Russia vs. China thread

[Avvakum]

I believe that many of our present problems with Russia might be better understood if we realize that China is the long-term enemy of Russia, and that Putin & co. are buying them off like the Russian Princes did during the yoke of the Golden Horde in the 13th century. Ditto with Iran. An article for your consideration;

Russia-China relations in perspective

Posted in: Long Posts on Tuesday, 17th December 2013 – by Stephen Blank

Russian and Chinese leaders regularly proclaim a bilateral identity of interests between their governments. But closer scrutiny of Russo-Chinese relations belies this idyllic assessment. Admittedly both sides currently require a friendly and normal relationship with the other as they concentrate on economic development and other, more critical, ‘theaters’ of interest. For Russia in particular, Siberia and Russian Asia, the source of most of its present and future energy and raw materials wealth is something of a strategic liability because it can only be defended against China with its own indigenous resources. If war broke out China could cut Moscow’s links to Asia in a day or less. Thus militarily these areas are an austere or economy of force theater that can only survive through their own resources. Therefore nuclear deterrence is Russia’s strategy here as it is towards America. And deterrence is a strategy for relations with adversaries or potential adversaries not friends.
China is also the main investor in Siberia and Eastern Russia, investments that are critical to Russia’s becoming the independent Asian great power that it dreams of becoming. Russia’s many manifestations of ‘illegitimate governance’ rent-seeking, corruption, criminality, malfeasance, and hostility to foreign investment have multiplied the difficulties for all investors, including China. Nevertheless Beijing persists for strategic reasons, i.e. the need for a quiescent Russia on its north and for Siberian energy supplies that go to it alone and therefore bypass Japan or South Korea and the Strait of Malacca.
Consequently on issues of Asian regional security from the Arctic to the South China Sea and Central Asia it is easy to discern rivalry, growing Russian anxieties about Chinese power, and Chinese encroachment on Russian. Indeed, arguably despite China’s increased aggressiveness vis-Ã*-vis Japan, the United States (US), Southeast Asia, and India, it has only succeeded in making enduring strategic gains against Russia. In Central Asia Chinese economic power, as displayed in numerous huge deals for infrastructure, energy pipelines, telecommunications, roads, railways, energy pipelines, minerals, etc. has eclipsed Russia. According to Alexandros Petersen of the US’ Woodrow Wilson Center, China is already the most powerful and consequential foreign actor in Central Asia and this author and Barnard University Professor Alexander Cooley have argued along similar lines.
In the Arctic Russian energy explorations now depend on deals with China. Meanwhile China has leapt ahead in commercial exploitation of the Northern Sea Route. Russia unsuccessfully opposed Chinese observer status in the Arctic Council and the recent People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) circumnavigation of the Sea of Japan, hitherto a Russo-Japanese lake, and the purchase of the North Korean ports of Rajin-Sonborg and Chongjin, plus its investments and interests in other North Korean ports signify not just China’s burgeoning interest in the Arctic but also its eclipsing of Russia in regard to influence and presence in North Korea.
China’s recent unilateral proclamation of an Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) over parts of its own, South Korean, and Japanese airspace plus warnings that similar moves are to be expected in the South China Sea, can only heighten not only Asian but Russian apprehensiveness over the likelihood of similar unilateral encroachments on Russian interests and capabilities. Indeed, the reinvigorated Russo-Japanese normalisation dialogue owes much to both sides’ mounting concern about China as does Russia’s recent strategic partnership agreement with Vietnam, its readiness to sell Vietnam more weapons and continuing investment in offshore Vietnamese energy platforms in the South China Sea. Though Russia does not flaunt these decisions, Beijing fully grasps their import.
Nevertheless Moscow’s capacity of conducting an independent policy in Asia towards China is also gradually being eroded. It already had to build the East Siberian Pacific Ocean oil pipeline exclusively to China, and the recent mammoth energy deals with Rosneft have made that company almost a wholly owned subsidiary of China incorporated. This may line Igor Sechin and his retainers’ and Putin’s pockets, but energy deals and pipelines to one customer hardly gratify Russian interests. Similarly Russia is losing the battle to sell China gas at market prices. Its alternative of a trans-Korean pipeline has gone nowhere and Putin now discusses building an underwater pipeline to South Korea.
China demands below market prices for Russian gas and does not need to buy it, and if Russia cannot sell its Siberian and Asian gas those resources will be ‘stranded’ in the ground. Likewise, apart from China’s domination of foreign investment in Russian Asia, Moscow has now had to sell China better weapons than India gets, namely the SU-35 Fighter and the Amur Class Submarine. This marks an unprecedented reversal of past Russian policy and demonstrates Chinese leverage as well as the Russian arms industry’s dependence on China as seen, if not by arms sellers than by the Russian government.
This litany hardly catalogues an identity of interests. That identity is largely for issues on the global stage directed against Washington on issues like democracy promotion, intervention abroad, non-proliferation, regime change, and the like. Indeed, Russia’s China policy has been particularly targeted at the global strategic triangle seeking to use China to force Washington to take it more seriously. But it long ago became impossible to use China for anyone else’s purposes. However, if Russia cannot reform its own governance and compete peacefully but effectively with China it may not be long before Beijing can use Moscow for its purposes.
Therefore Russian-Chinese relations have more than an academic or passing interest for Europe. As the current Ukrainian crisis shows, Moscow has declared hostilities on European security institutions and Europe as such. It now prefers to seek real gains in the East. But it is quite unlikely to succeed due to its own debilities and China’s increasingly superior capabilities. Thus it is likely that sooner or later Moscow will have to recoil from its ‘Ostpolitik’ to find new gains in Europe, its priority theatre of operations in every sense. Is Europe ready for either Sino-Russian partnership or for the subordination of Russia to Chinese ambitions, or for an increasingly defeated Russia turning back from an abortive Asian turn to Europe? Europe’s own security is bound up with whatever Moscow decides to do and if it turns Russia’s back on Europe that creates both challenges and opportunities for European governments and security institutions. However, in that context we must ask whether or not European institutions both understand those challenges and opportunities and whether they can or will respond to them. Much of the future of European security may ride on those questions.
• Image credit: Tony Lin.

[vector7]

I wish this were true now, but there are way too many agreements between both Russia and China that have spanned over a decade in Military, Financial and Economic policies that makes this scenario almost non-existent at this point in time. They also geographically share borders and cultures.

In fact, if you study their behavior in both the Korean and Vietnam war they both worked together against America and it's interests.

Just as Nazi Germany was the glue that held Russia and the Allies together, America's strength and leadership propped up the West and made Russia and China gravitate toward each other after WW2.

I can see where previous Administrations have tried to catch China up as a superpower right after the Soviet Union fell by transferring technology and wealth to Beijing. This plan has backfired as China has a very tepid financial relationship with America, now that most of our secrets are bought, stolen and America's nearly broke.

China's true behavior toward the America is now showing while in contrast both Russia and China are obviously becoming more friendly.

Don't listen, but watch what they do in UN. See how the back each others interests including their surrogates like North Korea, Syria, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela and Nicaragua. They have a goal to retrieve land in their own territories and expand their influence. The only thing standing in the way of that is a coalition of free nations led by America.

Once America is taken out the rest of the world will reorganize under a bi-polar Sino-Russian hegemony. Then under new relationships and treaties they may begin to question the others motives, long after America is no longer a superpower.

For example, I could see Japan gravitating toward China once we are gone because they would have little choice, also Japan may have some further technology and manufacturing China might foresee needing in the future to subdue the Russians with down the road.

If war between the Bear and Dragon does happen, it would be long after America is gone.

[Ryan Ruck]

Great post vector!

[Avvakum]

I agree with most of what you say, but with a slightly different perspective-remember that the the main point the writer of this article and others make is that Russia is in essence FORCED geopolitically to remain allied to China. Let's break this down. You said;

"I wish this were true now, but there are way too many agreements between both Russia and China that have spanned over a decade in Military, Financial and Economic policies that makes this scenario almost non-existent at this point in time. They also geographically share borders and cultures. "

All this is quite true, but as I said, it is because China is 'chained to a corpse'. Russia is dying demographically-more on that later. Next you said;

"In fact, if you study their behavior in both the Korean and Vietnam war they both worked together against America and it's interests. "

Sure, when America was at her height of power and wealth, and prior to the rebirth of militant Islam. These are not negligible considerations, either. Then you said this;


"Just as Nazi Germany was the glue that held Russia and the Allies together, America's strength and leadership propped up the West and made Russia and China gravitate toward each other after WW2."

Confirming my previous statement. Russia and China became more state-capitalist and nationalistic as time went on, which meant they increasingly saw as a matter of realpolitik that they had to balance America's might in combination in order to go about their regional interests free of American meddling-or the meddling of each other. Then you add;

"I can see where previous Administrations have tried to catch China up as a superpower right after the Soviet Union fell by transferring technology and wealth to Beijing. This plan has backfired as China has a very tepid financial relationship with America, now that most of our secrets are bought, stolen and America's nearly broke."

And now the Russians are playing the same game we did with the Chinese back then, right now, except that they're neighbors and Russia's demographic decline and losing grip over Siberia and Central Asia means that their 'friends' the Chinese fill that void left by Russia in those areas. Then you said;

"China's true behavior toward the America is now showing while in contrast both Russia and China are obviously becoming more friendly."

What should we expect, after that vermin Bill Clinton screwed the Russian people over in the 90's? He imploded their economy while I think 26 Trillion dollars in flight capital went into Western Bank accounts, Law and Order almost collapsed, over a million people starved to death, and Clinton broke Bush the Elder's solemn promise not to expand NATO into Russia's near-abroad and violated Russia's geopolitical interests in Belgrade and other places. Bush had Putin solidly cemented as our friend, especially against Islam, and Clinton and Obama lost him. You then add;

"Don't listen, but watch what they do in UN. See how the back each others interests including their surrogates like North Korea, Syria, Iran, Cuba and Venezuela and Nicaragua. They have a goal to retrieve land in their own territories and expand their influence. The only thing standing in the way of that is a coalition of free nations led by America."

Are we still free? Or are we ruled by a cabal of Antichristian Islamic surrogates like Obama and Clinton, who use our power only to make the world safe for the coming Islamic tide? Some might ask me; "what about Iran"? Iran is ruled by a heretical Sect of Moslems, a Shia minority, to be played against the vast Sunni majority. Remember that Israel is aware of all this and really does have the warmest of relations with the Kremlin, with Putin and Netanyahu particularly so... You next said;


"Once America is taken out the rest of the world will reorganize under a bi-polar Sino-Russian hegemony. Then under new relationships and treaties they may begin to question the others motives, long after America is no longer a superpower."


Ordinarily i'd agree, but Russia is dying; they dont have the time to wait and after a struggle with the USA they wouldn't survive destruction from China. They know this. That's why I can't agree with this;


"For example, I could see Japan gravitating toward China once we are gone because they would have little choice, also Japan may have some further technology and manufacturing China might foresee needing in the future to subdue the Russians with down the road.

If war between the Bear and Dragon does happen, it would be long after America is gone. "

We better pray we have Russia still around, and not a China, Masters of all Eurasia.

[Avvakum]

Read 'between the lines' on this one, emphasis mine in bold:

China media: 'Rise of Russia'

The presidents of China and Russia often agree on foreign policy issues
Media are assessing how Russia's clash with the West over Ukraine could impact on relations with China.
The Chinese edition of the Global Times asks if "the rise of Russia" is a threat to Beijing.
"Some people are worried that Russia might become 'unreasonable' after its victory in Crimea and Beijing will find it difficult to deal with Moscow in the future," says the daily.
However, in its editorial, the paper also points that Russia could not endanger China, as "the main strategic pressure comes from US-led Western powers".
"This ubiquitous uncertainty is the main issue facing China in the 21st Century and it is more worrying than the uncertainty between Beijing and Moscow… China hopes for a multi-polar world, which a relatively powerful Russia could help achieve," writes the Global Times.
Echoing a similar sentiment, political scientist Wang Yiwei writes in Haiwai Net that although the stand-off between Russia and the West could slow down global economic recovery, China could only benefit from the confrontation.
"The revival of Russia will help relieve China's strategic pressure. US energy and economic sanctions against Russia will be a favourable factor in speeding up negotiations with Moscow on energy co-operation and building a strategic partnership," he argues.
Phoenix TV, a Hong Kong-based pro-Beijing TV station, is surprised that the Russian President Vladimir Putin "thanked China for its support" during his speech in Moscow on Tuesday in which he defended Moscow's annexation of Crimea.
"China did not do anything; it just abstained" from voting against Russia in the United nations Security Council, the TV recalls. "This shows that Mr Putin is very isolated and feels compelled to tell the West that he has Chinese support," the channel points out in a commentary.
It adds, however, that "this appreciation is rather uncomfortable for China… as Beijing is very cautious not to be seen supporting separatism".
Michelle Obama Meanwhile, China-US relations, along with the dress sense of the US first lady, are grabbing media headlines as Michelle Obama starts a week-long visit to China.
She will be greeted by Peng Liyuan, the wife of Chinese President Xi Jinping, who will accompany her for part of her stay in the country.
Ni Feng from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences tells China Daily that the interaction between the two women "diversifies the style of leadership contacts between Beijing and Washington", and could prove crucial in "maintaining stable bilateral ties and resolving disagreements".
The People's Daily overseas edition notes that Mrs Obama had made the effort to learn to speak Chinese and acquaint herself with the country's culture.
It also thinks that "first lady diplomacy" can promote "understanding among the people of both countries".
Commenting on Mrs Obama's dress sense, an article in Xinhua news agency notes that she "likes bright colours" and has "changed the way a first lady should dress".
And finally, the press is calling for more transparency in the way schools are run and better protection for children after two former top managers at a sports school were accused of sexually abusing students.
The Xinhua news agency thinks there has been a "cover up" of the scandal and that this puts the students at risk. It calls for a change in the "culture of 'total submission' in sports schools".
BBC Monitoring reports and analyses news from TV, radio, web and print media around the world. For more reports from BBC Monitoring, click here. You can follow BBC Monitoring on Twitter