By: Mark N. Katz – Middle East Times

U.S./NATO supply lines through Pakistan to Afghanistan have come under increasing attack. Russia has responded to this by allowing the United States to increase the amount of ‘non-lethal’ supplies they ship through Russia to Central Asia and Afghanistan. This, of course, helps the American-led effort in Afghanistan.

POWER POLITICS — The great powers each need to acknowledge that the others have legitimate interests in Central Asia, and thus none should be excluded from it. The picture shows workers at the Tengiz-Black Sea oil pipeline which runs from the Tengiz oil field in Kazakhstan to the Russian Black Sea port of Novorossiisk. (ITAR-TASS Photo via Newscom)

But fearing the growth of U.S. influence in Central Asia, Moscow has for years been urging Kyrgyzstan to expel American forces from the Manas air base, which the United States has been using in support of operations in Afghanistan. The Kyrgyz government has now ordered American forces to leave Manas – a move that hurts the American-led effort in Afghanistan.

Moscow’s pursuit of policies that simultaneously help and hurt the U.S./NATO campaign in Afghanistan is a reminder that the geopolitics of Central Asia is highly complex. Petroleum and pipeline routes, the potential for Islamic extremism, and the possibility of democratization are each issues that contribute to this complexity.

What is especially interesting to observe is that the geopolitics of these three issues is different.

America, Russia, and China are competing against one another with regard to petroleum and pipeline routes from Central Asia. The Europeans have been divided over whether to support pipeline routes from Central Asia through Russia or a route under the Caspian and across the southern Caucasus that avoids Russia that the U.S. favors.

The recent Russian-Ukrainian gas crisis has made the Europeans more wary of relying on Russia, and hence more in favor of a non-Russian route. The Europeans, though, are far more willing to contemplate a pipeline route via Iran than the United States is (at present anyway). In short: Cooperation among the four great powers is at a minimum with regard to petroleum and pipeline routes from Central Asia.

By contrast, America, Russia, China, and Europe are all united in opposing the rise of Islamic extremism in Central Asia. In that Russia and China border Central Asia, the rise of Islamic extremism there would have extremely negative consequences for both of them.

With supply routes through Pakistan to Afghanistan increasingly under attack, the rise of Islamic extremism in Central Asia has only worsened the considerable difficulties America and its European allies already face in their struggle against similar forces in Afghanistan. And of course, the rise of Islamic extremism in Central Asia would greatly limit or even eliminate the possibility of exploiting the region’s petroleum reserves.

With regard to the possibility of democratization in Central Asia: Russia and China oppose this, while America and Europe either support it or would welcome its occurrence. Russia and China prefer the existing authoritarian regimes in Central Asia because they see them as more willing to ally and cooperate with Moscow and Beijing than democratic governments there would. America and Europe, for their part, anticipate that democratic Central Asian governments would align themselves more with them.

The great powers, then, have both competing interests and common interests in Central Asia. Because much is at stake for them all, they would be well advised not to pursue their competing interests so aggressively that they harm their common interests. Each needs to acknowledge that the others have legitimate interests in the region, and thus none should be excluded from it.

Central Asian petroleum can be exported to several markets by different routes. Just as the authoritarian governments that Russia and China prefer have worked with America and Europe, democratic governments (should they ever arise in the region) would undoubtedly seek to work with Russia and China as well as the West. Beijing would probably realize and adjust to this quickly — even if Moscow did not.

Whether authoritarian or democratic, however, Central Asia is likely to be vulnerable to Islamic extremism. Russia’s acting to deprive America of access to military facilities in Central Asia which support U.S./NATO operations in Afghanistan only increases this vulnerability. Moscow’s success in this will not benefit Russia, but the Islamic extremists instead.