Things Are Not Going In The Beijing-Astana-Moscow Triangle The Way An Opinion Writer For SCMP Portrays Them – OpEd

Nikola Mikovic, a freelance journalist, researcher, and analyst based in Serbia, in his piece entitled “Has China Gained the Upper Hand over Russia in Kazakhstan?” and published on the South China Morning Post's Opinion page, says: “Last year, China overtook Russia to become Kazakhstan's biggest trading partner, with two-way trade hitting US$41 billion.

It is, therefore, no surprise that Chinese President Xi Jinping was given a warmer welcome this year at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Astana than any other leader of the multinational group, founded in 2001. Unlike Russian President Vladimir Putin and the leaders of other SCO members - Belarus, India, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Pakistan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan - Xi was welcomed at the airport in Astana by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. All the other leaders were met by Prime Minister Olzhas Bektenov”. 

In this opinion piece, the author, who, while being an analyst with a focus ‘on Russia’s involvement in the post-Soviet space, the Middle East, and the Balkans’, surveys recent developments in the relationship between Kazakhstan and China, on the one hand, and between Kazakhstan and Russia on the other, and hence he concludes that the relations in the triangle Beijing - Astana - Moscow are just now undergoing significant changes, and “growing Chinese influence in the strategically important region threatens to end the era of Russian dominance in significant parts of Central Asia”.  

To prove this Nikola Mikovic presents two arguments: China's ranking first among Kazakhstan's trading partners in 2023, and the fact that unlike Russian President Vladimir Putin and the leaders of other SCO members, Chinese President Xi Jinping was welcomed at the airport in Astana by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev before the recent SCO summit in the Kazakh capital city. However, both give rise to questions as to how appropriate they may be considered in this context. Let's consider those two arguments in turn. 

What can be said about the first one of them? There was a statement in March 2024 by Kazakh Minister of Trade and Integration, Arman Shakkaliev, about China having come out on top among Kazakhstan’s trading partners last year, surpassing Russia. In terms of trade with Kazakhstan, China, according to Chinese figures, for the first time surpassed Russia a decade and a half ago. According to the Kazakh statistical data, this first happened only in 2023. The discrepancies in Kazakhstan-China trade turnover value, as some say, may be attributed to differences between the methods of keeping statistics. But, in truth, such an explanation sounds quite unconvincing, as the data of these two countries varied and is still varying widely. For instance, China was Kazakhstan’s largest trade partner in 2023, with bilateral trade turnover reaching $41 billion, a 32% increase over the previous year’s total, according to Chinese figures. T

he Kazakhstan side, meanwhile, reported total bilateral trade in 2023 as totaling $31.5 billion, while the volume of trade between Kazakhstan and Russia amounted to $26 billion. In this regard, Nikola Mikovic refers to the Chinese figure,  US$41 billion, and claims that in 2023, for the first time, “China overtook Russia to become Kazakhstan's biggest trading partner”. But, if one is guided by the Chinese official data, one must be aware that, according to it, Сhina has almost continuously been Kazakhstan's biggest trade partner in the last fifteen years. This is a well-known thing that does not need proof. Here is what Yavuz Çelik, a Turkish researcher, in his study entitled “China’s Economıc Presence in Central Asia: Kazakhstan Case” and published in July 2023, said: “China has long since surpassed Russia as Kazakhstan's most important trading partner. Before Xi announced the BRI [on September 7, 2013], bilateral trade between Kazakhstan and China totaled $28.9 billion, compared to Russia's $23.5 billion”.

And now about the second argument. Those familiar with the actual state of things in and around Kazakhstan would have found it very moot. 

Here is what Adil Kaukenov, a Kazakh expert on China, says in this regard: “The leader of China was the only one [among the leaders of SCO members] to have been personally welcomed [at the airport in Astana] by President Tokayev. The explanation for this [fact] is simple: Unlike other heads of state, Chinese President Xi Jinping did not just come to a working meeting within the SCO but he is making a State visit to Kazakhstan, during which he also will take part in the SCO [summit]. Many who do not understand this nuance have created the entire conspiracy theories [on the subject]”.

It can be added to the aforementioned that on November 9, 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin, who had arrived in Kazakhstan on an official visit, was - just as in the case with Chinese President Xi Jinping 7 months later - welcomed at the airport in Astana by Kazakh President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev. Hence the conclusion suggests: that there's nothing offending for Moscow in what is described by Nikola Mikovic as China's leader ‘getting a warmer welcome this year at the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) summit in Astana than any other leader of the multinational group’. Therefore, it is almost certain that the fact that Chinese President Xi Jinping was recently welcomed at the airport in Astana by his Kazakh counterpart has generated no cause for concern for the Kremlin.

In a word, there are looks, that Nikola Mikovic's arguments and the analytical conclusion in his above opinion piece he made based on them are built on sinking sand, so to speak. If he had posted this piece on his page on social networks, there would have been little need to pay so much attention to it. Another thing is when it was published in the South China Morning Post, a newspaper providing “the best news, [opinions] and analysis on Hong Kong, China, and the rest of Asia”. In the latter case, the above piece certainly looks like an expert opinion the reliability of which is underpinned by the credibility of the SCMP. And this is a matter of regret.