China locked out of Russia's far
east By Dmitry Shlapentokh
Since the incorporation of the far east
into the Russian empire in the 17th century,
Russia has strived to keep the area under its
rule. This is why Moscow sent not just millions of
convicts there but also considerable funds to
build towns, factories and roads.
After
the end of the Soviet regime, nothing emerged in
its place. The economy in the far east has
declined and Moscow worries it will lose its
influence there.
It plans to avoid this by
luring foreign investment to the vast region,
which located between Lake Baikal in Eastern
Siberia and the Pacific Ocean includes the Far
Eastern Federal District - a huge area covering
6,215,900 square kilometers.
China seemed
to be the logical source. A few years ago, there
was a plan to rent part
of Vladivostok to China in exchange for funds.
However, that led to a public uproar and the plan
was quickly shelved. Another plan was for China to
have a lease to exploit the far east and Siberia's
mineral riches, with the use of Chinese labor. One
of the provisions of the treaty implied that
Chinese workers would return to China at the end
of the workday. Clearly utopian, it was also
consigned to the deep freeze.
Finally, a
recent plan was made to lease huge territories of
the far east for farming. With its shortage of
arable land and huge surplus labor force China
should have been the prime candidate. But China
was excluded. One could assume that Moscow is not
happy with a Chinese presence due to an apparent
dislike of Asians, or actually of any
non-Europeans.
Russians are hardly alone
in such Asian-phobia feelings; they are, indeed,
quite widespread in Europe. Nevertheless, racism
alone could hardly explain Moscow's decision. And
those who might replace the Chinese on this
agricultural project, at least according to the
plans, are also Asians: South Koreans,
Singaporeans, etc. Moscow has a continuous
predisposition towards Japan, and some Russian
politicians imply that Russia could even cede the
Kuril Islands, which Tokyo regards as a part of
Japan, if it would lead to a massive investment in
the far east and Siberia. The problem, thus, is
not with the Chinese as Asians but with China as
state.
Moscow clearly sees in China its
own past - a totalitarian/semi-totalitarian
society that used huge state controlled funds and
control over the political/social process to
enhance its economic/geopolitical interests in the
long run. This is what makes Moscow apprehensive
and why it prefers either capitalist market
countries, such as South Korea or those
authoritarian/corporate societies such as Vietnam.
These countries are seen as too small to change
the demographic and economic structure of the far
east in a way potentially dangerous for Moscow's
control over the area.
Still, the major
threat for Moscow could come not from ethnic
migrants, but from ethnic Russians in the area.
Moscow is aware of the alienation of local
populations from Moscow and the economic
degradation of the region. This led it to put
forward a new proposal that should parallel the
above-discussed plan to lease a considerable area
of arable land in the far east to Asian migrants.
The new plan implies the creation of a
government trust that would invest in the far
east's economy and provide some money for those
who would move to the region. Still, judging by
the response to the program on the Internet,
Russians, both those who live in the far east and
on the Russian mainland, are highly doubtful that
the plan would work.
The previous reason
people moved to the far east was because the
government provided direct investments in building
factories, roads and cities. Nothing of this is in
the project; in addition, the fact that the funds
would be managed by Moscow implies that most of it
would be stolen as in the past.
Furthermore, the money promised to those
who would move to the far east is miniscule. The
point is that those who engaged in the discussion
- and they clearly represent a view of quite a few
ethnic Russians in the far east - assume that
Moscow will not help. And the best way for far
easterners to solve their problem would be to
distance themselves from Moscow as much as
possible, for Moscow regards the far east as just
a colonial appendix.
This latent or not so
latent separatist feeling had percolated to local
law enforcement who are not anxious to deal with
locals in case of problems. Indeed, when a few
years ago a disturbance erupted in Vladivostok due
to problems created by Moscow, which had tried to
limit the export of Japanese cars, the Kremlin was
compelled to send riot police from the Russian
heartland because local law enforcement was not
anxious to tackle the problem with the needed
severity.
It is clear that in the case of
a major economic or political crisis - and there
are indications that Russia might, indeed, be
entering an era of instability, together with a
good part of the world - Moscow's power over the
far east could be loosened and the locals could
take advantage of this movement to seek
semi-independence/independence.
This plan
for a new geopolitical marriage would definitely
include Japan as a possible option; as a matter of
fact, during the demonstration in Vladivostok a
few years ago some of the demonstrators carried
posters saying "Give Vladivostok to Japan."
Still, in the case of China's continuous
economic rise and especially if it were to be
perceived as a natural economic/geopolitical
center of Asia or even the world, China could well
emerge as the natural center of gravitation. The
emergence of a new geopolitical order could happen
very quickly as the result of a serious economic
crisis.
Started in the West, it could
easily spread to Russia and shake the unstable
construction of Russian statehood, leading to its
disintegration, and where China and possibly other
nearby nations would vie for predominance in the
far east. And China could well emerge as a prime
candidate, and her dominion in the far east would
not depend on military pressure or even
demographic expansion. It would be related to a
deep alienation of the majority of ethnic
Russians, especially those in the far east, which
no Kremlin schemes could eliminate. And for most
of the residents of the area, all of these nations
might well look like a more preferable overlord
than Moscow.
Dmitry Shlapentokh,
PhD, is associate professor of history, College of
Liberal Arts and Sciences, Indiana University
South Bend. He is author of East Against West:
The First Encounter - The Life of Themistocles,
2005.
(Copyright 2012 Asia Times
Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please
contact us about sales, syndication and
republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
