" It is widely believed that the two countries remain deeply suspicious of each other, and internal rifts will prevent them from forming a meaningful partnership. One of the realms where Moscow and Beijing are strategic competitors is Central Asia."

On the other hand, maybe Xi and Putin are sufficiently mature to tackle these issues and work out an explicit modus operandi. While such cooperation might seem strange to us in the West, it appears from all appearances that this is what they've done.

The consensus amongst many observers is that Russia and China are headed towards a "new" Cold War for no other reason than the Chinese are the bad guys. China is characterized as being envious, rapacious, greedy, and insatiable in its quest not just for resources, but for territory and influence as well.

The problem with this jaundiced analysis is that they view China's quest for resources through a very skewed prism. The US, for example, pursues resources and influence to make our lives easier. In the US, we complain if our latest cell phone isn't 10% faster or if the wi-fi cuts out. In the grand scheme of things, if we don't secure a new source of oil or wheat, we are inconvenienced. Our national livelihood, contrary to the claims of all the hand-wringers, is not actually threatened in any meaningful manner. We produce all the food and energy we need, have a military that is so enormous it scraps brand new tanks and planes just to keep production lines open, and we have available to us innumerable luxuries and recreation items that we purchase, discard, and replace as a matter of habit, not necessity. Heck... we have so much disposable income in the US and such a high standard of living that we buy guns for fun and shoot old TV's and computers with them for fun. Those are two items most folks can't get their hands on for cheap and most certainly not for the purpose of using one to destroy the other for something as narcissistic as a YouTube video.

China on the other hand requires a vast amount of resources just to maintain its position, to say nothing of advancing the standard of living. What is often characterized as grasping, insatiable imperialistic greed is actually necessary to improve the lot of over one billion people.

Of course, it is a purely American - and often a conservative American - viewpoint that portrays the needs of others as inferior in morality to our recreational urges and capricious whims. They may need something to survive, but that makes them such a primitive breed because we at least have the class, breeding, and intellect to kill, invade, and occupy others for the finer things in life. How dare China pursue its interests when our convenience is at stake?

The EEU and One Belt, One Road initiatives are not a recipe for a Cold War any more than France gaining the nuclear bomb was a recipe for World War III. The hackneyed response is to compare a situation to Munich and appeasing Hitler. The sophomore, however, rushes for the Cold War because Hitler is overplayed whereas the Cold War seems more sophisticated and just a tad more intellectual.

It is also just as wrong. The Cold War was not the result of competition for influence, that was a symptom. The Cold War ultimately had three driving forces: mutual suspicion, mutual insecurity, and a lack of communication. The Soviets and the West were possessed of the same mindset, that THEY were the ones in an inferior position vis a vis their opponent and that the only way to prevail was to have more friends or clients to act as a wider buffer state and/or shooting partner once the war went hot. A lack of communication spawned by suspicion between the two sides only further exacerbated this situation.

The war remained cold not because of perceived strength on our side, but because of a perceived weakness. No one wanted to throw the first punch because they were not sure they'd be able to take one in return.

And that is where the current Sino-Russian relationship differs. China has no fear of Russia and for all of its wariness, Russia at worst feels less threatened by China than it does NATO. At best Russia feels like it has a counterweight it can exploit against the West.

Furthermore, the capacity and desire for China to effect regime change in the regions it sends its military to have been non-existent. Whereas the US, France, the UK, and Russia send troops in with the aim of preserving or overthrowing regimes, Chinese military deployments have been more akin to foreign police deployments than military campaigns. Chinese troops and PMSC's deal mostly with providing security to Chinese civilians and facilities, not overthrowing the local emir or president-for-life.

And the reason for that, a reason Russia knows well, is that China values stability over all else. It upsets the status quo when it has to, not when it wants to. China, for all of its strength both economic and military, has not yet reached the point where it can engage in military action for the sake of such intangibles as influence or national pride. One only has to take a look at the China-Myanmar border to realize that.

So in the end China's presence in Central Asia won't lead to a "new Cold War" so many wannabe experts proclaim. The underlying mutual suspicion and insecurity is simply not in place and Moscow and Beijing certainly communicate much more openly and frequently than the West and the Soviets ever did. There is also the case to be made that Russia and China never killed tens of millions of each other whereas the West was all too willing to rebuild and rearm Germany in the years following World War II.

My prediction: while China will bankroll the development of Central Asia, this will not lead to any of the hoped-for friction between it and Russia. Whereas Russia will maintain a free hand to intervene militarily in the region should the need arise, China will maintain its stand-offish approach to security deployments and keep its presence strictly within the realm of security and little else. The end result will be Russia's near abroad gets developed on China's dime while China gets a "free ride" - in our parlance - because Russia will, at least implicitly, be the one guaranteeing the region's stability.

Makes sense for Russia to work with China. The millennia old threat to Russia from the east ended in the mid 1500s with the conquest of the Kazan & Astrakhan Tatars. Japan posed a temporary threat for several decades, and then China for a few decades but apart from that the east has been a non-issue since the 16th century. In the west though it has been a whole other matter. Since the Dark Ages, from Europe have arisen mortal threats to Russia - Vikings, Crusaders, Grand Duchy of Lithuania, Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Sweden, Prussia, Napoleon Bonaparte, Germany, NATO, & European Union.

China & Russia working together brings benefits to both sides. Russia gets Chinese investment, assistance when it comes to infrastructure, and technology (industrial, computers, telecomm, etc) which is more advanced than what Russia has. China gets access to Russian hydrocarbons, metal ores, and help in the few remaining fields in military technology they need assistance with.

Securing & developing Central Asia has the added benefit of creating a buffer with Islamic ffundamentalism. Long term with Iran & Pakistan in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the "One Road, One Belt' initiative completed they could turn the region into a military alliance rivaling the US-led network of alliances and an economic bloc larger and wealthier than any other in the Old World.

Russia signed a Faustian deal. In their desperation to protect their economy and culture from the West, Russia has already begun laying the tracks for millions of Chinese to begin to make their way into Central Asia.

On the face of it this seems a good deal for both sides - both get a reasonable accommodation that plays to their current respective strengths in the security and economic arenas. However, as in all geo-political moves it is the long term advantages that must be weighed up and in this analysis it is Russia that emerges as a distinct loser with China a clear winner. China gains new transport infrastructure along the silk road route - roads, rail and no doubt airports later on - as well as the necessary back up logistics of fuel and water pipes, electricity supplies etc. While initially these will be of economic benefit to Russia too they are infinitely more useful to China in the long run as they provide a ready made invasion route to Central Asia - maybe not even in one overt attack but perhaps just taking on progressively more security responsibility along the route and employing the old French colonial oil slick method of theatre domination by incrementalism. Russia has no interest in Chinese territory but the Chinese look enviously at the vast natural resources in sparsely populated eastern Russia. This deal allows the Chinese to dominate the economic sphere at the expense of the current paymasters, the Russians. This obvious replacement will prove to the Central Asians who the real masters of Asia are and will increasingly see Russia relegated to a junior partner and then an irrelevance in Central Asian eyes over time as China's economic and military strengths grow accordingly. Any initiative that allows China's economy to grow will inevitably mean a more effective Chinese military and that alone should be of concern to Russian securocrats. Politically it appears that a major concession has been made by the Chinese to work with a multi-lateral organisation rather than the usual (Nazi foreign policy derived) bi-lateral negotiations that China insists on. Again however it remains to be seen how this will play out over time and China has already successfully ensured that the other 'Stans have not joined the EEU and so presumably does not feel threatened by a moribund organisation that over time will fall apart as it relied on a Russian paymaster who is being replaced by a Chinese paymaster. Indeed over time a smarter Chinese move would be to keep the EEU alive on a drip feed and then at an opportune moment take over the EEU as a ready made Eurasian version of the Greater East Asian Co-prosperity Sphere. Who knows though, maybe Russia and China can survive as partners in Central Asia - but I doubt it - you can only serve one master.

With all said and done, Which scenario does anyone ponder what will happen going into the future.......China going after Russia's Resources by a land invasion , or the West....... ? just wondering ........?

If this bloc comes to fruition smoothly we will likely see a new Cold War era scenario brewing.

Why?

This bloc may be economically a gold mine, but it's one that comes with small or few curses of it's own.

Russia and China are despotic regimes that will help others become stronger or even incipient democracies in Asia and beyond collapse to establish sympathetic regimes led by men not so dissimilar to Putin or little Kim.

And once it grows stronger and possibly into a military alliance, it will start to reach beyond to put pressure in Europe, Africa, Oceania and America itself.