• Research
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie India logoCarnegie lettermark logo
AI
{
  "authors": [
    "Dmitri Trenin"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Carnegie China",
    "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center",
  "programAffiliation": "",
  "programs": [],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "East Asia",
    "China",
    "Russia"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Climate Change",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Economy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media
Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center

Gas Deal Entails China-Russia Strategic Depth

The Sino-Russian gas deal emphasizes and accelerates the fading of Russia’s until-now special relationship with the EU. The partnership between Russia and China is acquiring truly strategic depth.

Link Copied
By Dmitri Trenin
Published on May 25, 2014

Source: Global Times

The Sino-Russian 30-year, $400 billion gas deal signed during President Vladimir Putin's recent visit to China is as important to global energy geopolitics as the agreement concluded in the 1960s which opened the way for Russian gas to reach Western Europe. It will, however, change more than energy flows. 

Russia's pivot to Asia, particularly to China, is becoming more pronounced even as the West is ratcheting up sanctions against Moscow. The Russo-Chinese partnership, originally a pragmatic arrangement, is acquiring truly strategic depth.

Critics dismiss the gas deal as essentially another declaration of intentions in the decade-long process of gas negotiations between Gazprom and its Chinese partner.

They point to how few details are known about it, and speculate that the Chinese simply responded to Putin's desperate call for some kind of an agreement which he would be able to show to the Europeans as proof that at last, Gazprom is diversifying its exports. The dearth of details, however, can also point to the complex nature of the deal, in which there are numerous trade-offs. 

In any event, things will be clear once the pipeline from Eastern Siberia begins to be built.

Others contend that Putin has had to give too much to China in terms of price concessions. Historically, this has been the sticking point in Russo-Chinese gas talks. 

It is true, of course, that the sharp decline in Russia's relations with the West has also weakened Moscow's hand in its dealings with Beijing. Yet gas prices can go down as well as up over time, and creating alternatives to the European market is a must for Russia. 

Gas deposits in Eastern Siberia, such as Kovykta, are naturally destined for the Asian market. Gazprom may not reap too much profit in China, but balancing the geography of its exports is the right thing to do. 

More importantly, President Putin may have dropped his earlier resistance to allowing the Chinese to get a stake in Russian energy projects. 

The recent experience with US companies such as Visa and MasterCard has taught him that major Western businesses are also susceptible to government pressure. Chinese State-owned companies are at least overtly government-controlled. Russia needs markets and investment, and China can provide both. 

Beyond gas and oil, Russia looks forward to expanding its presence in China's nuclear energy market. 

There is also an electric power connection which completes the all-round energy partnership. 

The Russo-Chinese gas deal does not switch Gazprom's exports from Europe to Asia. However, the opening of the Chinese market does diversify the Russian gas trade away from Europe. 

It emphasizes and accelerates the fading of Russia's until-now special relationship with the European Union. 

Even though the Russia-China annual trade today ($90 billion) is only a fraction of Russia-EU annual trade ($410 billion) in 2013, the prospect for the latter, in the current circumstances, is negative, and for the former, largely positive. 

Viewed from Moscow, China and the EU are increasingly seen as equidistant, and Russia seeks to strike a balance between the two. 

This trend is strengthened by the sanctions already imposed on Russia as well as those only threatened. Among the latter, the most serious are in the fields of energy and finance. 

The recent gas deal, which can be expanded in the future, addresses the first challenge. Joint steps, however modest, which would reduce Russia's and China's reliance on the US dollar move in the direction of the second. 

As the world keeps changing, and, as both Beijing and Moscow believe, changing in favor of non-Western players, the Sino-Russian relationship looks an important feature of the things to come rather than a throwback to the 1950s.

This article originally appeared in Global Times.

About the Author

Dmitri Trenin

Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center

Trenin was director of the Carnegie Moscow Center from 2008 to early 2022.

    Recent Work

  • Commentary
    Mapping Russia’s New Approach to the Post-Soviet Space

      Dmitri Trenin

  • Commentary
    What a Week of Talks Between Russia and the West Revealed

      Dmitri Trenin

Dmitri Trenin
Former Director, Carnegie Moscow Center
Climate ChangeForeign PolicyEconomyEast AsiaChinaRussia

Carnegie India does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie India

  • Paper
    Threading the Needle: India’s Path Forward with China

    After the chill in ties between 2020 and 2024 that brought India–China relations to their lowest point in several decades, the two countries have engaged each other afresh. This paper argues that there are predominantly four imperatives guiding India’s approach to China, and they exist in an order of priority.

      Saheb Singh Chadha

  • Article
    Managing Divergence: India’s BRICS Presidency in 2026

    This piece argues that India’s central challenge is not managing a single flashpoint but resolving the underlying tension between expansion and institutional coherency of the BRICS grouping.

      Vrinda Sahai

  • Article
    India–Africa Strategic Partnership: Challenges, Potential, and Possible Pathways

    A partnership between India, a country of subcontinental size, and Africa, a continent of fifty-four countries, may seem asymmetric until one notes that both are home to nearly the same number of people—1.4 billion. This essay spells out the existing challenges to the partnership, its optimal potential, and the possible pathways to realize it over the next quarter-century.

      Rajiv Bhatia

  • Commentary
    Emerging From the “Zombie State” of Trade Agreements: The India-EU FTA

    The India–EU Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is shaping up to be one of the most consequential trade negotiations, both economically and strategically. But, what’s in the agreement, what’s missing, and what will determine its success in the years ahead

      Vrinda Sahai, Nicolas Köhler-Suzuki

  • Article
    India’s Press Note 3 Gamble: Opening the FDI Door to China

    On March 10, 2026, India’s Union Cabinet approved amendments to Press Note 3, a regulation that mandated government approval on all foreign direct investment (FDI) from countries sharing a land border with India. This amendment raises questions primarily about whether its stated benefits will materialize and if the risks have been adequately weighed. This piece will address the same.

      Konark Bhandari

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
Carnegie India logo, white
Unit C-4, 5, 6, EdenparkShaheed Jeet Singh MargNew Delhi – 110016, IndiaPhone: 011-40078687
  • Research
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie India
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.