Russia As A Chinese Hegemon's Right Hand Man

Jono

Jono

Junior Member
Registered Member
Phead128 said:
I am strongly against a formal treaty alliance with Russia.

a) Russian and Chinese strategic interests overlap in terms of multi-polarity and anti-hegemonism.
b) Russian and Chinese military collaboration is very strong and robust.
c) Russian and Chinese share many of the same interests as far as countering US imperialism in developing countries and themselves.

That's great, Russia and China should be "Comprehensive Strategic Partnership", but never a Formal Treaty Alliance. (See Sino-Soviet Split in height of Cold War and how 'anti-Americanism' and 'anti-imperialists' was an insufficient glue)

China should never get into a quagmire in Eastern Europe or Middle East to defend Russian sphere of influence, OR defend Russia from NATO invasion or get into Cold War 2.0 situation where it has to choose between West or Russia.
Click to expand...
I would agree with China not entering into a formal treaty alliance with Russia, and vice versa.
OTOH, China is striving towards a multi-polar world where Russia should play a major role. Hence a strong strategic partnership works to both countries' advantages. The only people not happy to see this development are the Anglos.
Being strategic partners, China should help Russia secure its interests in Europe and central Asia because I see a convergence of interests at these places for both countries, taking the joint military drill to prepare for changes in Afghanistan as a cue. And in return I think Russia will grow to accept the BRI as it is in Russia's interests too.
I predict the Shanghai Cooperation Organization will grow in numbers and in strength.
 
Blitzo

Blitzo

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Deino

Deino

Lieutenant General
Staff member
Super Moderator
Registered Member
Blitzo said:
For these kind of ideas, there's no reason to entertain them unless they have been stated in an official capacity.
Click to expand...
Do you know hIm? … and if you think its better to delet’s my post, then please go ahead.
 
O

Overbom

Brigadier
Registered Member
Deino said:
I must admit, I‘m not sure if this is the appropriate thread, but this was posted by a guy I don‘t know (esp. since he blocked me) but my publisher rates quite high!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1730491323541778857

What do you think?
Click to expand...
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Just a casual reading of it, already makes clear that this "plan" is in fact, a garbage plan.

"100 years administration"
"A clutch of leading institutes of higher learning -- including Peking University -- would move their main campuses to Harbin"
 
D

Deleted member 24525

Guest
Deino said:
I must admit, I‘m not sure if this is the appropriate thread, but this was posted by a guy I don‘t know (esp. since he blocked me) but my publisher rates quite high!

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1730491323541778857

What do you think?
Click to expand...
Russia has always been extremely resistant to allowing Chinese activity in Siberia and the far east to expand, and it would be a pretty wild 180 for them to suddenly be okay with leasing the land to China for 100 years. Also 北大 and NUDT moving their main campuses to a whole other province is quite a claim.
I would be very happy if this were actually true, and China were allowed to actually survey and develop even a small portion Siberia's vast mineral deposits without constant roadblocks, but I don't think it's going to happen.
 
D

drowingfish

Junior Member
Registered Member
its remarkable that two years ago no one cared about this idea and here we are seriously contemplating this as a possibility.
 
B

Bob Smith

Junior Member
Registered Member
drowingfish said:
its remarkable that two years ago no one cared about this idea and here we are seriously contemplating this as a possibility.
Click to expand...
No one is seriously contemplating this outside terminally online geopolitics addicts. Have you seen how Russians speak of Chinese people online? Just like how white supremacist Americans talk about the brown hordes crossing from Mexico across the southern border. Putin would unironically be thrown from power if he allowed this.
 
Luke Warmwar

Luke Warmwar

New Member
Registered Member
A better analogy than US-Australia would be US-UK, or even US-France.

Australia isn’t a middle power. It has no nukes, no independent military, and no diplomatic heft or overseas vassals.

The UK and France have security council seats, nukes, remnants of colonial holdings, and international heft in finance and diplomacy.

Often their interests align with those of the US. Sometimes they conflict, and often they lose out. But they’re still semi-independent actors.

Another comparison might be Israel, Türkiye, or Saudi Arabia. They’re also all US-aligned, but are able to take independent-ish action.

Australia, though? Not a chance. It’s a terminal vassal. When its last master, the UK, packed up shop, it promptly went and handed the leash to the US.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top