Another sign that Putin et al are rebuilding the Soviet Union. Kyrgyzstan was a US ally in Afghanistan with the Kyrgyz airbase as a vital asset. The Russians have been making deals to take control of Kyrgyz assets including the airbase keeping the US from going back. http://asia.nikkei.com/Politics-Economy/International-Relations/Russia-tightens-hold-on-Kyrgyzstan Russia tightens hold on Kyrgyzstan RYSKELDI SATKE, Contributing writer BISHKEK -- As the U.S. prepares to close its sole military base in Central Asia in July, Russia is making sure the Americans won't be coming back. Russian state-owned oil company Rosneft inked a preliminary deal Feb. 19 with the Kyrgyz government to invest up to $1 billion for a stake of at least 51% in Manas International Airport, which is both Kyrgyzstan's main international gateway and home to the U.S. base used to support NATO operations in Afghanistan. The investment, Rosneft said, is "aimed at the creation of a large-scale international logistics hub," although the company is not experienced in that area. "Rosneft's bid for Manas marks the culmination of Russia's recent methodical acquisition of Kyrgyzstan's key strategic assets," said Alexander Cooley, a political scientist specializing in Central Asia at Barnard College in New York. "Over the last two years, Moscow has sought to terminate Bishkek's security cooperation with the U.S. and become the Central Asian state's dominant and exclusive strategic partner. It is now clear that Moscow seeks to turn Kyrgyzstan into a client state." Russian state-owned energy companies have been leading the way. Alongside the Manas deal, Rosneft on Feb. 19 also signed a framework agreement to buy 100% of Bishkek Oil, which has a wholesale and retail gasoline business in the capital, and a 50% stake in the sole aviation fuel provider at Osh International Airport, Kyrgyzstan's second-largest airline hub. "We are interested in the all-round promotion of the Rosneft brand in the high-potential Kyrgyz market," said Igor Sechin, chairman of Rosneft and a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin. "I believe that this acquisition (of Bishkek Oil) will allow all Kyrgyz motorists to appreciate the high quality of our fuel." Lock, stock barrel The same month, Gazprom moved closer to completing its acquisition of 100% of Kyrgyzgaz, operator of the country's natural gas network. The Russian gas giant is paying $1 for Kyrgyzgaz but will assume $40 million in debt and has pledged to invest 20 billion rubles ($551.4 million) to modernize its gas pipelines over the next five years. Gazprom has been involved in exploration in Kyrgyzstan since 2003 and also is the dominant provider of aviation fuel. It has a 70% share of the retail gasoline market. RusHydro, another partly state-owned Russian energy company, last year began construction on the first of a series of hydroelectric dams in Kyrgyzstan that it is also to manage. It is investing at least $205 million in the first four dams. Inter Rao UES, another Russian energy company, is leading the development, with support from RusHydro, of an even bigger dam project, which has raised tensions with neighboring Uzbekistan and is expected to cost at least $2 billion. While welcoming this flood of Russian capital, Kyrgyzstan is bargaining for more. In acceding to Russia's demands that the U.S. base close, Kyrgyzstan two years ago persuaded Moscow to write off $189 million in debt immediately with another $300 million to be forgiven through 2025. The deal, though, extended Russia's lease for its own air base near Bishkek by another 15 years. Kyrgyzstan has so far stalled on Russia's request that it join a Moscow-led trade bloc with Belarus and Kazakhstan, although Putin on March 5 said talks were "at a most advanced stage." Turning the screws "Moscow's assertiveness and how it conceives its relationship with its partners in the former Soviet space pose a serious challenge for Bishkek and the sovereignty of Kyrgyzstan," said Nicolás de Pedro, a Central Asia specialist at the Barcelona Centre for International Affairs. "The presence of Kyrgyz migrants in Russia gives the Kremlin a quite effective tool to exert a critical influence over Bishkek at any time. "If Russia takes control of the few strategic assets that Bishkek has at its disposal, the Kyrgyz authorities will see their already narrow capacity of maneuver severely diminished," he said. But Kyrgyzstan still has some room to play Russia off against China. President Almazbek Atambayev last year proposed a new railway project to link his country with Russia, Kazakhstan and Tajikistan, then in December signaled cooling interest in borrowing from China to fund a long-discussed railway link that would run to China and Uzbekistan. In February, the government also suspended operations at a new $300 million oil refinery opened by Zhongda China Petrol after complaints about emissions and noise.
No. Glynch said this is not happening. Russia is an innocent, peaceful nation that the US is trying to pick a fight with so that we can build up or military and steal oil.
I have a hard time being too upset about this - in a world where invading people is not supposed to be allowed, this is how the US and all major powers try to gain influence within other countries. We chose to leave the base and stopped leasing it, so Russia will instead. It sucks for us, but it's all voluntary, at the end of the day - their government is not being forced to accept any of these deals. They are doing it because they want the money, and we could have outbid Russia if we wanted to. We regularly buy influence all over the world through the same basic dependency model, although using different methods (see Egypt and their military).
I don't really think it sucks for us, but it does suck for Europe and the surrounding countries who don't want to be part of Russia.
True - by "us', I was more thinking the western world. But for the countries surrounding Russia, I think Ukraine and Georgia are real concerns because those weren't voluntary. But this example is a voluntary one, so really, this just gives those countries a heads up to be wary of making any deals with Russia because they have made their interests/goals clear.
So, only the US is allowed to stick its dick wherever it wants? I mean, what is the point of mentioning China at the end of the article? EDIT: This article is also about Russia doing business with Kyrgyzstan. Russian businesses do business with other countries, like Iraq.
But doesn't this miss the point that Russia is dangerous? The problem I'm getting at is moral equivalence. If North Korea did it, would it be ok?
I don't think Russia's nearly as dangerous as they seem, but that's a different argument. Accepting that they are reasonably dangerous, I agree with you in the sense that it strengthens Russia's interests and that sucks for the US and the west (and their other neighbors). But I don't think they are doing anything particularly "wrong" here - we just don't like it because they aren't our friends. But unlike the Crimea stuff, they aren't violating international law or reasonable international standards - they are just making a strategic acquisition. This doesn't seem like an example of them strong-arming anyone or treating anyone unfairly or anything like that.
Fair enough. I just don't see what's wrong with disliking it because they aren't our friends. What our allies and enemies do is important, whether technically legal or not.
Oh I agree - I'm not saying we should be happy about or shouldn't dislike it. It potentially affects strategic balance of the region and therefore affects NATO, etc. It's just a different sort of issue than the other things Russia is engaged in. I don't think this is a situation where there's any reason for the US to take any particularly retaliatory action or even really officially comment or complain about it. I'm sure China and other potential competitors in the world are regularly acquiring strategic assets to grow their influence as well, so this isn't particularly a unique thing.
No no no... The key is understanding where Russia is coming from and their feelings... They feel threatened by the US and really we should support their actions... If we could just sit down over a decaf latte and have a heart to heart we would have wonderful relations..
Essentially, Russia is "buying" Kyrgyzstan. Some day in the future, the locals may decide they don't care for this arrangement, and believe that the regime responsible for this lunacy needs to go. That's when you'll see Russian troops swoop in to "help the government of Kyrgyzstan defeat the facists, terrorists, and extremists." Then they'll stick around for several decades, wanted or not. Probably after a rigged election demanding that Kyrgyzstan return to the embrace of a "Greater Russian Co-Prosperity" union. I read about this several days ago. I'm surprised that the US hasn't spoken out against what's going on. I guess we're "busy."
I'm not sure what you're suggesting, but if you're suggesting that we should not aim to understand where Russia is coming from and what it's strategic calculus is, I think that's fairly short-sighted and simplistic.
Good god, get a grip. Kygrzstan is a total mess - the last time I even remember thinking about it was a coup 2010 which was liveblogged here. It's dysfunctional gang of crooks government (not a bug, a feature of central asia!) is seldom not far from my thoughts. Kyrgzistan is a sparsely populated sh-thole in the middle of nowhere between Afghanistan, and China with literally no strategic value unless you're planning on invading afghanistan again. It probably stopped having such value in the 19th century back when it was unmapped and the British were paranoid that it was a back door to its Indian colonies (it's really not...anyway read "The Great Game" if you're interested) If Russia wants to waste money it can't afford by sending it to the Kyrgyz, more power to them. Maybe the Kyrgyz will get lucky and the CHinese will offer to beat their price. Either way, fears of a "takeover" are overblown, it's about 6% ethnic Russian and it doesn't even border on Russia. But even there was a "takeover" - If putty wants to build his legacy by lavishing goodies on sheepherders in the middle of nowhere, why do we even care? I can find nobody other than a yammering Fox News sh-thead or John McCain who would even bother to feign outrage.
No, it is important to understand what Russia's motivation and concerns are. However, I do not agree with the idea that "understanding" Russia will solve the problems. Nor do I necessarily view Russia as evil, we just play for different teams.
I don't think anyone has or would argue that understanding Russia will solve anything. But if you want to solve the problems, understanding what drives them and makes them tick is a necessary step.
Oh ya? Let's see how many from our team would join their team and how many of their team want to join ours.
Maybe I'm just an armchair strategery novice, but I don't really see Putin's grand plan for Risk domination. Just a few moves here and there to stoke nationalistic pride and also throw in some mafioso justice here and there from slights long ago. The authoritarian states are all poking and prodding with one eye straight on what the US will do. China's the only one that could play but really can't given its economic troubles.
