• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "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 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 Endowment for International Peace

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    How to Join the EU in Three Easy Steps

    Montenegro and Albania are frontrunners for EU enlargement in the Western Balkans, but they can’t just sit back and wait. To meet their 2030 accession ambitions, they must make a strong positive case.

      Dimitar Bechev, Iliriana Gjoni

  • Fire damage is pictures as US President Joe Biden (out of frame) visits to an area devastated by wildfires in Lahaina, Hawaii on August 21, 2023.
    Article
    The United States Has an Internal Displacement Problem

    By reorganizing federal disaster policy around the rights of displaced people, the United States could unlock additional federal resources, accelerate the rebuilding of lives and livelihoods, and reduce suffering and economic disruption.

      • Kayly Ober

      Kayly Ober

  • A demonstrator holds a tablet displaying a message as they occupy a road in protest against plans by the main opposition Kuomintang (KMT) and the Taiwan People's Party (TPP) to expand the parliamentary powers during the vote for the Parliament reform bill, outside the Parliament in Taipei on May 24, 2024. T
    Article
    Digital Hegemony and the Reification of Taiwan’s “Unification-Independence” Dichotomy

    Governments now deploy online platforms to shape public opinion and influence collective cognition. This is acutely apparent between China and Taiwan.

      Frank Cheng-Shan Liu

  • flood wall
    Commentary
    Emissary
    BRIC Is Critical for U.S. National Security. After a Yearlong Legal Battle, It’s Back.

    Its reinstatement should be celebrated, but it retains some major shortcomings.

      Leonardo Martinez-Diaz

  • Article
    Leveraging Internal Security Cooperation with Vietnam Offers a Glimpse of Future Chinese Diplomacy with Southeast Asia

    Despite long-standing differences, China and Vietnam are reinforcing common ground for collaboration, especially in public security. This internal security–centered diplomacy offers a strengthened road map for how China moves forward with Southeast Asia.

      Sophie Zhuang

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600Fax: 202 483 1840
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.