WASHINGTON URGES MOSCOW TO HAVE A "FRANK TALK"

Despite its differences with Russia the US administration is ready for cooperation on various issues, Victoria Nuland, an official spokesman for the State Department, has stated.

"We will try to cooperate closely with Russia on as many issues as we can which we share, including such world issues as Nagornyy Karabakh, Iran, Afghanistan and Syria. However, we will be frank on those questions where we differ," Radio Mayak quotes Nuland as saying.

In making this statement the White House's official spokesman again voiced the American-Russian agenda. On the other hand, Nuland virtually confirmed claims by western analysts that the re-election of Barack Obama as US president ought to have caused a sigh of relief in the Kremlin. In their opinion Obama has enough worries without Russia. The American president's ambitions since the collapse of the Soviet Union are minimal and he will not be actively opposing the creation of a Eurasian Union. The second Obama administration's attitude towards Russia will be based on realism and America's interests. If Moscow wants to cooperate, then Washington will be ready. Most experts are inclined to believe that if there is a stand-off between Moscow and Washington the confrontation will be virtual and to a degree necessary to maintain the tone and to consolidate society against an "external enemy". The problem is that this "external enemy" could be a third force which, with skilful interpretation, would be capable of bringing the geopolitical opponents together, and at times even make them allies, albeit for a minimal period of time.

At the beginning of last December the renowned American political analyst, Zbigniew Brzezinski, named China as this "common enemy" of Moscow and Washington, particularly the latter. Speaking in the US Congress, Brzezinski noted that Russia was changing rapidly, perhaps not even in spite of Putin but thanks to him. But what is most interesting is that in order for Russia to prosper and succeed, Brzezinski is advising Moscow to draw closer to the West. Otherwise, it will lose everything to China. In other words, in the geological struggle against China's increasing influence, the renowned American academic is proposing that Moscow unites with the West, which is of vital importance, first and foremost, for Russia itself.

It is worth noting that in his new book "Strategic Vision: America and the Crisis of Global Power", which was presented last February, regarding the new role of China, India, Japan, Russia and the EU in today's world, Brzezinski makes no secret of his alarm about China's increasing political-economic and military might, although he doesn't bracket it with the US. Nevertheless, in acknowledging China's might, he describes it as the future successor of the US. "I believe that the geo-economic trend - without the outbreak of a war - has already been defined and will result in China taking the US' place as the world's leading economic power in 2016," Brzezinski writes. At the same time, he believes, China is not capable of becoming a world leader, although in nuclear armaments, information technology and other technological areas it is snapping at Washington's heels. Furthermore, a strong nationalism could develop in China at some time which could involuntarily lead to the creation of a damaging powerful regional coalition, because none of its main neighbours (India, Japan and Russia) is prepared to recognize China as a world leader to replace the USA. But the US should refrain from direct military intervention and assist in the reconciliation of the mutually hostile key East Asian players, especially China and Japan. A Washington mission of this kind as a mediator in the East could become the basis for shaping a trilateral partnership between the US, China and Japan which, in turn, would help in successfully dealing with problems of a strategic nature on the basis of China's growing role in the region. That said, America must respect China's historical and geopolitical role in maintaining stability in the Far East.

Brzezinski believes that a serious dialogue with China on questions of regional security would help not only to reduce the likelihood of an outbreak of American-Chinese conflicts, but also reduce China's possible differences with Japan and India and even Russia regarding natural resources and its role in Central Asia. And so, throughout last year, Brzezinski, commenting on various chapters of his book in numerous interviews, focusing attention on China's increasing might, made it crystal clear that Russia, with or without Putin, which should and could become a part of the West, has no other choice than an alliance with the West.

It is significant that earlier in his book "The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and its Geostrategic Imperatives" (1997), Brzezinski questioned China's ability, even with a more favourable clash of circumstances, to become a truly world power on key issues. He said that since time immemorial China, with its huge population, has had its own unique and proud civilization. From this point of view, China's fall from greatness - the last 150 years of humiliation - is an aberration, a desecration of China's special quality and a personal insult to every individual Chinese. This should never have happened and these perpetrators deserve due punishment.  The main perpetrators in varying degrees have been Britain, Japan, Russia and America. Such a complementary rhetoric towards the PRC in the 1990s is perfectly explicable. In the period of the "Cold War" and the political shaping of the final victory over a prostrate Russia, Washington was not averse to soliciting the support of China, which had serious claims against Moscow. Besides this, another most important task was to prevent the creation of a powerful continental Russia-China bloc which, basically, the West was able to do.

It should be noted that Russia, for its part, since 2000 has been wooing Beijing and also Delhi to try and create a Moscow-Delhi-Beijing geopolitical axis. In other words, up to recently there has been a fierce struggle between Moscow and Washington for China's "soul". Judging by the recent statements by Nuland and Brzezinski, another, no less intriguing struggle has been developing - for the "soul" of Russia. It is more than likely that dominance in the geopolitical stand-off between the US and China will depend on whose side Moscow's sympathies or antipathies lie.

Washington, which has clearly designated Japan as its strategic ally and considers it to be a world power, is today very seriously worried by China's increasing political-economic and military might.

Having made an astounding economic leap, China currently stands second in the world list for volume of GDP. Thanks to this the rhetoric of Beijing, which is advising Americans to reject the ban on exports of advanced technology in exchange for the removal of barriers to American exports of farm produce to China, is being beefed up. It is quite natural that economic growth enables Beijing to ceaselessly build up its military might. Experts estimate that the most numerous (2.25 million men) Chinese army lies in second place in the world for military might. According to the official figures, Beijing's spending on defence last year was approximately $10bn. Some western analysts claim that in fact this figure is closer to $150-170bn.

China's anxious neighbours, especially those with whom Beijing has territorial disputes (Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, etc), which have joined the arms race, also intend to shelter under America's protective umbrella. Washington, in reviving a policy of restraining China, is sending troops and aircraft to Australia and reaching an agreement with Singapore on the deployment of warships. The US also plans to extend its ABM system in South-east Asia. According to the official version, the building of new radar stations in southern Japan and the Philippines is aimed at tightening control over refractory and unpredictable North Korea. But Beijing sees this move by Washington as anti-Chinese and calculated to protect the US' reliable partners in the Asia-Pacific region - Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Philippines, Australia and New Zealand. Furthermore, by strengthening economic and military-technical cooperation with India, the White House is trying to win over another powerful ally in the anti-China struggle. In Washington's strategy quite an important role is being given to the policy of maximum restriction of supplies of energy carriers for the rapidly developing Chinese economy. In this context, apart from the Persian Gulf, which has become a convenient oil market for China, the African continent, and especially the countries of the Gulf of Guinea and Sudan, are also acquiring increasing importance in ensuring the CPR's energy security. This means that competition for oil between its main consumers will increase many times over in the future. The import of oil to China from the Near East and from Africa and Latin America will increase significantly and the main risks will be hidden in protracted sea routes. The destabilization of the situation in some Near Eastern and North African countries will directly affect China's interests.

Having taken control of the sea routes of the Indian Ocean, Washington is trying to restrain the growth of China's economic might. As a result of NATO's military campaign in Libya, the CPR had to wind down 50 large-scale projects in this North African country and evacuate 30,000 of its experts working mainly in the oil sector in eastern Libya. As a result the Chinese irretrievably lost huge sums of money they had invested in the Libyan economy. The marked exacerbation of the situation in Nigeria - the world's seventh largest country for level of oil extraction - which possesses half of Africa's reserves of natural gas, is also in Beijing's interests, because Nigeria is a key supplier of energy resources to China. In recent years contracts for the development of Nigeria's richest oil and gas fields, bypassing Chinese companies, are going to western companies. Another serious blow to Chinese interests was the recognition of the independence of Southern Sudan, which possesses large supplies of oil. A serious defeat for Beijing was the unrealized project of the Sudan-Libya oil pipeline - the first trans-African oil pipeline not controlled by the western powers, which was due to be implemented last year. Incidentally, by giving every support to projects for the transport of energy carriers from Central Asia to Europe, Washington is mainly trying to minimize their deliveries to China.

In the light of these realities the veiled proposals to Moscow to become Washington's ally in the geopolitical game against third forces assumes a particular relevance. But will the Kremlin agree to this? Most probably, no. Putin, who has set as his main objective Russia's return to the club of the world's strongest, is hardly likely to accept such an offer, especially bearing in mind that Moscow, which agreed to be Washington's junior partner in the 1990s, was almost fully deprived of geopolitical influence even after the collapse of the USSR.  Furthermore, bearing in mind the serious territorial differences with the US' strategic ally in south Asia - Japan - it is hard to believe in the creation of a Washington-Moscow-Tokyo geopolitical axis. Moscow's virtually negative response over this question was expressed in Putin's Message to the Russian Federal Assembly: "Our task now is to create a rich and prosperous Russia. At the same time, I would like everyone to understand clearly that the next few years will be decisive and, perhaps, even critical, and not just for us but for almost the whole world which is embarking on an era of radical change and perhaps even shocks. Global development is becoming more and more uneven. The seeds are being sown for new conflicts of an economic, geopolitical and an ethnic nature." In his speech Putin, once again focusing attention on the project of a Eurasian Union, virtually made it clear that Russia intends to travel its own path, skilfully manoeuvring between the US and China who are competing with one another, securing for itself the dominant role in such a huge area as Eurasia. Even despite the fact that, in the opinion of some experts, China might take back the Far East from Russia by force or acquire it by peaceful means. But the one thing that is certain is that in this incredibly important game the stakes are too high.