By Mamuka Tsereteli
Newly emerging geopolitical and economic realities are dictating an increased focus on developing the land transportation corridor between Asia and Europe. Asian producers and European importers are seeking faster ways of delivering business orders to European consumers at competitive prices, while there is also an increased flow of goods from Europe to Asia. Maritime routes are cheap but slow, and there is a growing competition between different land transportation options from China, India, Pakistan and other countries via Central Asia to Europe. One of them is a multimodal transportation option from Central Asia through the South Caucasus to the Black Sea or Turkey and beyond to Europe. Regional leadership and U.S. and EU support is required for it to succeed.
BACKGROUND: Europe is the
largest trading partner for Asian producers. For example, the China-EU
bilateral trade in goods reached €428 billion in 2013. EU exports to China
increased by 2.9 percent to reach a record €148.1 billion. EU exports have
nearly doubled in the past five years, contributing to a rebalancing of the
trade relationship. China is the EU’s main supplier, with €279.9 billion worth
of goods in 2013. In general, with rising purchasing power in China, India and
other large and small countries in Asia, a larger trade in goods between Europe
and Asia can be expected. These developments increase the potential of
bilateral trade exponentially and, therefore, require additional transport
options.
Current transportation options
include the most cost effective transportation from Eastern China via sea,
crossing the Indian Ocean, and then through the Suez Canal to Europe. As of
today, this is the preferred way of transporting goods from China. But while
this is the cheapest route, it is also the most time consuming, taking at least
40 days. A wide range of goods and products require faster delivery at
competitive prices, hence the necessity of the shorter transportation options.
One traditional route with a shorter delivery time is crossing from China into
Russia and reaching Europe via the Trans-Siberian Railway; but this is not the
best export option for the rapidly developing Central and Western Chinese
provinces due to geography and distances.
A much more attractive land
route for reaching Europe from China is a railway connection with Central Asia
and beyond to Russia. Trains using the Chongqing-Xinjiang-Europe international
railway network take just under 20 days to get to Europe, roughly twice as fast
as cargo ships sailing from China’s east coast ports. The railway passes
through Xi’an, Lanzhou, Urumqi and the Alataw Pass, where it crosses the border
into Kazakhstan. It then continues through Russia, Belarus and Poland into
Germany.
China’s rapidly developing Xinjiang
region is also looking for export options via Central Asia. Urumqi, the
provincial capital, is more than 3,100 kilometers (1,920 miles) from Beijing,
while Kashgar, the westernmost Chinese city and historically a major Silk Road
trading hub, is nearly 4,400 kilometers from the Chinese coast. It is natural
that producers from Xinjiang are looking at transport options via Central Asia
for shipping their goods to European markets. Kazakhstan is becoming major
transit hub in growing trade between Western China and Europe. The recently
developed railway connection from the Khorgos border crossing to the Zhetygen
terminal near Almaty will facilitate larger cargo traffic between Xinjiang and
Central Asia and beyond. In August Kazakhstan commissioned the new
Zhezkazgan-Shalkar-Beineu and the Arkalyk-Shubarkol rail links with a total
length of more than 1,200 km, 17 major stations and 31 junctures. These new
railroads will be a shorter route to get from the East to the Caspian and
further to the Caucasus and Europe, while making it possible to move rail cars
eastward all the way to the Lianyungang port on the Chinese Pacific coast.
India’s interest in Central
Asian markets and transit for Indian goods is also growing. Currently some
products are shipped via Pakistan and Afghanistan to Central Asia and beyond by
tracks, demonstrating a powerful transportation option even in the current
security environment, and it promises to grow exponentially when conditions are
improved and additional elements of infrastructure are in place. The Central
Asian transportation network was a key element of the so called Northern
Distribution Network (NDN), used to supply U.S. troops in Afghanistan. Russia’s
railway system and Latvia’s port of Riga were part of the NDN as well, as was
the South Caucasus transportation system, both connected to Central Asia.
Reversed cargos associated with the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan have
created a good precondition for commercializing cargo transportation from
Afghanistan and most other countries of South Asia.
IMPLICATIONS: Currently,
options exist for railway cars to continue from Central Asia through Russia into
Europe, as well as two alternative options for linking world markets by
bypassing Russia. One option is to ship cargos to Iran, and then to Turkish or
Iranian ports. As of today, Iran provides transit mostly for cargos originating
in Central Asia. Over 12 million tons of goods were transited via Iran in the
past Iranian calendar year, which ended on March 20, 2014 – a 4 percent rise on
year on year basis. Over 96 percent of the goods transited by roads, showing an
8 percent rise compared to the year ending in March 2013. The attractiveness of
the Iranian option for the auto shipments is determined by the very low cost of
diesel fuel due to Iran’s continued government subsidies.
The Central Asian states are
building a railway connection to Iran via Turkmenistan to potentially use the
railway connection from Iran to Turkey. The railroad will run from Uzen in
Kazakhstan through Bereket in Turkmenistan to the Gorgan in Iran, then onward
via Iran’s existing railroad system to Turkey, the Iranian Gulf ports, or to
the newly developing port of Chahabar on the Gulf of Oman. Chahabar is of great
interest to India as an access point to Central Asia, and possibly even to
Europe via the Caucasus and the Black Sea. This Port already serves as an
important export point for Afghanistan, competing with Gwadar port in Pakistan.
These developments clearly
present Iran as a competitor to other transportation options that bypass
Russia, but also bypass Iran – the multimodal transportation network from
Kazakhstan or Turkmenistan via the Caspian Sea through Azerbaijan, then to
Georgia’s Black Sea ports or Turkey’s transportation system to Europe and the
Mediterranean. The additional attraction of this option is that some cargos
could be shipped from the Port of Poti in Georgia via the Black Sea and the
Danube Channel to the countries of Eastern and Central Europe, or via a Viking
container train connecting the Black Sea through Ukraine and Belarus to the
Lithuanian port of Klaipeda. The overall security environment in the Black Sea
area, as well as security in Ukraine, will be a major factor in the viability
of these options. Instability in the Black Sea region spreading from Ukraine
may damage the perception of this transit corridor’s security.
It is clear that there will be fierce
competition for cargos between these diverse transportation networks. Russia
will try to maintain the leading role in transit for Asia-Europe trade.
Countries of Central Asia and the South Caucasus will need greater regional
cooperation and major international support to establish viable transportation
alternatives to the emerging transit options in Russia and Iran.
A regional effort is in place,
focused on developing the new elements of infrastructure facilitating
Asia-Europe trade. In addition to upgrading railway infrastructure in
Kazakhstan, this also includes the new railway system connecting Turkmenistan
to Afghanistan and then Tajikistan, which can facilitate regional trade, as
well as trade between these states and the rest of the world via Trans-Caspian
or Iranian connections. This also includes upgrading port facilities on both
sides of Caspian Sea – Aktau and Turkmenbashi on the Eastern shore, and
Baku/Alat on the Western shore. Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey are finalizing
construction of the Baku-Tbilisi-Kars railway, which will ensure delivery of
rail cars all the way from China to Turkey’s Mediterranean ports, or directly
to Europe by railway. Port facilities are under active development on Georgia’s
Black Sea coast, including an upgrade of the existing terminals, as well as
plans for developing new ones. There are also ongoing upgrades to the road
systems in both Georgia and Azerbaijan.
In addition to infrastructure
development, there are clear signs of greater coordination between the transit
countries. Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Turkey – in the framework of
the so called Silk Wind project – have agreed to create a common customs and
tariff structure for container trains shipped from China to Europe. The railway
companies of Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, and Georgia have also agreed on a common
tariff on grain and liquefied petroleum gas from Kazakhstan to Georgia. As a
sign of greater collaboration between Georgian and Azerbaijani railways,
container block trains resumed regular operations in July 2014 between Baku and
the Black Sea port of Poti twice a week, allowing containers to move from the
Caspian port to the Black Sea port in about 30 hours.
All these developments
strengthen the competitive position of Central Asia-South Caucasus
transportation corridor. But in order to compensate disadvantages of the
multimodal nature of the transportation between railway and maritime
operations, more must be done by the transit countries to reduce costs and
transit time. That will require harmonizing tariffs and border crossing
procedures for an entire range of cargos for containers, as well as other
cargos, with the common aim of increasing the competitiveness of all of the
corridor’s transit countries.
CONCLUSIONS: At least two
elements are needed for the Central Asia-South Caucasus transportation system
option to succeed: 1) strong regional cooperation between all transit countries
and, 2) strong support for security and stability in the region by the major
actors interested in the success of this corridor. The regional countries and
their governing elites need to realize that a large scale presence and interest
from international actors such as China, India, the EU, as well as the
commercial interests of producers, global traders and consumers from Europe,
Asia and the U.S. will facilitate greater interest in stability and security in
Central Asia and the South Caucasus.
Greater traffic can increase
stability for the transit countries, while strengthening their sovereignty and
economic and political independence. China’s and the EU’s interest in the
functioning of this corridor is a strong factor contributing to its potential
success, but it is the U.S. that has a unique ability and experience to
facilitate regional cooperation through pro-active diplomacy, as it
demonstrated during Caspian energy developments. Currently functioning
infrastructure that allows hydrocarbons from the Caspian region to be shipped
to European markets is a vivid demonstration of the success of U.S. policies in
the late 1990s and early 2000s. The countries of the region should step up
their own diplomatic efforts to generate support from the U.S. and other state
and commercial actors. Concerted efforts by countries in Central Asia and the
South Caucasus and their international partners, including the U.S., can make
these regions a primary transit route for Asia-Europe trade. By linking two
major economic power centers of the world and by harmonizing multiple
interests, this transportation network will facilitate global and regional
stability.
Mamuka Tsereteli
is Research Director of the Central Asia Caucasus Institute, Johns Hopkins
SAIS.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий