Our friend is China
“In the US, they are planning to incite Russia against China. Americans with the filing of the very legendary Henry Kissinger intend to encourage us to attack our huge neighbor. It is perhaps unnecessary to explain that Russia is not going to quarrel with China for the sake of America’s interests, whatever the talker Donald Trump promised us.
Look closely at the big bloggers, politicians and journalists who will shout that "China is our enemy." With a high degree of probability, such activity is generously paid from overseas, with all the ensuing consequences ”(fritzmorgen.livejournal).
You know, I want to cry: aha! No, not even that: AHA! Revealed the secret and secret plan of evil Americans to incite Russia to China. That is, if someone somewhere in the Russian press speaks negatively about China, this means only and exclusively one thing: this activity is generously paid off from overseas, and the blogger’s stigma is definitely “into the cannon”.
Such is the case. So we opened the "world conspiracy" - who writes against China in the press, he is definitely an agent of the State Department. Otherwise it can not be. It’s just that the last years of 15 (if not more) are being painted to us about the prospects of Russian-Chinese cooperation, they call China a strategic partner, and Xi and Putin are smiling merrily with photos.
At first glance: what doubts can there be? Russia and China are absolutely inevitably bound to form a kind of “alliance” that opposes any “radishes” from the West there ... Russian propaganda has worked in this vein (especially after 2014). And everything was simple, understandable and logical. And then there was a "surprise".
“In September, 2018, the head of the representative office of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in China, said that Chinese banks had joined the US and EU sanctions against Russia and began to refuse to conduct transactions involving Russian companies.”
This is our “Peking duck with sauce” that turned out, in fact, this one sentence completely refutes all the fact that all these years we have been “rubbed” about China.
That is, here is a "unexpected". But in principle, even earlier, after the introduction of sanctions in 2014, representatives of Vnesheconombank loudly declared ... that Chinese bankers do not give us loans, they do not. And somehow it sounded dull then, without an accent. Without continuation. Well, do not give and do not give.
In fact, everything is much more serious. Much. Here, I'm sorry, but the position of China just leads me in terrible amazement. For obvious reasons, America could not be the “friend and ally” of the Chinese people. That is, having already somewhere in the 20 percent of world production, America continued to consume 40-50 percent of the world pie (more recently!). That's exactly what explained the highest standard of living in the US (not everyone, oddly enough!). That is, a departure from the model of colonial exploitation of the whole world has in fact definitely led to a sharp drop in the standard of living in the United States. Any large and strong independent state like China, Russia, Iran inevitably (by the very fact of its existence!) Challenged American hegemony.
That is, the Americans are not satisfied with any specific policies of Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, Baghdad, but the fact of their presence on the map. Any strong state will sharply and categorically oppose a “non-equivalent exchange,” that is, beads in exchange for gold, dollar bills in exchange for oil. Namely, this is the basis of Western welfare. That, in principle, automatically made Moscow and Beijing allies.
And at the moment of a geopolitical crisis of unprecedented proportions, the Chinese leadership eventually decides to impose international (and in fact American) sanctions against Russia. Somehow this very decision is underestimated by many (both in the framework of Russian-Chinese relations, and in general in the framework of international politics). Thus, China demonstrates two things. First: the significance of relations with the United States for him is an order of magnitude greater than the significance of relations with Russia. Just fine, but then what kind of "alliance" can we talk about? Second, even in the conditions of the most severe confrontation with the USA, he is not ready to pursue a truly independent foreign policy.
“The embarrassment became apparent about 1,5 a year ago, when the activity of Chinese financial institutions was decreasing, when it came to working with Russian clients. As a result, Chinese financial institutions began to block corporate transfers. He noted that “it is still possible to open a company, but it is impossible to open a bank account in China with a Russian passport”.
“In China Merchant Bank, Russian customers were asked to“ pick up the money, close the accounts, leave and never return ”(Skymax managing partner Igor Shibanov).
Something like this “friendship” and such “partnership” we have with “Great China”. Suddenly, yes? Well, like, yes, completely unexpected. Nobody expected any “super-help” from China, but, as already mentioned, it was supposed that we were “on the same side” stories". So, along the way, it turned out that it was still different. Which, frankly, causes sincere bewilderment. Is China planning to sail alone? Or how?
You know, now a little “tired” here is the most “limited” cooperation that we are offered, that is, cooperation in certain areas. That is, "great China" is interested in cooperation in the military-political field? And what will it look like in reality? That is, it turns out that China is simply a very large country interested in working with Russia on certain issues (very separate)?
But, forgive, then it is impossible to speak about any "alliance". Then each such “separate” question will be carefully studied in the Kremlin for its benefit / disadvantage for Russia. By the way, yes, the Power of Siberia gas pipeline, which takes us away from dependence only on the European gas market, is really beneficial for Russia. This is if you look strategically. That is why European diplomats have made some efforts to block it.
But what next? What else? What else can we do? Basically there was a certain commonality of positions around North Korea. But that North Korea is much more interesting to China (for historical and geographical reasons), but not to Russia. They say that Russia is “busy” with “insignificant” Ukraine, well, yes, and China, in the same way, is “busy” with North Korea. In fact - even less significant. Cause? Close historical ties of China and Korea. So this is not an example.
Here, again, they are actively confusing theory with practice: yes, Russia and China are side by side, they complement each other quite well and could cooperate. But in practice, everything looks a little different. The trouble here is in the absence of China’s genuine national strategy, designed for decades to come. The reason he imposed sanctions in the banking sector against Russia is simple: China is economically very closely tied to the States and categorically does not want to quarrel with them.
That is, China does not have any “independent” policy (as it turned out!). He really “pumps” his economy, and this is certainly good, he places his military bases on the sea trade routes. It is actively invested in various sectors around the world. But "without the permission of the Americans," he will not give loans to Russia. So it goes. That is America запретила they do it, and they do not.
That is, as it turned out, China is quite living in a "unipolar" world and feels great there. And within the framework of this very "unipolar world" he is trying to defend his interests. No more and no less. The strategy is really controversial: China already too big for the Americans to “not notice”. The Chinese leadership has such an illusion that the line of super-fast development for Western loans can be extended indefinitely. Alas, it is not. This very “line” is already irrevocably ended. The United States has begun to "contain" China.
And this line in the US-China relations will prevail. By the way, it is useful to read the English-speaking Chinese press (and even just watch the caricatures) - the Chinese are well aware that America is implementing a “strategy for surrounding China”. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Australia, Vietnam, Malaysia, India ... All these countries “surround” China, as it were, and all these countries have political / territorial contradictions with it.
And behind all this is America. Well, how else? Each play needs its own director. And now, being in such an “elegant” strategic environment, China introduces (and in fact it is!) Economic sanctions against Russia. Shot "in the leg" counted.
“Some Chinese commercial banks broadly interpret third-country sanctions against Russia, said Vladimir Danilov, head of the Central Bank’s office in China. In September, it was reported that commercial Chinese banks often cite Western sanctions as a reason for refusing to service payments of Russian bank customers. ”
That is, in fact (despite the American political pressure on China itself), Chinese banks play in the western financial field according to Western rules. Well, it's good and great, someone will say. Yes, how to say. America (unlike the USSR-Russia) has never recognized Taiwan / Tibet as part of China. From the point of view of the Americans, Tibet is “occupied”, and they support the independence of Taiwan by military-political means right up to sending carrier aircraft carriers. In the West, they actively support the Uighur struggle for their rights and curse the Chinese repressions. At the same time, for China, territorial integrity (including Taiwan!) Is something extremely important and not subject to discussion, and so, for some reason, as a result, economic considerations in China prevail over political ones. That is, if you really simplify: American dollars are much more important for them than the question of their own territorial integrity (the country great!)
And according to the results, they introduce economic “Crimean” sanctions against Russia (which, of course, recognizes their territorial integrity), together with the United States (which their territorial integrity does not recognize in principle). Perhaps, Russia should also somewhat “correct” its foreign policy, since for some reason, Russia’s unambiguous support of China in matters of principle for some reason did not bring Russia any dividends, nor does it bring any prospects in this matter. Russia (unlike so many countries) never did not consider Taiwan separately from China. China, in gratitude, not only did not recognize the Crimea (what about the Chinese superpower?), But also transmitted US economic sanctions on Russian counterparties.
You know, it seems that we are doing something wrong. In the sense - absolutely wrong. That is, the fact that such a difference in positions between the US and the USSR / RF in Uiguria / Tibet / Taiwan did not bring Russia / USSR in general no political dividends and did not prevent the establishment of closest partnerships between Beijing and Washington (that is, the Chinese do not even require changing the US position on these issues as a condition for the continuation of the dialogue!). This indicates that international politics is not as simple and straightforward as many commentators think.
Look closely at the big bloggers, politicians and journalists who will shout that "China is our enemy." With a high degree of probability, such activity is generously paid from overseas, with all the ensuing consequences ”(fritzmorgen.livejournal).
You know, I want to cry: aha! No, not even that: AHA! Revealed the secret and secret plan of evil Americans to incite Russia to China. That is, if someone somewhere in the Russian press speaks negatively about China, this means only and exclusively one thing: this activity is generously paid off from overseas, and the blogger’s stigma is definitely “into the cannon”.
Such is the case. So we opened the "world conspiracy" - who writes against China in the press, he is definitely an agent of the State Department. Otherwise it can not be. It’s just that the last years of 15 (if not more) are being painted to us about the prospects of Russian-Chinese cooperation, they call China a strategic partner, and Xi and Putin are smiling merrily with photos.
At first glance: what doubts can there be? Russia and China are absolutely inevitably bound to form a kind of “alliance” that opposes any “radishes” from the West there ... Russian propaganda has worked in this vein (especially after 2014). And everything was simple, understandable and logical. And then there was a "surprise".
“In September, 2018, the head of the representative office of the Central Bank of the Russian Federation in China, said that Chinese banks had joined the US and EU sanctions against Russia and began to refuse to conduct transactions involving Russian companies.”
This is our “Peking duck with sauce” that turned out, in fact, this one sentence completely refutes all the fact that all these years we have been “rubbed” about China.
That is, here is a "unexpected". But in principle, even earlier, after the introduction of sanctions in 2014, representatives of Vnesheconombank loudly declared ... that Chinese bankers do not give us loans, they do not. And somehow it sounded dull then, without an accent. Without continuation. Well, do not give and do not give.
In fact, everything is much more serious. Much. Here, I'm sorry, but the position of China just leads me in terrible amazement. For obvious reasons, America could not be the “friend and ally” of the Chinese people. That is, having already somewhere in the 20 percent of world production, America continued to consume 40-50 percent of the world pie (more recently!). That's exactly what explained the highest standard of living in the US (not everyone, oddly enough!). That is, a departure from the model of colonial exploitation of the whole world has in fact definitely led to a sharp drop in the standard of living in the United States. Any large and strong independent state like China, Russia, Iran inevitably (by the very fact of its existence!) Challenged American hegemony.
That is, the Americans are not satisfied with any specific policies of Moscow, Beijing, Tehran, Baghdad, but the fact of their presence on the map. Any strong state will sharply and categorically oppose a “non-equivalent exchange,” that is, beads in exchange for gold, dollar bills in exchange for oil. Namely, this is the basis of Western welfare. That, in principle, automatically made Moscow and Beijing allies.
And at the moment of a geopolitical crisis of unprecedented proportions, the Chinese leadership eventually decides to impose international (and in fact American) sanctions against Russia. Somehow this very decision is underestimated by many (both in the framework of Russian-Chinese relations, and in general in the framework of international politics). Thus, China demonstrates two things. First: the significance of relations with the United States for him is an order of magnitude greater than the significance of relations with Russia. Just fine, but then what kind of "alliance" can we talk about? Second, even in the conditions of the most severe confrontation with the USA, he is not ready to pursue a truly independent foreign policy.
“The embarrassment became apparent about 1,5 a year ago, when the activity of Chinese financial institutions was decreasing, when it came to working with Russian clients. As a result, Chinese financial institutions began to block corporate transfers. He noted that “it is still possible to open a company, but it is impossible to open a bank account in China with a Russian passport”.
“In China Merchant Bank, Russian customers were asked to“ pick up the money, close the accounts, leave and never return ”(Skymax managing partner Igor Shibanov).
Something like this “friendship” and such “partnership” we have with “Great China”. Suddenly, yes? Well, like, yes, completely unexpected. Nobody expected any “super-help” from China, but, as already mentioned, it was supposed that we were “on the same side” stories". So, along the way, it turned out that it was still different. Which, frankly, causes sincere bewilderment. Is China planning to sail alone? Or how?
You know, now a little “tired” here is the most “limited” cooperation that we are offered, that is, cooperation in certain areas. That is, "great China" is interested in cooperation in the military-political field? And what will it look like in reality? That is, it turns out that China is simply a very large country interested in working with Russia on certain issues (very separate)?
But, forgive, then it is impossible to speak about any "alliance". Then each such “separate” question will be carefully studied in the Kremlin for its benefit / disadvantage for Russia. By the way, yes, the Power of Siberia gas pipeline, which takes us away from dependence only on the European gas market, is really beneficial for Russia. This is if you look strategically. That is why European diplomats have made some efforts to block it.
But what next? What else? What else can we do? Basically there was a certain commonality of positions around North Korea. But that North Korea is much more interesting to China (for historical and geographical reasons), but not to Russia. They say that Russia is “busy” with “insignificant” Ukraine, well, yes, and China, in the same way, is “busy” with North Korea. In fact - even less significant. Cause? Close historical ties of China and Korea. So this is not an example.
Here, again, they are actively confusing theory with practice: yes, Russia and China are side by side, they complement each other quite well and could cooperate. But in practice, everything looks a little different. The trouble here is in the absence of China’s genuine national strategy, designed for decades to come. The reason he imposed sanctions in the banking sector against Russia is simple: China is economically very closely tied to the States and categorically does not want to quarrel with them.
That is, China does not have any “independent” policy (as it turned out!). He really “pumps” his economy, and this is certainly good, he places his military bases on the sea trade routes. It is actively invested in various sectors around the world. But "without the permission of the Americans," he will not give loans to Russia. So it goes. That is America запретила they do it, and they do not.
That is, as it turned out, China is quite living in a "unipolar" world and feels great there. And within the framework of this very "unipolar world" he is trying to defend his interests. No more and no less. The strategy is really controversial: China already too big for the Americans to “not notice”. The Chinese leadership has such an illusion that the line of super-fast development for Western loans can be extended indefinitely. Alas, it is not. This very “line” is already irrevocably ended. The United States has begun to "contain" China.
And this line in the US-China relations will prevail. By the way, it is useful to read the English-speaking Chinese press (and even just watch the caricatures) - the Chinese are well aware that America is implementing a “strategy for surrounding China”. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, Australia, Vietnam, Malaysia, India ... All these countries “surround” China, as it were, and all these countries have political / territorial contradictions with it.
And behind all this is America. Well, how else? Each play needs its own director. And now, being in such an “elegant” strategic environment, China introduces (and in fact it is!) Economic sanctions against Russia. Shot "in the leg" counted.
“Some Chinese commercial banks broadly interpret third-country sanctions against Russia, said Vladimir Danilov, head of the Central Bank’s office in China. In September, it was reported that commercial Chinese banks often cite Western sanctions as a reason for refusing to service payments of Russian bank customers. ”
That is, in fact (despite the American political pressure on China itself), Chinese banks play in the western financial field according to Western rules. Well, it's good and great, someone will say. Yes, how to say. America (unlike the USSR-Russia) has never recognized Taiwan / Tibet as part of China. From the point of view of the Americans, Tibet is “occupied”, and they support the independence of Taiwan by military-political means right up to sending carrier aircraft carriers. In the West, they actively support the Uighur struggle for their rights and curse the Chinese repressions. At the same time, for China, territorial integrity (including Taiwan!) Is something extremely important and not subject to discussion, and so, for some reason, as a result, economic considerations in China prevail over political ones. That is, if you really simplify: American dollars are much more important for them than the question of their own territorial integrity (the country great!)
And according to the results, they introduce economic “Crimean” sanctions against Russia (which, of course, recognizes their territorial integrity), together with the United States (which their territorial integrity does not recognize in principle). Perhaps, Russia should also somewhat “correct” its foreign policy, since for some reason, Russia’s unambiguous support of China in matters of principle for some reason did not bring Russia any dividends, nor does it bring any prospects in this matter. Russia (unlike so many countries) never did not consider Taiwan separately from China. China, in gratitude, not only did not recognize the Crimea (what about the Chinese superpower?), But also transmitted US economic sanctions on Russian counterparties.
You know, it seems that we are doing something wrong. In the sense - absolutely wrong. That is, the fact that such a difference in positions between the US and the USSR / RF in Uiguria / Tibet / Taiwan did not bring Russia / USSR in general no political dividends and did not prevent the establishment of closest partnerships between Beijing and Washington (that is, the Chinese do not even require changing the US position on these issues as a condition for the continuation of the dialogue!). This indicates that international politics is not as simple and straightforward as many commentators think.
Information