Ukrainian Punishers Receive Orders in English at UAF Training Camp

Translated by Ollie Richardson for Fort Russ

31st March, 2016

Donbass.center

The training camp is located in Melitopol, which is located near the border of the Kherson region.

If you look closely at the video, you can see that the UAF  are being trained by NATO specialists and mercenaries.

According to Aleksey Zhuravko, the UAF are being trained by the so-called Islyamov battalions - mercenaries from the Turkish group "Grey wolves" - in Kherson.

     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
                                                 

       Follow us on Twitter!
                             

             Donate!

US's Kangaroo Court Foiled: Serbia's Seselj Acquitted of all Charges

March 31st, 2016 - Fort Russ News - 

By: Joaquin Flores, editor - 

Today, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) surprised many today with its announcement of the verdict of the leader of the Serbian Radical Party Vojislav Seselj - he was acquitted of all charges, with the court finding no criminal wrong doing on his part. He was accused of financing, managing, and supporting the Serb volunteer units and inciting ethnic hatred during the wars in Croatia and Bosnia in the early 1990's. His trial and imprisonment had long been a focus of Serbia's heated internal political scene, which is split over the issue of European integration and NATO, or increased ties with the Eurasian Union and the CSTO. Seselj is seen as a symbol of Serbia's resistance to foreign military and economic domination.

His acquittal comes as a surprise, not because of the strength of the evidence against him, but indeed the opposite. Previous convictions of other Serbs had been carried out by just as much evidence, which is to say, very little. 

The trial of Vojislav Seselj

Unlike many of the others accused by the Hague Tribunal, Seselj did not hide from the court, but turned himself in to the Hague 10 days after the drawing up of the charges against him on 24 February 2004. Seselj wanted to defend his innocence in court and turn the trial into a trial against the Hague Tribunal. The prosecution lasted for 11 years and the Hague Tribunal has failed to provide conclusive evidence of Seselj's guilt. In 2014, Seselj was freed for health reasons (cancer), but proceedings against him continued. Vojislav Seselj had no plans to attend today's sentencing, as he believes that from a moral perspective he already defeated the Hague Tribunal a long time ago. Seselj's defiance of the ICTY proceedings often took place at the proceedings themselves, and these now famous - intelligent and often humorous -  indictments of the entire proceedings and indeed the entire Atlanticist legal order were recorded on film, having now become a component of popular Seselj lore and canon.

Intrigue and controversy behind his early release

His early release in November 2014 also came as a surprise, at a politically sensitive time in Serbia. Seselj had consistently maintained his innocence, and questioned the grounds of his arrest and the legitimacy of the entire procedure for the duration of his detention, pre-trial procedures, and trial. He voluntarily surrendered in 2004, and used his platform not only to prove effectively that the charges against him were false, but to ridicule and mock the criminality and incompetence of the court itself. 

The best theory behind his early release relates to Russia and the ongoing conflicts in the world which involve both the US and Russia at seemingly opposite ends, as well as the Color Revolution/Spring tactic. It is clear that the US has the most clout over the proceedings of the ICTY, as the court itself is widely viewed as a kangaroo court where the prosecution and the judges work on the same side, to arrive at a politically pre-determined verdict, on the foundation of victor's justice. Both the US and Russia see Seselj as a potential game changer for Serbian politics, but have opposing goals in mind. 

Both players understand that the actions of Seselj will figure into the stability and legitimacy of the present Serbian government of the Progressive Party. We must recall that the role of Russian doctors claiming an illness is not new; this was used with Milosevic's case, in failed attempts to have him released from prison due to his illness. There then came some coherent evidence that Milosevic's early death was brought about directly by the ICTY or its handlers, as Milosevic's defense strategy was prevailing over the kangaroo court at the Hague, even with all mechanisms stacked in its own favor. 

There is little reason to conclude that the US would have agreed to the release of Seselj if it was not part of some compromise or deal with the Russians, who provided both the diplomatic framework and medical justifications for his early release in November 2014. That means that to understand this, we cannot compartmentalize this case, and instead look at this as part of a larger global conflict, which involves live-fire conflicts in Ukraine and Syria. 

Seselj's release in November can then be seen as part of a larger negotiation connected with ceasefires or prisoner exchanges, but also in the context of any aim to destabilize Serbia. 

But it would also be an error to view this entirely in terms of Russians having some interest in his release, with the Americans entirely wanting him to be imprisoned. Rather, the US also had an angle in releasing Seselj. What was it?

The US and Russia both wanted Seselj released

Vucic is sitting in two chairs, and finds himself in a unique situation, but one similar to both Yanukovych of Ukraine and Assad of Syria. The facts and circumstances which have emerged tend strongly to confirm the view that Vucic is no longer seen by the West as someone who can remain at the head of the government. Despite his gestures, which are fiercely opposed by the fractured nationalist and patriotic bloc, he has not made significant progress in reducing Serbia's sovereignty in a number of key areas such as NATO and the EU. Furthermore, as the US has decided to move into a failed state model for the 2nd world countries of certain regions, it is likely that the West Balkans is such a region, for reasons relating both to Serbia's strategic culture and Serbia's strategic use of culture, energy markets, and geopolitical alliances. 

Stability and prosperity for certain regions do not fit into the US grand-strategy, and the US seeks a relative advantage by setting back others in areas where they found themselves unable to get ahead. This is difficult for many Serbians to understand, because Vucic has long been vilified for his attempts at being in the good graces of the West. 

It was hoped by the Atlanticist powers behind Seselj's early release that he would immediately engage in the politics he has been known for: resounding attacks against a corrupt and entrenched political establishment led by Prime Minister Vucic, which he views as bent on undermining the sovereignty and security of Serbia. Instead, Seselj frustrated them, and has refrained from attacking Vucic, who many see as farther from Seselj politically, and contrary to this did two things, which seem contradictory and frustrated the Atlanticist plot. He began attacking Serbia's now deposed political establishment of the Democratic Party, which is viewed by nearly everyone  as being closer to the West than Vucic, even if by a degree or two. At the same time he did something entirely at odds with that - in attacking President Nikolic, who is nevertheless viewed by the public as being closer politically, even if by a degree, both to Seselj and to Russia. 

The US is attempting to forge a liberal + nationalist alliance in Serbia, a standard practice for them in the Color/Spring tactic. The details vary in each country, based on profound differences rooted in culture, politics, and history. In Ukraine, nationalists were anti-Russian and saw themselves as a continuation of European identity, even where at times this clashed with Europe's new liberal self-conception and instead relied on older continental incarnations of European power such as the Third Reich. In Serbia it is quite different, nationalists are pro-Russian and specifically anti-EU and anti-NATO. Furthermore, Serbia has already experienced a decidedly pro-Western coup in the past, using the Color/Spring tactic. This means that any tactic, applied again to Serbia, must take into account and figure around those points which Serbians may already be inoculated against. 

The credibility of Seselj and the Serbian nationalist's reverence for him was sought by the Atlanticists to be used as a tool against the government of Vucic. 

One of the main operating and proven ideas is that vague or open ended political slogans can be co-opted for any purpose by those with better power at projecting their message, and connecting the dots for the masses.  In other words, without tremendous media power, one cannot control the consequences of their own statements if vague or when made with provisos, which part of that statement would be redacted,  or conversely which part highlighted and echoed, and so on.

Any vague 'anti-Vucic' remarks that Seselj was encouraged to make, can then have its conclusions drawn out and solutions created by other nationalist leaders with Western backing. 

The Russians on the other hand were several moves ahead on this play. They saw that while Seselj's release would invigorate Serbian nationalism, that this could easily and most naturally be directed towards its own aims, with a much less convoluted plot when compared to the American. Instead, Seselj was advised, or naturally intuited based on his own knowledge of realpolitik, to attack the liberals (in power for the decade following the bombing of Belgrade) and Nikolic, the current president. This clearly gave Vucic a pass, who in response elevated Seselj somewhat officially to that of the 'Third force' in Serbian politics. 

                              pro-Seselj demonstration

Why Vucic must go

Presently the government of Serbia is trying to conduct its most balanced foreign policy since the Yugoslavia period. This means that it conducts diplomacy and international dealings in a way that reflects the realities of Russia's resurgence as well as the EU's prominent though waning economic  clout, combined with US military superiority in the Balkans through NATO, including Camp Bondsteel in the occupied Kosovo region of Serbia. 

This attempt at a balanced policy creates political problems at home, with US and EU backed liberals - a minority numerically but with ties to finance, media, and light industry - seeing the Progressive Party government of Vucic as swerving dangerously off track from EU ascension, and wary of the government's economic deals with China, Russia, and the increasing Russian presence in Serbia's deep state, security apparatus, military agreements, observer status in CSTO, Serbia's refusal to play the sanctions game against Russia, and the general refusal to engage in the US dominated political narrative of 'isolated Russia'.

Serbian patriots, that is 'nationalists', on the other hand, have an opposite view. They see Vucic's conciliatory tone on subjects like Kosovo, attempts to woo foreign EU investment, as well as his statements and official policy of EU integration (though in fact there has been little if any forward movement), as well as making a passage and tax deal that favors NATO's presence, as evidence that he is against Serbia's sovereignty and is actively working with Serbia's moral and geostrategic opponents. 

The Serbian patriotic scene readily, and rightly, embraced both Assad of Syria and Gaddafi of Libya, and supported their resistance to the Color/Spring tactic, and understood it in such terms. What was absent from their collective analysis, or rather, what has failed to be underscored as it relates to Serbia, is that Vucic is in a similar situation in certain important aspects, as was Yanukovych or Assad.  In the case of Assad - there were, at the beginning, very real 'pro-Syrian' objections to Assad's governance, primarily rooted in the concessions and relationship that he built with western powers in the years directly following the US invasion of Iraq. 

Not only since the collapse of the USSR, but more so after the US's middle-east incursions, Syria sought branding as one of the 'moderate' countries in the region, which agreed to social and economic reforms in Syria, bringing in further IMF debt and forfeiting important social-government work to foreign controlled NGO's, who eventually won the hearts and minds of a sizable minority of the country's population, leading to the formation of the coalition and the FSA. 

It has been a failure on the part of Serbians to understand that prior to being scheduled for offing, Assad had attempted to maintain balanced relations with Russia, China, and Iran on the one hand, and Turkey, the EU, the US and other players on the other. While Vucic has committed to policies which critics are right to point out, the alternative supported by the west involving his removal would result in not only an end to the Progressive Party government, but to the Serbian state itself. 

This last part is critical: Serbia is in a delicate position where it has the possibility of either gaining Republika Srpska and regaining Kosovo, while maintaining regions like Vojvodina, or by fracturing and shattering further, as part of a precursor to an actual conflict between devolving local powers and hostile regional states.

Seselj refused to play a role in the Color/Spring script

The Color/Spring tactic is an active and adaptive method. The organizations which move it are capable of self-awareness, meaning they are aware that there are active attempts to subvert or derail the tactic, and the tactic adapts to this threat as a living or sentient entity would. This means that the tactic has undergone several evolutions since it was first introduced many decades ago during the Cold War, to the point where it can even adapt to political mechanisms and movements (such as in Serbia) that are aware of its methods and tactics and have therefore built some level of immunity to it. 

That means that instead of using the public's relatively non-existent pro-Western and anti-Russian sentiments towards a catalyzed 'Majdan'-like spring/occupy/color tactic, another track is being taken. The idea for Serbia is to attack Vucic for his inability to make a coherent and uniform pro-Russian policy. The result of the attack is his desired downfall, and his replacement by an actually anti-Russian government, with the possibility of the dismantling of the state both in terms of territory and the military-security apparatus. 

Because Seselj apparently understood the plot that he was expected to play a part in, and saw the trap, he was able to avoid it. This caused the ICTY to call for his return, something which the government of Serbia was wise to gesture their unwillingness to cooperate with. Had they returned him, it would have meant the creation of an occupy/spring tent encampment at the steps of government offices, with the call for Vucic to step down. 

For these reasons, today's acquittal of Seselj is both a surprise and, just as his conviction would have been, a political maneuver on the part of the ICTY and its NATO backers, which analysts will be attempting to reconcile and explain in the coming period.

The best theory so far is this: Seeing that Vucic would not hand Seselj back months ago after the urging of the ICTY and complaints by Croatia, and would not even send him for today's verdict, the West would not further their position by convicting Seselj. In fact, Vucic's refusal to hand Seselj back after such a conviction would further bolster his credibility in the eyes of the fractured nationalist bloc, and would work against the West's aims to undermine his authority, and the project to remove Vucic from power through some popular protest-type movement, connected to next month's elections in Belgrade. By simply acquitting Seselj, Vucic cannot demonstrate his fealty to the Serbian cause by refusing to hand him over. Vucic has been robbed of this opportunity, even though it provides Seselj the legal guarantees required to position himself as a viable alternative candidate for the remainder of his career.

     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  

                                                 

       Follow us on Twitter!

                             

             Donate!

Instability in Turkey and the Cornering of Erdogan

March 31, 2016 -
Dimitris Konstantakopoulos, Katehon - 

Some hours before the Brussels terror attacks, on the other side of the Atlantic, a rather astonishing article was posted on the website of the ultra-hawkish and pro-Israeli American Enterprise Institute. It was written by a known neocon activist with strong ties (at least in the past, but probably also now) with Turkish Kemalists, Michael Rubin. Τhe article was entitled “Could there be a coup in Turkey?” In it, Turkish military are all but strongly advised to overthrow President Erdogan. The author assures them that they have nothing to fear from USA, NATO or Europe if they do it. He is also “describing”, for Erdogan and his closest advisors, a fate not so different than the fate of the overthrown Egyptian President Morsi.

This publication is not an isolated incident. On March 10th, two former US ambassadors in Turkey did not go as far as to suggest a coup against Erdogan, still they called him to “reform or resign”, as goes the title of their article published in the Washington Post. One of the writers, Mr. Edelman, belongs to the core of neoconservatism. He is believed to have contributed greatly, from the sidelines, to the emergence of Erdogan, when influential people in the USA were looking around for a more “accomodating” and “friendly” person to replace as head of the Islamists the ousted by the army PM Erbakan, too “original” and too “authentic”. As for the other co-author of the piece in Washington Post, Mr. Abravomitz, he avoided being identified too much with Neoconservatives, still his soul seems not to be very far from their positions.

The two writers are not limiting themselves to the – quite usual now in the international press - critiques of Erdogan's policy. They also address themselves clearly, if indirectly, to what remains of the kemalist currents inside the army. As they write in their article “the AK Party's heralded attempt to hold the military accountable for its undemocratic behavior was a show trial in which manufactured evidence served to implicate political opponents”.

Both articles are remarkable for their content, for the persons who sign them and for where they were published.

The neoconservative “state within the state”

The AEI was one of the main think tanks in the United States which prepared “ideologically” the invasion to Iraq and the war against the “axis of evil” the Bush government had initiated. To do it, it had taken, at the time, pretext of the terror attacks in New York on September 11th 2001. It used the political atmosphere, prevailing in the USA after the attacks to the Twin Powers, in order to shift radically the whole axis of the US policy in the Middle East. Such a shift could not, of course, but produce more chaos and more terror, as we can all see now on our TV screens.

Terror attacks are extremely helpful for people wishing to change policies, exactly because they provoke terror, disturbing the rational (or usual, better to say) way of thinking (?) of humans.

Mr. Rubin has been a very active neocon activist. Among other activities of his he worked with the notorious Office for Special Plans, created by Secretary Rumsfeld in the Pentagon, to prepare the invasion of Iraq and manage the situation afterwards. This Office is a very interesting example of the (formally legal) methods used by neocons to “hijack” USA and circumvent its normal, usual, institutional intelligence gathering and decision making processes. The same method was used in many other places, like in Paris, after the election of President Sarkozy, leading to the interventions in Libya and Syria. Even under Obama, neocons still handle a lot of influence in Washington and the administration itself. 

In fact neocons created an unofficial “state inside the state”. According to an article by Greg Miller, staff reporter in the Los Angeles Times (9.3.2004), the Director of the CIA himself, George Tennet, revealed during testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee,  that “a special intelligence unit at the Pentagon provided private prewar briefings to senior White House officials on alleged ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda without the knowlegde of the CIA Director”. Miller writes that this “disclosure suggests that a controversial Pentagon office played a greater role than previously understood in shaping the administration's views on Iraq's alleged ties to the terrorist network behind the Sept. 11 attacks, and that it bypassed usual channels to make a case that conflicted with the conclusions of CIA analysts”. (1)

Turmoil in Turkey

According to well informed diplomats, who have served many years in Washington and in Turkey, Mr. Rubin entertained close friendly relations with Turkish kemalist circles in the past, but those relations were shaken when he accused them of “betraying Israel”. Probably he remains now in contact with some of them. 

The publication of the article in the AEI website represents objectively first an open threat to Erdogan, second a direct encouragement to Turkish military who would like to get rid of their President and, also, to revenge him for what he did against Kemalists. It is very important as a signal and we cannot exclude that Rubin and the ambassadors emitted this signal in common with their Turkish friends. But of course there is some distance between sending signals and staging coups. Only time will tell us how long it is.

There are some formidable objects to the realization of such projects. First, the war against the Kurdish PKK has led to a tactical alliance between Kemalists and Erdogan. Second, the Turkish society is no more what it used to be. The reason the President did not get the majority he wanted last year is exactly the success of his own policy! By attacking and weakening seriously the traditional power of the Army in Turkey, Mr. Erdogan helped unleash social forces which turned in some cases against him, but which hardly would support a new military coup, if some in the Army have really the capacity to organize it. Third, nobody can be sure of the repercussions such a coup would really have, both in Turkey and regionally/internationally.

All that withstanding, nobody acquainted with Turkish history should not totally exclude the scenario of a coup. More the Turkish President will use authoritarian methods and more intolerant will show himself, more the range of social forces which want to get rid of him will be enlarged. On the other side, if he proves too soft on Kurds, he will alienate the Army.  

Between East and West

Like its bridges in Instanbul, Turkey is a country between Europe and Asia. Its leaders try, everyone in his own way, to balance between those two worlds and the two Turkish identities. Both Islamists and Kemalists are often torn apart because of such contradictions. They dream to be the best friend of the West in the East, but they want also to be the leaders and representatives of the Arabic and Muslim East to the West. It is difficult to achieve, especially in the context of constant wars against the “axis of evil” and of “Clash of Civilisations”.

Recently, Erdogan has seen both his Middle Eastern and his Kurdish policy collapse. If that was not enough, he took the suicidal decision to down the Russian jet, thus nearly destroying his “strategic depth”, to use  the term so much likes PM Davutoglu. In the concrete circumstances the real strategic depth of him was the nearly strategic relationship with Russia and his personal ties with Putin.

It remains a big question mark. He acted alone in deciding to down the jet or after having received a “green light”? And if he received such a “green light”, by whom and it what purpose?

More isolated than ever, after the downing of the Russian jet, Erdogan turned to Israel. But a rapprochement with Netanyahu poses also problems for him. One is ideological. The second is that Israelis ask for a price to be paid, in severing ties with Gaza Palestinians. They give him a tactical “gift”, but his concessions may prove of a strategic nature. He made already the same mistake, choosing tactics over strategy and ideology, when he decided to participate in western wars against Kaddafi and Assad and he paid already a heavy price for these choices.

As for neoconservatives in general, one would be foolish to believe that they have left the place because their plan A for Syria (toppling Assad, dismembering the country and destroying Hezbollah) has not succeeded, at least for the time being and after the Russian intervention. They are already looking for other ways to attain their strategic goals and they will go on trying to destabilize the whole region.

Neoconservatives have a huge advantage compared to their rivals. One may not like their goals, but they do have a clear strategy and they persist on that. Behind the Chaos they produce, there is an Iron, if terrible Order, one has to recognize it. Up to now, their opponents had not always a comprehensive vision, they were more objecting and protesting, than pursuing an alternative. And they are not always united.

____

(1) Some believe the same forces and the same methods were also used to instigate wars in Georgia and Ukraine. For those who like “conspiracy theories”, the method used to provoke and “direct” these crises has an astonishing similarity to the methods international Finance used to orchestrate the “European answer” to the financial crisis of 2008-9 (destroying Greece!) or to the refugee crisis of 2015 (again destroying Greece!).

Hid

     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
                                                 

       Follow us on Twitter!
                             

             Donate!

Kedah in the Pan-Eurasian Great Game of the 21st Century - A Geopolitical Analysis

March 31, 2016 -

Wan Fayhsal, Katehon - 

There’s something big going on in Kedah at present. International events have rekindled the prospect of Kedah – which sits at the tip of Malaysian Peninsular – to be one of the most important pivots for Pan-Eurasian integration.

The removals of sanction on Iran by the United States of America (the US) and the potential naval escalations in South China Sea have ramped up Beijing’s geo-economic diplomacy across Africa and Asia.

Beijing’s ultimate goals are: (1) to secure strategic access to natural resources and (2) to preserve its trade routes by way of diversifying its transportation channels in reducing potential risk such as unwanted blockades or unforeseen security threats that could falter its day-to-day trade.

To surmount these challenges, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has increased their presence in these strategic areas and channels by way of financing and constructing massive logistical projects that are beneficial to both China and the host countries – a win-win situation. Malaysia especially Kedah also falls within this strategic scheme.

For China, Kedah as a state in the Federation of Malaysia is not that crucial. Rather it is Kedah as the gatekeeper of the northern route of the Strait of Malacca that matters the most to its geo-economic interest.

The strait, which begins at the mouth of Andaman sea, is a narrow maritime chokepoint, sandwiched between Island of Sumatra and the contiguous Malaysian Peninsular. It the past, the Strait of Malacca has traditionally served both the Eastern and the Western nations in vibrant economic and cultural exchanges. But in this modern age and time, the strait is not only able to maintain its relevance but also becoming more indispensable as many East Asian countries are highly dependent on the Strait of Malacca to secure safe passages for their vessels to connect with the Western hemisphere. Such over-reliance has become a real geopolitical sore point especially to the fastest growing economy in the world – China.

Former Chinese premiere Hu Jin Tao had even coined the term “Malacca Dilemma”to reflect not only the importance of the strait but also the potential security setback for China. It is evident as the strait is the most important economic artery for China and the East Asian countries in securing almost 75% of their energy needs sourced from the oil-rich Middle East and Africa.

Malaysia due to its traditional custodian role for the Strait of Malacca has always been in the radar of China especially at this time and age when the Middle Kingdom is increasingly expanding their trade outreach to the whole world. Such endeavor presupposes seamless integration especially via the Sea Lines of Communication (SLOC) where the Strait of Malacca is one of the most important SLOC that straddles between the East-West divide.

Among all littoral states in Malaysia that are adjacent to the Strait of Malacca, it is Kedah that draws the critical attention from the policymakers in Beijing. They see Kedah as another potential addition to their strategic pivot in the region.

Why all of sudden Kedah is considered a potential pivot or more interestingly as a ‘zipper’ for China? Some of the answers could be glimpsed through Gwadar, Pakistan.

The first Pan-Eurasian zipper

Former President of Pakistan General Pervez Musharraf in his speech to inaugurate the groundbreaking ceremony of Gwadar Deep Sea Port in 2002 described the whole region of Pakistan as an economic funnel that opens up critical access to the land-locked Central Asia. He also described Pakistan as China’s nearest corridor to the West and the Middle East.

Being at the southern most tip of the funnel, Gwadar is not only serving the interest of Pakistan but also the whole region of Central Asia and China for their access to land-based route via the Karakoram highway as well as sea-based route of the SLOC that opens the door to the Middle East and Africa. Gwadar as a logistic and transportation hub that connects the sea with the land, really plays an important role for Pakistan as a funnel or in a more nuance metaphor – a ‘zipper’ for Pan-Eurasian integration.

The concept of zipper for Pan-Eurasian integration was first comprehensively analyzed by Andrew Korybko in his article ‘Pakistan is the Zipper of Pan-Eurasian Integration’, published by Russian Institute of Strategic Studies (RISS).

Korybko sees Pakistan as a very important transit point for energy routes flowing from the Middle East that can be distributed to the land-locked Central Asian states as well as China. Geo-strategically, Pakistan is linked to four important economic blocs: the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union, China, Iran, and South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC – stretches from Pakistan to Bangladesh with India as its important economic anchor). This made Pakistan, in the words of Korybko:

“Uniquely poised to zip together a variety of economic blocs, taking advantage of both its convenient geography and China’s grand investment vision to make it happen”

China sees this potential hence they took President Musharaff’s vision further by augmenting Gwadar’s role via the proposed China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) – a trans-Pakistan economic corridor which begins at the mouth of Persian Gulf where Gwadar lies, crossing the Karakoram highway and ends up at Kashgar, China.

Kedah might not have the same geographical connectivity of Gwadar-Karakoram-Kashgar but it sure does offer great potential – by linking southward to the Island nations of South East Asia and Oceania in helping them to be part of the larger contiguity of Pan-Eurasian integration.

Kedah could be made as an economic hub that receives goods and services from the South to be distributed in multimodal land-based routes to the East, North and West Asia.

Kedah’s potential is not only confined to the land-based route. In terms of SLOC, Kedah possessed two natural islands: the Langkawi Island – a world-renowned tourism destination and the Bunting Island that could be utilized not only as a mere economic purposes but also for defense intents. The two islands especially Langkawi, are fronting the mouth of Andaman Sea and naturally positioned as the gatekeeper to the Strait of Malacca – one of the busiest straits in the world.

Since Bunting Island is already connected to the mainland via a land bridge, Kedah could also be a gateway to the Andaman Sea and beyond by carrying the economic goods that are transported through the land route along the West coast of Malaysian Peninsular either via the trunk road of North South Expressway or the electrified double-tracking rail network.

As these infrastructures are already in place, Kedah is set to become an important logistical and transportation hub for the Malaysian Peninsular as well as for the island nations of Indonesia, Singapore, and Brunei in securing their access to the Eurasian super continent via the land route.

Existence of an alternative route will not only help to decongest the Strait of Malacca but also offer the possibility for cheaper transport options and will reduce the environmental impact by the thousands of ships sailing through the strait.

The zipper in ZIPY

From geo-economics perspective, the largest mega project in Kedah, which is Yan Petroleum Industrial Zone or better known as ZIPY in its Malay acronym has the biggest potential to follow the developmental trajectory of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) albeit in smaller scale.

It is no longer a speculation but a possible future.

The signing of the partnership agreement between Merapoh Resources Sdn Bhd (Merapoh) and China Energy H City Reality Investment Co. Ltd (China Energy)  – a company owned by the PRC government marked a major milestone to revive the delayed ZIPY project. It also opens other economic vistas which will not only benefits China and Malaysia, but the whole region of South East Asia and Oceania.

Since 2005, the government of Malaysia had already approved the plan for ZIPY in which Merapoh – a special-purpose vehicle (SPV), was given the sole exclusive right after obtaining the necessary licenses and work permits to develop the whole of ZIPY.

The agreement will give China Energy 70% stake in Merapoh subsequently making them as its major shareholder while the rest of the shares are in the hands of local party. Merapoh estimated the total investment in ZIPY to be roughly at USD 140 Billion (RM 520 Billion) – a herculean figure which would dwarf other mega projects in the country presently.

With ZIPY, Malaysia through Kedah will play a very significant role as the ‘zipper’ for the both landed and maritime Silk Road, “One Belt, One Road” in ASEAN region.

Kedah in the China-driven Silk Road

China is not only investing in the logistic and energy sector but also in the fisheries – as demonstrated in the recently signed Memorandum of Understanding between China-based Qingdao Lu Hai Feng Investment Co Ltd (Lu Hai Feng) and the Kedah State Development Corp (PKNK).

They will jointly develop international fisheries centre especially for tuna in South East Asia through the establishment of the Kedah Integrated Fishery Terminal (KIFT).  The Kedah state government itself has recognized the project as part of Maritime Silk Road. By acknowledging Beijing’s strategic trade master plan, the state government hoped that it would spur further investment from the Middle Kingdom into Kedah.

China-based Beijing Auto International Cooperation (BAIC) also has plans to make Malaysia a hub for its electric cars for the Southeast Asian market.

But ZIPY remains the the crown jewel of China’s economic pivot to Kedah.

According to Merapoh chairman Datuk Bistamam Ali, 8% of China's total need for refined oil – roughly equivalent to 350,000 barrels per day – and refined petroleum products will be supplied by ZIPY via its crude oil refinery and integrated petrochemical complexes.

Both complexes will be fully designed and built by China Huanqiu Contracting & Engineering Corporation (Liaoning), a subsidiary of China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) and China State Construction Engineering Complex and Storage Corporation (CSCFC) respectively.

China’s state-owned enterprises (SOEs) are not limited to the integrated complexes alone. Other key ZIPY infrastructure projects such as Multi-Purpose Marine Terminal, Floating Storage and Offloading Platforms, Crude Oil and Multi Products Interlinking Pipeline Systems as well as the Administrative and Staff Accommodation Complex will be built by the SOEs and financed by China state-owned banks such as The Import-Export Bank of China and Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC).

In short, the involvements of China’s SOEs throughout the project value chain especially in its financing and engineering, procurement, construction and commissioning (EPCC) aspects of ZIPY do mirror the development model of China’s involvement in CPEC.

The role of China National Petroleum Company (CNPC) is striking enough in CPEC. They not only secured the feedstock for their own-built refineries and petrochemical complexes from the Middle East, they would also be laying down network of pipelines that will connect these corridors and economic zones to China, Central Asia and potentially to Europe as well via the Russian existing infrastructures.

CNPC too is going to build the same oil and petrochemical infrastructures for ZIPY. Although Merapoh corporate website described the intermodal transfer through high-speed electrified trains as the mean to connect ZIPY to the east-coast of Malaysian Peninsular, the original idea to build the Trans-Peninsular Pipeline and Bachok Offshore Oil Terminal in the state of Kelantan that fronts the South China Sea thus far is not being clearly spelled out.  Although some details are absence, the ZIPY impact is real and no longer mere speculation.

Kedah and the String of Pearls

By now it should be clear to us that ZIPY is indeed another addition to China’s string of massive logistic and energy projects as envisioned by the Central Committee in their Maritime Silk Road master plan. The commitment exemplified by Beijing on ZIPY is not far off from, if not similar to, its commitment in CPEC.

The Chinese might have not acknowledged their possible long term plan to install their naval facilities at these sites but the prospect of ‘upgrading’ these special economic zones by co-opting them into their ‘String of Pearls’ – a network of military and commercial facilities along the SLOC of Indian and Pacific Ocean that connects China to resource-rich regions of Africa and Middle East – is not an impossibility.

Continuous instabilities surrounding the gulf of Aden, piracy threat in the Persian Gulf, revelation of India’s Indian Ocean Strategy and maritime provocation in the name of Freedom of Navigation Operation (FONOP) by the United States of America (the US) in South China sea – all these events have spurred China to aggressively secure their strategic interest along these SLOCs through various ways and means – ingeniously fronted by using their economic and business vehicles especially their SOEs. On the first glance it is seen as harmless. Yet it lethal in nature as Beijing’s strategic ambiguity is usually designed to cater to their economic and security interest in a parallel manner.

China’s strategic ambiguity in securing access to these SLOCs has not stopped them to build their first overseas military base in Djibouti – a clear signal of urgency to protect their assets and people at all cost. Such move was done in the middle of heightened tension in the recent war in Yemen that threatens the maritime chokepoint of Bab el-Mandeb – a gateway where nearly 13% of China’s oil imports pass through it.

When things are spiraling out of control, China will not hesitate to flex their muscles anywhere in the world in the name of their national security that extends far and beyond their traditional border. Similar case can be seen in their strategy of anti-access and area denial (A2/AD) that is supported by their controversial Nine Dash Line interpretation of maritime border in the South China Sea.

Such interpretation totally disregards the Euro-centric United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) yet China still insisted to make use of the Nine Dash Line in the name of their sovereign rights at sea. It provides ‘legitimacy’ for China to continue with their land reclamations to build artificial islands around the Spratly Islands. All of these drastic moves are actually meant for China’s regional security and defense although never declared officially by Beijing.

It’s not a surprise later if Kedah were to play the same role as these ‘pearls’. In case of Malaysia, Kedah is neither the first nor the last potential ‘pearl’. China is also building deep-sea ports for the state of Pahang (by upgrading the Kuantan Port) andthe state of Malacca. Both ports will be fronting the contentious SLOCs, where the former to the South China Sea and the latter to the Strait of Malacca. In the event of great emergency, both ports could be converted into the Chinese ‘pearls’.

But among all of China’s logistical investments in Malaysia it is Kedah that holds the most crucial role to China’s geopolitical future. Being the northern most state of Malaysian Peninsular, Kedah is destined geographically to play an important role not only for Pan-Eurasian integration of South East Asian and Oceania region but also for China’s defense as demonstrated by the String of Pearls/Maritime Silk Road dual-strategy of economic and defensive postures.

Strait of Malacca remains a critical pivot for China to control. It can be used by China as an insurance against the East Asian countries – the likes of Japan, South Korea or even the Philippines. These nations, being the strongest US allies in the region are traditionally viewed by Beijing as a collective threat to China’s national security. China is fully cognizant on how the US is leveraging unto these nations to further its containment strategy against China in South China Sea.

In the worst-case scenario, Kedah as a China’s pivot could be turned into a deterrence option against the potential skirmishes and provocations in the South China Sea. The Chinese via Kedah as their ‘pearl’, which stands guard at the entrance of the Strait of Malacca could be used to ‘strangle’ the SLOC of East Asian nations especially the Island nations of Japan and Philippines. Their risk exposure is greater than China as they are relying heavily on the Strait of Malacca for their energy and economic route to the West.

Such potential scenario will surely invite other global powers to counter check China in Kedah or in other parts of Malaysia especially the ever-vulnerable Borneo.

As one of the five-veto nations in the United Nations Security Council, China is a global power that has all the latitude to secure their interests globally by any means necessary. With massive financial and technology capability at their disposal, not to forger their burgeoning manpower, China can easily realize their vision and missions just like how they have committed to Gwadar in Pakistan.

Kedah is next in line for China. Through ZIPY, Malaysia will surely be inducted into this Great Game of 21st Century. It’s only a matter of time. Let’s pray our government is ready for this as at present we are nothing but a passenger or worse  – a spectator. 

     Follow us on Facebook!                                                  
                                                 

       Follow us on Twitter!
                             

             Donate!