Sudan’s Referendum and Chinese and American Interests

Published in Sohu
(China) on 12 February 2011
by (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Trevor Cook. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
Under the watch of the international community, the southern Sudanese independence referendum — six years in the making — was finally conducted on schedule from February 9-15. Sudan, which has been through over 50 years of civil war, now faces the possibility of being split up. This referendum could change the political map of Africa. Most observers expect that the referendum will result in the splitting of Sudan from one unit into two, one Sudan with Khartoum as its capital and another with Juba as its capital (the new country's name has not yet been decided) — with the southern country holding the majority of oil reserves.

If southern Sudan gains independence, it will affect China's oil interests. Since southern Sudan is more friendly with the West, it's possible that its independence could pose a challenge to the investments and cooperation of the China National Petroleum Company (CNPC)and other such Chinese resource companies in their territory. Nevertheless, China has been maintaining relations with the authorities of southern Sudan: It sent a delegation of observers during the referendum period and has made contacts with leaders and authorities in the region. Last December, a high-level delegation of southern Sudanese authorities visited China.

In Sudan, China has a base of foreign oil, where its painstaking business efforts over many years have been comparatively successful. Statistics show that currently, China has over 30,000 people from over 100 companies working in northern and southern Sudan and Darfur. They are participating in engineering projects, technical cooperation, investment, etc. Currently, China possesses the largest, most complete industrial chain in Sudan, covering every area including exploration, extraction, piping and refineries.

From the long-range perspective, the strategic significance of China’s increased investment in the area lies not only in the long-term development of Sudan's oil resources, but even more in the part this development plays in China's strategy of developing oil resources throughout the whole of Africa. China's process of African oil exploration extends gradually outward, with Sudan as a base. Of course, the dramatic rise in China's demand for natural resources, as well as its increasingly deep involvement in Africa's oil development, could result in conflicts with the interests of the United States.

In a book called Resource Wars: The New Landscape of Global Conflict, American futurist Michael T. Klare says that in the first decade of the 21st century, scarcity of resources will become the main source of international conflict. Future wars will certainly not erupt over differences in ideology; rather, they will break out over attempts to secure supplies of the most precious and ever-rarer natural resources. This is certainly not an instance of mere alarmism: Observing the exertions of China, the U.S., Japan and India as they contend for Sudan's oil, one can see the seeds of such a struggle.

The foreign media consider Africa an important central zone, and that the area between Sudan and Chad in this zone’s interior is its most important part. This has thus become another important battlefront since the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 — the source of a new cold war between Washington and Beijing over who will control oil supplies. Up to this point, Beijing has played its cards more astutely than Washington.

U.S.-Sudan relations have been tense for a long time. The U.S. listed Sudan as a state sponsor of international terrorism, and U.S. pressure on Sudan has never lifted for even a moment. From the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in 2005 to the 2011 referendum, this sequence of events has all been brought about under the dominance of U.S. influence.

On the surface, America's enthusiasm for the referendum seems to come from its humanitarian purpose of finally ending Sudan's civil war, but in fact, the U.S. hopes to gain greater oil interests in southern Sudan. The principal U.S. oil enterprises have known about Sudan's oil wealth since the 1970s, and since then, wars over control of oil have not ceased. Chevron invested $1.2 billion in southern Sudan; it was their oil extraction work that triggered Sudan's second civil war in 1983. Chevron became the target of multiple attacks and assassinations, and in 1984 it terminated its expansion plans.

In 1995, Chinese enterprises began arriving in Sudan and undertaking development. In 1997, the Greater Nile Petroleum Operating Company, in which CNPC holds a 40 percent stake, began developing the oil resources in southern Sudan that had been abandoned by Chevron and other multinational companies. Among these developments, the most important was CNPC's participation in the Block 1/2/4 oil project, and from these areas were built oil transport pipes that lead to Sudan Harbor on the coast of the Red Sea, from whence the oil is loaded onto ships and transported to China.

The global energy market is undergoing a profound change. As the international oil price comes close to breaking $100 per barrel, the U.S. government is beginning to view China's demand for energy as a new threat. Their anxiousness to act in this case is an attempt to compete with China, to get their share of the oil pie.

It cannot be denied that China is a latecomer to the struggle in the world oil market. Currently, the world's 20 largest oil companies have already monopolized 81 percent of the world's verified oil reserves. China's desire to share currently available oil resources will naturally face obstruction and restriction by many factors as it operates within a global oil framework painstakingly built over the last hundred years by Western nations. Furthermore, as China continues to seek oil resources, competition will inevitably unfold between it and the United States and other Western countries.


苏丹公投牵动中美利益
来源:《能源》杂志 作者:邱林
2011年02月12日08:11

在国际社会的关注下,酝酿了6年之久的苏丹南部公投终于在2011年1月9日至15日如期进行。在过去50年间经历频繁内战的苏丹,目前正面临可能分裂的命运。此次公投可能改变非洲地理及政治版图。多数观察家预计,此次公投的结果将使苏丹一分为二,形成以喀土穆为首都的苏丹和以朱巴为首都的苏丹南部(新国家名称未定)两个国家,而苏丹南部蕴藏着大部分石油资源。

如果苏丹南部独立,中国的石油权益将受到影响,因为苏丹南部比北部更亲西方,可能会考验中石油等中资公司在当地的投资与合作。不过,中国近期与寻求独立的苏丹南部当局之间的互动也在进行,在公投期间,中国派出了观察团,并与苏丹南部当局领导人进行了接触。去年12月,苏丹南部当局一个高级代表团访问了中国。

  苏丹是中国苦心经营多年,比较成气候的海外石油阵地。据统计,目前,中国有100多家公司、3万多人在包括苏丹北南双方以及达尔富尔等地区工作,参与工程承包、技术合作、投资等。目前中国在苏丹拥有海外最大、最完整的石油产业链,覆盖勘探、采油、输油管、炼油厂和港口等各领域。

  从长远看,中国加大这一地区的投资,其战略意义不仅在于对苏丹石油的长期开发,更在于它关系中国的整个非洲石油开发战略。以这个基地为据点,中国在非洲的寻油之路逐步延伸。当然,中国对能源需求的剧增,以及更深介入非洲的石油开发,有可能与美国的利益发生冲突。

  美国未来学家迈克•T•克莱尔在《资源战争:全球冲突的新场景》一书中说,21世纪最初10年,资源匮乏将成为国家之间冲突的最重要根源;未来的战争绝不是由于意识形态的分歧而爆发,而是为确保最宝贵并日益减少的自然资源的供应而爆发。这绝非危言耸听,看看在苏丹石油争夺中,中国、美国、日本和印度等国使出的浑身解数,就可见一斑。

  外媒认为非洲是重要的中心地带,而在非洲内部,苏丹和乍得之间的中心地带是重中之重。这就形成了2003年美国入侵伊拉克以来又一条重要的新战线,是华盛顿和北京为争夺对石油的控制权而展开的新冷战。到目前为止,北京的牌比华盛顿玩得更机敏。

  长期以来,美国与苏丹政府关系十分紧张,美方将苏丹列入“支持恐怖主义国家”,美国对苏丹的渗透一刻也没有停止。从2005年南北方和平协议签定,到2011年的苏丹南部公投,这一系列进程都是在美国的主导下完成的。

  美国对这次公投如此积极,表面上看是出于最终结束苏丹内战这一人道主义目的,但实际上是希望在苏丹南部获取更多石油利益。美国的主要石油企业从上世纪70年代初起就知道了苏丹的石油财富,从此,石油争夺战从那以后便没有停止。雪佛龙公司在苏丹南部投资12亿美元,而雪佛龙的石油开采,却引发了 1983年的苏丹第二次内战。雪佛龙成为多次袭击和暗杀的目标,并于1984年终止了开发计划。

  1995年中国企业开始进入苏丹进行石油开发。1997年,中石油控股40%的大尼罗河石油公司成立,开始开发雪佛龙等跨国公司退出的苏丹南部的石油。其中,最重要的是中石油参与了1/2/4区(黑格利、团结和基康油田)石油项目,还从这些项目区中建设输油管道,管道的另一端是红海沿岸的苏丹港,石油从那里装船运往中国。

  在全球能源市场经历深刻变革、国际油价将有可能突破100美元/桶高点附近时,美国政府开始将中国的能源需求视为新威胁。他们在这次急于出手,就是试图与中国一争高下,从苏丹南部的石油资源中分得一杯羹。

  不可否认,中国是世界石油市场争夺的后来者。目前,世界排名前20家大石油公司垄断了全球已探明优质石油储量的81%。中国要想在西方国家苦心经营了上百年的全球石油格局中分享现有的油气资源,必然会受到诸多因素的干扰和制约。而且,今后中国在寻求石油资源上将不可避免地与美国等西方国家展开竞争。

(责任编辑:Hengxiaojing)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Topics

Canada: President Trump, the G7 and Canada’s New ‘Realistic’ Foreign Policy

Taiwan: The Beginning of a Post-Hegemonic Era: A New Normal for International Relations

Canada: Trump vs. Musk, the Emperor and the Oligarch

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Germany: Peace Report 2025: No Common Ground with Trump

Australia: America’s Economic and Political Chaos Has Implications for Australia

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Turmoil in Los Angeles: Key Test of Trump’s Power

Related Articles

Russia: Trump Is Shielding America*

Hong Kong: The Lessons of World War II: The Real World Importance of Resisting Hegemony

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China