How important is Iran to China?

SampanViking said:

Hi FreeAsia

"There is many a slip twixt cup and lip" or so the old saying goes. I would not wish to over or under estimate the danger of such a situation, but the players are still sorting out their hands before beginning to play the first cards.

HI Walter

Absolutely. I will really exetending the futility aspect of the arguement. It is no longer high technology, so if you have all the necesary bits, you will succesfully put them all together.

Click to expand...

SampanViking ...i agree but to quote Burns

Wee, sleekit, cow'rin, tim'rous beastie,
O, what a panic's in thy breastie!
Thou need na start awa sae hasty,
Wi' bickering brattle!
I wad be laith to rin an' chase thee,
Wi' murd'ring pattle!

I'm truly sorry man's dominion,
Has broken nature's social union,
An' justifies that ill opinion,
Which makes thee startle
At me, thy poor, earth-born companion,
An' fellow-mortal!

I doubt na, whiles, but thou may thieve;
What then? poor beastie, thou maun live!
A daimen icker in a thrave
'S a sma' request;
I'll get a blessin wi' the lave,
An' never miss't!

Thy wee bit housie, too, in ruin!
It's silly wa's the win's are strewin!
An' naething, now, to big a new ane,
O' foggage green!
An' bleak December's winds ensuin,
Baith snell an' keen!

Thou saw the fields laid bare an' waste,
An' weary winter comin fast,
An' cozie here, beneath the blast,
Thou thought to dwell-
Till crash! the cruel coulter past
Out thro' thy cell.

That wee bit heap o' leaves an' stibble,
Has cost thee mony a weary nibble!
Now thou's turn'd out, for a' thy trouble,
But house or hald,
To thole the winter's sleety dribble,
An' cranreuch cauld!

But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane,
In proving foresight may be vain;
The best-laid schemes o' mice an 'men
Gang aft agley,
An'lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!

Still thou art blest, compar'd wi' me
The present only toucheth thee:
But, Och! I backward cast my e'e.
On prospects drear!
An' forward, tho' I canna see,
I guess an' fear!

just love that poem

realistically the only things that can happen to a country are

1. Victory in present borders with present government

2. Victory in present borders with another government

3. Victory with altered border and present government

4. Victory with altered borders and different government

5. Defeat with numbers 2 & 3 of the above

6. Occupation

7. Civil war

8. Destruction of entire population

Which do you think is most likely in the case of Iran ? I think it's bombing combined number 3 and long term attempt to overthrow the current government.

First I would like to say that at the time the U.S. invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan was a MUCH MORE complex issue than just oil and WMD's. And when you say "if the U.S.A invades Iran for it's oil, using WMD's as an excuse." I see it as a reference to the invasion of Iraq, of which WMD's WERE NOT an excuse, they were fact. Saddam had biological/chemical weapons and used them on his own people, fact. I mean no disrespect, but I see that as a kind of uneducated statement.

Anyway, back on topic...

I seriously doubt the possibility of any U.S. led invasion/military action in Iran. This is because of many reasons but mainly because the U.S. knows that we'd just be sticking our finger in a Hornet's nest. If anyone thinks Iraq is bad, well... let's just say that American groundpounders are safer where they're at.

But maybe an Israeli led, U.S "backed" super secretive mission into the belly of the beast to destroy these strategically placed nuclear reactor/refining sites... who knows?

Hi Free Asia

Just goes to show, if you play with Nukes you run the risk of serious Burns!!

It is agreat poem, but it does need the right accent (Pte Frasier from Dads Army was just plum!!!).

But back on Topic. I think the possibility of Interplay between China and Japan for Oil Field Development Rights in Iran is a very interesting area for further examination.

This is especially true if these same Oil concessions start to strain US Japanese relations as the crisis unfolds. This could add very significantly to the future direction of Sino-Japanese relations.

I think we should also be following Chinese support for the Russian offer of enrichment processing in Russia.

Hi Gollevainen

This is my attempt to point the boat in the right direction, let me know if you think the tiller needs a further twilt.

I see it as a reference to the invasion of Iraq, of which WMD's WERE NOT an excuse, they were fact. Saddam had biological/chemical weapons and used them on his own people, fact. I mean no disrespect, but I see that as a kind of uneducated statement.

True, Saddam did have chem + bio weapons - in 1991! The last time he used these weapons was in the kUrdish rebellion. By the 21st century, the Iraqi special weapons programme was in much disrepair, as was the missile programme. If you look at all the wrecked iraqi missiles and bombers they found after the invasion, you'll see my point. Saddam only hada couple dozen missiles at the time of the iraq war. They were of poor quality anyway and did not pose much of a threat. Ifhe did have WMD, why didn't he use them coalition troops? It is likely the same issue in Iran - the iraninas don't posess modern nuclear technology. And the Shahab 3 missile programme, for all the mullah's tough talk (i'll agrue with anyone on this) is plauged by thechincal problems. The Iranians had to modify it twice just to get it working. And from what my sources tell me, over 50% of their missile tests failed. So I doubt that either countries ever posed much of a threat strategically. How's that for uneducated?!

Some numbers:

According to the Department of Energy (DoE), Iran supplied 14% of China's oil imports in 2003, and is expected to provide an even larger share in the future. China is also expected to rely on Iran for a large share of its liquid natural gas (LNG) imports. In October 2004, Iran signed a $100 billion, 25-year contract with Sinopec, a major Chinese energy firm, for joint development of one of its major gas fields and the subsequent delivery of LNG to China.

ndia is also keen to obtain oil and gas from Iran. In January, the Gas Authority of India Ltd. (GAIL) signed a 30-year deal with the National Iranian Gas Export Corp. for the transfer of as much as 7.5 million tons of LNG to India per year. The deal, worth an estimated $50 billion, will also entail Indian involvement in the development of Iranian gas fields. Even more noteworthy, Indian and Pakistani officials are discussing the construction of a $3 billion natural gas pipeline from Iran to India via Pakistan ¬ an extraordinary step for two long-term adversaries. If completed, the pipeline would provide both countries with a substantial supply of gas and allow Pakistan to reap $200-$500 million per year in transit fees. "The gas pipeline is a win-win proposition for Iran, India, and Pakistan," Pakistani Prime Minister Shaukat Aziz declared in January.


IMO for the PRC, continued reliance on petro is suicidal in the long term. The government is trying to invest in nuclear and alternative energy, but it's moving slowly.

China has many geographical locations that are suitable for solar and wind farms. The solar panels today are better built and can last up to 40 years. It's been estimated that one of the best locations, the Sahara desert, can generate 50MW per sq km per day in solar energy @ 12% efficency. The Sahara desert is 9 million sq km in size. China's desert regions are not as "perfect" as the Sahara's for solar energy, but should generate at least half as much per sq km.

The downside to wind/solar energy is geographic limitions, higher cost, and longer break-even point. A nuclear or coal power plant can generate enough energy to reach break-even point at less than 1 month, versus solar power needs 5-7 years, plus the real estate. But our sun will prolly last 5 billion years, versus our petro reserves ??

The economic ties between and China and Iran is extensive, as can be seen by the following article:

China's energy insecurity and Iran's crisis
By Kaveh L Afrasiabi
British Prime Minister Tony Blair has gone on record stating that the fear of soaring energy prices should not deter the international community from imposing comprehensive sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. That is easier said than done, especially when looking at the dire economic and non-economic consequences of the current Iranian crisis for China, Iran's energy partner. In fact, the China-Iran connection transcends energy and covers a whole spectrum of economic activities - dam-building, steel mills, ship-building, transport and dozens of other projects. At present, more than 100 Chinese firms are involved in Iran, also cooperating to develop ports, jetties, airports in six cities, mine-development projects and, of course, oil and gas. Trade between the two countries in 2005 hit a new record of US$9.5 billion, compared with $7.5 billion in 2004. The world's media are nowadays awash with news of China's energy dependency on Iran weighing heavy on its policy considerations in light of the possible showdown at the United Nations Security Council next month over Iran's nuclear program and suspicions that it might want to develop a nuclear weapon - something Tehran vigorously denies. China currently gets 13.6% of its oil imports from Iran. Beijing is also in the process of importing Iranian natural gas. China's plan is to become a comprehensive participant in exploration, drilling, petrochemicals, pipelines and other upstream and downstream services related to Iran's oil and gas industries (see China rocks the geopolitical boat, November 6, 2004).
As the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries' second-largest oil supplier, with a unique location straddling two main energy hubs, the Caspian Sea and the Persian Gulf, invoking the notion of an "energy Silk Road" to China, Iran is a natural partner for China and its booming economy's increasing appetite for foreign oil. China's total energy consumption in 2004 was about 2.3 times that in 1980. China's plans with Iran are both short-term and long-term; the latter includes a plan to secure a 386-kilometer pipeline connecting Iranian oil with another pipeline from Kazakhstan to China. China's demand for a stable Iranian - and Persian Gulf - supply of oil and gas is critical for its rapidly growing economy. As the world's second-largest oil consumer in the world after the United States, China has been a net oil importer since 2003; its dependence on foreign oil reached 40% in 2004. According to the Energy Information Agency, China alone accounted for one-third of global oil-demand growth during the period 2001-04. Still, its total oil imports accounted only for 6.6% of the total global oil trade in 2004.
According to experts, China's growing hunger for oil has been driven mainly by three factors: the increasing demand for personal mobility and good transport; a growing chemical industry that relies on petroleum products as feedstock; and using diesel-fired power generators as short-term solutions to provide needed electricity on-site when there is a national or regional electricity shortage. In the United States, there is considerable concern over a future US-China collision over energy. Last December, Joseph Lieberman, a high-ranking Democratic senator, raised the specter of military conflict between the two countries by stating: "We are heading towards two-thirds [reliance of] each country on ... foreign oil. Let's recognize this problem before it becomes an intense competition which can actually lead to military conflict." Last year, because of strong objections by the US Congress, China's $18 billion bid for a share of the US energy pie, that is, its quest to procure Unocal, the ninth-largest US oil company, was frustrated. That episode has brought into sharp focus the potential zero-sum energy game between the US and China. What worries China in this game is its heavy reliance on foreign intermediaries to transport most of its oil from the Middle East (where China obtained 45% of its imported oil in 2004) and Africa (which contributed to 29% of China's oil imports) to its ports, and its lack of navy capacity to protect oil cargoes on the high sea and patrol the Malacca Strait, through which four-fifths of its oil imports pass. To compensate for its sources of energy security, China has engaged in a spirited energy diversification, production-sharing and other creative oil contracts around the world, as well as beefing up its military power projections by, among other things, developing Gwadar Port in Pakistan's Balochistan province at the mouth of the Persian Gulf, some 400km from the Strait of Hormuz, at the estimated cost of $1.16 billion. Moreover, recently China consented to Iran's accession to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization as an observer, thus adding to the geostrategic dimension of its energy-led cooperation with Iran. Simultaneously, China's cooperation with other Persian Gulf countries - Kuwait, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia - has increased dramatically recently. According to one China watcher penning in a recent issue of the Washington Quarterly, increased China-Saudi cooperation could translate into a weakening of the oil kingdom's US dependency. Conspicuously absent in the various commentaries on China and the Middle East is any serious consideration of what is actually loudly talked about in Tehran these days, that is, China's potential to contribute to regional security arrangements. :coffee:

For more see related link:

There are some facts that people need to keep in mind in this discussion:

1. Nuclear weapons technology is going to proliferate no matter what we do. You can't stop the march of technology. It is just a matter of time before every country has nuclear weapon technology.

2. No country can be trusted with nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are meant to threaten political opponents. It is coercive by its very nature. No country is a peaceful and responsible user of nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons in any country's hands only increase the level of threat to world security. Paradoxically, the only way to counter that threat is to deter it with even more nuclear weapons.

3. Nuclear weapons are the best defense against aggression by a more powerful military force.

4. Nuclear weapons has altered the paradigm of warfare. It is a deterrence that works. Nuclear armed countries don't go to war with each other. They can only invade non-nuclear countries.

5. China has already tolerated nuclear weapons in far less stable hands than Iran: the North Korea Dictator. China is not likely to oppose a nuclear armed Iran, though publicly China will shun the prospect.

6. China has already penned a $100 billion gas development deal with Iran, potentially worth up to $200 billion in total trade.

7. China has one of the world's largest shipping fleets and is projected to overtake Japan and South Korea to become THE largest shipping country. This includes both container ships transporting manufactured goods to the west as well as enormous supertankers to insure oil deliveries to China. China's economy is projected to increasingly depend on oil and gas imports.

8. Iran is accused of threatening to wipe Israel off the face of the map. If threatening to annhilate another nation is grounds for denying them the right to nuclear weapons than consider this:

Israel has ALREADY wiped Palestine off the face of the map.

I take it everyone's heard the recent news that the United states will give Iran 30 days to comply. The question is - what if it doesn't? I reckon that it will be the Osarak raid all over again. This time it will be by U.S. warplanes against the reactor at Bushehr or the enrichment facility at Natanz. How will China and Russia react to this?





The second article briefly mentions Russian and Chinese opposition. I've also had a thought. China could interfere in a less direct approach to help Iran defend itself against air attacks. The Iranian air defence syatem is dated. But China can help there.
If I was Hu Jintao, and my intelligence services were telling me the U.S. and Israel were planning air strikes against Bushehr and Natanz, then I would use this action. Put it this way:

THE IRANIAN GROUND DEFENCES WOULD BE BRISTLING THE NEXT MORNING WITH HQ-9S AND HQ-7S:china:

DPRKPTboat said:

I take it everyone's heard the recent news that the United states will give Iran 30 days to comply. The question is - what if it doesn't? I reckon that it will be the Osarak raid all over again. This time it will be by U.S. warplanes against the reactor at Bushehr or the enrichment facility at Natanz. How will China and Russia react to this?

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

The second article briefly mentions Russian and Chinese opposition. I've also had a thought. China could interfere in a less direct approach to help Iran defend itself against air attacks. The Iranian air defence syatem is dated. But China can help there.
If I was Hu Jintao, and my intelligence services were telling me the U.S. and Israel were planning air strikes against Bushehr and Natanz, then I would use this action. Put it this way:

THE IRANIAN GROUND DEFENCES WOULD BE BRISTLING THE NEXT MORNING WITH HQ-9S AND HQ-7S:china:

Click to expand...

Correction: UN security council gives Iran 30 days to comply. There is a difference. Yes, China vote for the resolution. The real contention is how to make Iran stop having nukes.

On the question of how important Iran is to China. Iran is China's political tool that is used to frustrate and annoy the US and give China concessions on the real issues. (Reunification, holding back Japan. etc).