Is the new alignment between Russia and China a threat to the United States?

Aimed at further hamstringing the U.S.-led neoliberal order, the emerging

relationship appears to have factored into the current entropy in U.S. foreign
policy Moscow and Beijing have not been this close in half a century.

Under Chinese President Xi Jinpings "New Model of Great Power Relations"

there are two great powers: the United States and Russia. Chinese strategy
documents indicate the intention is to "manage" the United States and "ally" with
Russia. The two countries, after all, share significant interests. Xi and Russian
President Vladimir Putin have a common opposition to colored revolutions
(coordinated advice for authoritarian Eurasian regimes began in 2004 through
the Shanghai Cooperation Organization). They also both deploy an ethnic
nationalist discourse, glorifying the Rossiya (the Russian people) and Han
Chinese civilizational themes, respectively. In May at the Shanghai meeting of the
Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia (CICA) Xi
Jinping made the most direct verbal assault on the U.S.-led San Francisco Treaty
system in Asia since Gorbachevs 1985 Vladivostok speech, echoing the same
themes of peaceful coexistence, multilateralism, and opposition to alliances and
blocs in Asia. Putin signed on to Xis theme of a new Eurasian-centered concept
of security clearly aimed to counter the maritime alliances of the United States.
The $400 billion Sino-Russian gas deal in May demonstrated Chinas utility to
Moscow as the West tries to isolate Russia over Ukraine.

The two leaders have promised to increase "coordination" on policy, and could do
a number of things in concert that would complicate U.S. security policy. The
operational tempo of Russian forces in the Far East has picked up recently,
putting new pressure on U.S. and Japanese forces up North at a time when
Japanese forces are being stretched around the Senkakus, responding to Chinas
layered coercion of fishing boats, coast guard ships, and over-the-horizon PLA
Navy surface action groups. Russian arms sales to China mostly naval but also
including jet engines for fighters and bombers have returned to the levels of
the 1990s after a 15-year dip. Circumstantial evidence suggests that the Snowden
affair was a joint operation between Russian and Chinese intelligence services
at least after the fact, since somebody (probably the Russians) knew how to direct
Snowden, and somebody (certainly the Chinese) knew exactly what he was doing
in Hong Kong and ensured he could get out. Given attribution challenges and the
use of hacker militia by both countries, cyber also seems a possible area of
unhelpful cooperation between Moscow and Beijing.
However, the new Sino-Russian alignment is unlikely to be so significant that the
West needs to change its fundamental approach to both the Western Pacific and
Ukraine. China is a rising power with revisionist aims in the Pacific, but
continuing dependence on the U.S. economy and global economic institutions.
Russia is a declining power with revisionist aims in Central Europe, and far less
dependence on global economic institutions. While China has its own corruption
abyss, Xis rule depends more fundamentally on meeting the Chinese peoples
expectations of rising living standards, while Putin needs to keep a smaller
corrupt kleptocracy satisfied. Thus while resisting the United States is the
animating theme in Putinism, there is still enough Dengism in Xis worldview
that a stable U.S.-China relationship matters. Meanwhile, China has little
motivation to empower Russia in Asia, while Russia has much to fear from a
natural resource hungry giant of 1.3 billion people alongside its 7 million and
declining population in the Far East. A closer Sino-Russian alignment will
always have less coherence than Americas treaty alliance system in the Pacific,
unless we lose our own focus on allies.

Nevertheless, the Xi-Putin bromance should serve as a reminder to the White

House that our Russia policy cannot just be trans-Atlantic. It is critical that as we
deal with Putin we expand our definition of "the West" beyond Europe. This is
what Reagan did at the 1983 G7 summit in Williamsburg, Va., when he made
Yasuhiro Nakasone and Japan a full partner in the defense of liberty and
containment of Soviet adventurism. In the end, the Cold War was not just won in
Europe it was won with the help of key powers in South Asia and the Pacific. In
addition to Japan, India is the best stick in the Sino-Russia mud the United
States could ask for Russia sells three times more arms to India than China and
the Sino-Indian strategic rivalry will crimp Moscows ability to work too closely
with Beijing. Despite lackluster attention in Washington, the United States still
has a better geostrategic relationship with Delhi than either Moscow or Beijing
and the administration needs to redouble its investment in relations with the new
Modi government to keep up that advantage.

The White House also has to remember that our response to Russian coercion
against Ukraine and Article V treaty allies in the Baltic will be watched with an
eagle eye by our Asian allies, who are already flustered by the administrations
weak hand and inconsistency on Syria. There is a deficit of global trust in
American willpower these days that needs to inform U.S. thinking about the
consequences of Putins strategy. At the same time, if the United States is seeking
to avoid a new Cold War and to find off ramps from the current Ukraine crisis, it
may well find that Asia is where it, Japan, and others can eventually work best
with Russia as Chinese hard power begins to look a lot more important to
Moscow than Putins ideological confrontation with the West. Finally, the Obama
administration must reinforce the overall momentum of the neoliberal order by
 getting serious about the domestic U.S. politics of both the trans-Pacific and
trans-Atlantic trade deals (TPP and TTIP). We can and must reinforce the pillars
of the neoliberal order even as we respond to challenges at its frontier.

The new Sino-Russian alignment should not shake the United States from its
basic opposition to Putin in Ukraine, but it might just help cure it of its myopia
and force it to think globally as it acts locally.

4 Big Reasons the

Iranian Nuclear Deal
Didnt Happen
Washington would like to believe it has a lot more leverage over Tehran than it really
does.
BY AARON DAVID MILLER Aaron David Miller is vice president for new initiatives and a distinguished
scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars. His forthcoming book is titled The End

of Greatness: Why America Can't Have (and Doesn't Want) Another Great President. , JASON BRODSKY

NOVEMBER 24, 2014

So what went wrong? How come the champagne corks arent popping in Vienna?
After all the hype, drama, and suspense, why is it that all we have to show is a
close-but-no-cigar seven-month extension?

All is not lost. With a deadline pushed until next summer, the negotiations are
already set to resume in December. And though critics of the deal will shout from
the rooftops that this extension will only give Iran more leverage, its still possible
that a way could be found to reach a comprehensive agreement.
But why wasnt it possible by Nov. 24? As John Kerry suggested today, more time
will not make matters easier. Sure, the gaps were wide, the suspicions deep, the
politics constraining. All of this was known in advance. Its not as if the U.S.
negotiators realized at the eleventh hour that a comprehensive deal was a long
shot.

But was this a doomed enterprise from the start? Or was it just that more time
was required to make a deal? Or was there something wrong with the structure of
the trade-off: Iranian concessions on substance upfront for gradual removal of
sanctions?

Ive been involved in a lot of tough negotiations most of them failures and
Ive seen what happens when negotiators get too close and attached to their deal.
Indeed, in every negotiation, those at the table enter with a set of assumptions
about the other side that reality soon tests, a mindset of analytical realities that
are either borne out or not.

Here are the four faulty (or yet to be realized) assumptions that drove the
talented and committed U.S. negotiators to believe that a comprehensive
agreement was possible.

1. Rouhani and Zarif have the power to cut a bargain.

The president and foreign minister of Iran may be moderates, but they are not
free agents and dont work for the United States. Iran is an authoritarian state
and yet one with a real political life, complete with tense divisions at the top,
bottom, and center. But amid all the tea leaf reading and studying the entrails of
goats, one thing is stunningly obvious even to the interminably obtuse: At the
apex of this pyramid sits an aging theocracy at whose center is Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei the final arbiter on all matters of state.

Rouhani came to office promising prudence and hope, and even penned anop-
ed in the Washington Post entitled Time to Engage. But these overtures all came
with the blessing of the establishment: Khamenei gave the president the
necessary breathing room to secure a comprehensive accord. For instance, in
September 2013, as Rouhani was preparing to make his maiden voyage to New
York, the supreme leader called for heroic leniency on the nuclear file, stressing
that he was not opposed to correct diplomacy.
It has been Khamenei calling the shots
throughout this entire process setting
clear red lines that were never to be
crossed.
It has been Khamenei calling the shots throughout this entire process setting clear red
lines that were never to be crossed. Zarif said as much this September, during an
appearance at the Council on Foreign Relations: Of course, we have a plurality of
opinion in Iran and people have different opinions, but we have a single foreign policy,
and that is why foreign policy, according to [the] Iranian constitution, the general
framework of foreign policy is set by the leader so that we will not have domestic
squabbling over foreign policy.
If past is prologue, Khamenei and his conservative allies arent afraid to rein in
moderate politicians who might wander astray. Weve seen this before during the
reformist presidency of Mohammad Khatami, who was dubbed Ayatollah
Gorbachev after winning the election of 1997. During his tenure, a fifth column
was out for blood and thwarted his every move, leading Khatami to quip that his
government survived on average one national crisis every nine days.
For instance, after Khatami called for a dialogue among civilizations with the
West in a groundbreaking CNN interview early in his first term, the Supreme
Leader roundly rejected such a dtente. Talks with the United States have no
benefit for us and are harmful to us, said Khamenei. We dont need any talks or
relations with the United States. The regime of the United States is the enemy of
the Islamic Republic.
In the end, it was Khatami not Khamenei or his disciples who paid a high
price for such adventurism: During his term, reformist newspapers
including Jamee, Salam, and Neshat were banned; one of Khatamis closest
political advisors was gunned down; and 24 Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps
commanders issued a public letter accusing him of leading Iran into anarchy.
Lets also remember that it was Rouhani who resigned as Irans chief nuclear
negotiator after clashes with the newly elected hard-line President Mahmoud
Ahmadinejad back in 2005; reports indicate that the Supreme Leader actively
supported Ahmadinejads candidacy. With reformists and moderates out of
fashion, Rouhani quickly lost his mandate.
So Rouhani and Zarif just like their predecessors are on a retractable leash.

2. Iran needs a deal.

Sure, but how badly? In any negotiation, cutting a deal requires not just urgency
but that both sides have clocks that are in sync or closely coordinated. The
American sense of time is measured in four- and eight-year increments, driven by
elections and politics; the Iranian clock is much more open-ended. Part of that
flexibility has to do with the fact that however pressed those who want a deal may
feel, Iran has demonstrated remarkable capacity to resist economic pressure and
to adjust to the imposition of sanctions and declining oil prices. The sanctions
may have brought the mullahs to the table, but that doesnt mean that they can
force a deal. Tehran has been nimble in finding loopholes to lessen the bite of
sanctions, and Khameneis economy of resistance is more than just a
revolutionary talking point.
The New York Times in August reported that the Islamic Republic found a way
around the sanctions in exporting petroleum products to China and other Asian
countries. According to Iranian customs data, the country in recent months has
exported 525,000 barrels a day of the ultralight oil, known as condensates, over
two times more than it did a year ago. In the last three months, the sales have
generated as much as $1.5 billion in extra trade a rate of about $6 billion a year
based on Iranian trade figures and market prices. Not bad for a country under
sanction. And later that month, Tehran and Moscow also inked a framework for a
$20 billion oil-for-goods deal.
There are new indications that Irans economy is rebounding however
slightly. According to CNBC, in the second quarter of 2014, Irans GDP was in the
plus column for the first time in 2 years, rising 2.5 percent.
3. Interests are more important than pride.
Maybe. But honor and dignity are hard to bargain with.
The supreme leader has consistently
coupled the nuclear file with the Islamic
Republics perennial quest for dignity.
And its personal for Khamenei.
The supreme leader has consistently coupled the nuclear file with the Islamic Republics
perennial quest for dignity. And its personal for Khamenei.
An internal IAEA document that was prepared in 2009 detailed an April 1984
high-level meeting at the presidential palace in Tehran in which Khamenei
then president of Iran championed a decision by then-Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to launch a nuclear weapons program. According
to the account, Khamenei said that this was the only way to secure the very
essence of the Islamic Revolution from the schemes of its enemies, especially the
United States and Israel, and to prepare it for the emergence of Imam Mehdi.
The former president further declared that a nuclear arsenal would serve Iran as
a deterrent in the hands of Gods soldiers.
Fast-forward to 2014 and, after a decade of failed nuclear talks and even a fatwa
against nuclear weapons, Khamenei is still publically toeing the same line
keyed now toward maintaining a strategic nuclear hedge under the auspices of a
robust civil nuclear energy program. In May, he described the stakes: Logic and
reason command that for Iran, in order to pass through a region full of pirates,
needs to arm itself and must have the capability to defend itself. Todays world
is full of thieves and plunderers of human honor, dignity, and morality who are
equipped with knowledge, wealth, and power, and under the pretense of
humanity easily commit crimes and betray human ideals and start wars in
different parts of the world.
The primacy of the nuclear file also has trickled down to the Iranian street. When
Gallup asked ordinary citizens whether it was worth continuing to develop the
Islamic Republics nuclear power program back in early 2013, almost two-thirds
or 63 percent said yes.
This narrative explains why Tehran has chosen to suffer under the punishing
weight of economic sanctions. According to an estimate by the Carnegie
Endowment in 2013, the mullahs nuclear program has cost the country more
than $100 billion in lost oil revenue and foreign investment alone. To put that in
perspective: Before the most recent round of oil-export restrictions in 2012, the
Congressional Research Service estimated that oil revenue generated about 20%
of Irans GDP, about 80% of its foreign exchange earnings, and about 50% of its
government revenue. Those figures have surely made a dent in the economy, but
not in the nuclear ambition to attain an industrial-size uranium enrichment
capacity.
Thus far, the odyssey for pride, honor, and dignity has clearly trumped national
interests in this equation.

4. The Rolling Stones are always right.

Not this time. Sometimes you really will hold out for what you want, not just what
you need.

U.S. negotiators were hoping to find that elusive middle ground on which they
might construct the kind of balance of interests required for a sustainable deal. It
may well be that the constraints of domestic politics and particularly now with
a Republican-controlled Congress make it nearly impossible to close an
agreement. But there may well be something even more fundamental at work: a
strategic disconnect.
We cant end Irans nuclear capacity, so we are working to constrain it through
buying time. Iran is trying to preserve as much of that capacity as possible while
easing and eliminating economic pressure. And Iran is also playing with and for
time. Theres really no end state, either on the nuclear issue or sanctions relief.
And thus any comprehensive agreement is, by definition, interim at best. That
just doesnt add up in todays highly charged and suspicion-laden political
environment, no matter how moderate and well-intentioned the negotiators
themselves may be.

The fact is that Iran knows what it wants: to preserve as much of its nuclear
weapons capacity as possible and free itself from as much of the sanctions regime
as it can. The mullahs see Irans status as a nuclear weapons state as a hedge
against regime change and as consistent with its regional status as a great power.
That is what it still wants. And thats why it isnt prepared yet to settle just
for what it needs to do a deal. Ditto for America. And its hard to believe that
another six months is going to somehow fix that problem.

kish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan more and more resembles the drunken
uncle who shows up to Thanksgiving dinner uninvited and makes everyone
uncomfortable with his verbal bombshells. On Monday, Nov. 24, the conservative
Muslim attended a womens justice summit in Istanbul and declared that women
arent equal to men.

Certain work, Erdogan said, goes against womens "delicate nature," and "their
characters, habits, and physiques are different" from mens.

"Our religion [Islam] has defined a position for women: motherhood," he said.

He then went on to blast feminists, accusing them of not understanding their role
in society.
"Some people can understand this, while others cant," he said. "You cannot
explain this to feminists because they dont accept the concept of motherhood."

Erdogan tried using the Quran to advance his point, saying, "Paradise lies at the
feet of mothers," which ended up just turning into an awkward reflection on the
role of his mother in his own family.

"I would kiss my mothers feet because they smelled of paradise," he said. "She
would glance coyly and cry sometimes."

Those comments came on the heels of a recent claim that Muslims, not
Christopher Columbus, first discovered the Americas.
Though Turkey has a secular constitution, Erdogans feelings on feminism dont
exactly come as a surprise. He has a history of trying to incorporate his religious
values into law, proposing limiting abortion rights and access to birth control, for
example. He also once said that every Turkish woman should give birth to three
children; and in July, one of his top ministers said women should resist laughing
in public.
The feminists present at Mondays speech probably had a tough time avoiding
that temptation.

Russia to provide Mi-35 helicopters to Pakistan

In an exclusive interview, Russian envoy to Pakistan Alexey Dedov says Russian Defense Minister
Sergey Shoygu will soon visit Islamabad. Russia will provide Pakistan Mi-35 helicopters to strengthen its
counterterrorism efforts.
In an exclusive interview with Radio Pakistan's correspondent Javed Khan Jadoon, the Ambassador of
the Russian Federation Alexey Dedov said the deal between Pakistan and Russia will help combat
terrorism. He said politically the deal has been approved; however, further negotiations on details of
political-commercial contract are in progress.
The ambassador also said that Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu will soon visit Islamabad and
his agenda of talks with Pakistani counterparts also includes the sale of defense equipments to Pakistan.
Regarding Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Alexey Dedov said Russia is actively involved in
the process of accession of Pakistan to the organization as a full member. He hoped that at next Summit
meeting, scheduled to take place in July next year in Russia, full member status will be awarded to
Pakistan. He said the documentary work in this regard has already been completed.
He said Russia intends to resolve Afghan conflict during its Chairmanship of SCO. He expressed hope to
succeed in bringing sustainable peace in the region through concerted and collaborative efforts of
Afghanistan and the countries of the region.
Russia and Pakistan are already engaged on the matter and fruitful meetings have taken place recently in
this regard. He said besides terrorism, drug trafficking which stems from Afghanistan is also an area of
concern.
Ambassador Dedov said Russia fully supports Chinese plan of developing Silk Route, which also includes
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. He said Russia is interested in various energy related projects
including CASA-1000, development of Gwadar Liquefying Facility and construction of pipeline between
Gwadar and Nawabshah.
The Russian Ambassador said Pak-Russia Intergovernmental Commission's meeting is scheduled to take
place in Moscow on 26th of this month, which will give new impetus to our bilateral economic cooperation.
He said bilateral trade volume of the two countries does not coincide with the actual potential and plenty
of room exists which needs to be tapped.
He said a Russian parliamentary delegation is also ready to participate in Asian Parliamentary Assembly
meeting in Lahore.
Russia will provide Pakistan Mi-35 helicopters to strengthen its counterterrorism efforts.
In an exclusive interview with Radio Pakistan's correspondent Javed Khan Jadoon, the Ambassador of
the Russian Federation Alexey Dedov said the deal between Pakistan and Russia will help combat
terrorism. He said politically the deal has been approved; however, further negotiations on details of
political-commercial contract are in progress.
The ambassador also said that Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoygu will soon visit Islamabad and
his agenda of talks with Pakistani counterparts also includes the sale of defense equipments to Pakistan.
Regarding Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), Alexey Dedov said Russia is actively involved in
the process of accession of Pakistan to the organization as a full member. He hoped that at next Summit
meeting, scheduled to take place in July next year in Russia, full member status will be awarded to
Pakistan. He said the documentary work in this regard has already been completed.
He said Russia intends to resolve Afghan conflict during its Chairmanship of SCO. He expressed hope to
succeed in bringing sustainable peace in the region through concerted and collaborative efforts of
Afghanistan and the countries of the region.
Russia and Pakistan are already engaged on the matter and fruitful meetings have taken place recently in
this regard. He said besides terrorism, drug trafficking which stems from Afghanistan is also an area of
concern.
Ambassador Dedov said Russia fully supports Chinese plan of developing Silk Route, which also includes
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. He said Russia is interested in various energy related projects
including CASA-1000, development of Gwadar Liquefying Facility and construction of pipeline between
Gwadar and Nawabshah.
The Russian Ambassador said Pak-Russia Intergovernmental Commission's meeting is scheduled to take
place in Moscow on 26th of this month, which will give new impetus to our bilateral economic cooperation.
He said bilateral trade volume of the two countries does not coincide with the actual potential and plenty
of room exists which needs to be tapped.
He said a Russian parliamentary delegation is also ready to participate in Asian Parliamentary Assembly
meeting in Lahore.