THE APPROACHING CONFLICT
critical work…” Dr Jim Saleam,
By Dr K R Bolton FCIS
1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty
Sino-Soviet Border Clashes
Chinese Territorial Ambitions
Scenarios for War
Sino-American confrontation unlikely
Carter’s Trilateral Administration Develops Ties with
US-China Economic Symbiosis
Conclusion: Prospects for
Appendix I: Coming War in
Appendix II :
Appendix IV: Asians in NZ to outnumber Maori – report
Note: This is the text only version of an illustrated self-published book available from the author for $20.00. Reviews, comments, critiques and publication offers welcome. Send to:
seeming rapport in recent years between
question is set in the context of the larger stream of history covering
centuries of conflict. The so-called “treaty of friendship” between the
for future conflict are examined, particularly what will emerge as major
contentions over water resources, both between
subject is of vital importance to
Finally, this is written from the perspective of Realpolitik, a method of analysis based on hard Fact rather than wishful thinking or personal inclination.
monograph has been written at the very time when in July 2008
of the primary geo-political shifts in recent years has been the rapport that
has seemingly developed between two historic enemies,
However, in recent years
is the thesis of this paper that the accord between
There will eventually be conflict between
The relationship between
In the 1960s, when Chinese
“communists” dissolved their “fraternal relations” with the
This writer has long held that a Russo-Chinese accord would not hold, but rather there would be conflict with the possibility of war:
“The split between
Harrison Salisbury states:
Russian makes no distinction between the people of the East. He does not
distinguish between the Mongols who ravished his land 600 years ago and the
Stalin backed Chiang
Kai-shek’s nationalists. The primary Soviet goal was a united front between
Chiang and Mao to fight the Japanese, while recognising Chiang as the leader of
Even under the Sino-Soviet alliance of 1950 the military equipment from
Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship,
dreams of establishing
Mao could have cultivated friendship with the
As Chang and Halliday point out in their
definitive biography on Mao this
Conversely, as surprising as it might seem – superficially – aid from
Stalin to Mao was extracted at a very high price; the prelude to the humiliating
Sino-Soviet treaty. This was not at all a matter of communist solidarity, but of
the ancient animosity existing between
Mao was determined to
It is only recently that the secret annexes to the 1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty have become known. The $US300 million loan was spread over five years. Stalin approved 50 large industrial projects, a lot fewer than Mao intended.
Mao paid a high price in return.
Mao referred to the two regions among his inner circle as Russian
‘colonies’. This was to be a permanent sore point with
“Of all the foreign powers that invaded, bullied and enslaved China since the Opium War (in 1842), Japan inflicted the greatest damage; but in the end the country that got the most benefit out of China was Tsarist Russia, including the Soviet Union during a certain period…”
Chang and Halliday remark: “Deng was certainly referring to this treaty.”
The ironically named ‘friendship treaty’ established virtual Russian
colonial status over
Now the old imperialism had returned under Soviet ‘fraternity’
During the years 1953-54 Mao embarked on a so-called “Superpower
Programme” that was again to wreak
havoc especially on the peasantry. The Chinese were told that the equipment from
Halliday and Chang state that
Sino-Soviet discord through the late 1960s was the result of contention
over the status of
According to S. C. M. Paine:
"For China, the physical territorial losses were enormous: an area exceeding that of the United States east of the Mississippi River officially became Russian territory or, in the case of Outer Mongolia, a Soviet protectorate."
In 1964 A Concise Geography of China was published. This shows
In 1964 Mao told a delegation of Japanese socialists.
are too many places occupied by the
In 1960 there were 400 border clashed between Russian and Chinese troops, in 1962 more than 5000, in 1963 more than 4000.
The biggest clash came on
Mao was taken aback by the massive Russian response and worried over a Soviet invasion.
On 13 August the Russians attack at the Kazakhstan-Xinjiang border, surrounding and destroying Chinese troops
At this time, the Russians intended to drive home their offensive to the
point of nuclear attack, but were rebuffed by the
The revelations of a top Nixon aide go further:
Pres. Nixon’s chief of staff H R Haldeman
reveals in The Ends of Power that for years the Russians had been warning
The thesis of
In 1979 the Soviet publication Soviet-Chinese Relations – What Happened in the 60’s, stated in a realistic manner the real causes for the Russo-Chinese conflict behind the facade of ideological rift:
“The more distant goal was to call in question and, if possible, challenge the legality of the existing borders between the USSR and China, and thus to substantiate Mao’s statement, made during a meeting with Japans socialists in 1964, about ‘the seizure of 1.5 million sq. kilometres of Chinese territory by Russia’… In analysing the Maoists’ stand on the territorial questions, one should turn to China’s history and consider the expansionist aspirations of the Chinese emperors and the chauvinistic claims of the Chinese nationalists who dreamed of the return of the ‘golden age’ of the Chinese empire when many of China’s neighbours were mere vassals… It is crystal clear that in pressing their territorial claims the Maoists pursue far-reaching expansionist aims which can be summed up as Great Han Hegemony…”
`Far from the USSR having been a benevolent father figure in siring a communist offspring that would achieve Super-Power status with Russia arms and technology, and stand side-by-side with the USSR in confronting the imperialist powers and bringing communism to the world, China had been relegated to the status of a colony. The bitterness endured long past Mao’s demise.
Towards the end of his life, Mao changed tactics and sought an alliance
However, Bobo Lo’s contention as to the peaceful economic expansion of China notwithstanding, China has in the years since Mao shown itself ready for shooting wars over strategic territory and even as shows of force towards its neighbours.
Despite the proclamations and treaties aimed at showing China’s ‘good
neighbourliness’ towards Russia, Central Asia and India, China stubbornly
continues to raise the question of disputed borders in an ominous manner. This
seems to be contrary to Bobo Lo’s theory that
Moreover, the tensions that
occurred between Russian and
“One should recall that on
“Western scholars have
all too often overlooked that even during this period of Sino-Soviet tensions,
the 1950 Sino-Soviet Treaty of Friendship, Alliance, and Mutual Assistance
remained fully in force throughout this entire period of unrest. From
The rift between
Elleman states that far from
2. Repudiating the Russo-Chinese supposed accord which had been nothing but an encumbrance and was due for renewal at precisely the time of the invasion:
of backing down, however,
only three weeks of fighting,
“To prevent Soviet intervention on Vietnam's behalf, Deng warned Moscow the next day that China was prepared for a full-scale war against the USSR; in preparation for this conflict, China put all of her troops along the Sino-Soviet border on an emergency war alert, set up a new military command in Xinjiang, and even evacuated an estimated 300,000 civilians from the Sino-Soviet border.” 
The continuing aggression towards
Bill Emmott, former editor of The Economist, and a member of the elite think-tank the Trilateral Commission states of the conflict:
“In 1962 China and India fought a border war that humiliated India and left an enduring legacy of bitterness and suspicion. Both countries are now increasing their military spending and trying to modernise their armed forces. The border dispute remains unresolved. China claims an entire Indian state, Arunachal Pradesh, which borders southern Tibet and is roughly the size of Portugal. India claims that China is occupying 15,000 square miles of what is rightfully India – in Aksai Chin, an almost uninhabited plateau high in the Himalayas.”
The Chinese are not about to
let the disputed areas rest, and again here is a lesson if it is thought that
“On the face of it the two sides have since made progress. A border crossing was opened to trade in 2006 for the first time since the war. That year, however, the Chinese ambassador to Delhi caused outrage by publicly emphasising that China claims the whole of Arunachal Pradesh.
Ten months ago a “confidence-building” visit to China by more than 100 Indian officials had to be cancelled after China acted in a typically provocative way: it refused to grant a visa to a member of the Indian delegation from Arunachal Pradesh on the grounds that he was Chinese and did not need one.” [Emphasis added].
So far from the Chinese
leadership being too pragmatic and rational to resort to war,
A recent feature in The Sydney Morning Herald
based on Bobo Lo’s assessments shows that the old
"The Russians are spooked by
the idea you have 110 million people in just three northern Chinese provinces
and million people in the
Russian Far East," says Bobo Lo, author of the
forthcoming Axis Of Convenience:
Many Chinese traders in
For their part, Chinese authorities have enforced tough passport requirements on traders who had previously travelled freely across the border. They have also booted thousands of Russians out of northern China as part of an over-zealous security campaign that is driving foreigners out of the country ahead of the Olympics….
…Oil volumes fell last
year but defence sales crashed, prompting analysts to speculate that
For all the fuss
about a Russian-China axis against Islamic separatists and US missile shields,
the relationship is constrained by Russian insecurity and Chinese insensitivity.
It is just one example of how
present Russian policy seeks to offset American world hegemony, while declining
to regard a ‘multi-polar world’ in which
A Voice of America analysis of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization provides some relevant background to Sino-Russian relations, and alludes to the potential areas of strain and discord.
The basis of the Sino-Russian accord, the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization (SCO) formed in 1996, was first known as the "Shanghai Five,"
"The SCO really is
Nesnera writes that although
“At the same time, many
Prof. Legvold is quoted as stating:
"In the most important
Lo indicates that the present Sino-Russian agreement regarding the countering of
“Bobo Lo from the Center for
European Reform says that while
Lo concludes: “And
De Nesnera concludes that analysts will be
watching to see what extent the Russian and Chinese rivalry manifests in
Lo in an interview with a Russian think tank called Open Democracy explained his
perspective on Sino-Russian relations, which provides further insight. 
The interview began with the statement: “The
Regardless as to whether the Russian suspicion of the Chinese is justified or not, it is the perception that matters, and that perception is based on ages-old animosity and the present day grab for resources which, as previously alluded to, could initially become manifest in Central Asia, a pivotal region in geo-politics, and one in which the USA and the omnipresent George Soros have also been particularly active.
Lo alludes to the goodwill between Russian and
Lo does not see this as a long-term problem for Russo-Chinese relations, yet
states very significantly that this is because
This Chinese realisation, based on understanding historical and geo-political realities, must have a significant impact on Russo-Chinese relations, as it did in the past, even when both nominally shared ideological commitments under communism. Lo states:
“…Chinese have few illusions
it must be pointed out does NOT believe there will be a military
“You can argue that
is asked: “Traditionally, the Russians
have felt acutely threatened by
Here Lo repudiates the thesis that there will be Russo-Chinese military conflict and the threat of invasion, but rather states that the rivalry will take the form of geo-political and realpolitikal manoeuvring:
“The real threat is this:
Lo does not deny the demographics that could see
“The reality is
that there are 110 million people in northern
“If you ask Russians how they
view the Chinese, well, they view them much more favourably than a few years
As Lo himself has stated, as
quoted previously, the Russian xenophobia in regard to
is now turned to the crucial role of
“The Chinese game
As Lo states there are rival
Lo continues by describing the contending nature of two pacts, that of
understand the Chinese game, so they're lukewarm about the SCO. The
SCO does for China what the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO)
does for Russia. The CSTO, which
particular significance to
Lo states that
“…But the thrust of their military planning is towards the south, not the north. They've focused on acquiring Kilo submarines, Sovremennyy destroyers. In theory, these might lead not only to the recovery of Taiwan, but also enable the Chinese to protect the sea-lanes through which 80% of their oil imports pass, and to project power in the South China Sea and the Pacific.” [Emphasis added].
states that stability is the principal aim of the Chinese in
“From the Chinese point of
view, greater economic interdependence creates a more stable environment, and
energy is the spearhead of this.
Lo reiterates that he does not
believe that there will be military confrontation between
“The obsession with the security of the Russian Far East reflects paranoia, not reality. The RFE scarcely features on the list of Chinese military priorities.
“People have a somewhat hysterical view of the Chinese. But actually they're quite pragmatic. They do want to engage, not because they are "nice", but because constructive engagement is the most effective way to achieve their objectives.”
There will come a time when “constructive engagement” and “peaceful means” will fail.
states the fundamental reasons for division rather than accord between Russians
and Chinese, both in terms of economics and of innate psychological or ethnic
differences, as well as the commonality between
the Russians like doing business with people they know. They have done gas deals
with various European countries since 1967. By contrast, they have little
understanding of how the Chinese operate. Second, there is the issue of price.
The Europeans pay top dollar, whereas the Chinese are always looking for a
discount. Third, most of the deposits are in western
Despite rejecting an notion of a coming war between
“The fact that
“In my forthcoming book I call their relationship an ‘axis of convenience'. Both countries have become closer because of selected common interests, rather than ideas. But interests change.” [Emphasis added].
RUSSIAN FAR EAST: ECONOMIC & DEMOGRAPHIC EXPANSION
As seen from the above
Putin has warned for years about the
demographic expansion of
“President Vladimir V. Putin warned last year that the spread of Asian influence in the Russian Far East placed Russia’s very existence at stake. “If we don’t make concrete efforts,” he said, “the future local population will speak Japanese, Chinese or Korean.”
Local authorities also express such concerns:
we see in the Russian Far East is the peaceful and slow colonization of all
Russian territories in the area by the Chinese,” said Alexei D. Bogaturov, the deputy director of the
York Times correspondent
Michael Wines, writing from Zabaikalsk
a town in the Russian Far East sharing a border with
“For a lesson in 21st-century geopolitics, come to this border town, until just a few years ago an outpost for Russian infantry awaiting a Chinese invasion.
Russian gun emplacements are crumbling now but the invasion is under way anyway: Chinese built the town’s few new apartments, China Telecom connects the cellular phones, and Chinese traders hire busloads of jobless Russians to tote Chinese-made clothes and electronics through the Chinese-built border crossing. Maybe 1,000 of the 11,000 or so residents are Chinese, too.
“The inescapable impression, here and elsewhere in the region, is of a land clinging tightly to its essential Russianness—and slowly losing its grip. Along a stretch of Russian borderland as big as Western Europe, demographics, economics and, for the first time, history are all working against Moscow.” [Emphasis added].
Wines states that the
collapse of the
“When Communism collapsed,
so did the subsidies. The military all but disappeared, too, leaving a wreckage
of near ghost towns behind.
…Mr. Putin’s fear is that Chinese economic expansion will crowd
out Russian commerce and political power unless
In a brilliant strategy of psychological warfare aimed at wooing Russians into embracing Chinese overlordship, the Chinese have built a model city, albeit one that does not reflect the reality of the Chinese peasant. Wines writes:
“For Zabaikalsk residents, paradise begins 50 yards across the border, past abandoned Russian tanks and rusted barb-wire fences. There the Chinese have built a gleaming free-trade center, a small city of hotels, freight-forwarding offices, wholesale stores and pagodas.
On the horizon, 10 minutes
down a freshly paved highway in
more glaring admission can there be that
the Primorsky Krai
region some 30,000 Chinese have permanent residence. The region is a disputed
territory, with rich land that was not cultivated until the arrival of Russians
in the beginning of the 17th Century. Treaties in 1858 and 1860 moved
the Russian border south to the Amur and
Primorsky Krai's economy is the most successful in the Russian Far East.
Food production is the most important sector, particulartly fish processing. The annual catch constitutes one half of the Russian Far East total. Agriculture is important, and includes the production of rice, milk, eggs, and vegetables.Grain, soybeans, potatoes, and vegetables are the prime elements in agriculture.. The breeding of livestock, especially sheep, is well developed. The timber industry has an annual yield of about 3 million cubic meters and is the second largest in the Russian Far East.
Machine manufacturing is the second most important element of the economy, and half of the output is to service the fishing industry and shipyards.. The construction materials industry supplies the whole Russian Far East.
The region generates more electricity than any other Russian Far East administrative division.
The defence industry is also important; with naval vessels and military aircraft production.
The coastal location makes the region an important maritime trade and defence route into the Pacific. Primorsky Krai-based shipping companies provide 80% of marine shipping services in the Russian Far East.
Primorsky Krai is the largest coal producer in the Russian Far East. Among the other minerals found here are: tin, tungsten, lead, zinc, silver, gold, fluorspar ore (containing rare minerals such as beryllium, lithium, tantalum and niobium), and Russia’s largest supply of boron ore (boron being used in textiles, aerospace materials, smelting, control of fission in nuclear reactors, rocket fuels, jet engines, and hundreds of others uses).
the Russian Far East becomes increasing reliant on Chinese investment, as the
Chinese population expands and the Russian declines, a future food-population
The Chinese Foreign Ministry describes the relations between
“In 1962, both sides signed Sino-Mongolian Treaty on Friendship and Mutual Assistance, and in 1962, signed Boundary Treaty. In mid and late 1960s, their relations suffered ups and downs. In 1970s, the two countries restored to exchange of ambassadors. In 1980s, their relations saw gradual improvement.
The Ministry’s statement on
“In 1989, their state and
ruling party (Chinese communist Party and Mongolian People’s Revolutionary
Party) were relations normalized. Since then, their friendly relations and
cooperation have consolidated and developed in such areas as the political,
economic, cultural, educational and military. In 1990,
Soviet control of
Elleman states that Soviet control of
“In response to
SCENARIOS FOR WAR
Bobo Lo’s insightful perspective of the coming
divergence of interest between
As water sources become scarce or polluted, water will become a source of conflict no less than oil. Indeed, it seems reasonable to contend that water will be a resource even more desperately sought after than oil, since it is one of the most fundamental elements for the survival of life.
Of major concern are Chinese
attempts to dam or redirect the southward flow of river waters from the Tibetan
plateau, where major rivers originate, including the
However, into this scenario are
The article below is worth studying in detail. It shows that
“Over the last decade
While Bobo Lo states that China has entered the Shanghai accord with Russia and Central Asian republics to secure its aims while appearing to be a ‘good neighbour’, Yermukanov reports that China has shown its aggressive hand in its determination to secure the water resources of Central Asia and Russia:
“Patience ran out when
states that local Russian authorities are in disagreement in regard to the
practicability of negotiations with
“Last November, in a
desperate attempt to prevent an environmental disaster, the governor of
Yermukanov cites the pessimism of Sinologists in regard to China’s willingness to negotiate other than for the purpose of stalling: “Experts familiar with the state of affairs on the Chinese side are less optimistic about Beijing's resolve to solve the problem of water resources in the Irtysh-Ili basin without dragging out the talks endlessly.”
China has already began giant projects on both the Ili and Irtysh Rivers, in what appears to be a disregard for the ‘good neighbourliness’ and the aim of maintaining stability in Central Asia that Bobo Lo contends is putting brakes on open conflict between China and its Russian and Central Asian neighbours. He states that the Kazakhstan Government is not even fully aware of the situation:
“Many in the government are
apparently not aware of the fact that last year
refers to the industrialisation of northwestern
“The forced industrial
development of north-western
ominously points to the ethnic dynamics of the region, which he states could
lead to violence. The Chinese are changing the demographics of the region with
Chinese ethnic incursions, in the name of peaceful commerce. Yermukanov also reveals that
“The accelerated development
of Xingjiang Uighur
Autonomous Region is increasingly alarming the Kazakh government. Border areas
in southern regions have already become an incongruous melting pot of dozens of
ethnic groups. The water shortages in this densely populated area could lead
to a violent outbreak of interethnic conflict. Another worry is that,
despite the signing of border agreements between
contradistinction to Bobo Lo’s references to
The crucial issue of water resources is a factor that Bobo Lo, for all his perceptiveness, seems to have overlooked, and one that has significant potential for armed conflict.
“There are some who, for varying reasons, would appease Red China. They are blind to history's clear lesson, for history teaches with unmistakable emphasis that appeasement but begets new and bloodier war. It points to no single instance where this end has justified that means, where appeasement has led to more than a sham peace. Like blackmail, it lays the basis for new and successively greater demands until, as in blackmail, violence becomes the only other alternative.” 
–Gen. Douglas MacArthur, 1951.
Any confrontation between the
Over the course of several decades since 1983, the role of
The same business and political elites that governed the
When Mao dramatically repudiated the 1950 ‘friendship treaty’ with
Chang and Halliday state that Mao had sought an
alliance with the
It was at
MacArthur considered the American policy “defeatist” and made four recommendations:
“(1) Blockade the coast of China; (2) destroy through naval gunfire and air bombardment China's industrial capacity to wage war; (3) secure reinforcements from the Nationalist Chinese garrison in Formosa to strengthen our position in Korea if we decided to continue the fight for that peninsula; and (4) release existing restrictions upon the Formosa garrison for diversionary action against vulnerable areas of the Chinese mainland.”
Truman responded to MacArthur’s opposition regarding a
“no-win” policy – a policy that was to be repeated in
return to the rapport that was established between the
The importance of Kissinger for the Rockefeller family is indicated by the introduction he was given by ambassador Richard Holbrooke to the 50th anniversary gala banquet of the Asia Society honouring the Rockefellers:
the Rockefeller Legacy, not just John D. Rockefeller III, but the whole family,
there really was only one person who could do it, and that was Henry Kissinger.
Henry has been a friend of the Rockefeller family as you all know, Vice
President Nelson Rockefeller, David Rockefeller, and the rest of the family, so
many of whom are here tonight, for fifty years. He also has a very strong
and deep connection to
Kissinger, despite being outside of Government service, remains deeply influential in State, business and diplomatic circles as head of Kissinger Associates, his private advisory service, and retains his connection with high level think tanks such as the Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberg conferences, and as seen, the Asia Society.
However Mao, posturing as the pre-eminent
anti-American champion before the
Kissinger made his first trip to
In 1973 Kissinger assured Mao that the
The groundwork was also laid
for the technological and industrial build up of
“I have talked to the French
Foreign Minister about our interest in strengthening the PRC [People’s Republic
“In particular you have asked for some Rolls-Royce technology. Under existing regulations we have to oppose this, but we have worked out a procedure with the British where they will go ahead anyway. We will take a formal position in opposition, but only that. Don’t be confused by what we do publicly…” [Emphasis added].
Kissinger’s last sentence is a key to understanding world history and politics: “Don’t be confused by what we do publicly.” It is the manner by which high politics works behind the scenes, and has little to do with what is given out be the news media for public consumption.
The building of
This writer has outlined the development of relations between the
“The “normalisation of
relations” between the
Previous groundwork had been undertaken during the Nixon Administration through the so-called “Ping Pong diplomacy” of Secretary of State Henry Kissinger…
After Kissinger had made the
preliminary arrangements, Pres. Nixon travelled to
In 1973 David Rockefeller
David Rockefeller’s Standard
Oil obtained exclusive rights to
When in 1978
Japanese Trilateralists were
also heavily involved with early dealings in
The most compelling reason that confrontation between the
. Niall Ferguson states: “…Since April 2002 the
central banks of
“Far from being strategic rivals, these two empires have the air of economic partners. The only question is which of the two is the more dependent, which, to be precise, stands to lose more in the event of a crisis in their amicable relationship, now over thirty years old….”
Today global business in China is such that China Business World has over 1000 listings of US companies just in Beijing and Shanghai
When in 2006 the US Labour
organisation AFL-CIO petitioned the Bush Administration to place economic
One of the most interesting personalities of the
“Nicholas Rockefeller is
vice chairman and chief legal officer of the RockVest
Group of Investors and is involved in various banking and commercial projects in
He is a member of the
Council on Foreign Relations, the International Institute of Strategic
Studies, the Advisory Board of RAND, the Corporate Advisory Board
of the Pacific Council on International Relations, the Board of the
Western Justice Center Foundation, and the
Central China Development Council and has served as a participant in the
World Economic Forum and the Aspen Institute. He also serves as
a director of the
seems that the business elite in the
The factors are quite different on several levels. There is no powerful
lobby with a vested interest in war with
war in Kosovo against the Serbs was also a direct challenge to
The Russian “folk soul” is neither Eastern nor Western,
yet since the time of Peter the Great Russia has sought cultural impetus from
the West. For a brief time under Bolshevism, Western technology was pressed into
the service of Oriental despotism, and the
The inevitable impress of geo-politics on the relations between
“…Despite her commitment to
back the ideological crackpots and charlatans in the
Today the ideological commitments are gone, and what remains is a temporary pragmatic alliance between Russia and China, which is only serving to provide time while both try and build their economic and military structures while remaining inherently suspicious of each other.
The British scholar C Northcote Parkinson
was of the opinion that between the
Parkinson alludes to the belief in Victorian Britain that
Parkinson concludes that, “As against
New Zealanders naively see the Free Trade Agreement as merely a means of gaining export markets and cheap imports. The Chinese see such agreements as more far-reaching. Already the Wellington power grid has been sold to a Chinese company headed by a front man for the Chinese military. Most ominously, New Zealand and China are developing military relations, and meetings have been held at high level, although only reported by the Chinese media, while New Zealanders remain oblivious.
As a matter of sheer survival, New Zealand should get out of Asia, and specifically eschew China, develop relations with the small Pacific nations, and focus on creating a new power bloc in the South Pacific with Australia.
The Coming War in Asia
As NZ officially became a part of the Chinese orbit and was pushed further into the Asia quagmire with the signing of the China Free Trade Agreement on April 7 2008, there was an almost universal hurrah from sundry Big Business, media and political interests. China is a rising star that might one day become a falling star, and when it crashes to earth there will be widespread devastation. Of the many problems facing Asia, water is a major concern and the Chinese plans to dam the source of much of Asia’s water source that begins in Tibet could mean major regional military confrontations, including between the two most populated nations –both nuclearised – China and India, whose territorial disputes have still not been resolved. The following article shows that China is planning to dam the headwaters of much of the water source for India and the rest of S. Asia, which it controls from Tibet.
The second article reports on a 2007 conference, the Asia-Pacific Water Summit, where UN Sec. Gen. Ban K-moon addresses the concern that water supply is going to be a major source of potential war for the region. A war between India and China could also involve numerous other Asian states and escalate into a region-wide conflict, as states seek to resolve long-time border disputes, such as those that exist between India and China, India and Pakistan, and Russia and China; with a myriad of ethnic rivalries also extending into Russia surface amidst the turmoil.
China aims for bigger share of South Asia’s water lifeline
By BRAHMA CHELLANEY,
Japan Times, Tuesday, June 26, 2007
NEW DELHI — Sharpening Asian competition over energy resources, driven in part by high growth rates in gross domestic product and in part by mercantilist attempts to lock up supplies, has obscured another danger:
Water shortages in much of Asia are beginning to threaten rapid economic modernization, prompting the building of upstream projects on international rivers. If water geopolitics were to spur interstate tensions through reduced water flows to neighboring states, the Asian renaissance could stall.
Water has emerged as a key issue that could determine whether Asia is headed toward mutually beneficial cooperation or deleterious interstate competition. No country could influence that direction more than China, which controls the Tibetan plateau — the source of most major rivers of Asia.
Tibet’s vast glaciers and high altitude have endowed it with the world’s greatest river systems. Its river waters are a lifeline to the world’s two most-populous states — China and India — as well as to Bangladesh, Myanmar, Bhutan, Nepal, Cambodia, Pakistan, Laos, Thailand and Vietnam. These countries make up 47 percent of the global population.
Yet Asia is a water-deficient continent. Although home to more than half of the human population, Asia has less fresh water — 3,920 cubic meters per person — than any continent besides Antarctica.
The looming struggle over water resources in Asia has been underscored by the spread of irrigated farming, water-intensive industries (from steel to paper making) and a growing middle class seeking high water-consuming comforts like washing machines and dishwashers. Household water consumption in Asia is rising rapidly, according to a 2006 U.N. report, but such is the water paucity that not many Asians can aspire to the lifestyle of Americans, who daily use 400 liters per person, or more than 2.5 times the average in Asia.
The specter of water wars in Asia is also being highlighted by climate change and environmental degradation in the form of shrinking forests and swamps, which foster a cycle of chronic flooding and droughts through the depletion of nature’s water storage and absorption cover. The Himalayan snow melt that feeds Asia’s great rivers could be damagingly accelerated by global warming.
While intrastate water-sharing disputes have become rife in several Asian countries — from India and Pakistan to Southeast Asia and China — it is the potential interstate conflict over river-water resources that should be of greater concern. This concern arises from Chinese attempts to dam or redirect the southward flow of river waters from the Tibetan plateau, where major rivers originate, including the Indus, the Mekong, the Yangtze, the Yellow, the Salween, the Brahmaputra, the Karnali and the Sutlej. Among Asia’s mighty rivers, only the Ganges starts from the Indian side of the Himalayas.
The lopsided availability of water within some nations (abundant in some areas but deficient in others) has given rise to grand ideas — from linking rivers in India to diverting the fast-flowing Brahmaputra northward to feed the arid areas in the Chinese heartland.
As water woes have been aggravated in its north due to environmentally unsustainable intensive farming, China has increasingly turned its attention to the bounteous water reserves that the Tibetan plateau holds. It has dammed rivers, not just to produce hydropower but also to channel waters for irrigation and other purposes, and is currently toying with massive interbasin and inter-river water-transfer projects.
After building two dams upstream, China is building at least three more on the Mekong, inflaming passions in Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Thailand. Several Chinese projects in west-central Tibet bearing on river-water flows into India, but Beijing is loath to share information.
Following flash floods in India’s northern Himachal Pradesh state, however, China agreed in 2005 to supply New Delhi data on any abnormal rise or fall in the upstream level of the Sutlej River, on which it has built a barrage. Discussions are on to persuade it to share flood-control data during the monsoon season on two Brahmaputra tributaries, Lohit and Parlung Zangbo, as it has done since 2002 on the Brahmaputra River, which it has dammed at several places upstream.
The 10 major watersheds formed by the Himalayas and Tibetan highlands spread out river waters far and wide in Asia. Control over the 2.5 million-square-km Tibetan plateau gives China tremendous leverage, besides access to vast natural resources. Having extensively contaminated its own major rivers through unbridled industrialization, China now threatens the ecological viability of river systems tied to South and Southeast Asia in its bid to meet its thirst for water and energy.
Tibet, which existed independently up to 1950, comprises approximately one-fourth of China’s land mass today, having given Han society, for the first time in history, a contiguous frontier with India, Myanmar, Bhutan and Nepal.
Tibet traditionally encompassed the regions of the central plateau, Kham and Amdo. After annexing Tibet, China separated Amdo (the present Dalai Lama’s birthplace) as the new Qinghai province, made the central plateau and eastern Kham the Tibet Autonomous Region, and merged the remaining parts of Tibet into the Chinese provinces of Sichuan, Yunnan and Gansu.
The traditional Tibet is not just a distinct cultural entity but also a natural plateau, the future of whose water reserves is tied to ecological conservation. As China’s hunger for primary commodities has grown, so too has its exploitation of Tibet’s resources. And as water woes have intensified in several major Chinese cities, a group of ex-officials have championed the northward rerouting of the waters of the Brahmaputra in a book enlighteningly titled “Tibet’s Waters Will Save China.”
Large hydro projects and reckless exploitation of mineral resources already threaten Tibet’s fragile ecosystems, with ore tailings beginning to contaminate water sources. Unmindful of the environmental impact of such activities in pristine areas, China has now embarked on constructing a 108-km paved road to Mount Everest, located along the Tibet-Nepal frontier. This highway is part of China’s plan to reinforce its claims on Tibet by taking the Olympic torch to the peak of the world’s tallest mountain before the 2008 Beijing Games.
As in the past, no country is going to be more affected by Chinese plans and projects in Tibet than India. The new $ 6.2 billion Gormu-Lhasa railway, for example, has significantly augmented China’s rapid military-deployment capability against India just when Beijing is becoming increasingly assertive in its claims on Indian territories. This hardline stance, in the midst of intense negotiations to resolve the 4,057-km Indo-Tibetan border, is no less incongruous than Beijing’s disinclination to set up, as agreed during its president’s state visit to New Delhi last November, a joint expert-level mechanism on interstate river waters.
Contrast China’s reluctance to establish a mechanism intended for mere “interaction and cooperation” on hydrological data with New Delhi’s consideration toward downstream Pakistan, reflected both in the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (which reserves 56 percent of the catchment flow for Pakistan) and the more recent acceptance of World Bank arbitration over the Baglihar Dam project in Indian Kashmir.
No Indian project has sought to reroute or diminish trans-border water flows, yet Pakistan insists on a say in the structural design of projects upstream in India. New Delhi permits Pakistani officials to inspect such projects. By contrast, Beijing drags its feet on setting up an innocuous interaction mechanism. Would China, under any arrangement, let Indian officials inspect its projects in Tibet or accept, if a dispute arose, third-party adjudication?
If anything, China seems intent on aggressively pursuing projects and employing water as a weapon. The idea of a Great South-North Water Transfer Project diverting river waters cascading from the Tibetan highlands has the backing of President Hu Jintao, a hydrologist who made his name through a brutal martial-law crackdown in Tibet in 1989. In crushing protesters at Tiananmen Square two months later, Deng Xiaoping actually borrowed a leaf from Hu’s Tibet book.
The Chinese ambition to channel the Brahmaputra waters to the parched Yellow River has been whetted by what Beijing touts as its engineering feat in building the giant $ 25 billion Three Gorges Dam project, which has officially displaced a staggering 1.2 million citizens. While China’s water resources minister told a Hong Kong University meeting last October that, in his personal opinion, the idea to divert waters seems not viable, the director of the Yellow River Water Conservancy Committee said publicly that the mega-plan enjoys official sanction and may begin by 2010.
The Brahmaputra (Yarlung Tsangpo to Tibetans) originates near Mount Kailash and, before entering India, flows eastward in Tibet for 2,200 km at an average height of 4,000 meters, making it the world’s highest major river. When two other tributaries merge with it, the Brahmaputra becomes as wide as 10 km in India before flowing into Bangladesh.
The first phase of China’s South-North Project calls for building 300 km of tunnels and channels to draw waters from the Jinsha, Yalong and Dadu rivers, on the eastern rim of the Tibetan plateau. Only in the second phase would the Brahmaputra waters be directed northward. In fact, Beijing has identified the bend where the Brahmaputra forms the world’s longest and deepest canyon just before entering India as holding the largest untapped reserves for meeting its water and energy needs.
While some doubts do persist in Beijing over the economic feasibility of channeling Tibetan waters northward, the mammoth diversion of the Brahmaputra could begin as water shortages become more acute in the Chinese mainland and the current $ 1.2 trillion foreign-exchange hoard brims over. The mega-rerouting would constitute the declaration of a water war on lower-riparian India and Bangladesh.
Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the privately funded Center for Policy Research in New Delhi, is the author, most recently, of “Asian Juggernaut: The Rise of China, India and Japan”.
Russia sets scene for new Cuban crisis
China, New Zealand pledge to further army exchanges
www.chinaview.cn 2008-07-04 18:54:22
BEIJING, July 4 (Xinhua) -- China and New Zealand vowed here on Friday to further army exchanges to push forward military relations between the two countries.
The Chinese armed forces advocate expanding contact and substantial cooperation with their New Zealand counterparts to upgrade military relations in the long run," said Chen Bingde, chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People's Liberation Army.
During a meeting with New Zealand army chief Louis Gardiner, Chen hailed the relationship between China and New Zealand, saying it conformed to the fundamental interest of the two countries and peoples and contributed to regional peace and prosperity.
Gardiner said the military ties between New Zealand and China had maintained sustainable development and cooperation kept improving, adding that New Zealand would continue to enhance cooperation and exchanges with China and its military.
Wellington Power Grid Under Chinese Military Front-man
“Non-Strategic” Asset Controlled by China
Wellington’s electricity network has been sold to Asia’s richest man, Li Ka-Shing. His company Cheung Kong Infrastructure bought the Wellington power grid from Vector for $785 million. Many have wondered why the Government has allowed Wellington’s power grid, which covers the Wellington Central Business District, Porirua, and the Hutt Valley to be sold to China, after refusing to allow a minority stake by Canadian investors in Auckland Airport on the basis that it’s a “strategic asset”. Prime Minister Helen Clark has stated that the Wellington power network does not involve “sensitive land” (sic), although nobody seems to know what she means, and she hasn’t explained herself.
This “non-strategic” (sic) asset will theoretically allow a company intimately connected with the Chinese State to control the literal lifelines not only of Wellington commerce and technology, but, the Government itself, Security Intelligence HQ, defense, government departments, etc., etc.
One has a right to ask whether this is insanity, or whether it is calculated treason? Mr L Ka-shing operates on behalf of the Chinese military and intelligence. His role through the companies he runs is to acquire strategic assets for China throughout the world. Two years ago his Hutchison Whampoa Co. tried to buy the Port of Lyttelton, but this bid was rebuffed locally. Whampoa specializes in acquiring strategic port facilities around the world, and the presence of Chinese military personnel thereafter becomes a feature. Mr Li is transparently a major player in China’s global geo-political strategies. This involves far more than just money and investments. He serves as an adviser to CITIC, the State investment corporation. His holdings include interests in 55 countries, and include telecommunications, airlines, ports and property. He has large stakes in Australia.
The following is extracted from my book The Menace of China in the Pacific, dealing with Chairman Li Ka-shing:
“A HOME BASE IN EVERY OCEAN”
…The following report shows the extent of China’s naval operations, under the cloak of global business, and in partnership with Western corporations.
Chinese Company Completes World's Largest Port in Bahamas
Christopher Ruddy and Stephan Archer
Bahamas – The same Chinese company that recently took operational control of the Panama Canal is currently completing construction of the largest container port in the world in Freeport, Bahamas – just 60 miles from Florida.
Several U.S. military experts say that the activities of Hutchison Whampoa Limited, a Hong Kong-based conglomerate, in both Panama and the Bahamas, pose a significant risk to U.S. national security.
Officials for Hutchison Whampoa have heatedly denied any links with the Red Chinese government, but several established connections – including new evidence uncovered by NewsMax.com – suggest the Chinese government has a keen interest in the company's activities.
One port facility that has captured the interest of the Chinese government is Hutchison Whampoa's sprawling port facility in the tourist destination of Freeport on Grand Bahama Island.
Strategically Located Near U.S. East Coast
According to the company's Web site, the port is located at one of the most strategic spots in the world because "Freeport is the closest offshore port to the east coast of the United States, at the cross-roads of routes between Europe and the Americas and through the Panama Canal."
In 1995, Hutchison Whampoa entered into a 50-50 partnership with the Grand Bahama Development Company, a privately owned Bahamian company, to develop and expand the small Freeport facility that had catered to cruise ships.
Since then, Hutchison has helped dredge and expand the port, making it capable of handling the largest container ships on the high seas….
The company has ambitious plans to create the largest air cargo facility on land adjacent to the port. Hutchison has a 50 percent stake in the Grand Bahama Airport Company, which owns one of the largest airport runways in the world – more than 11,000 feet long. According to Powers, the runway is capable of handling the world's largest cargo and military aircraft.
On 800 acres of wooded land adjacent to the airport, Hutchison plans to create the Grand Bahama Sea-Air Business Center – a center that could potentially allow for 8 million square feet in warehouse space.
Communist China Ties Disturbing
Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, R-Miss., and former U.S. Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger have expressed concerns about Hutchison's influence over the Panama Canal.
Lott has described the Hong Kong firm as "an arm of the People's Liberation Army."
Hutchison Whampoa's chairman, Li Ka-Shing, is also a board member of CITIC – the China International Trust and Investment Corporation. U.S. intelligence sources have described the firm as a front for China's governmental State Council.
Congressman Dana Rohrbacher, R-Calif., has stated that CITIC has been used as a front company by China's military to acquire technology for weapons development.
Closely Tied to Beijing Rulers
A recently declassified report by the United States Southern Command's Joint Intelligence Center, prepared in October 1999 and obtained by the government watchdog Judicial Watch, said that "Hutchison Whampoa's owner, Hong Kong tycoon Li Ka-Shing, has extensive business ties in Beijing and has compelling financial reasons to maintain a good relationship with China's leadership."
The military intelligence report also warns that "Hutchison containerized shipping facilities in the Panama Canal, as well as the Bahamas, could provide a conduit for illegal shipments of technology or prohibited items from the West to the PRC, or facilitate the movement of arms and other prohibited items into the Americas."
Despite the strong claims made by Hutchison that China has no interest in their Bahamian port, evidence suggests otherwise.
A review of the visitor's log by NewsMax.com at the company's main office in Freeport shows that Chinese government officials have been frequent visitors to the port facility.
According to the log, China's ambassador to the Bahamas, M A Shuxue, has visited the port facility at least a half dozen times in the past few years. He has also accompanied groups of Chinese government officials. On other occasions Chinese governmental or commercial representatives have also paid visits without the presence of Ambassador Shuxue.
Chinese Hold Frequent-Visitor Record
The visitor logbook indicates Chinese officials have visited the port more often than officials from any other country, including the United States.
The logbook also shows that on June 2, 1999, the Cuban ambassador, Lazaro Cabeza, also paid a visit to the facility. Cuba is a strong ally of China's.
"If they have no connection to Hutchison and the port, if they are not interested in this company, why is China sending its ambassador there?" asks retired Admiral Thomas Moorer. "Why are other Chinese officials showing up there? Why is Castro's ambassador going there?"
Moorer, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, also served as former commander in chief of the Pacific and Atlantic Fleets.
"Of course the Chinese military sees the benefit of having a base, a future base, so close to the United States," Moorer said, adding, "What China is trying to do is get a kind of maritime position worldwide, and they need a home base – so to speak – in every ocean."
They Even Wanted Long Beach
"Not only are the Chinese in the Bahamas, they're in Panama and the Spratly Islands right off the Philippines. They tried to get Long Beach," Moorer said.
"There's no question about the fact in my mind that the Chinese military forces are affiliated with Mr. Li, who in turn runs Hutchison Whampoa," added Moorer.
Moorer said while the port facilities appear harmless today, they could be used as a staging ground by the Chinese at some future point if hostilities were to arise in the Korean peninsula or over Taiwan….
· PANAMA CANAL
"Major ports on both ends of the canal are now under the control of a Hong Kong-based company – Hutchison Whampoa – which has close ties to the Chinese government and is partly owned by the Chinese communist regime – China Resources Enterprises – which is a known front for Chinese military intelligence." [California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher].
Rohrabacher revealed that American companies bid for the contract won by the Chinese firm and showed that they actually outbid the Chinese but were still denied the contract in what the U.S. State Department called a "highly irregular process." It was arranged by the passage by the Panamanian legislature on Jan. 16, 1997 of Law No. 5, which, according to Adm. Thomas Moorer, gave Hutchison-Whampoa – and, therefore, China – exclusive concessions including:
* Responsibility for hiring new pilots for the canal. Pilots have complete control of all ships passing through the canal. They determine which ships may go through and when.
* Control of the port of Balboa on the Pacific end of the canal and the port of Cristobal on the Atlantic end. In addition to these critical anchorages, Hutchison was granted a monopoly on the Pacific side with its takeover of Rodman Naval Base, a U.S.-built, deep-draft port facility capable of handling, supplying, refueling, and repairing just about any warship.
* Control of the order of ships utilizing the entrance of the canal on the Pacific side, and even authority to deny ships access on either side if they are deemed to be interfering with Hutchison’s business. This is in direct violation of the 1977 Panama Canal Treaty, which guarantees expeditious passage for the United States Navy.
* The right to transfer "contract rights" to any third party – i.e., any company or nation. This means Hutchison could transfer rights to China, Russia, Cuba, Iraq, Syria, Libya, or corporate fronts for the Russian mafia or Colombian drug cartels.
* Control of certain public roads, such as Diablo Road, allowing access to strategic areas of the canal to be cut off.
* Control of U.S. Air Station Albrook and Telfers Island.
Western capitalism and China are co-dependent. A crisis for one will have far-reaching consequences for the other.
With New Zealand being placed in increasing economic dependency on China and with the large number of Chinese migrants being drawn here, what will New Zealand’s position be when China confronts a crisis of economics, disease and famine?
It is sheer folly to think that New Zealand will be able to turn to our “traditional ally”, the USA, for assistance. This antiquated thinking derives from America’s role in the war against Japan. The scenario of future Chinese aggression in this region is quite different to that of Japan’s aggression during the 1940s. In particular, the USA is itself enmeshed economically with China, and the US has nothing to gain by confronting China. Indeed, in the event of a confrontation with Russia, the USA will welcome the situation.
It is significant to note that according to a report in The Dominion Post (C1, April 29, 08) Vector took its advise on its selling options from Goldman Sachs. This international New York banking firm is a major player among the globalist elite that aims to create a new world order. It so happens that Goldman Sachs has a relationship with Red China stretching back to the 1970s. It was thus one of the first of the major capitalists to get into China. The company has “strategic partnerships” with Chinese banks such as the Industrial and Commercial Bank of China. In 2004 it became the first international bank to be permitted to arrange equity and bond deals in China. They are also associated with Mr Li’s Hutchison Whampoa. What a sham! 
Tuesday, 08 July 2008
As New Zealand continues to build its economic ties with Asia, the number of Asians living here will continue to increase and will eventually overtake the Maori population, according to a new report.
The Asia New Zealand Foundation study, Asians in New Zealand: Implications of a Changing Demography, found that the closer economic ties would have a profound effect on New Zealand's population.
For the past 20 years, successive New Zealand governments, the business community, and the education sector have all been working to position New Zealand as an active participant in Asia.
An integral part of the relationship has been the opening up of New Zealand to immigration of talent, capital and visitors from Asia, said researchers Richard Bedford and Elsie Ho, of Waikato University's Population Studies Centre.
The signing of the free trade agreement with China in April, the first such bilateral agreement to be achieved by a Western country, was a clear sign of the importance New Zealand government and business interests placed on strengthening ties with the region, the report said.
As a result, the number of Asian people wanting to live in New Zealand would continue to increase, as it had over the past 20 years.
Taking into account a number of projections of immigration flows, birth rates and outward migration, the researchers concluded that New Zealand's population would continue to become more Asian beyond 2026 and that Asians would eventually outnumber Maori.
As the New Zealand-born Asian population increased, larger shares of the Asian population would be of mixed ethnicities and counted in more than one population, the report said.
According to the 2006 census, Asians in New Zealand numbered 354,552 (9.2 percent of the population), and Maori 565,329 (14.6 percent).
Under "mid-range" projections, Statistics New Zealand sees the Asian population reaching 790,000 by 2026, still marginally behind the Maori population on an estimated 820,000. NZPA
Bolton K. R., The Washington-Peking-Tokyo Axis: Threat to NZ’s Survival, Realist Publications, NZ, 1983.
Bolton, K R., The Banking Swindle, Spectrum Press, NZ, 2000.
Bolton, K R ed. George Soros’ World Revolution: How the currency speculator funds New Left revolutions, Renaissance Press, NZ.
Bolton K R, The Menace of China in the Pacific, Spectrum Press, NZ, 2004.
K R Bolton, Wellington Power Grid Under Chinese Military Front-man “Non-Strategic” Asset Controlled by China Restoration, #3 2008, Renaissance Press, Wellington, New Zealand,
Chang J., Halliday J Mao – the unknown story, Jonathan Cape, London, 2005.
De Colonna Bertram, The Truth about Germany, The Mirror, Auckland, NZ, April, 1938.
Evening Post, May 3, 1983.
Emmott Bill, Rivals: How the Power Struggle Between China, India and Japan Will Shape Our Next Decade Allen Lane, 2008.
Ferguson N, Colossus: The Rise & Fall of the American Empire, Penguin, Britain, 2004.
Garnaut J., Russia on edge as China grows, Sydney Morning Herald, June 9, 2008.
Haldeman H R , The Ends of Power, New York Times Books, 1978.
Higham C., Trading with the enemy: how the allied multinationals supplied Nazi Germany throughout World War II, Robert Hale, London, 1983.
Lawton, Lancelot, Empires of the Far East, London, 1912,
Li Xiaokun, China, Russia, sign border agreement, China Daily, July 22, 08.
Paine S C M, Imperial Rivals: China, Russia, and Their Disputed Frontier, NY, 1996.
Parkinson, C N, East & West, John Murray, London, 1963.
RIA Novosti, Moscow, Russia says U.S. missile shield will harm European security, July 15, 2008. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080715/114016639.html
Salisbury Harrison E., The Coming War Between Russia & China, Pan Books, London, 1969..
Rockefeller D., From a China Traveller, NY Times, Aug. 10, 1973.
Scalapino Robert A., The Political Influence of the USSR in Asia, in Donald S. Zagoria, ed., Soviet Policy in East Asia New Haven, Yale University Press, 1982, 71.
Scholl-Latour, Dr P., Death in the rice fields : an eyewitness account of Vietnam's three wars, 1945-1979, St. Martins Press, NY, 1985.
Spengler, Oswald, The Decline of the West, Allen & Unwin, London, 1971.
Sutton Dr Antony, Trilaterals Over Washington, Arizona, 1978.
The Dominion, May 29 1982.
Trenin, Dmitri, Pirouettes and priorities: distilling a Putin doctrine, The National Interest, Dec. 22, 03.
Wines M., Chinese Creating a New Vigor in Russian Far East, NY Times, September 23, 2001.
Asia Society Gala 50th anniversary dinner speeches, http://www.asiasociety.org/support/specialevents/anniversary_dinner/galaspeeches.html
Bobo Lo, Russia-China: Axis of Convenience, 20 - 05 – 2008, http://www.opendemocracy.net/user/511394
Boron entry http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron
Russia and China focus on Central Asia, Washington, 12 June 2008, Voice of America, http://www.voanews.com/english/NewsAnalysis/2008-06-13-voa23.cfm
Natural resources of Primorsky Krai, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources_of_Primorsky_Krai
Primorsky Krai, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primorsky_Krai
Rockefeller, N. http://www.nicholasrockefeller.net/rand_dinner/
Soros G., (http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/previousdetail.php?id=125401, Bangkok Post, Jan. 23 2008.
Yermukanov, Marat, China obstructs River Management Talks with Kazakhstan, February 17, 2006 :Eurasia Daily Monitor, Jamestown Foundation, http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2370793.
The Menace of China in the Pacific, K R Bolton, Renaissance Press, $15.
 Li Xiaokun, China Daily, July 22, 08.
 Appendix: I The Coming War in Asia..
 Salisbury Harrison E., The Coming War Between Russia & China, Pan Books, London, 1969. Salisbury was assistant managing editor of The New York Times, and a veteran journalist in Russia and Asia. He was the first American journalist to visit Hanoi during the Vietnam War.
 Bobo Lo was second-in-charge at the Australian embassy in Moscow in the late 1990s and is now director of the China and Russia programs at London's Centre for European Reform.
 Bolton K. R., The Washington-Peking-Tokyo Axis: Threat to NZ’s Survival, Realist Publications, NZ, 1983.
 Chang J., Halliday J., Saved by Washington, Mao – the unknown story, Jonathan Cape, London, 2005, 304-311.
 Chang, Halliday, ibid., 310.
 Chang, Halliday, ibid., 362.
 Chang, Halliday, ibid.., 368.
 Chang, Halliday, ibid. 369.
 Chang, Halliday, ibid., 397.
 Paine S C M, Imperial Rivals: China, Russia, and Their Disputed Frontier, NY, 1996. Dr Paine is an expert on Russia and Asia and has studied in Russia, China, Taiwan and Japan. She is associate professor of policy & strategy at the US Naval War College.
 Chang& Halliday, op.cit. 570-571.
 Chang & Halliday, ibid., 572.
 Haldeman H R , The Ends of Power, New York Times Books, 1978.
 Scalapino Robert A., The Political Influence of the USSR in Asia, in Donald S. Zagoria, ed., Soviet Policy in East Asia New Haven, Yale University Press, 1982, 71.
 Elleman, op.cit.
 Elleman, ibid.
 Elleman, ibid.
 The Trilateral Commission was founded at the behest of David Rockefeller, head of the banking and oil dynasty, as a think tank originally based on a merging of interests between North America, Europe and Japan. The concept now embraces the entirety of the Pacific Rim nations. It draws membership from the elite of business and politics. For e.g. the Carter Administration had many Trilateralists, from Carter down. The commission’s first director was Zbigniew Brzezinski, Carter’s National Security adviser, and now foreign policy adviser for Democratic presidential nominee Obama. The Trilateral Commission has expanded its membership to China.
 Emmott Bill, Rivals: How the Power Struggle Between China, India and Japan Will Shape Our Next Decade Allen Lane, 2008.
 Emmott, ibid.
 Garnaut J., Russia on edge as China grows, Sydney Morning Herald, June 9, 2008.
 Trenin, Dmitri, Pirouettes and priorities: distilling a Putin doctrine, The National Interest, Dec. 22, 03. Trenin is a Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and Director of Studies at the Carnegie Moscow Center. The Carnegie Endowment is a long established globalist think tank influential in US ruling circles, along with other inter-locking think tanks and Foundations, such as the CFR , Trilateral Commission, Ford Foundation, et al.
 Russia and China focus on Central Asia, Washington, 12 June 2008, Voice of America, http://www.voanews.com/english/NewsAnalysis/2008-06-13-voa23.cfm
 Bobo Lo, op.cit.
 de Nesnera, op.cit.
 de Nesnera, ibid. Quoting Lo.
 Bobo Lo, Russia-China: Axis of Convenience, 20 - 05 – 2008, http://www.opendemocracy.net/user/511394
 George Soros, the currency speculator, operates an array of think tanks, fronts and foundations across the world, aimed at breaking down traditional cultures and opening up protected economies to globalisation. Agenda include liberalisation of abortion and drug laws for e.g. Generally operating under the Open Society Institute, Soros’ networks played pivotal roles in undermining the Soviet bloc by backing Solidarity in Poland, and in Czechoslovakia for e.g., and are very active in the old Soviet Republics. Soros activities include “training future leaders” through the “Internet Access and Training Program” in Belarus, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Soros networks funded and organised the “colour revolutions” in Georgia and the Ukraine. (See George Soros’ World Revolution: How the currency speculator funds New Left revolutions, Renaissance Press, NZ). Soros is a major backer of Obama for the presidency, along with numerous other plutocratic luminaries. Soros is investing heavily in China, along with the other US global coporates; for e.g.: Grand China Air, Chinese car manufacturing (Chery.
During an interview with the BBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Soros stated that, . "I'm not looking for a worldwide recession. I'm looking for a significant shift of power and influence away from the US in particular and a shift in favour of the developing world, particularly China." (http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/previousdetail.php?id=125401, Bankock Post, Jan. 23 2008.
 Wines M., Chinese Creating a New Vigor in Russian Far East, NY Times, September 23, 2001.
 Wines, ibid.
 Russian Maritime Province.
 Primorsky Krai, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primorsky_Krai
 Boron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boron
 Natural resources of Primorsky Krai, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_resources_of_Primorsky_Krai
 Elleman B., op.cit.
 MPR = Mongolian Peoples Republic.
 Elleman, op.cit.
 Elleman, ibid.
 Bolton K. R., The Menace of China in the Pacific, Renaissance Press, 2004.
 Appendix I The Coming War in Asia.
 Yermukanov, Marat, China obstructs River Management Talks with Kazakhstan, February 17, 2006
Source:Eurasia Daily Monitor, Jamestown Foundation, http://jamestown.org/edm/article.php?article_id=2370793.
The Jamestown Foundation is a US based think tank specialising in the analysis of the affairs of the republics of the former USSR, and is staffed by academic specialists. Eurasia Daily Monitor is the Foundation’s publication. Marat Yermukanov is a journalist working for the Russian-language private newspaper Panorama Nedely in Petropavlovsk, North Kazakhstan.
 MacArthur, Gen. Douglas, Farewell Address to Congress, April 19, 1951
 The Dominion, May 29 1982.
 Evening Post, May 3, 1983.
 Chang and Halliday, op.cit. ch. “Saved by Washington”, 304-311.
 Chang & Halliday, ibid. 601.
 Joint Chiefs of Staff telegram to General Douglas MacArthur, December 1950.
 General MacArthur to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, December 1950
 Asia Society Gala 50th anniversary dinner speeches, http://www.asiasociety.org/support/specialevents/anniversary_dinner/galaspeeches.html
 Other Rockefeller think tanks followed, the most important being the Trilateral Commission, which staffed the Carter Administration, from Carter down. The Trilateral Commission was founded specifically for the purpose of drawing the economies of America, Europe and Asia together. Trilateralists were also to play a key role in fostering relations with China. David Rockefeller speaking at the Asia Society gala alludes to his role in developing Sino-American relations, in association with the Trilateral Commission: “Ever since, for example, I had the good fortune to meet in 1973 with Prime Minister Zhou En-lai and subsequently with Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin in connection with the Trilateral Commission.”
 Asia Society Gala 50th anniversary dinner speeches, op.cit.
 Chang & Halliday, ibid. 602.
 However, a united Vietnam within the Soviet orbit was not in China’s interests.
 Chang & Halliday, ibid. 604-605.
 Ibid., 612.
 Ibid. 613.
 Bolton, K R, The Menace of China in the Pacific, Renaissance Press, Wellington, New Zealand 2004, 18-19.
 Rockefeller D., From a China Traveller, NY Times, Aug. 10, 1973.
 Antony Sutton, Trilaterals Over Washington, Arizona, 1978. Sutton was a research Fellow with the Hoover Inst.
 Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Rise & Fall of the American Empire, Penguin, Britain, 2004. Ferguson is Herzog Professor of Financial History at the Stern School of Business, NY University, Snr. Research Fellow at Jesus College, Oxford, and Snr Fellow of the Hoover Institution, Stanford.
 Dated June 23, 2006.
 Russo made his revelations on the Alex Jones (radio) Show in 2006, stating he was first approached by Nicholas Rockefeller in 1999 because of his impact at the political level. Russo, winner of Emmy Tony and Grammy Awards, was also a political activist, a “constitutionalist” and “libertarian”; he died in 2007.
 Higham C., Trading with the enemy: how the allied multinationals supplied Nazi Germany throughout World War II, Robert Hale, London, 1983.
 For one of the few explanations on how Nazi Germany’s banking and state credit system operated see Bertram De Colonna, European correspondent for NZ businessman, baking reformer and philanthropist Henry Kelliher’s Mirror magazine, The Truth about Germany, The Mirror, Auckland, NZ, April, 1938. This is quoted at length in Bolton, K R., The Banking Swindle, Spectrum Press, NZ, 2000. The policy was basically similar that of the 1935 First NZ Labour Govt., which used 1% Reserve Bank state credit to fund its famous State Housing programme.
 RIA Novosti, Moscow, Russia says U.S. missile shield will harm European security, July 15, 2008. http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080715/114016639.html For a Russian response threatening to deploy nuclear bombers in Cuba and Venezuela see Appendix II attached.
 The Western folk soul is “faustian”, looking star ward, into infinity. The Russian soul looks towards the horizon; its expansive outlook is land bound. See Spengler, Oswald, The Decline of the West, Allen & Unwin, London, 1971, Vol. II 192-196; 295, n.1
 However, the Chinese ideological offensive among the colonial peoples and even among communist parties throughout the world made little headway. See Jung & Halliday, op.cit.
 Japan was funded in its war against Russia by the prominent US banker Jacob Schiff, senior partner of Kuhn, Loeb & Co., while the First National Bank and National City Bank sponsored Japanese war loans in the USA. Schiff was awarded the Order of the Rising Sun in Japan by Emperor Meiji for his efforts.
 Scholl-Latour, Dr P., Death in the rice fields : an eyewitness account of Vietnam's three wars, 1945-1979, St. Martins Press, NY, 1985. Scholl-Latour is a Franco-German academic and journalist who spent many years in Africa and Indo-China.
 C Northcote Parkinson, the British historian, philosopher and novelist of Parkinson’s Law Fame
.Parkinson, C N, East & West, John Murray, London, 1963, 264.
 Lawton, Lancelot, Empires of the Far East,(1912), vol. 2, 810. Quoted by Parkinson, ibid., 264.
 Parkinson, op.cit. 265.
 Parkinson, ibid. 267. Where Parkinson errs however, is in the common persistence that the USA is the ‘leader of the West’ and will lead the West in coming to the assistance of Russia against Chinese aggression. New facts, as shown herein, show the reverse.
 For the background to this see the writer’s Menace of China in the Pacific, Renaissance Press, 2004.
 Appendix II.
 NewsMax.com Jan. 19, 2000.
 NewsMax.com. Aug. 8, 2000.
 Bolton K R, Restoration #3, 2008.