Russia may accept majority Chinese control of big oil and gas fields

[Hamartia Antidote]

Capable people? Foreigners or Locals?

Seems like Texaco owns 37% of Petroecuador

 

[Echo_419]

We don't want to sound like an opportunist who takes the opportunities during Russia's moment of difficulty.

As I said, the Russian government should remains as the largest shareholder of their national assets such as the SOEs and oil/gas fields.

But China can bring investment to inject more capitals for them.

Reuter is making the propaganda by trying to create a rift between China/Russia's alliance.

I respect you for it but why shouldn't you have the majority stake when you offer the majority capital

 

[Chinese-Dragon]

I respect you for it but why shouldn't you have the majority stake when you offer the majority capital

Our business interests in Russia are long-term.

Short-term profit grabbing is a bad idea, whereas increasing trust and good will between China and Russia is good for business in the long-term.

 

[TaiShang]

Due to the lack of common interests and difference in geopolitical visions, BRICS is just a loosely organized forum. In addition, the vast difference in monetary strength between so-called-members makes the BRICS financial pool hard to function in any balanced manner (say voting rights and responsibilities).

Updates of forex reserve shows that China (exclude HK, TW) has 3.7 times of the RIBS combined (and if include HK/TW then 4.4 times of the RIBS combined). Foreign Exchange Reserves (US$ billion) data:

China 3,946

Russia 376

Brazil 362

India 329​

Taiwan 424

Hong Kong 325​

List of countries by foreign-exchange reserves - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
​

Rather than BRICS, a bi-lateral alliance between Russia and China would be financially sufficient as an insurance policy, while common vision/interests are also safeguarded.

I say, both. Multilateral and bilateral institutions have their own strengths and weaknesses.

Not all institutions are meant to thrive. Some are just there in case you need them in the future. Some are more immediate. China-Russia partnership is poised to outperform BRICS because less actors are involved and their functions are different.

China is not throwing out money; China's financials are regulated and growing. China does launch certain initiatives and pledge funds (loans) that are mostly development (investment) oriented.

Lucky that China does not have to burn money to fight ISIS. Hence, there is money to spend on development.

 

[Shotgunner51]

Russia have the third largest Jewish population in the world, behind Israel and US, at about 500 to 800 thousands, used to be the second largest and even have more Jewish population than In the USA, but they almost all gone after WW2.



That is actually whats worries most people, myself included.

China cant just go try, try and try again and help other country as long as they are of same interest (ahm, anti-west) This is a kind of ball game the US play in the 60s and 70s, when they are enemy of Soviet Union, they are friend of the US, hence the US supoort covertly and overtly all kind of crazy organisation (Aka Saddam and Mujaheedin) see how it turns out for the Americans now lol

China should always be Business first, if there are money to make, they should, but blindly adding baggage simply because they think alike is a big no-no

You are right, China shouldn't go anti-West just for the sake of it, and actually China isn't, in fact China is still trying to do the other way round. However the matter of hard cruel reality is, the West is encircling/containing China in an unprecedented manner. It doesn't take much wisdom for anyone to understand the context of "Pivot to Asia", TPP, deploying 60% naval assets in Asia Pacific, double-standard on Imperial Japanese Militarism vs Nazi, "normalization" with Communist Vietnam, special censorship on Chinese investments, and the likes.

Russia is in the similar situation. Check their short history since the fall of USSR, in return for sharp armament reduction, adopting Western style democracy and abiding to IMF-dictated economic reform, they got NATO expanded to their doorsteps.

Anti-West is not an option subjectively chosen by China, but a situation forced upon. As long as this situation persists or even worsens (which is likely), the natural instinct would be to pursue whatever self-protection measures deem necessary. If the West is worried, probably it will be constructive for them to review their anti-China policy (in that sense anti-Russia, anti-Muslim policy), before that happens there is nothing much China can do to help but to pursue its own path of safeguarding national interests.

Personally I hope, however remote the chance seems to be, cooler heads will prevail in the West instead of dominated by neoconservative warhawks. Let's hope that buddy!

 

[TaiShang]

You are right, China shouldn't go anti-West just for the sake of it, and actually China isn't, in fact China is still trying to do the other way round. However the matter of hard cruel reality is, the West is encircling/containing China in an unprecedented manner. It doesn't take much wisdom for anyone to understand the context of "Pivot to Asia", TPP, deploying 60% naval assets in Asia Pacific, double-standard on Imperial Japanese Militarism vs Nazi, "normalization" with Communist Vietnam, special censorship on Chinese investments, and the likes.

Russia is in the similar situation. Check their short history since the fall of USSR, in return for sharp armament reduction, adopting Western style democracy and abiding to IMF-dictated economic reform, they got NATO expanded to their doorsteps.

Anti-West is not an option subjectively chosen by China, but a situation forced upon. As long as this situation persists or even worsens (which is likely), the natural instinct would be to pursue whatever self-protection measures deem necessary. If the West is worried, probably it will be constructive for them to review their anti-China policy (in that sense anti-Russia, anti-Muslim policy), before that happens there is nothing much China can do to help but to pursue its own path of safeguarding national interests.

Personally I hope, however remote the chance seems to be, cooler heads will prevail in the West instead of dominated by neoconservative warhawks. Let's hope that buddy!

The more China achieves self-sufficiency, overall national strength and greater capacity to protect its sovereignty, the more "anti-West" it will be seen.

Hawk or dove, it does not matter. China will be seen as a threat as long as power transition from the West continues.

Challenging the Western domination is by default anti-West. There is no side-stepping from it so long as you wish China to achieve new success stories.

Therefore, it better to cut the crappy talk short, stop the self-imposed delusion, and tell what is in our mind: We do not give a damn about what the West might think of what we think of them. China now has capacity to protect its vital interests. The more capable it gets, the more independent and sovereign it becomes.

I do not like the idea of "being forced upon." So we are becoming anti-West not out of our own doing, but because of being forced to be so? I would consider it an insult to take the latter as an answer.

Sure we do not necessarily call ourselves anti-West (being anti-something means one in fact takes the other side seriously). China is not anti-West. But, China's actions create the image of an anti-Western China in the West. And China does not give a flying ant to what the West thinks what China is.

Our actions, our undertakings, and our concepts.