, “The agreement means that huge quantities of goods will be transported to Piraeus from Shanghai.”

As the economically-troubled Greek economy produces few products China needs, China has encouraged growth of a mainstay of Greece’s economy, tourism trade with China. This year an estimated 200,000 Chinese tourists will visit Greece and spend billions there. As Piraeus is also a port for luxury cruise liners, Chinese cruise operators are servicing that as well. China company Fosun International, engaged in modernizing the former site of Athens Airport into one of the biggest real-estate projects in Europe, is also interested in investing in Greek tourism. Significantly, they own a share in Thomas Cook Group and are designing holiday packages aimed at the huge China tourist market. Fosun sees 1.5 million Chinese tourists in Greece in the next five years and is investing to accommodate at least a fair share.

Piraeus is only one part of China’s larger maritime strategy. Today Chinese ships handle a mere 25% of Chinese ocean container shipping. Part of the Made in China 2025 transformation is to increase that by investing in state-of-the-art commercial shipbuilding modernization. China’s State Oceanic Administration and the NDRC national development council have defined select industries in the port and shipbuilding sector as “strategic.” This means they get priority in receiving state support. Areas include upgrading fisheries, shipbuilding, and offshore oil and gas technologies and technologies for exploitation of deep sea resources. Further areas of priority in the current 5-year China state plan include developing a modern maritime services industry with coastal and sea tourism, public transport, and maritime finance. All these will benefit from the BRI Silk Road.

This is the heart of the present Xi Jinping transformation of China from a cheap labor screwdriver assembly economy to an increasingly self-reliant producer of its own high-technology products. This is what the ongoing Trump Section 301 and other trade war measures target. This is what the EU is increasingly trying to block. China is determined to develop and create new markets for its goods as well as new sources of imports. This is the essence of the Belt and Road Initiative.

Why import oil platforms from US companies if China can make them itself? Why charter Maersk or other EU shipping companies to carry Chinese goods to the EU market if China can do the same in their own ships? Isn’t the “free market,” so much touted since the 1970’s in the West, supposed to be about competition? In 2016 the Central Committee of China’s Communist Party and the State Council adopted the “Innovation Driven Development Strategy”, adopted in 2016 by the Central Committee and the State Council. According to this China intends to become an “innovative country” by 2020, to move into the top tier of innovative countries by 2030-35, and attain global leadership by 2050. This is what China 2025 is all about and why Washington and the EU Commission are alarmed. They have a plan. We in the West have so-called free markets.

Rather than take the Chinese strategy as a challenge to be better, they attack. For certain EU interests, free market works fine when they dominate the market. If someone comes along and does it one better, that is “unfair,” and they demand a “level playing field” as if the world economy was some kind of cricket field.

Silk Road Fund

One of the most amusing charges by EU countries against China and their state-guided economic model—a model not too different in essence by the way from the model used by Japan after the war or by South Korea– is that EU critics attack the funding practices of the China Silk Road Fund. A report by the German government has criticized the fact that Chinese state banks give some 80% of their loans for the BRI projects to Chinese companies.

The Silk Road Fund is a Chinese state fund established three years ago with $40 billion initial capital to finance select projects in Eurasia of the BRI or Silk Road. It is not to be confused with the separate Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. Among its various projects to date are construction of a Mombasa–Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway; investment in the Karot Hydropower Project and other hydropower projects in Pakistan as part of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor; or a share of Yamal LNG project in Russia.

The fact that a Chinese state-controlled fund, investing funds resulting from the hard work of Chinese people to produce real goods and services, decided to use its state funds to benefit Chinese companies is hardly surprising. The real issue is that the European Union as a group or the individual states so far have boycotted full engagement with what could be the locomotive of economic recovery for the entire EU. They could easily create their own versions of China’s Silk Road Fund, under whatever name, to give subsidized state-guaranteed credits to German or other EU companies for projects along the BRI, along the model of Germany’s Marshall Plan bank, KfW, which was used effectively in rebuilding communist East Germany after 1990. This it seems they do not want. So they boycott Chinafor lack of “transparency” instead.

These examples are useful to illustrate what is going on and how ineffective the EU “free market” model is against a coordinated state development strategy. It is time to rethink how France, Germany, and other EU member states rebuilt after World War II. The state played an essential role.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”

The Silk Roads of Faith

The Silk Roads of Faith

By Bionic Mosquito & http://www.lewrockwell.com

The Silk Roads: A New History of the World, by Peter Frankopan.

Frankopan begins his journey not with trade in goods but trade in faith.  Buddhism, Hinduism, Jainism, Manichaeism, Zoroastrianism, Judaism, Christianity (of more than one flavor), and eventually Islam (of more than one flavor) all come into play in this journey, and not always in a peaceful way.

As early as the third century B.C, Buddhist principles could be found as far to the east as Syria, with a Jewish sect in Alexandria, Egypt known as Therapeutai bearing unmistakable similarities to Buddhism.  In central Asia, forty Buddhist monasteries ringed Kabul.  Noted a visitor:

“The pavement was made of onyx, the walls of pure marble; the door was made from moulded gold, while the floor was solid silver; stars were represented everywhere one looked…in the hallway, there was a golden idol as beautiful as the moon, seated on a magnificent bejeweled throne.”

The first four centuries of the first millennium saw the explosion of Christianity and “a maelstrom of faith wars.”  Persia, the leading power during the rise of the Sasanian dynasty, was Zoroastrian, persecuting other religions and sects.

The story of the spread of Christianity from Palestine to the west is well known; the spread of Christianity to the east was far more remarkable and extensive.  Christianity was brought in through the trade routes, as well as through the deportations of Christians from Syria.  It was a Christianity with a communion different than that to be found in Rome.  This difference would prove to play a key role in the not too distant future. 

Evangelists reached north into Georgia, reaching a large community of Jews who converted.  There were dozens of Christian communities along the Persian Gulf and as far to the east as today’s Afghanistan.  As the influence of Christianity increased, the persecution by the Zoroastrian Persians followed suit.  For the leaders of the non-Persian minorities, Christianity was seen as a way to break free of the empire.  It was seen this way by the Persians as well.

Precisely how and when rulers in the Caucasus adopted Christianity is not clear.  One example regarding this should suffice, regarding the conversion of the Armenian King Tiridates III at the start of the fourth century:

…according to tradition, Tiridates converted after turning into a pig and roaming naked in the fields before being healed by St. Gregory, who had been thrown into a snake infested pit for refusing to worship an Armenian goddess.  Gregory healed Tiridates by causing his snout, tusks and skin to fall off before baptizing the grateful monarch in the Euphrates.

Way better than the story of Constantine, who looked up in the sky and saw a cross-shaped light.

Constantine’s conversion was a blessing to Christians of the west; it led to a disaster for Christians in the east.  While Christianity was not made a state religion, Constantine did declare himself the protector of Christians wherever they lived – even outside of the Roman Empire.

To the Persians, he presented himself as speaking on behalf of these eastern Christians.  From here on, every conversion was seen as an act of war.  In order to protect these eastern Christians, Constantine planned his attack on Persia; he was going to bring about God’s kingdom on earth.  As noted Aphrahat, head of a key monastery near Mosul, “Goodness has come to the people of God…the beast will be killed at its preordained time.”

Apparently this wasn’t the preordained time.  Unfortunately for these Christians, Constantine fell ill and died; Shapur II proceeded to unleash hell on the local Christian populations as payback for Constantine’s aggressions.  The list of martyrs was long.  It truly was a disaster for Christianity in the east.

Eventually the conflicts between Rome and the Persians settled down; the Persians secured key points on the routes of trade and communication.  Half of Armenia was annexed.  Both powers were faced with a new enemy coming from the steppes of Asia.

Driven by famine attributed by the author to catastrophic climate change (too many cows?  Volkswagen diesels?), the tribes of the steppes were driven westward.  They drove refugees in front of them, clear to the Danube.  Persia was not spared this invasion, with attacks along the major cities of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers.  This drove Persia and Rome into a previously unlikely alliance.

A massive fortification was built by the Persians along a 125 mile stretch between the Caspian and Black Seas.  Thirty forts spanned this expanse; a canal fifteen feet deep protected the wall; 30,000 troops manned this barrier.  Rome made regular financial contributions in support of this fortification; further, they supplied a regular contingent of soldiers to defend it.

As far as Rome itself was concerned, it all came too late; in 410, the city was sacked.  The city that controlled the Sea which was considered to be the center of the world was conquered.  To the Christian men of Rome, this was God handing out punishment for man’s sinful ways; to others, it was a result of Rome’s turn to Christianity and away from its pagan roots.

This was a benefit to Christians in the east; Rome was no longer seen as a threat to Persia.  Constantinople had its own defenses from these hordes to worry about, so there was little threat from this quarter either.

This relative calm allowed for the various Christian sects, east and west, to work out the doctrine – turning the Gospels and letters into consistent practice, belief, action and governance; the perfect opportunity to turn Christianity into a unified church.

It didn’t work out this way.  Bishops against bishops, sects against sects, unsettled debates at the various councils, power politics, and excommunication freely offered.  To offer any meaningful detail would only make my head hurt.

While the church in the west was busy rooting out deviant views, the church in the east went on a missionary outreach to rival any other.  From the tip of Yemen to Sri Lanka, Christian communities could be found headed by clergy appointed from Persia.  The author suggests that even during the Middle Ages there were more Christians in Asia than in Europe.

This outreach was made possible due to the tolerance shown by the Sasanian rulers of Persia – you might consider these the Constantines of the east.  The clergy would pray for the Shah’s health; the Shah would organize elections for the clergy.

It might be generally said that religious tolerance was shown throughout the region.  In Bamiyan, within today’s Afghanistan, two immense statues of Buddha stood – one as high as 180 feet.  Carved in the fifth century, they were left intact under later Muslim rule for 1200 years, ending only under the Taliban in 2001.

Others did not show as much tolerance.  While the Palestinian Talmud refers lightly to Jesus and His followers, the Babylonian Talmud takes a “violent and scathing position on Christianity.”  Converts to Judaism, according to one prominent rabbi, still had the evil in them until twenty-four generations have passed.

In the kingdom of Himyar, in the southwestern corner of the Arabian Peninsula, Jewish communities became increasingly prominent.  Judaism was adopted as the state religion; Christians faced martyrdom for their beliefs, after being condemned by a council of rabbis.

In any case, by around the middle of the seventh century, Christianity was generally on the march east, at the expense of Zoroastrianism, Judaism and Buddhism.

This period was to quickly come to an end.

Reprinted with permission from Bionic Mosquito.

The Best of Bionic Mosquito

Les USA découvrent le Nouvel ordre mondial (des Routes de la Soie)

Auteur : Pepe Escobar

Ex: http://zejournal.mobi

Les véritables Maîtres de l’univers aux USA ne sont peut-être pas météorologues, mais ils commencent à flairer d’où le vent souffle.

L’histoire dira peut-être que tout a commencé cette semaine à Sotchi, lorsque leur camelot de service, le secrétaire d’État John Kerry, a rencontré le ministre des Affaires étrangères Lavrov, puis le président Poutine.

Ce qui a mis la puce à l’oreille des véritables Maîtres de l’univers, c’est sans doute la vue de ces soldats de l’Armée populaire de libération, défilant côte à côte avec les militaires russes sur la place Rouge le Jour de la Victoire. Jamais on n’avait vu des troupes chinoises défiler sur la place Rouge, même à l’époque de l’alliance entre Staline et Mao.

Comme rappel à l’ordre, c’est digne du système de défense antimissiles russe S-500. Les adultes dans les officines à Washington ont peut-être fait les calculs qui s’imposent et conclu que Moscou et Pékin pourraient être sur le point de signer des protocoles militaires secrets similaires au Pacte germano-soviétique (Molotov-Ribbentrop). Le nouveau jeu des chaises musicales a vraiment de quoi rendre fou de rage le docteur Zbig grand échiquier Brzezinski, qui a fait de l’Eurasie son obsession.

Et voilà que soudain, en lieu et place de la diabolisation incessante de la Russie et des hauts cris de l’Otan à propos d’une agression russe proférés toutes les dix secondes, nous avons Kerry qui dit que le respect de Minsk-2 est la seule façon de s’en sortir en Ukraine et qu’il mettra sérieusement en garde son vassal Porochenko de ne pas exécuter sa menace de bombarder l’aéroport de Donetsk et ses environs afin de réintégrer le tout dans le giron de la démocratie ukrainienne.

 

Le sempiternel réaliste Lavrov a qualifié la rencontre avec Kerry de merveilleuse. Pour sa part, le porte-parole du Kremlin Dmitry Peskov a décrit la nouvelle entente USA-Russie comme extrêmement positive.

Ainsi donc, les tenants de la politique autoproclamée d’éviter les conneries de l’administration Obama semblent avoir fini par comprendre, en apparence du moins, qu’isoler la Russie ne sert à rien et que Moscou ne reculera jamais sur deux fronts : pas question que l’Ukraine intègre l’Otan et pas question que les Républiques populaires de Donetsk et Lougansk soient écrasées par Kiev, par l’Otan et par qui que ce soit d’autre.

Ce dont il a été vraiment question à Sotchi (mais rien n’en est ressorti), c’est de déterminer comment l’administration Obama pourra se sortir du bourbier géopolitique dans lequel elle s’est elle-même enfoncée à la frontière occidentale russe sans trop perdre la face.

À propos de ces missiles…

L’Ukraine est un État en déliquescence maintenant converti en colonie du FMI. L’Union européenne (UE) n’acceptera jamais de l’accueillir comme membre ou de payer ses factures astronomiques. Le véritable enjeu, aussi bien pour Washington que pour Moscou, c’est l’Iran. Ce n’est pas un hasard si la très louche Wendy Sherman, la négociatrice en chef des USA dans les pourparlers sur le nucléaire entre l’Iran et le P5+1, faisait partie de la délégation accompagnant Kerry. Un accord détaillé avec l’Iran ne pourra être conclu sans la collaboration essentielle de Moscou sur tout, de l’élimination du combustible nucléaire usé à la levée rapide des sanctions imposées par l’ONU.

L’Iran joue un rôle clé dans le projet chinois des Nouvelles Routes de la Soie. Les véritables Maîtres de l’univers ont dû s’apercevoir (il était temps !) que tout gravite autour de l’Eurasie qui, c’était à prévoir, a volé la vedette lors de la parade du Jour de la Victoire le 9 mai. Après son arrêt d’une portée significative à Moscou (où il a signé 32 accords distincts), le président chinois Xi Jinping est allé conclure des ententes avec le Kazakhstan et la Biélorussie.

Bienvenue dans le Nouvel ordre mondial (des Routes de la Soie) : de Pékin à Moscou par TGV ; de Shanghai à Almaty, Minsk et au-delà ; de l’Asie centrale à l’Europe de l’Ouest.

Nous savons maintenant que cette aventure commerciale et géopolitique à vitesse grand V est inéluctable, avec la participation de la Banque asiatique d’investissement pour les infrastructures, sous la direction de Pékin avec l’appui de Moscou, et de la Banque de développement des BRICS. L’Asie centrale, la Mongolie et l’Afghanistan (où l’Otan vient de perdre une guerre) sont inexorablement attirés vers cette orbite commerciale et géopolitique qui englobe tout le centre, le nord et l’est de l’Eurasie.

Ce qu’on pourrait appeler la Grande Asie est en train de prendre forme, non seulement de Pékin à Moscou, mais aussi de ce centre commercial qu’est Shanghai à la porte de l’Europe qu’est Saint-Pétersbourg. C’est la conséquence logique d’un processus complexe que j’examine depuis un certain temps déjà, c’est-à-dire la rencontre entre la Ceinture économique de la Route de la Soie et l’Union économique eurasiatique, menée par Moscou, que Poutine a décrite comme un nouveau genre de partenariat.

 

Les véritables Maîtres de l’univers ont peut-être remarqué aussi les discussions très approfondies entre Sergueï Choïgou, ministre de la défense russe, et le général Fan Changlong, vice-président de la Commission militaire centrale de la Chine. La Russie et la Chine comptent effectuer des exercices navals en Méditerranée et dans la mer du Japon, en donnant la priorité absolue à leur position commune en ce qui concerne le bouclier antimissile mondial des USA.

À cela s’ajoute cet aspect non négligeable qu’est la découverte, par le Pentagone, que la Chine possède jusqu’à 60 silos de missiles balistiques intercontinentaux (les CSS-4) capables de frapper l’ensemble des USA, à l’exception de la Floride.

Dernier point, mais pas le moindre, le déploiement par les Russes du système de défense antimissile ultra perfectionné S-500, qui protégera la Russie contre la Force de frappe mondiale rapide (Prompt Global Strike) des USA. Chaque missile S-500 peut intercepter dix missiles balistiques intercontinentaux à une vitesse pouvant aller jusqu’à 24 912 km/h, atteindre une altitude de 185 km et parcourir une distance horizontale de 3 500 km. Moscou soutient que le système ne sera fonctionnel qu’en 2017. Si la Russie est capable de déployer 10 000 missiles S-500, ils seront en mesure d’intercepter 100 000 missiles balistiques intercontinentaux lorsque la Maison-Blanche aura un nouveau locataire.

Les véritables Maîtres de l’univers semblent avoir refait leurs calculs à ce chapitre aussi. La Russie ne peut être réduite en poussière. Le Nouvel ordre mondial (des Routes de la Soie) ne peut être changé. Il vaudrait peut-être mieux alors s’asseoir et discuter. Mais il est préférable de bien tenir votre bride (géopolitique), car ils pourraient encore changer d’idée.

- Source : Pepe Escobar

Une nouvelle Route de la Soie reliera l’Asie à l’Europe

Une nouvelle Route de la Soie reliera l’Asie à l’Europe

Par Tatiana Golovanova

Ex: http://fortune.fdesouche.com

Les pays regroupés dans l’Organisation de coopération de Shanghai (OCS) pourront rétablir la Voie de la Soie sous forme d’un corridor de transport spécialement aménagé. Comme l’a annoncé vendredi au sommet de l’OCS à Bichkek (Kirghizie) le ministre de la Recherche et des technologies de la Chine Wang Gang, ce projet a trouvé un soutien auprès de tous les pays membres de l’organisation.

Les membres de l’OCS sont prêts à développer les échanges économiques et commerciaux. Durant ces trois mois des spécialistes de Chine, qui a pris l’initiative de faire renaître la Voie de la Soie, ont visité les pays d’Asie Centrale – le Kazakhstan, l’Ouzbékistan et la Turkménie.

La Voie de la Soie rénovée pourra relier la Chine à l’Europe via la Russie et les États d’Asie Centrale

Des ententes ont été conclues au sujet de la réalisation des projets communs pour des dizaines de milliards de dollars. L’aménagement d’un corridor de transport de l’Asie à l’Europe est une étape suivante de l’essor de ces rapports, remarque Sergueï Sanakoïev, secrétaire de la Chambre sino-russe.

« Il s’agit de créer un corridor transnational traversant le territoire du continent eurasiatique. Comme toujours, l’aménagement de tels corridors en plus de rendre possible la circulation des marchandises et des services prévoient aussi la création de grappes d’entreprises industrielles, de nouvelles productions, de technologies de pointe. Cela veut dire que cela ouvre de plus larges possibilités à la coopération dans le cadre de l’OCS lors de la mise en œuvre d’une telle initiative. »

Le projet est censé mettre en place un réseau routier reliant le Pacifique à la mer Baltique, anéantir les barrières commerciales, réduire les délais de livraison des marchandises et augmenter les règlements mutuels en monnaies nationales. L’une des variantes possibles de la future Voie de la Soie est le corridor de transport « Europe –Chine Occidentale ».

Il passera par le Kazakhstan, approchera la frontière de la Russie et se prolongera par Orenbourg et les autoroutes fédérales vers Saint-Pétersbourg et la Golfe de Finlande et la mer Baltique. La longueur de ce parcours pourra atteindre près de 8 500 km. Voici le commentaire d’Alexandre Potavine, analyste de la compagnie « RGS – Gestion des actifs ».
« En regardant la carte du monde et en évaluant les possibilités d’aménager une telle voie, on verra que les marchandises de Chine seront livrées via la Russie, l’Asie Centrale en Europe. Ce projet profite évidemment à la Chine. Il permet de minimiser les frais de transport, étant donnée que la Grande Voie de la Soie est d’environ un tiers est plus court que la voie maritime, contournant l’Asie et la péninsule Arabique. »

Si on réussit de mettre en œuvre cette conception, la Chine réduira les délais de livraison de ses marchandises. Actuellement les frets parviennent à l’Europe par mer au bout de 45 jours, par le Transsibérien – cela prend deux semaines. La nouvelle voie sera la plus courte et ne prendra pas plus de dix jours.

En plus de la Chine le corridor de transport permettra de se développer à d’autres participants. Ils pourront gagner bien sur le transit et la logistique, et vont encore attirer des investissements chinois pour leurs projets de transport, remarque Sergueï Sanakoïev.

La Voix de la Russie