Miscellaneous News

taxiya said:

Our difference is that I don't see Crimea being part of Ukraine to begin with.

Click to expand...

Except Russia itself recognized Crimea being part of Ukraine at the breakup of Soviet Union and it was even gifted to Ukraine SSR in 1954.

taxiya said:

Crimea is not like Baltic countries for example. Crimea was taken by Russian from Ottoman who itself "annexed" Crimea from the Tartar, then it was "gifted" to Ukraine SSR by Khrushchev. You can call the early Crimean Tartar the "victim" but you can't call Ukraine the victim.

Click to expand...

Fair enough. Ottoman Empire, Tartars, Russian Empire, and United States are ALL dirty imperialist powers. Glad we can agree too. If it is a matter of "who is a bigger imperialist", then I agree US is the biggest imperialist of them all. But being 'best friends' with Russia doesn't mean I need to blindly support every action Russia performs. That double-standard is America's specialty.

taxiya said:

The idea of "gift" was based on the expectation that there will never be a divorce.

Click to expand...

Our difference is that I see a "divorce" as the breakup of Soviet Union, and Russia recognized Crimea being part of Ukraine at the breakup of Soviet Union in 1989.

taxiya said:

But if one side breaks the promise then don't expect the other side to hold on the bargain.

Click to expand...

??? I don't understand this. What 'promise'? What 'bargain'? When Soviet Union collapsed, Russia recognized Ukraine's sovereignty as an independent nation. There is no conditions on Crimea upon independence as far as I am aware?

taxiya said:

Yes I know there was an agreement at the breakup of USSR, and I won't give a dime to it

Click to expand...

Yea, pffffttttttt, that legally-binding treaty at breakup of USSR that Russia signed recognizing Ukraine's independence? I won't give a dime to it... because Ukraine broke some vague 'promises' and 'bargains' to not 'divorce'.

I'm not buying this...

taxiya said:

just like I don't give a dime to any treaty that China signed with foreign powers before 1949.

Click to expand...

PRC is a successor state to ROC/Qing, so all prior treaties are already nullified and not valid, such as Treaty of Nanjing 1842 with Hong Kong.

However, Russia signed the legally-binding treaty recognizing Ukraine's independence as a sovereign state. So you can't even use successor state as an excuse to nullify the past agreements, because it was Russia (not Soviet Union) who recognized Crimea as part of Ukraine.

taxiya said:

So I don't see the "annexation" and "Imperialist" to begin with.

Click to expand...

If we were both honest, both the United States and Russia are "defending their core interests" by using imperialism offensively. It's just a matter of semantics and perspective and word choices. Just because China is 'best friends' with Russia doesn't mean you need to blindly support every Russian actions even when it's blatant annexation/imperialism.

taxiya said:

Another difference is that you interpret China's support to Russian sovereignty integrity does NOT cover Crimea.

Click to expand...

Incorrect. I said China maintains a formal policy of 'Strategic Ambiguity' on Crimean sovereignty to appease both Ukraine/Russia. The proof is China's abstentions from UNSC vote to condemn Crimea annexation (rather than a veto or yes vote). In reality, China maintains defacto trade relations. China doesn't even touch the subject of Crimean sovereignty to appease Ukraine/Russia.

taxiya said:

For that you quoted an Ukrainian news claiming Chinese official stance. Yet this significant "stance" was neither made public by Ukrainian government, nor Chinese government. That is kind of wishful twist.

Click to expand...

Fair enough.

taxiya said:

Now we are seeing the "unlimited friendship better than any alliance" from the highest level.

Click to expand...

This is precisely you twisting words to fit your narrative. Here is the exactly quote:

The sides call for the establishment of a new kind of relationships between world powers on the basis of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and mutually beneficial cooperation. They reaffirm that the new inter-State relations between Russia and China are superior to political and military alliances of the Cold War era. Friendship between the two States has no limits, there are no ”forbidden“ areas of cooperation, strengthening of bilateral strategic cooperation is neither aimed against third countries nor affected by the changing international environment and circumstantial changes in third countries.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

It doesn't say "Russia-China unlimited friendship is better than an alliance.", it says "Russia-China unlimited friendship is a superior replacement of antiquate/obsolete Cold-war era military/political alliances." In other words, the "Russia-China unlimited friendship is not aimed at third-party like antiquate/obsolete Cold-war era military/political alliances." or more "Win-win-win" relationship the foreign ministry loves to recite.

taxiya said:

Are you still going to insist on your interpretation of China's "objection of Crimea annexation"?

Click to expand...

There are three aspects to this:

• China's formal policy of Strategic Ambiguity on Crimean sovereignty to appease Ukraine/Russia.
• China does not want to recognize "Crimea Reunification Referendum" because it would legitimate Xinjiang/Tibetan Independence Referendums. It just sets up a bad precedent.
• China does not want recognize irredentism based on loose historical or ethnic/racial kinship, because that is a bad precedent on it's own territorial integrity.

taxiya said:

You may disagree with what China is doing, but I can't see how you can hold on to your interpretation. This is the reason of my post #28,637

Click to expand...

I fully agree with China's "strategic ambiguity" on Crimean sovereignty to appease Ukraine/Russia, it's the smartest move. Not even your "unlimited friendship" will force China to openly screw over Ukraine. China will be formally neutral, and that is correct stance.

taxiya said:

True. But in UN charter there is also the self-determination clause where 90% of Crimea population can choose to join Russia.

Click to expand...

Let's be real. China doesn't like this self-determination clause because it can potentially enable Xinjiang or Tibetan self-determination vote and independence. Privately, I bet Chinese gov't thinks the Crimean self-determination referendum is bullshit, but will not openly state it to avoid a fallout with Russia.

sinophilia said:

There are more Mongolians in China than in Mongolia. In fact there are more Mongolians in China than on the rest of the Earth combined.

There are some ~3.4 million Mongolians in Mongolia. The number of households is under 800,000. The GDP per capita is ~$4k. Giving each Mongolian household $100k would amount to a one-time cost of $80 billion for China. I think a whole lot of Mongolians would be happy to accept such a sum in return for voting for annexation in a referendum, and in fact they would be getting a better life and equal rights in a country which has been as much a part of their civilization as vice versa.

They would be living in a country as equal citizens with a future ahead of them that surpasses any nation before it in Human history, instead of just doing what Mongolians do in Mongolia which is basically more of nothing. Also I doubt that all Mongolians would take up such an offer so the cost would be less than $80 billion anyway. You just need >50% or >66% if they make it two-thirds supermajority.

Click to expand...

inner Mongolians are much more Sinicized. even their dialects are very different. the Mongo empire actually has 4 factions, Yuan was just one of them with higher sinicization. the other factions played more role in Europe, which is why outer Mongolia is close to Russia. I seriously doubt outer Mongolians know what China is like these days, thus no incentive. so I don't have any expectation of that happening (but certainly would welcome if they are willing) expect maybe in some form of Asian Union.


In fact almost every one of China's land neighbors has a close relative as an ethnic group in China. So it would be interesting to watch as you see more of the same people with much better lives inside China than outside.

so even though the Mongolia has special historical relationship with China, it's Korea, Japan (and Vietnam culturally) that has the genetic and cultural affinity with China. I would prioritize relationship with these countries. they are our genetic and cultural kins. no matter how difficult it is, we have to make it work. my understanding is the Europeans have done much more butchering towards each other than us east Asians.

This American comedian. Cope harder.

ZeEa5KPul said:

Phead128 said:

Let be real here. I am Anti-Imperialism.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Quoting out of context?
This was in reference to Crimean annexation. Imperialism is bad, whether it is Russian or American.

ZeEa5KPul said:

Phead128 said:

If Russia can tolerate junior subordinate status in the Sino-Russo relationship

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

In fact, it is possible to support closer cooperation between China-Russia against a common enemy, and still recognize that Russia does some pretty naughty things. Or do I have to blindly support Russia because it's a best friend and abandon basic moral principles? Yea, I'm going to call out imperialism, whether Russian or American.

Also, "Junior subordinate status" like US-UK relationship is nowhere near the level of imperialism of Russia's Crimean annexation. Nice try quoting out of context though.

victoon said:

inner Mongolians are much more Sinicized. even their dialects are very different. the Mongo empire actually has 4 factions, Yuan was just one of them with higher sinicization. the other factions played more role in Europe, which is why outer Mongolia is close to Russia. I seriously doubt outer Mongolians know what China is like these days, thus no incentive. so I don't have any expectation of that happening (but certainly would welcome if they are willing) expect maybe in some form of Asian Union.

In fact almost every one of China's land neighbors has a close relative as an ethnic group in China. So it would be interesting to watch as you see more of the same people with much better lives inside China than outside.

so even though the Mongolia has special historical relationship with China, it's Korea, Japan (and Vietnam culturally) that has the genetic and cultural affinity with China. I would prioritize relationship with these countries. they are our genetic and cultural kins. no matter how difficult it is, we have to make it work. my understanding is the Europeans have done much more butchering towards each other than us east Asians.

Click to expand...

I disagree with the genetic and cultural kin aspect. For the past few decades, China played that game with SK, Japan, and Vietnam, using their shared history, culture, and skin color to pave way for special relationships. What did they receive in return: insults, cultural appropriation attempts, political f**k overs and etc. China should only have special relationships with countries that share its mentality. This "muh race" mentality is, to be frank, stupid and can easily be exploitable since SK and Japan are basically American vassal states while Vietnam carries a "screw China" mentality that is at least a millennia old. The Europeans are "united" because they are rich. I guarantee you that once their economies get driven down into the ground while China continues to ascend, they will go back to shredding each other up. Lithuania's Taiwan issues, reactions to Macron's proposal for a European army, and Brexit are examples of small cracks in this European "unity".

Phead128 said:

In fact, it is possible to support closer cooperation between China-Russia against a common enemy, and still recognize that Russia does some pretty naughty things.

Click to expand...

Does it? I can't think up examples, I'm afraid. All I see is Russia belatedly responding to being encircled and hounded after it tried every conceivable way to integrate with the West.

Phead128 said:

Or do I have to blindly support Russia because it's a best friend and abandon basic moral principles?

Click to expand...

Not at all, you can support or oppose whatever Russia does for any reason you please; just don't expect your views to gain much traction. For instance, I - with my eyes wide open - support what Russia's doing now on moral grounds. I oppose the West's encroachment into Slavic territories (as I oppose its encroachment into any people's territories) and support Russia's efforts to repel this encroachment. That concords very well with my basic moral principles.

Phead128 said:

Yea, I'm going to call out imperialism, whether Russian or American.

Click to expand...

If you like slapping the "imperialist" label on things, perhaps you might find some examples of Chinese imperialism - or is China exempt from your moralizing?

Phead128 said:

Also, "Junior subordinate status" like US-UK relationship is nowhere near the level of imperialism of Russia's Crimean annexation.

Click to expand...

Why do you have this urge to "subordinate" Russia?

Crang said:

View attachment 82243

This American comedian. Cope harder.

Click to expand...

The guy was awfully quite when BLM was happening, sure he said a few things here and there, but his people were being killed. Cope harder.

sinophilia said:

There are more Mongolians in China than in Mongolia. In fact there are more Mongolians in China than on the rest of the Earth combined.

There are some ~3.4 million Mongolians in Mongolia. The number of households is under 800,000. The GDP per capita is ~$4k. Giving each Mongolian household $100k would amount to a one-time cost of $80 billion for China. I think a whole lot of Mongolians would be happy to accept such a sum in return for voting for annexation in a referendum, and in fact they would be getting a better life and equal rights in a country which has been as much a part of their civilization as vice versa.

They would be living in a country as equal citizens with a future ahead of them that surpasses any nation before it in Human history, instead of just doing what Mongolians do in Mongolia which is basically more of nothing. Also I doubt that all Mongolians would take up such an offer so the cost would be less than $80 billion anyway. You just need >50% or >66% if they make it two-thirds supermajority.

Click to expand...

I once posted here about a surreal experience during a bioethics workshop where I was the only non-white participant and all my Trump-bashing colleagues thought it was self-evident that if technology was to become available, all people of color would want to gene edit their children to be white.

I'm now seeing the same kind of logic being echoed here. Kindly remember China is not the only country with national pride. History matters. Culture matters. Identity matters.