Don't you know, only the US has the right put troops wherever they see fit. Russia needs to ask NATO for permission to even move a fuel truck inside their borders, lest the Baltic lapdogs or Poland feel threatened.
Ukrainian War Developments
- Thread starter james smith esq
- Start date
- Status
Don't you know, only the US has the right put troops wherever they see fit. Russia needs to ask NATO for permission to even move a fuel truck inside their borders, lest the Baltic lapdogs or Poland feel threatened.
What is the purpose of these discussions ?
There is no hard data, only repeting the same thing again and again, try to dismiss any comment contradict with the official naraticve.
The guy could be replaced with a simple software, no one recognise the difference.
Even the answers could be scripted, with just gaps to insert the words, like "it is true there was issues in the past with the [INSERT WORD HERE] but since we improved a lot, and now we are better to handle [INSERT WORD HERE].
I sometimes enjoy watching US spokes"people" do their approximations of speech. It's what I imagine having a pet parrot to be like.
Not really, it's rooted in the Sino-Soviet Split, despite your "anti-Americanism" glue and mutual shared ideology (read: Communism).
It's not China's self-proclaimed 'true' intentions, but rather what the perception by opposing party that ultimately matters. For instance, China perceived USSR as a "revisionist power" and "existential threat", and I'll bet a $99 dollars that USSR would deny those claims and claim China was the "reckless power" and "aggressor". Perception by the opposing party is ultimately what matters and drove the Sino-Soviet Split, not what one side proclaims to be their 'true' intent.
If there is an enormous economic and military disparity between China and Russia, then it's entirely possible, in fact, likely that Russia will percieve China as a security threat to Siberia, due to declining Russia population, climate change rendering natural resources more accessible, and opening of the Northern Sea Route between Europe and Asia. Heck, anyone with half-a-brain seeing 120 million Dongbeiren landlocked without access to Sea of Japan as anomaly in world history.
Last edited:
Human beings aren't Newtonian point particles in a high school physics problem. Hyper-determinism and seeing how densely you can pack "Sino-Soviet split" into a sentence isn't the way to analyse geopolitics. People, or at least people like Xi and Putin and those who are going to succeed them, learn from history.
Since you're so interested in the Sino-Soviet split, let me tell you the main cause of it: The question of who would lead the Communist world. Mao felt that after Stalin's death he was the senior revolutionary and thus China should lead. Khrushchev felt otherwise. All of the ideological blather that followed stems from this basic contradiction. Today, no such question exists between China and Russia - their relationship is much stronger than it was then precisely because it lacks this ideological baggage. It was ideological and it was stupid and it won't be repeated.
Another point to raise was that China primarily wanted rapid advancement from its post-revolutionary backwardness and destitution into modernity and, quite simply, the West was the quicker ride to that modernity. Even that pragmatic dynamic doesn't exist today.
Second, for Russia to switch as you describe, it must perceive that it would be switching to the winning side - especially since Russia would be volunteering itself to be the West's front line. China being vastly more powerful than today negates the possibility of a Russian shift precisely because a future Russia which we'll assume resents China (an assumption I think is false and will remain false) would still fear China's enmity because of the vast power disparity.
To bring this back to the thread topic somewhat, Russia clearly has a project to unite the Slavic world under its banner in one form or another. Who's standing in the way of this project? America or China? Do you think China would object if Russia manages to take not only Ukraine but the Baltic states and a good chunk of the Balkans as well? The only thing Xi would tell Putin about this is, "All the best of luck to you. March all the way to Lisbon if you can make it."
What Russia shares with the West is blond hair and blue eyes. Do you think that's enough?
solarz
Brigadier
Exactly. Trying to explain the US-Russia-China dynamic through identity politics is the utmost foolishness.
Russia was wrecked by capitalist oligarchs after the fall of the Soviet Union. Putin single-handedly rescued Russia from destruction by reining in the oligarchs.
Xi Jinping built his popular mandate on his wildly successful anti-corruption campaign.
What do the two have in common? They both thwarted Western attempts to corrupt their country. They are far more ideologically aligned than most people give them credit for.
The danger with Russia is a lack of credible successor to Putin. Should something happen to Putin, it's quite possible that the oligarchs would take over again.
Do you think it is natural for 120 million Dongbeiren to be landlocked from access to Sea of Japan, while 120 million Russians from 8000 miles away have direct access to Sea of Japan? This is the precise reason why a Sino-Russian alliance will never work, because of Siberia and the natural contradiction from the Trans-Amur-Baikal annexations from Qing-era. As Putin said: "If we don't make every real effort [to invest in Siberia], then the indigenous Russian population will soon speak mostly Chinese, Korean, and Japanese." Putin recognizes the weakening demographic factors in Siberia compared to their neighbors.
This isn't even considering that climate change would unleash tremendous fertile lands and natural resources in Siberia and unlock the highly coveted Northern Sea Route. But yes, let's dilute it to merely "identity politics". It's not that simple.
Last edited:
Is taking over this land the only way China could have access to the water? And what use is the Sea of Japan? It's just another lake surrounded by islands like the SCS. What China needs is open access to the Pacific, and that means reunifying with Taiwan.
Part of what I think Putin is doing vis-à-vis Ukraine and the Baltic statelets is for the "domestic ricochet" effects. If Putin annexes more of Ukraine (or even the entire country), think about the price any successor would have to pay to mend relations with the West. He already raised the price with Crimea and he intends to raise it even further. Hell, if the University of Chicago (the cesspit out of which crawled neoliberal economics) could appoint Russia's president, their puppet would be hanged if he so much as suggested giving up any of the territories Russia took.
It's a brilliant political strategy - open fire on foreign enemies so their return fire kills your domestic opponents.
solarz
Brigadier
Sorry, but that's patently absurd. China has no interest in any Russian territory. The Chinese-Russian relationship today is extremely mature and stable. Any potential disagreements have long been ironed out.
- Status