Comments on: Choo Chooooo!

By: Andrew Grantham

Andrew Grantham — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 23:27:32 +0000

Thanks – that would indeed make rather a lot of sense!

Someone who visited the locos in the museum some years ago found some writing scrawled on one which was identified as being along the lines of “[name] woz ‘ere”…

By: Phoenix

Phoenix — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 23:20:57 +0000

Andrew,
You are right. Thank you for pointing that out. China is “planning”. The Aynak investment decision is strategic. The Chinese government usually gets such things done. It has money. It puts low value on workers’ lives or health. And it has no worries about elections.

By: Michael Hancock

Michael Hancock — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 23:14:40 +0000

My Persian I teacher will be proud of me (maybe if I didn’t screw up) when I tell you I think it says “Darulaman – Kabul” – but you could have guessed that, yeah? I’m not 100% sure on the Darulaman (flowery script must not be covered until Persian II), but it definitely says Kabul for the 2nd destination.

By: Andrew Grantham

Andrew Grantham — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 22:55:59 +0000

@pheonix: Is China "building", or is it at this stage still "planing to build" to Aynak? If they are building, any idea which route they have chosen? Something is supposedly happening towards developing a Tajikistan - Shirkhan Bandar railway, but I've not yet looked into exactly what or who is behind it. @Michael: In February the Director of Transport at Economic Cooperation Organisation said details of a Kazakh line would be announced this year. There was a previous plan in 2004, but it seems to have fizzled out. As an aside, are any Afghanistan experts able to read the writing on the side of a coach on the (now defunct) railway in Kabul?

By: Phoenix

Phoenix — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:35:10 +0000

Andrew,
Very informative comment. A minor note. China is building a railway into Afghanistan. Part of their plan to develop the Aynak copper deposit.

By: Michael Hancock

Michael Hancock — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:28:39 +0000

Thanks again! I had never seen your blog before researching this story – it’s great how big the Internet is so that after years of reading on a topic (Afghanistan, Central Asia, etc.) there are still literally hundreds (thousands?) of blogs, journals, and other internet-focused materials out there for a person to find.
This is the first I’ve heard of a standard gauge connection from China through Kazakhstan – to where will it go? I’ll look it up, but any info you can share would be great!

By: Andrew Grantham

Andrew Grantham — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 21:23:02 +0000

China and Iran do indeed use the same railway gauge – 4′ 8.5″ (known as “standard gauge”, and also found in Turkey, the middle east and most of Europe). The former USSR is all 5′ gauge, while India and Pakistan are 5′ 6″ gauge. This all adds up to a bit of a problem for easily connecting up any future Afghan rail network!

My understanding is that building a railway directly from China into Afghanistan – while probably not impossible for people who’ve already got a railway to Lhasa – would be very challenging, and so the proposals are to go via Tajikistan, or south through Pakistan to the sea instead (Afghanistan – Karachi links have been proposed for 100+ years).

Separately, there are also current plans for a standard gauge line from China right across Kazakhstan, which could have interesting political and strategic implications for Russia as it would compete with the Trans-Siberian route(s), which have a break of gauge at the Chinese borders.

I would be very interested to know the current status of the Iran – Herat railway – does anyone know for sure whether it is really being built on the Afghan side of the border?

By: Metin

Metin — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:55:45 +0000

… pipeline from Turkmenistan to China is built through Kazakhstan.

it still needs to go through Uzbekistan. Oldschoolboy, Pheonix, sorry, but Uzbekistan is still there.
Besides, even if your wishful thinking is taken for granted, it is very doubtful that the Kyrgyz will get the same subsidized gas price as they do from Uzbekistan. Kazakhstan is less dependent on Kyrgyz water, so Kyrgyz have little cards to play in price negotiations.

By: Metin

Metin — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:30:10 +0000

Old Schoolboy,
free trade works among CIS, for products produces in their countries. That’s why GM-Uzbek cars are sold on mass in Russia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine etc. without customs duties.
CU will create common customs against third countries, with exception to those with bilateral free trade agreements. CU won’t affect exports from CIS countries. If you doubt about this – consult an expert.

By: Oldschool boy

Oldschool boy — Thu, 03 Jun 2010 20:21:45 +0000

There would be no point of creating CU just to duplicate any free trade agreement. CU is to protect only the countries within and it will affect trade with any other countries, including CIS. Plus, I did not observe any free trade among CIS countries. As far as I know, all tariffs or barriers between any two Former Soviet Union Countries were based on bilateral agreements only.