Academician: China is not a strategic ally, it will not send soldiers to fight for our interests


Although Russia and China have overlapping interests, our countries are not strategic partners. And we can not fully trust China.


This idea was expressed today by academician Alexei Arbatov during the online session of Primakov Readings, organized by the Institute of World Economy and International Relations (IMEMO) RAS and the news agency Interfax.

Academician Arbatov heads the Center for International Security at IMEMO. He believes that Russia should become an independent center of power in the modern world.

Alexei Arbatov mentioned the events of half a century ago, when relations between Moscow and Beijing were so spoiled that the USSR called China the main threat to peace. The academician believes that today we hit the other extreme, calling China a strategic partner:

You can’t rush from one extreme to another, then China is our biggest threat to peace, then it is our strategic ally or partner. Such concepts cannot be thrown. A strategic ally is when you are ready to send your soldiers to fight for the interests of your ally and vice versa. I am sure that we and China do not and will not have such a situation.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

84 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Hunter 2 29 May 2020 16: 16 New
    • 38
    • 21
    +17
    Damn it - Revealed the Truth! laughing All 5 thousand years of its existence, China has not entered into military - strategic alliances!
    Academics are getting smaller! crying
    1. Kronos 29 May 2020 16: 20 New
      • 20
      • 5
      +15
      Entered for example happened with the Koreans against the Japanese, such as during the time of the famous admiral Lee Sun Xin
      1. Hunter 2 29 May 2020 16: 32 New
        • 10
        • 11
        -1
        When the Japanese decided to conquer Korea ... well, along the way, China? Well, where is the strategic union? Where is the Chinese Navy during the battle? Stop making up stories.
        1. Kronos 29 May 2020 17: 03 New
          • 8
          • 4
          +4
          The Chinese army supported the Koreans than helped the Koreans greatly
          1. Hunter 2 29 May 2020 20: 37 New
            • 9
            • 3
            +6
            The USSR also helped China in the fight against the Japanese Militarists ... during WWII and the USA they helped, but this does not mean at all that China was a Strategic Ally of both the USSR and the USA. This is a situational alliance threatened by a common Enemy. The goals and objectives of each side are completely their own.
            So with your example.
            Colleague Rich (Dmitry Greetings hi) below on the branch clearly defined the Strategic Allies!
            1. Kronos 29 May 2020 20: 40 New
              • 6
              • 3
              +3
              In general, the USSR were just strategic allies under Stalin, in particular during the Korean War, the Chinese troops fought against the Americans instead of the Soviet specialists, but under Khrushchev they already fled
              1. Hunter 2 29 May 2020 20: 53 New
                • 3
                • 3
                0
                Quote: Kronos
                In general, the USSR were just strategic allies under Stalin, in particular during the Korean War, the Chinese troops fought against the Americans instead of the Soviet specialists, but under Khrushchev they already fled

                Ok ... let's try it differently! The USA during the WWII provided much more assistance to China than the USSR. It turned out for one simple reason - the Enemy of My Enemy, FRIEND !!! In your opinion, it turns out that they were also Strategic Allies ??? The USSR - also received US assistance ... also a Strategic Ally?
                It is very interesting, you are not embarrassed that a little later during the War in Korea - so many Strategic Allies clashed?
                1. Kronos 29 May 2020 21: 05 New
                  • 6
                  • 2
                  +4
                  No, it doesn’t bother in the USSR and China built socialism it was not a situational union while the USA was a contradiction from the very beginning of the existence of the USSR
                  1. Shurik70 29 May 2020 21: 39 New
                    • 2
                    • 4
                    -2
                    ANY country will not sign a strategic military alliance agreement with the first one. Only with those with whom such an alliance is beneficial.
                    And Russia has a GREAT chance to make such an alliance profitable. Make friends against the USA.
                  2. Maki Avellevich 30 May 2020 07: 45 New
                    • 7
                    • 1
                    +6
                    Over time, it began to think that, in principle, China saw all the pale-faced in white slippers, without exception.
                    To fantasize about alliances with them is not a blissful lesson.
                2. Lopatov 29 May 2020 21: 52 New
                  • 3
                  • 2
                  +1
                  Quote: Hunter 2
                  In your opinion, it turns out that they were also Strategic Allies ???

                  Yes. And still remain as such.
                  I remind you that the United States helped the Kuomintang. They are now in Taiwan.
    2. Olgovich 29 May 2020 16: 26 New
      • 16
      • 9
      +7
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Damn it - Revealed the Truth! All 5 thousand years of its existence, China has not entered into military - strategic alliances!
      Academics are getting smaller!

      So this is the whole Arbat, which thundered during perestroika!

      Thought he disappeared ...

      Apparently, they forgot it already, so I decided to get out with the obvious truth, to remind myself ...
      Without him, of course, no one knows this ...

      Where interests coincide, we go together, where no, we simply respect each other.

      And we have allies ...- yeah!
      1. Alex777 29 May 2020 17: 35 New
        • 13
        • 0
        +13
        In today's world - the fewer allies, the lower the cost.
        1. Nyrobsky 29 May 2020 19: 36 New
          • 4
          • 2
          +2
          Quote: Alex777
          In today's world - the fewer allies, the lower the cost.

          It’s as if you can’t argue, but the mattresses think differently, because the “allies” also pay extra to them,
          1. Alex777 29 May 2020 20: 30 New
            • 2
            • 1
            +1
            Look at the root. wink
            Who has a national debt of 27 trillion?
            Underpay pretty. And they won’t.
            Although Trump is not childishly jamming them.
        2. NordUral 29 May 2020 20: 40 New
          • 2
          • 0
          +2
          Speak the truth, Alexander.
      2. Lopatov 29 May 2020 17: 53 New
        • 6
        • 1
        +5
        Quote: Olgovich
        Thought he disappeared ...

        Money needed ...
        laughing
        Americans should pay well for spreading Brzezinski’s ideas ...
        1. Amin_vivec 29 May 2020 19: 16 New
          • 3
          • 0
          +3
          For Russia, the Chinese are “partners”, and the Americans are “partners”, the Turks are also “PARTNERS” ..... Even there are “partners from NATO” and “partners in the Minsk agreements” ...
          And Russia’s allies are only its army and navy, and there are still temporary fellow travelers ...
          1. Lopatov 29 May 2020 21: 50 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Amin_Vivec
            For Russia, both the Chinese are “partners” and the Americans are “partners”

            It was precisely "equidistance" that Brzezinski demanded.
            Russia from China, China from the USA and USA from Russia.
            When I realized that making Russia an ally in the war with China would not work. For the US, the union of China and Russia is unacceptable and catastrophic.
            1. Amin_vivec 30 May 2020 09: 26 New
              • 0
              • 0
              0
              "equidistance?" a good term, despite the fact that in the 20th century the United States came closer to China, restored its economy .... raised a military machine ... Why?
              Demanding "equidistance" the US should abandon the policy of pressure. Otherwise, the balance will constantly change.
      3. What did Emperor Alexander III say about the allies there? Two of them in Russia. The most reliable and time-tested - ,, army and navy ,,. The time passed and one more was added - the Russian Air Force. It is difficult to resist and not comment on the abbreviation ,, videoconferencing ,,. To whom is the brain crippling hydrogen sulfide? ,, Cosmos ,, is one of the names of Satan. Schoolchildren know, but adult uncles from Moscow Oblast do not? Or haven't you played enough in Masonic toys? It is imperative that ,, roasted cock ,, thoroughly ,, pecked ,,, WITHOUT THIS? Surely ,, adventure ,, need?
        About China. What does China owe to Russia today? What ,, unusually warm feelings ,, SOCIALIST China should have for the state ,, Capitalist Russia ,,? China is a serious state working for the Chinese. Yes, globalists have a certain influence on him, but this state does not forget its people, its ancient country. ,, Sings his song ,,. And what ,, RK ,,? A surprisingly empty and meaningless state. Private opinion? No! CASES! Cases speak for themselves. RK is not even interesting for Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan .. They are not interested in communicating with him. What can give about n about China? The experience of PROKHINDEY riding on the necks of, dear Russians ,,? So in China there are enough of their cunning. Only there they know, “medicine”, against them. Two lead ,, pills ,, (main and spare - ,, safety ,,,), which are paid by relatives ,, terminally ill ,,.
        Time ,, RK ,, is over. None of the people (or ,, nonhumans ,,) can stop the Stories. It is necessary to change this to something more attractive. And for the people of Russia and for external partners. After all, there were other times. When China, for example, considered it an honor to be called a friend of Soviet Russia during the reign of Stalin I.V.
      4. Jack sklo 29 May 2020 20: 22 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        In perestroika, his dad thundered rather!
      5. MstislavHrabr 29 May 2020 22: 43 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        The conductor of American interests, who has predicted the history of our country at the request of the United States, is an "academician" ... You can read his articles. But ... At the same time, you must not forget who he serves ...
      6. sgapich 30 May 2020 19: 44 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Olgovich
        ... So this is the whole Arbat, which thundered during perestroika!

        No, this is his son.
        Quote: Olgovich
        ... Thought he disappeared ...

        So he died in 2010 yet.
    3. Wolverine 29 May 2020 16: 27 New
      • 7
      • 2
      +5
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Damn it - Revealed the Truth! laughing All 5 thousand years of its existence, China has not entered into military - strategic alliances!
      Academics are getting smaller! crying

      Will wait for the passing corpse of the enemy past ...
    4. avg
      avg 29 May 2020 16: 35 New
      • 5
      • 5
      0
      I do not remember once that at the highest level, China was called an ally, but yes, a strategic partner. And why not, at a time when the US and NATO are completely off the rails, Japan is seriously arming itself, not having partners whose interests largely coincide with ours. Of course you don’t have to fall into euphoria and shout about eternal friendship, but this is not so. And if China will, all other things being equal, primarily buy our products, then we can only dream of such a market.
      1. hydrox 29 May 2020 20: 56 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        Quote: avg
        you can only dream of such a market.

        That's just who would be going to make a list of those goods that China could buy from us!
        Liberoids from the economic bloc of the Pr-va are unequivocally NOT ABLE for this, because for them in this work there is no margin, no cache (no rollback, no cut, no sawdust) ... laughing
    5. rich 29 May 2020 16: 50 New
      • 6
      • 2
      +4
      Academician Alexei Arbatov: China is not a strategic ally

      Hunter 2 (Alexey): Damn it - Revealed the Truth!

      Greetings, Alex hi
      Truly "Revealed the Truth" winked
      This was previously stated by the president at the Russian-Chinese conference “Prospects for Russian-Chinese cooperation” on June 10, 2015, in Moscow: “Russia and China today are at the initial stage of development of the“ partnership ”relationship and in the mode of forming a“ strategic partnership ” but they’re still not close to the stage of relations of the “strategic union."
      PS. The Soviet Military Encyclopedia defines 3 successive stages of interstate conscious relations:
      1. "Partnership" in general, it can only be in interaction and inter-co-action in important areas and areas that have a mutual, but rather narrow (utilitarian) interest, for example: space exploration, basic science, ecology, resource development, and so on.
      “Partnership” is in the nature of mutually beneficial cooperation and has a specific - project, and in general, temporary. In this regard, “partners” are united by the project goal, “touch” and interact in specific areas, pursue joint partnership goals, upon reaching which they can claim joint (and parity) operation of the results of the partnership (specific project), even in conditions of mismatch of the final strategic goals of its participants.
      “Partnership” does not generally change the established statuses and roles of their participants, but helps to strengthen them.
      2. “Partnerships”, even if they have a “special” status, they may not develop into relations of “strategic allies”.
      “Strategic partnership”, as a type of strategic relationship, is the cooperation of their entities (states) to achieve strategic goals. It can be initially determined by agreements or (and) formed by a successful “succession of partnerships”, and develop into its highest form, into relations of “strategic allies”.
      3. "Strategic Allies" - This is the highest form of strategic relations between the powers, they are united by a common ultimate Strategic Goal and mutually contribute to its achievement.
      Strategic allied relations are, as a rule, long-term in nature, involve the union of the nationwide potentials of allies, predetermine the sequence (algorithm, sequence), the level and scale of a specific project partnership, affect almost all fields of state life of the allied states and form a qualitatively different (higher) the level of their roles, statuses and capabilities.
    6. Mavrikiy 29 May 2020 18: 17 New
      • 3
      • 2
      +1
      Academician Alexei Arbatov: China is not a strategic ally, it will not send soldiers to fight for our interests
      What are academics of such depth and thought. fool Who counts on China, there is not an army, but semolina ("Great China, the rest is dust under your feet"). You cannot sit in one trench with them. On the world political arena, jump together, but may provide the rear. And the “brotherhood in arms” is crap. And in vain we conduct land exercises with them, we teach to fight. Together, show the flags in the Persian or the Baltic - this is politics, okay. But on tactics to train .... negative
    7. Alekseev 29 May 2020 19: 00 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      'Revealed the truth'
      That's right!
      The very personality of this Arbatov is very suspicious. Is it not a foreign agent?
      And China will send a soldier if its interests coincide with ours. And only so. To understand this, you do not have to be an academician. Although from the mentioned Arbatov academician as from this very bullet. Here is the agent of influence - that's it.
    8. SSR
      SSR 30 May 2020 04: 21 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      Quote: Hunter 2
      Damn it - Revealed the Truth!

      Please write me to academics too!
      We even need to keep our gunpowder dry with our CIS neighbors! With one we even fought 08.08.08/XNUMX/XNUMX.
      I am an Academician!)))
    9. antivirus 30 May 2020 18: 41 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      strategic partnership - a very long-playing person, and a proponent of a merger with the West - a very specific analyst
  2. knn54 29 May 2020 16: 19 New
    • 11
    • 1
    +10
    He is a fellow traveler.
    1. major147 29 May 2020 16: 33 New
      • 5
      • 1
      +4
      Quote: knn54
      He is a fellow traveler.

      Or as they say - "situational ally."
    2. New Year day 29 May 2020 16: 35 New
      • 7
      • 4
      +3
      Quote: knn54
      He is a fellow traveler.

      I will clarify - a fellow traveler!
  3. Vasyan1971 29 May 2020 16: 24 New
    • 3
    • 1
    +2
    China is not a strategic ally, it will not send soldiers to fight for our interests

    And who will send?
    But on the example of the Limitrophs, who sends his soldiers for the interests of Uncle Sam, who can be called the "strategic partners" of the United States?
    1. major147 29 May 2020 17: 00 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Vasyan1971
      China is not a strategic ally, it will not send soldiers to fight for our interests

      And who will send?
      But on the example of the Limitrophs, who sends his soldiers for the interests of Uncle Sam, who can be called the "strategic partners" of the United States?

      Handouts will stop - "allies" will run away!
      1. Vasyan1971 29 May 2020 18: 03 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: major147
        Handouts will stop - "allies" will run away!

        Exactly. We saw and see how this happened.
        Does it even exist, is it a "strategic partnership"?
  4. Svarog 29 May 2020 16: 25 New
    • 13
    • 6
    +7
    Academician: China is not a strategic ally, it will not send soldiers to fight for our interests

    China is hardly a fellow traveler. It’s hard to call allies, and strong countries have fellow travelers .. and vassals will be more correct .. and when countries are potentially equal in economic strength, ideological power and military potential, they become enemies ... but this is not the case with Russia and China, but China and America .. from our former power, unfortunately there is little left .. NW and natural resources ..
  5. Russobel 29 May 2020 16: 26 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Yes damn horse is understandable.
    And talk so much ?!
  6. alone 29 May 2020 16: 27 New
    • 3
    • 2
    +1
    I'm already tired of repeating here what is written in the article ..
    P.S. I am not an academician wassat wassat
    1. Normal 29 May 2020 16: 57 New
      • 2
      • 0
      +2
      This must be fixed! wink You need to find out where the certificates are issued. Yes, and the mantle with a cap will come in handy for the new year, to please the small children))
      1. alone 29 May 2020 17: 04 New
        • 3
        • 0
        +3
        Quote: Normal
        This must be fixed! You need to find out where the certificates are issued. Yes, and the mantle with a cap will come in handy for the new year, to please the small children))

        Well, agree that to wait for soldiers from China for the interests of Russia is an absurdity ... And to understand this, you should not be an academician
        1. Normal 29 May 2020 18: 10 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          I absolutely agree. I wrote with humor, but with respect and without sarcasm in your direction, comrade.
          1. alone 29 May 2020 18: 36 New
            • 1
            • 0
            +1
            Quote: Normal
            I wrote with humor, but with respect and without sarcasm in your direction, comrade.

            drinks drinks
  7. orionvitt 29 May 2020 16: 27 New
    • 5
    • 0
    +5
    Everyone knows that the Chinese are always on their minds. Collaboration, even strategic, is normal. But trust, it must be earned.
  8. Million 29 May 2020 16: 29 New
    • 4
    • 2
    +2
    Unsurprisingly, if some retirees think that playing hockey at night is normal, then there’s nothing to say about the Allies
    1. hydrox 30 May 2020 06: 14 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Why are they sucking up all the stupid things?
      An ally is a strategic partner that secured the initial partnership by signing the Union Treaty. The depth of this Agreement is the degree of confidence in the relations of partners who have entered the Union.
  9. ApJlekuHo 29 May 2020 16: 43 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    A strategic ally is when you are ready to send your soldiers to fight for the interests of your ally and vice versa.

    A strategic ally is when you lend a lot and for a long time, and then, in honor of paying off a debt, send a soldier of a strategic ally for slaughter. The truth still needs to have its own “lure” in the government of a strategic ally. Other allies, history does not remember.
  10. Normal 29 May 2020 16: 53 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    How sadly I lived without this information. Now that my eyes have opened to the state of affairs in the world, I have to start all over again. Thank you, good man.
  11. north 2 29 May 2020 17: 04 New
    • 5
    • 5
    0
    now more likely it is not that China does not want to send its soldiers to fight for Russia, but that China wishes that Russia sent its soldiers to fight for China. It doesn't have to be
    to be regiments and battalions of motorized infantry or tank armies of Russia. But missile troops, submarines, reconnaissance and electronic warfare systems, as well as missile launch warning systems, are just what China can ask Russia if the Americans cross the red line with respect to China. But do not think that only Cuba, Vietnam, East Germany and the peoples of the former Yugoslavia have not forgotten Russia's betrayals of the Gorbachev and Yeltsin times. This is not forgotten, and China, as Russia, it turns out, can betray. So Gorbachev and Yeltsin still put on Russia the mask of a traitor to the allies, which has not been a thousand years in the history of Russia, until Russia and its allies were betrayed by Gorbachev and Yeltsin. China here does not mean temporary bad relations between the USSR and China during the Brezhnev era. This is normal practice between states. Things happen . But it was not a betrayal. But how then, under the Democrats, Russia betrayed its allies, it is China that remembers. And one should not hope that, since then the relations between China and Russia have become normal, then China has taken and forgot how Russia is able to deal with allies under certain rulers who can betray Russia's allies so-so, out of nothing to do, out of the blue , just to please the Americans and the West ...
    1. Reserve buildbat 29 May 2020 17: 31 New
      • 9
      • 3
      +6
      Yeah. In Damansky there was no betrayal. Russia did not betray. And China is not a traitor. It just happens. Well, I tried to chop off a piece of land, so is this a betrayal? Now, if Russia tried ... That would be a betrayal! You have an interesting point of view. Some Chinese
      1. hydrox 30 May 2020 06: 20 New
        • 1
        • 1
        0
        And on Damansky there was neither alliance, nor partnership, nor even passing, there was an ideological confrontation with I.V. Stalin, in which China was much more consistent than our Central Committee.
        And to leave behind such an ally as China is to have no brains.
  12. magadan72 29 May 2020 17: 14 New
    • 4
    • 3
    +1
    And why should China send soldiers to us for war !? What a very strange interpretation of strategic partnership ...
  13. iouris 29 May 2020 17: 16 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    In general, all Arbatovs are "specialists" of the USA and Canada. What does China have to do with it?
    1. 16329 29 May 2020 21: 08 New
      • 1
      • 0
      +1
      US influence agents will increasingly oppose Russian-Chinese cooperation; for the US (current administration), it is necessary to gradually isolate China
  14. rotkiv04 29 May 2020 17: 23 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    But did anyone doubt it, well, if only the Kremlin sidelter still dreams about it
  15. dvina71 29 May 2020 17: 31 New
    • 4
    • 0
    +4
    It would be better if Arbatov told what caused such a sharp change in the course of China in relation to the USSR .. He knows ... after all ..
  16. cniza 29 May 2020 18: 14 New
    • 1
    • 3
    -2
    Although Russia and China have matching interests


    At this stage, yes, and the behavior of the "exceptional" contribute to this, and what will happen tomorrow ...
  17. Revolver 29 May 2020 18: 58 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    China will not send a soldier to, say, Donbass, or Ossetia, even in the absolutely unbelievable case that NATO will really fit in for Georgians and Banderlogs. But for the Arctic may well send. China is already building icebreakers to safeguard Chinese interests in polar waters. That's just the coastline of the Arctic and adjacent seas has long been divided, and the only way China can get a piece is to squeeze it. And where will he do it? In Alaska? In Norway? Or on the lands historically belonging to China? As part of the restoration of "historical justice", which they regularly recall?
    1. hydrox 30 May 2020 07: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Nagan
      and the only way China can get a piece is to squeeze it.


      Not serious.
      China can do this quite legally, simply forcing us to enter into an “Arctic TRADE partnership” with it - only a very expensive arrangement of the coastal infrastructure will be able to secure OUR rights to own the NSR, and without huge loans from OUTSIDE we won’t be able to do this. Here, in this case, China will be able to warn (and with us, prevent!) The US assassination attempt on the free use of the Navy by its Navy. But I repeat: this is possible ONLY if China has its COMMERCIAL interests in developing the NSR, but no one can guarantee that this will not be a “creeping conquest”.
    2. Private-K 30 May 2020 10: 24 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      It is divided exactly that the coastline of the Arctic, and open ocean areas they are free.
      In the USSR, on maps I drew my sea beads up to the North. the poles, but this was of no interest to anyone and was not recognized by anyone: the American nuclear submarines both sailed and continue to sail until now (if anyone doesn’t know, there are their regular missile positions for strikes against the USSR-RF).
      So, China may well claim to stake out some sections of the Arctic. Although there is no international legal mechanism for this.
    3. Quadro 31 May 2020 01: 32 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: Nagan
      Or on the lands historically belonging to China? As part of the restoration of "historical justice", which they regularly recall?

      Can you stop ceasing to spread this nonsense and myth? Claims on territories like Siberia and the Arctic are only found in Taiwan, Siberia is shown in the textbooks in Taiwan, not in China. But why should all-propagandists and conspiracy theorists delve into this, there are some Chinese scribbles written there, which means that the Chinese are from China. In general, Taiwan has such claims to everyone around it at the level of Khokhlyat Wishlist, while China and the Russian Federation have no complaints.
  18. mitrich 29 May 2020 19: 04 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    You might think that China will send its soldiers to fight for us. So perhaps, we cover the rear of each other.
  19. Plastmaster 29 May 2020 19: 28 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    this is when you are ready to send your soldiers to fight for the interests of your ally and vice versa .-------- so the top leaders in Russia have always been engaged in this. They sent their gene pool to die for others, well and for personal interests, ambitions. How is it there? Who is Russia in the allies?
  20. Doliva63 29 May 2020 19: 39 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    It’s ridiculous. The cap.RF and the PRC (under the leadership of the CCP) cannot be strategic allies in any way, this is a no brainer. laughing Do you sign up for academics? laughing
  21. rocket757 29 May 2020 20: 33 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    You can guess. BUT, the truth will become clear when the event occurs, one way or another. Then we will see.
    In the meantime, it's just a fortune-telling, which for some reason is called a forecast / analysis or something else.
    The unknown! That's all.
  22. Prisoner 29 May 2020 20: 55 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Same thing to me, Mr. Evidence. Is it Chinese or who else needs to fight for us and for our interests? All hope is only on oneself and one's own aircraft.
  23. yasvet 29 May 2020 21: 13 New
    • 2
    • 0
    +2
    Russia and China have matching interests, our countries are not strategic partners


    From a press conference by Foreign Minister Wang Yi:
    "When China and Russia stand together shoulder to shoulder, peace and stability on the planet will be fully guaranteed, and international justice will be reliably protected." (C)
  24. yasvet 29 May 2020 21: 38 New
    • 3
    • 0
    +3
    the Chinese troops fought against the Americans instead of the Soviet specialists, but under Khrushchev they already fled

    "Not a single enemy brought so much trouble as Khrushchev brought us with his policy regarding the past of our party and the state ...." (c) D.F.Ustinov.
    1. fif21 30 May 2020 13: 00 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      Quote: yasvet
      "Not a single enemy brought as much trouble as Khrushchev brought us

      Now Dmitry Fedorovich would significantly expand his list. I am amazed how this is possible in the Russian Federation so that the Vlasovites would hold a parade in honor of the winners against whom these traitors and shifters fought. hi
  25. Adimius38 29 May 2020 22: 04 New
    • 1
    • 0
    +1
    Quite right, China has never been and never will be our military ally. But the threat to our territories, he never ceased to pose. Nevertheless, today it is still low in terms of threat. In many ways, this is facilitated by the huge volumes of resources exported from Russia to China, while China exports wagons from Russia by rail, everything suits him.
  26. Old Horseradish 29 May 2020 22: 07 New
    • 1
    • 4
    -3
    And here is what our domestic prophets say about the threat that comes from China.
    "According to Messing’s prediction, published in Yandex. Zen ”, in the future, China will become the most serious threat to Moscow. The Chinese side will mask its aggressive steps, posing as a friend and partner of Russia.
    Due to the actions of Beijing, the Third World War should begin, noted in a quoted post. China will hit Japan and Taiwan with nuclear weapons, after which Russia will oppose the PRC.
    "https://weekend.rambler.ru/crazy-world/44234206/?utm_content=weekend_media&utm_medium=read_more&utm_source=copylink
    1. fif21 30 May 2020 12: 47 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      Quote: Old Horseradish
      The Chinese side will mask its aggressive steps, posing as a friend and partner of Russia.

      A terrible mattress dream is the rapprochement between Russia and Europe, Russia and China, China and Europe ... Therefore, they are trying to prevent the unification of countries leading their policies in their own interests, and not in the interests of the United States. And these "prophecies" are just that directed. Divide and rule
      (as old as the world) hi
    2. flicker 30 May 2020 19: 58 New
      • 0
      • 0
      0
      But what our domestic prophets (Messing) say about the threat that comes from China.

      Yeah, the prophet.
      Hippenreiter (in this session she played the role of an inductor) wrote how this “guru” made the audience laugh, still couldn’t understand what he had to do until she gritted his teeth (so that the audience couldn’t see the prompt): “sit down!” . After that, the "great guru" sat on a chair and the session of laughter therapy for the audience was over.
      bully
  27. RoTTor 29 May 2020 23: 22 New
    • 0
    • 2
    -2
    Is Arbatov an ancestral American recruited?
  28. fif21 30 May 2020 12: 39 New
    • 0
    • 1
    -1
    The idea of ​​a much polar world is tempting, but not real. It will inevitably lead to confrontation and a hybrid war. Which we are currently observing. World War 3 has already begun, the US is trying to regain control of the naughty. Military pressure, economic pressure, political pressure, information pressure .... everything is moving. And whoever emerges victorious will again be forced to prove his claims to world domination. And it will be the 4th world (using wooden clubs and stakes) hi
    1. Kuzmitsky 30 May 2020 18: 21 New
      • 0
      • 1
      -1
      In the world, the number of poles is constantly changing. A multipolar world is possible, it already was. And it was bipolar (Cold War), and even unipolar (Roman Empire). There were always those whom the existing order did not suit, and this led to changes.
      1. fif21 30 May 2020 19: 17 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: Kuzmitsky
        And the bipolar was (Cold War),

        And where is the Warsaw block now?
        Quote: Kuzmitsky
        and even unipolar (Roman Empire)

        laughing Did Rome rule the whole world? recourse
        Quote: Kuzmitsky
        There were always those whom the existing order did not suit, and this led to changes.

        So you yourself answered. I wrote about the same thing - there will always be a country that the existing world order will not suit. hi
        1. Kuzmitsky 30 May 2020 19: 41 New
          • 1
          • 0
          +1
          Rome, of course, did not rule the whole world. They did not even imagine the real dimensions of this world. But he could dictate the conditions to most countries and peoples, of which Rome was aware. And the rest (from among those known to him) could not compete with him for the time being.

          The USSR and the USA, too, didn’t rule the whole world for two, although they were essentially two poles of the world.

          Yes, it turns out that we are talking about the same thing, only in slightly different words.
  29. Looking for 30 May 2020 16: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Actually, the academician confuses the concept of strategy with tactics.
  30. flicker 30 May 2020 19: 46 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Alexei Arbatov mentioned the events of half a century ago, when relations between Moscow and Beijing were so spoiled that the USSR called China the main threat to peace. The academician believes that today we hit the other extreme, calling China a strategic partner:
    Very on time, “academician" Arbatov remembered this.
    ---
    It would be nice to immediately hear the opinion of Trump and the chief rabbi of Moscow, Pinhas Solomonovich Goldschmidt, about this, and not some kind of "academician." bully
  31. demo 31 May 2020 07: 58 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    You can’t rush from one extreme to another, then China is our biggest threat to peace, then it is our strategic ally or partner. Such concepts cannot be thrown. A strategic ally is when you are ready to send your soldiers to fight for the interests of your ally and vice versa. I am sure that we and China do not and will not have such a situation.

    Countries become strategic allies if their strategic goals coincide.
    China has a strategic goal - to become a world leader, without commitments (unlike the United States).
    But what, excuse me, is Russia's strategic goal?
    I do not take into account the jokes from the Supreme, in the form:
    “In order to implement breakthrough scientific, technological and socio-economic development of the Russian Federation, increase the population of the country, improve the living standards of citizens, create comfortable conditions for their living, as well as conditions and opportunities for self-realization and disclosure of each person’s talent, I decide:

    1. The Government of the Russian Federation to ensure the achievement of the following national development goals of the Russian Federation for the period until 2024:
    a) ensuring sustainable natural growth of the population of the Russian Federation;
    b) increase in life expectancy to 78 years (by 2030 year - to 80 years);
    c) ensuring a steady growth in real incomes of citizens, as well as an increase in the level of pensions above inflation;
    d) halving the level of poverty in the Russian Federation;
    e) improvement of living conditions for at least 5 million families annually;
    e) acceleration of the technological development of the Russian Federation, an increase in the number of organizations implementing technological innovations, up to 50 percent of their total number;
    g) ensuring accelerated introduction of digital technologies in the economy and the social sphere;
    h) the Russian Federation is among the five largest economies in the world, ensuring economic growth rates are higher than the world ones, while maintaining macroeconomic stability, including inflation, at a level not exceeding 4 percent;
    i) the creation in the basic sectors of the economy, primarily in the manufacturing industry and the agro-industrial complex, of a highly productive export-oriented sector, developing on the basis of modern technologies and provided with highly qualified personnel.

    What strategic goals does the Russian Federation have?
    I'm afraid to answer myself - no.
    About oil and gas, I will not.
  32. Andrey Krasnoyarsky 31 May 2020 14: 15 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Yes, of course, China will not fight for us, this is clear even without academics. The main thing is that our potential adversary does not help. And this is just possible.