Rearranging the chessboard

The United States has gained a foothold in Central Asia. Now it has to dig its heels deeper, writes Galal Nassar
For the United States, Central Asia has been a long- standing geopolitical quest. During the Cold War, Soviet influence kept the Americans at bay -- but things have changed considerably since then. The war against terrorism has offered the US a unique opportunity to manoeuvre itself into a strategic position on the regional chessboard: Afghanistan. Now the US is trying to rearrange regional structures so as to perpetuate its presence and influence in this part of the world.
Even prior to the 11 September events, US strategists were interested in getting a foothold in the region. China, India and Pakistan all have nuclear capabilities and Iran is expected to join their ranks soon enough. And since these four countries have been known to entertain political designs that do not always accord with US global schemes, US interest in Central Asia is hardly surprising.
This interest, however, is not solely political. Estimated oil reserves in the Caspian Sea and its immediate vicinity stand at 50 billion barrels, according to Petroleum Economist(May 2001) -- an amount sizable enough to stir up some dramatic interventions. On 10 September 2001, one day before the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, Oil and Gas magazine ran a story noting that the northern part of the Caspian Sea was undergoing the largest geological survey operation in its history.
The potential wealth offered by the oil stores in the Caspian Sea will have to be divided among the five countries that border it -- but how? The leaders of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan and Iran met recently to discuss matters of sharing and production and a proposal tabled by Russia. Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan agreed to the Russian proposal, but Turkmenistan and Iran had doubts. Iran wants the oil to be equally divided (20 per cent each) among the five countries. The Russian proposal allots Iran 17 per cent.
The Americans have already dipped a finger or two in the oil jar, and liked the taste. US strategists hope to give US oil companies an edge in the production process, and they even have certain preferences as to how the oil should be transported and into which ports. The pipelines, US strategists insist, should head toward the "friendly" ports of Turkey and Pakistan, rather than Iran. Russia and Iran oppose this plan and have signed an agreement pledging to keep the pipelines running to Iranian ports.
The US has already gained a foothold in the region, but it has to think long-term. The US is hoping to develop regional economic, political and societal structures that are more amenable to US influence and they are mindful that the needs of local populations cannot be ignored if the right climate for US values is to be created.
Instability is a particular concern for Washington. Central Asia has lived for decades under the shadow of radical Islam, civil strife and drug trafficking -- Afghanistan was just an extreme case. This instability gave the Soviets the pretext to intervene in Afghanistan and it may still offer the Russians more chances in the future.
This is one thing US strategists want to head off, since Russia's imperial ambitions could undermine US schemes in the region. The way to stymie the Russians, and a host of other ambitious regional powers, would be to stabilise the region, create pro-US security arrangements and fiddle with the existing social and political structures. The US administration wants to keep US troops in the region, even after the total elimination of Taliban and Al-Qa'eda leader Osama Bin Laden. To make the region safer for this military presence, the US has to act on three fronts: security, politics, and economy.
SECURITY: US strategists agree that the security of the region should not be left to one or two states to decide. This would be too risky in a region that teems with old rivalries and nuclear capability. The Americans, therefore, have pulled together a multinational force in Afghanistan, the strategic heart of the region. This presence will keep regional powers (China, India, Pakistan, Russia, Iran) from attempting to fill the political vacuum in that country. Countries from outside the region (France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Turkey) are all participating in the multinational force in Afghanistan, and US Secretary of State Colin Powell recently noted that US troops would be in the region for "some time." On this point, Powell made it clear that he was speaking about the long-term, saying that US troops would remain until all other forces withdrew their troops from the area and stopped providing military aid to Afghan factions.
US strategists have designed a multilateral security system, dubbed the "Concert of Powers." The system envisions cooperation between the United States, NATO members, and eminent regional powers: China, Russia, Iran, India and Pakistan. The US is already engaged in bilateral discussions with each of the countries involved and multilateral talks leading to official agreements are expected to follow. The envisioned security arrangements would set up a warning mechanism for early military and political dangers and would not preclude security cooperation between system members and other states. Every effort will be made to assure key Asian countries that the system would safeguard, rather than undermine, their regional stature.
POLITICS: The creation of the above-mentioned multilateral security system requires a certain level of confidence- building and dialogue in the region. This would require a bit of nudging for some, particularly Iran. The Americans are aware of the vulnerability of excessively centralised political systems in Central Asia, where national security considerations are often used to justify the apparent lack of democracy and civil liberties. The US is also aware that some of the countries involved may be suspicious of a multilateral security system that may step up pressure for political reform. US diplomats are now trying to persuade regional powers that the benefits of regional cooperation, involving the free movement of people and trade, would outweigh its drawbacks.
ECONOMY: The success and continuity of security arrangements and political reform in the region depends on the economy. The main threat to the region is not Islamic extremism or ethnic friction, but the economic viability of future arrangements. Since the Soviet era, poverty has worsened in the region's mountain areas, including the Karakoram range, between Kashmir and China; the Hindu Kush of northern Afghanistan; the Pamir mountains in Tajikistan; the Tien Shan mountains along the China-Russia border; the Alatau mountains of Kazakhstan and the Altai mountains of Mongolia. The low-lying valleys have generally fared a little better. Any successful regional cooperation in the region cannot succeed unless there is employment for locals. The expected clampdown on the cultivation and trade of narcotics would only heighten the need for economic revitalisation.
For the time being, the US wants to limit its involvement in large-scale infrastructure projects and Marshall Plan-style schemes. This much has become obvious from the extent of US involvement in the reconstruction of Afghanistan. The US comes in well below Iran, Japan and the EU in its provision of assistance to Afghanistan. Instead, American planners want to focus on small agricultural and industrial projects, while promoting societal and administrative changes that favour free-market capitalism.
To accomplish this, the US has agreed with the University of Central Asia to provide training to staffers in the public and private sectors in Asian countries. Major financial organisations and a considerable number of NGOs are likely to take part in this effort. The focus is on bolstering local, rather than central structures, so that development may be generated from the ground up, rather than trickling down from above. Washington also wants to remove impediments to trade by reopening old trade routes in Central Asia and reviving the fortunes of Pakistani and Indian ports. The rationale behind this is simple, though not necessarily unshakeable: trade cooperation in the region would presumably ease border tensions that have roiled the region for nearly half a century.
Will regional powers acquiesce to such ambitious arrangements? Or will they try to scuttle them, once the time is right? With Russia, China and Iran already whimpering about US influence in the region, the reshaping of Central Asia may prove trickier than the Americans hope.
Recommend this page
© Copyright Al-Ahram Weekly. All rights reserved
Send a letter to the Editor