What about this particular article, Jerome?

Does the world submit to becoming resource colonies of the West? Or does Asia/Middle East have its own plans for the future?

As I wrote recently over at eurotrib, Europe's current energy policy seems to be "you arrogant Russians had better give us your gas cheaply, or else we'll call you a nasty imperialist dictatorship", so it's no surprise that Russia is (i) reacting somewhat incredulously, and (ii) hinting at other plans.

But the fact is that all Russian pipelines (both for oil and gas) go West for now, and those that will eventually go East (i) are far from being built, (ii) will use other reserve areas than the Western ones to be filled, (iii) bump against China's unwillingness to pay more for natgas than prices used to be in the good ol' days ($2-3/MBTU), and (iv) are still subject ot Russia's games viz. Japan and China.

So sure, Russia and China talks. I'm not convinced it means much in practice, in the short term anyway.

Sorry, Jerome, but this strikes me as a bit naive. Russia & China are in this for the long haul -- many years. It's just commonsense to believe that American "hegemony" is part of the target. North American natural gas production is declining. One needn't be Sir Isaac Newton to figure this out. Russia and China are clearly making separate plans together. It's all about political leverage. Pipelines can be built. It takes a while to turn an elephant around. Russia's got the gas, China's got the T-bills, what's the problem?

But there's more. Qatari gas is not secure. They are just a few miles away from Iran across the Persian Gulf. Iran is aligned politically with Russia and China. Again, I say, you don't have to be genius to figure this out. The world's changing but you dismiss it.

I can't read where you are coming from on this stuff. Why do you downplay these obvious reports?

What's the link on your Eurotrib article?

Jeez, I hope Europe doesn't dismiss Cheney, Putin, China, etc., as baffoons unworthy of serious consideration.

I think this is the great game, the resource war, and I think it's all extremely dangerous.

I like France; I like how it's prepared (somewhat) for peak oil. I like its preservation of local agriculture. I love Paris.

But France will not be immune if this all goes badly.

Don't mistake me, I am not dismissing any of them. Just saying that their public pronouncements, their desires and the reality can be 3 different things. And as I am in the business of actually putting up the money (someone else's, but still) to pay for that reality, i think I have a decdent grasp of what's feasible and what's less so - and thus what's bluster, what's bluff, what's grandstanding, what's wishful thinking and what's ignorance.
I did note that this was not significant in the short term. I am also skeptical in the medium term. In the long term, the intense rivalry between China and Russia might reasssert itself, so it's hard t osay what would happen. I'd be Russian, I'd be wary to commit myself to a pipeline with a single (Chinese) client.

Thus the attractiveness of LNG, more easily tradeable. The trouble is that the LNG chain is surprisingly hard to master. Iran has proved totally incapable of it, and Russia is discovering that it is harder than pipelines.

We'll see, but i am not convinced that Russia's long term strategic interests are aligned with China's. Taking advantage jointly of the absolute stupidity of the current White House host is one thing, committing to the allies of the moment for much longer is another.