Asymmetric response, or China's strategy in the global world.

7
Rivalry in non-rivalry is the most skillful rivalry.

He who is skilled in the affairs of war and keeps the world submissive does not capture the cities ...

He creates for himself a space in which there is no confrontation, and nothing more.

Jie Xuan. Military canon in a hundred chapters


According to the precepts of "Sun Tzu" and Mao

The traditional and most common forecasting error in the field of socialhistorical sciences is an extrapolation of existing development trends within the existing general system of relations. At the same time, the possibility of breaking or cardinal changes in this very system (for example, the complete disappearance of some of its components or changes in the laws of its functioning) remains, as it were, outside the brackets. I wrote about this in 1986 in my dissertation on various methods of forecasting international relations. However, then, in the late USSR, it was difficult to assume the possibility of the complete disappearance of the Soviet Union from the map of the world, not only for mental, but also for political reasons ... Therefore, the forecast of the development of Soviet-Chinese relations for the period up to 2000, which is present in the dissertation as an appendix , turned out to be somewhat one-sided (which, however, does not diminish too much its effectiveness in relation to the development of China - I recently reread it on purpose).

Today, assertions that the world is in the process of drastically changing, or, to put it more scientificly, at the bifurcation point, have become almost a commonplace. The global system of relations itself is changing, starting with geopolitics and ending with geoeconomics (which, in the opinion, for example, of the well-known Russian philosopher A. Neklessa today increasingly defines the model of the world). However, the academic science itself in the field of international relations for the most part continues to be in the thrall of previous ideas, paradigms and contexts.

The above actually applies not so much to Russian, as to American academic science (and to the American political and foreign policy establishment), and above all, this approach is manifested in relation to China.

China is viewed today in the US as a key player in the international arena, on which the future of the world depends. It is the US-China relationship that is the principal problem of the modern world and, according to US Secretary of State John Kerry, said in early November 2014 on the eve of Obama's trip to Beijing for the summit, they "will determine the image of the XXI century." He is echoed by National Security Advisor Susan Rice, who, after her visit to Beijing in September 2014, does not stop talking and writing that “most of the global problems of the 21st century. impossible to effectively solve without the joint work of the United States and China. "

And this is not only a recognition of the fact that China is the second economy in the world (according to some calculations, it is already the first, at least in the area of ​​production). This is a reflection of the ideas prevailing today in Washington that the fate of the United States and the world as a whole depends ultimately on whether it will be possible to forge normal partnerships with China. The United States and China will eventually either sink together, or float together (and with them — most of the rest of the world). Either the two powers will be able to establish relations - and then everything will be fine, or they will not be able to - and then it will be difficult for everyone to swim.

This has its own logic, however, as some independent researchers emphasize, there is one major drawback in it - it assumes that countries that do not belong to the Western world, both today and in the past, can choose only one of two strategies: they can either assimilate into the existing international order established in due time or challenge it (this view applies not only to China and Russia, but also to other developing powers). As a result, Washington’s Chinese policy aims to fully encourage the first option (as much as possible) while preparing to limit the damage to the United States if China chooses the second option (the same applies to Russia). It is this logic that underlies the US foreign policy of restricting China over the past two decades.

In an article published in The National Interest magazine back in 2007, American independent researchers Naaznin Barma, Eli Ratner and Stephen Weber emphasized that such a “mental map” (and academic theories based on it) was not true. Developing countries and, in particular, China, most likely, will neither challenge nor assimilate into the world order led by the United States, since neither option benefits them. The liberal system as a whole does not meet the interests of China, but it’s also unprofitable to enter into a fight with the richest and most powerful country in the world. And to see China as a country driven into a corner and forced to choose between two equally unattractive options means absoluting existing academic theories and, even worse, misinterpreting the behavior of not only China, but also other developing countries.

I also add from myself that such a perception of Chinese strategy in the world is also separated from Chinese traditional strategic installations dating back to the times of Sun Tzu and other military treatises of antiquity, whose influence on the behavior of both ordinary Chinese and the country's leadership today remains significant. In accordance with the ancient military canons, always emphasizing the advantage of bypass maneuvers and the ability to win without entering into open confrontation with a rival, China prefers to “bypass” the existing international order by building a “world without the West.” And engaging into this world an increasing number of developing countries that are not comfortable with the existing state of affairs (and there seem to be more and more of them).

To this can be added the well-known theory of the “three worlds” of Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping, which today is the basis (with all the adjustments related to the changing international situation) of Chinese foreign policy concepts. According to it, China (unlike the countries of the West) belongs to the third world - to the developing countries, and this is their natural leader. And the current situation in which China, as they like to emphasize in Beijing, is the “locomotive” of the world economy, does not change this situation, but only “develops”.

Under these conditions, the PRC, trying not to allow open confrontation with the United States and Western countries, builds its own world parallel to the existing one, based not only on geopolitics, but on geo-economics (as mentioned above, it is this which today determines the development of the world). And that is what dictates, in my opinion, the main parameters and steps of Beijing on the world stage.

Beijing Consensus

However, before turning to foreign policy, it’s worth talking about internal politics. The fact is that, by its very existence, China is proving to the whole world the possibility of an alternative to the Western path of development, and at once in two positions - in the field of social and political construction and in the field of the economy itself.

It is possible to call the social and political model created in modern China in different ways (socialism with Chinese characteristics, state capitalism, an authoritarian regime, etc.). However, it must be admitted that this model, which was obtained by reforming, “modernizing” the previously existing so-called “Soviet model” using the Chinese traditions of state and public construction, is fundamentally different from the stereotypes in the West.

In the field of politics, over the years of the reforms of Deng Xiaoping 35, while maintaining the system of one ruling party (which continues to call itself communist), it was possible to create (including by trial and error) a fairly stable structure of governing the country. It is not free from shortcomings (the most serious of which is considered a high level of corruption), but it can ensure the stability of the leadership, its turnover on a regular basis, collectivity and even democracy (through the development of the so-called intra-party democracy). At the same time, the efforts of the PRC leaders of the last two “convocations” or, in other words, of the fourth and fifth generations are aimed at eliminating inequality in society (overcoming the “three gaps” - between those who became rich as a result of reforms and those who could not do it; between rich and poor provinces, between town and country) and the achievement of not only universal “average prosperity” (“xiaokang”), but also “social harmony” (“shehui hese”), proclaimed in the middle of Hu Jintao’s reign ra Vitia country. And the current leadership of China continues to work in this direction - in my opinion, the decisions of the November Plenum of the Central Committee 2013 of the year and the spring session of the NPC 2014 of the year are aimed at this.

As for the economic component of the phenomenon, which is called the “Chinese miracle”, here too, first of all, it is worth emphasizing the fact that it was achieved in spite of the current 90-s. the stereotype of the measures that are necessary, according to the ideologues of liberalism, for the successful transition of the countries of the former socialism or developing countries to the category of “developed”, i.e. contrary to what was then called the “Washington consensus”, i.e. contrary to the recommendations of the International Monetary Fund and other similar structures, which (alas, I cannot fail to note) continue to be strictly enforced in Russia by the liberal bloc of the government to this day.

In contrast to Russia, in China (largely due to the efforts of Deng Xiaoping directly, who is rightfully considered to be the “architect of Chinese reforms”), they chose, despite popular opinion, “self-reliance”. And even, as A. Salitsky writes in the article “Authoritarian Potential,” in the middle of 1980's, they abandoned the giant MBRD loan (200 billion dollars), the terms of which narrowed the country's economic sovereignty and its international specialization.

The successful experience of the reforms and economic development of China, which allowed 35 years to transform the country into the largest economy of the world and at the same time significantly raise the well-being of the population (with all the differences in the specific level of this welfare), forced experts in the middle of the first decade of our century, with a light hand to which this term belongs, to speak about the “Beijing consensus”, which is replacing the “Washington” one. I also had to write on this topic, however, in my opinion, the essence of what is understood by this term is most fully described in numerous articles by A. Salitsky.

Much has been written about the fact that the Chinese experience is unique and can hardly be used in other countries, including the aforementioned author, with whom I, for all my respect for him, allow myself in this paragraph to disagree. Yes, some moments (the presence of a large Chinese diaspora in the world, a peculiar political situation at the moment of the start of reforms, the presence of a large number of cheap labor, the ability to use the proximity and development experience of Hong Kong and Taiwan, as well as the tendencies that existed before the revolution in China the creation of so-called "free zones") are truly unique. However, in general, many aspects of the Chinese experience in economic development, in my opinion, can (and should) be used in other countries, including Russia. And I note, already used in many countries of Southeast Asia (for example, in Vietnam).

What is meant in this case? First of all, this is the desire for the full localization of industrial production (as one of the components of self-reliance). In the PRC, this was formulated as the creation of a "relatively holistic industry system." Unlike the overwhelming majority of developing countries, which specialize almost exclusively in labor-intensive links in the global division of labor (for them this is often the only way of foreign economic specialization), China, by participating in these chains, tries to lock them up, persistently pursuing a policy of increasing the share of added on the territory of the country, the value of the price of export (and imported in China) goods (today ASEAN is trying to follow the same path). And with the beginning of the new century, the predominant specialization of Chinese industry in labor-intensive products (with the continuing social importance of the array of small rural enterprises formed in the course of large-scale manufacturing of the countryside in the years of reform) is gradually becoming a thing of the past.

In addition, the complex industrial structure combined with the scale of the economy and foreign trade, as well as the vigorous expansion of Chinese corporations abroad, made it possible to avoid a dependent position in the world economy (in other words, if dependence on industrialized countries and their TNCs exists, then it is asymmetric ). No less important is the fact that the large-scale industry of the PRC is a powerful generator of effective demand for various kinds of innovations, on the one hand, and a means of their mass replication, on the other. By the way, as emphasized in the aforementioned article, with the transition to the “post-industrial” stage, the gap in the services sector (including information) is overcome in a shorter time than the lag in industry.

Another important point is that although China is the world's largest manufacturer of industrial products, as well as its exporter, its dependence on exports is an order of magnitude lower than that of neighboring countries (including because of the scale of the economy). China manages to increase its presence in the global economy at the same time as its dependence on it is weakened. In particular, despite the appreciation of the yuan against the dollar in 2005 - 2012. at 30%, China at the same time significantly increased its weight in world trade, which suggests that the competitiveness of Chinese industry relies not only on price, but also on other factors, including the consistency and coordination of the local industrial structure. Chinese experience, as emphasized in the same article, proves that it is possible to combine complex, full-industry industrialization with the use of comparative advantages in the foreign market in a number of industries, i.e. combine D. Ricardo and I. Fichte "in one bottle" of a gigantic economy.

Another important feature of the Chinese development path is a very large share of accumulation in the country's GDP and enthusiasm for large-scale infrastructure projects in the first decade of this century (construction of roads, including high-speed railways, housing, etc.). After the change of leadership in 2012 g This policy has come under criticism, but it must be admitted that it has made it possible to somewhat overcome the gaps in the development of various regions of the country and has consolidated the domestic market (while promoting its growth and reduced depending on exports), allowed to increase the mobility of labor and, by revealing the comparative advantages of the regions, optimize the distribution of productive forces, as well as improve the ecological situation in the most densely populated areas.

In addition, in the course of this construction, China, “borrowing money from the population”, was able to significantly increase the “depth” of its economy, which now qualitatively exceeds the economy of comparable large countries of neighboring large countries - India and Indonesia - in terms of “hard infrastructure”, which gives the PRC not only a serious margin of safety, but also the experience of implementing major infrastructure projects, which today is used for expansion abroad (the same high-speed railways China is already building around the world, including Europe How many have their own technology of cheap and high-quality construction).

And finally, infrastructure development, as the Chinese experience has shown, can serve as an important lever for overcoming the effects of crisis in the economy, eliminating market failures, stimulating private capital activity, etc., subject to the subordination of the financial (banking) sector to the development of real economy, while maintaining (and even better, cheaper) affordable, including long-term, credit.

The experience of the financial sector in China, in my opinion, is generally very instructive for Russia, especially in light of recent events. And above all in terms of currency regulation.

I think that any Chinese scientist who found the 90s, especially their first half - the years of active participation of the Chinese in buying up the remnants of the Soviet heritage - one way or another (as a translator or as a novice businessman) took part in this process. These people remember that the Chinese couldn’t sell anything for currency, because in order to buy something for currency (and exchange yuan for it), Chinese businessmen needed to have a permit, which was then almost impossible to get - if you want that to sell to China, you have to sell for yuan, buying something inside China (actually barter). Hence the prevalence of cheap and low-quality Chinese goods in our country in those years (the quality products in China were not yet very good at producing).

Today, these provisions (“guidin”) are no longer so rigid, however, as far as I know, a special permit is still needed for converting yuan to currency (at least at the level of the provincial Foreign Economic Activity Division). And, in any case, for companies it is necessary to have a contract, and for citizens - the presence of documents confirming the need for this conversion (visa, ticket, etc.). It is clear that this not only prevents the possibility of speculation in the foreign exchange market, but also, coupled with strict customs regulations (all-out export promotion and import restrictions - import duties on a number of goods, in particular, on cars, at one time were at the level of 100%) , promotes the development of its own production. And, I note, it doesn’t prevent Beijing from becoming a WTO member and integrating into the world economy while maintaining financial independence (unlike those countries that agreed to premature full conversion of their own currency, securing their dependent position in the global economy and making them victims of various “Crises” and financial schemes). And now it is possible to build our own international financial system based on turning the yuan into an international currency (agreements on expanding the sphere of trade for yuan are concluded by Beijing annually with an increasing number of very different countries, including the UK - an agreement on a gradual transition in settlements with the UK to yuan and pounds sterling and the opening of the banking center for yuan payments in London was made public during Lee Keqiang’s visit to London in June 2014). By the way, the Central Bank of China is directly subordinate to the government.

Revival of the Silk Road

Returning from domestic to foreign policy (which, as Lenin emphasized, is its continuation), I will begin, perhaps, with the most large-scale and equally widely promoted by the current generation of Chinese project leaders - the New Silk Road. This project, which, along with the “Chinese dream”, intended not only for domestic use, but also for the whole world, is apparently the main direction in Beijing’s foreign policy activities and is promoted at the level of top Chinese leaders (including personally Jinping).

A lot has already been written about the “New Silk Road”, but the essence of it, in my opinion, is to create reliable alternatives to the existing sea route connecting China with the rest of the world through the straits in the South China Sea, whose vulnerability in the case of serious international conflicts is well known. And Beijing began creating these alternative ways long before the current project was announced.

Starting with investments in infrastructure within the country, China today is moving to equally large-scale investments in infrastructure around the world, primarily in Eurasia. And he spends on this - the construction of roads, both highways and railways, ports, airports, urban infrastructure, energy facilities - pipelines, etc. - huge funds (most of all in the world). And besides this, it will modernize the fleet, proceeding to create an ocean fleetable to ensure the presence of China in any corner of the world (this task was put forward by the previous leadership in the person of Hu Jintao in the Report at the XVIII Congress of the CCP). Already today, the Chinese group in the Gulf of Aden, according to experts, is the largest. The task is “defense of the distant seas” (as formulated in Chinese documents) and the constant escort of Chinese merchant ships. The purpose of all this is to provide present-day China with a reliable (and multi-channel) connection with the rest of the world, capable of functioning even in the event of aggravation of conflicts in the world and attempts by the United States or anyone else to control the straits and communications on the approaches to China or elsewhere. And in this regard, the importance for the PRC of Russia and the Central Asian countries is quite large. But not exceptional - do not flatter yourself.

I will mention some of the other links in this strategy for creating workarounds and alternative routes.

Pearl Thread is a system of pipelines and strong points in Southeast Asia, designed to compensate for the above risks of disrupted communications in the South China Sea. It includes ports on the coast of Burma (at least five) plus pipelines and highways from them to Yunnan Province in southern China.

Construction of a large container port in Chittagong (Bangladesh).

Expansion and development of the deep-water port of Gwadar in Pakistan (near Iran), built in 2002 - 2005. (opened in the spring of 2007) with the assistance of China and its administration. According to reports, it is also planned to create a naval base in China.

The port of Hambantota on the south coast of Sri Lanka, built in 2010 and costing China 6 billion dollars (to get it, the Chinese also provided Sri Lanka several large loans). The creation of a naval base in the Maldives is also planned (as opposed to the American base on Diego Garcia).

Separately, it is necessary to note the development of China’s relations with Nepal, where, after the 2008 revolution, which led to the overthrow of the pro-Indian king, Maoist communists came to power. The result was the formation of a pro-Chinese government and the beginning of the construction of a railway through Tibet to China (to connect with the one that has already been laid from the eastern provinces of China to Lhasa).

And, of course, Kazakh oil, Turkmen gas, Afghan copper - all this (and much more that a global factory may need) is connected by oil pipelines, roads and railways not only through Xinjiang to China, but also to the same port of Gwadar in Pakistan . It is planned to build a gas pipeline from Iran to China through the territory of Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan. Another gas pipeline must go from Iran to China through Afghanistan. There are plans to build an oil pipeline from Russia to India through China. Moreover, all these projects involve the creation of an “economic belt of the silk road”, i.e. development of adjacent territories.

We will not forget about the plans for the development of the so-called Northern Sea Silk Road through the Russian Arctic, as well as the trans-Asian mainline through Russia, in which China also intends to take part.

All this is not just a duplication and diversification of communications in the event of a conflict with the United States. This is a real re-creation of the network of ancient trade routes linking China (producing at that time up to a third of the world gross product, according to some calculations) with Europe and other countries of the world (Persia, Sogdeya, Egypt, etc.) [23]. Here, too, are the Persian Gulf, and African countries that supply coal and gas to China and to which over the past 10 years, China has provided huge loans for infrastructure construction (in terms of investments in African countries, only India can partly compete). And then - the countries of Latin America, where the presence of China is also felt more and more. 23 December 2014 announced the beginning of the next construction of the century - the trans-oceanic channel in Nicaragua, which will cost 50 billion dollars to China, but will largely replace the existing Panama Canal, which is owned and controlled by the United States. The channel is supposed to be built in 5 years, it will be deeper and wider than Panama, and within 50 years after construction it will be in the concession of the Chinese ...

Beijing's European offensive

The end point of the “New Silk Road” is considered to be Europe (not so long ago Dusseldorf in Germany was called as such - the end point of the Chongqing - Xinjiang – Europe railway, now after Li Keqiang’s visit in October 2014 to Italy).

The relations between Europe and China have a long history, which includes rather gloomy pages (in the middle and end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th centuries), which the Chinese are by no means inclined to forget. At the present stage, relations also developed in different ways - there were sanctions (some, introduced in connection with the events on Tiananmen Square in 1989, have not been canceled so far), and trade wars (the latter - in connection with the supply of Chinese to the EU countries solar panels - took place in 2013), and a serious cooling of relations, the peak of which, it seems to me, fell on the second half of the first decade of our century. However, for all this, the European Union, as an association of countries, was the PRC's largest trade and economic partner and remains so far - both in terms of mutual trade volume (2013 billion dollars as a result of 560, versus the USA’s second highest 520 billion, and ASEAN countries - 443 billion), and in terms of mutual investments. Moreover, it is characteristic that today China not only sells more products to European countries than it buys, but also since 2013 has invested more in Europe than Europeans in China.

Nevertheless, at one time it seemed that Europe, which was experiencing a serious crisis, not only of the economy, but also of subject identity, was becoming less and less interesting for China. The EU delegations and individual European countries increasingly (especially after the economic crisis of 2008, which affected the EU countries, perhaps, to the greatest extent) acted in Beijing as petitioners for economic assistance (without ceasing, however, to teach the Chinese about human rights and the situation in Xinjiang and Tibet), while China, as a result of the same global economic crisis, strengthened its position, finally turned into a second superpower and began to realize itself in that capacity. The new correlation of forces was most clearly manifested during the trade disputes of the summer of 2013, which ended, in fact, with the victory of China.

Nevertheless, since the spring of 2014, we are witnessing in fact a new stage in Chinese-European relations, which can be called the European offensive of Beijing, which is also consistent with the advice of the ancient military canons. Chinese political analysts, commenting on the visits to Europe by Chinese President Xi Jinping and State Council Premier Li Keqiang to Europe in the spring and early summer, said that the European offensive of China is a strategic decision taken in response to the revitalization of the US policy in Eastern and Southeast Asia, aimed at strategic deterrence and isolation of China in the trade and economic sphere. "If the US goes east, then China must go west" to prevent a "siege" from the US. "

In general, from December 2013 to early July 2014 between China and the EU more than a dozen visits and summits took place. The Prime Minister of Great Britain, the President of France, the Prime Minister of Italy, the Chancellor and Vice-Chancellor of Germany, the President of Portugal, the President of Bulgaria, the Prime Minister of Hungary, the President of Croatia, and others visited Beijing in Beijing. The top leaders of the PRC, in turn, visited Europe three times (Chinese commentators also mention the visit of Liu Yunshan, a member of the PK Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, which took place shortly before Li Keqiang's visit).

Asymmetric response, or China's strategy in the global world. Part of the 1 Asymmetric Response, or China Strategy in a Global World. Part of 1

The most significant, of course, was the visit of the supreme leader of the PRC in March 2014. Germany, the main partner of the PRC in Europe (Germany accounts for a third of Chinese-European trade), was chosen for the trip, France is a traditional partner with whom China and the Chinese are linked by a long-standing and recently, a very difficult history of relations (France was the first western country that established relations with communist China 50 years ago), Belgium (where the EU headquarters are located), and Holland, which has a long history of relations with China m, and the second after Germany, the volume of bilateral trade with China. The visit was given special piquancy by the fact that relations with the European Union in Beijing are usually within the competence of the country's prime minister, and not the president of the People's Republic of China (and partly the CPC Secretary General).

However, there was a formal reason for the visit - participation in the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague, where Xi Jinping held a series of meetings with leaders of various countries, including President Obama who arrived at the summit in Europe (whose wife traveled in China).

Commenting on the visit, Chinese experts in the field of international relations emphasized the changes in relations between the two parties, which, in their opinion, indicate that they have reached a new level. This is, firstly, the transition from trade to mutual investments, the intensification of the strategic dialogue, as well as China’s desire to involve European countries in its New Silk Road projects. During his visit, Xi Jinping presented in Europe a “new concept of partnership”, which, emphasizing the difference between Chinese and European civilizations, indicates that this ensures the complementarity of the parties and is the basis for mutual respect for different choices of development. Nevertheless, during the visit it was specially emphasized that China views cooperation with Europe as part of the overall Eurasian cooperation in the framework of creating the “economic belt” of the Silk Road. And this is a new moment in the Chinese policy towards the EU countries, which is reflected in the “Joint Statement on the deepening of Chinese-European relations of a comprehensive strategic partnership based on mutual benefit and win-win,” published during Xi Jinping’s visit to European Union headquarters .

Following this, Premier Li Keqiang, who visited Great Britain and Greece in June, established, as the Chinese commentators emphasized, a “record” in the quantity and quality of the signed agreements. In particular, agreements on cooperation in the field of atomic energy were signed with Great Britain (despite the fact that contacts in this area are still limited to sanctions) and in the construction of high-speed railways (the latter means that Chinese technologies, tested many times in the country, turned out to be are already in demand in the most developed countries of Europe), as well as an agreement on a gradual transition in settlements with the UK to yuan and pounds sterling and the opening of the banking center for yuan in London ov Given the fact that London is one of the world's financial centers, the importance of this is difficult to overestimate. In addition, the Chinese managed to negotiate with London about a certain visa facilitation for Chinese citizens - the latter will be able to use Irish and Schengen visas to travel to the UK, and this despite the fact that London is known to be very tough on these issues.

During his visit to Greece, the focus was on the port of Piraeus, which the Chinese container transport company COSCO manages on loan for 35 years under an agreement concluded in 2009. The Chinese intend to make this port one of the leading in the Mediterranean and in Europe as a whole 2010 to 2013 they increased the capacity of Piraeus from 685 thousand TEU (a unit of measure equal to the volume occupied by the standard 20-foot container) to 2,52 million, that is, 3,7 times. It is clear that in comparison with the largest ports of the world (six of which are in China) - this is not much. However, according to European standards, the port of Piraeus is already quite comparable with others (the largest in Europe - Rotterdam - 10 million TEU, while the largest Russian container container terminal in St. Petersburg - no more than 500 thousand). China has agreed with Greece to build an airport in Crete and is likely to reach an agreement on visas and residency rights for Chinese participating in the above projects.

During his second visit to Europe in October 2014, Mr. Li Keqiang visited Germany (which, if we also consider the visit to Beijing by Angela Merkel in July 2014, is China’s most frequent negotiating partner among the EU countries), taking part in 6- Hamburg Summit as part of the Chinese-European Forum, which was attended by more than 500 representatives from the political, economic and scientific circles of China and Europe (the summit exists since 2004 and is held every two years), and in Italy, where it took part in 10- m summit "Asia - Europe" in Milan and you set foot with a speech in front of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in Rome. During the trip, which was viewed as an important step towards the implementation of the Program of Strategic Cooperation between China and the EU signed in the previous year for 20 years, Li Keqiang accompanied more than a dozen ministers and deputy ministers of the PRC government who also communicated with their counterparts from Germany and Italy. However, the main difference between this trip of the Chinese Prime Minister and the previous ones was that the visits to two EU countries were preceded by a halt and negotiations in Moscow with the leadership of the Russian Federation. This is an additional indication that Beijing today views cooperation with Western Europe as part of its efforts to build the New Silk Road, as part of Eurasian cooperation across the widest range, and not as a separate strategic direction. And in the light of the changed balance of forces, there is every reason for this.

China’s activity in the European direction is viewed by it as part of efforts to create an alternative structure to the existing one, the structure in which China should be in the center.

Parallel reality

All of Beijing’s vigorous activity — building ports and roads, actively developing economic cooperation with a wide variety of countries, building infrastructure that is able to firmly connect China with various parts of the world and ensure uninterrupted supply of Chinese goods to all countries is in fact only part of that painstaking of the work that China is doing, while still trying not to enter into open confrontation with the existing world order (and in this sense Deng Xiaoping’s famous covenant is “not to hang out - it can still be considered one of the pillars of the foreign policy of the Chinese leadership in the international arena). Work on the creation of a "parallel reality" that exists independently of those who today still determine the fate of the world - the United States, Western countries and international financial structures - is being carried out constantly and actively. And in cases where this reality needs to be protected, China is already able to act firmly and firmly to defend its interests (this is precisely what those who in China today urge to abandon the aforementioned Dan postulate hint at this).

International organizations created without the participation of the United States and Western countries - the SCO, BRICS, etc., switch to calculations in yuan, which are already practiced (based on direct reciprocal conversion) with Japan, Hong Kong, Macao, ASEAN countries, the United Kingdom ( such calculations with Russia and other BRICS countries), the creation under the auspices of China of numerous free trade zones around the world, the formation of an international financial system independent of the IMF and the USA - banks in Asia and the Bank of BRICS - all these are steps leading to the construction of What a "parallel reality."

I note that a parallel reality, independent of the leadership of the European Union, already exists in Europe. This is a forum of the People's Republic of China created and successfully functioning several years ago - the countries of Central and Eastern Europe.

Beijing some time ago, without thinking about Brussels, began to actively develop bilateral economic relations with problematic European countries (countries of Central, Eastern and Southern Europe), drawing them into its orbit. And with the beginning of the second decade of this century, he even moved to the formation of the so-called sub-regional cooperation format, creating a forum for China — CEE countries independent of relations with Brussels, with headquarters (or rather, representative offices of the participating countries) in Beijing.

Within the framework of this forum, the Prime Minister of China regularly holds meetings with the leadership of all CEE countries, alternately now in Beijing, then in the capital of one of the participating countries. At the summit in Bucharest, the capital of Romania in November 2013, the so-called Bucharest cooperation program between China and the CEE countries was adopted. China and Romania agreed to set up a working group to negotiate to promote cooperation in infrastructure. China, Hungary and Serbia have announced cooperation in building a railway between Hungary and Serbia. A number of countries expressed their willingness to develop cooperation with China in the field of nuclear energy, hydropower and thermal energy. On the whole, the package of proposals put forward at this summit by Li Keqiang allows for a five-fold increase in bilateral trade.

It should be noted that cooperation between China and CEE is referred to by both parties as “bilateral”, and not multilateral. In other words, China regards the CEE countries not as members of the EU, but as a separate structure, as a special partner of the PRC in the European direction. And representatives of these countries with this position, albeit with reservations, but agree [8].

***

And in conclusion - a few words about what to do with all this Russia.

First of all, learn to see this parallel emerging reality and use it for the benefit of Russia, and not only in the context of confrontation with a geopolitical adversary.

Learning to use China’s experience in developing its own economy, rather than relying on its disinterested help as a current strategic ally (China’s strategy, in full accordance with the same military canons of antiquity, does not imply long-term alliances that impose strict obligations on the behavior of the parties).

And try not to allow the emergence of a “parallel reality” on one’s own territory, that is, to prevent such phenomena as the numerous “Cherkizones” that widely bred in the 90s. (and not completely eliminated today) as a result of the so-called shuttle trade and fairly contributing to the outflow of foreign currency from our country and the elimination of the production of relevant goods on Russian territory (of course, along with other mistakes in economic policy). Or the situation that has developed today, for example, in the Russian tourism business serving the Chinese, who for several years have been holding the first place in terms of the volume of tourist traffic in the Russian Federation - the lack of control over it has led to the fact that 90% of tour groups from mainland China are at the mercy of " gray "Chinese firms.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

7 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Portoss
    0
    11 February 2015 18: 59
    China is getting stronger. Uncle SAM bites his elbows more and more.
    1. -8
      11 February 2015 19: 05
      Asian, she is weak with her hellish corruption and nepotism ... clans rule ... something similar with us
      1. Leonidych
        +7
        11 February 2015 19: 15
        and in Europe and Amerdosia that the clans do not rule? and read reports and reports on corruption in syshya and geyrop ...
        1. 0
          12 February 2015 00: 37
          Well, yes, he apparently never heard of the "Kennedy clan", "Bush clan", etc. Not to mention the "skull and bones", the ivy league and so on.
    2. Ibrahim Botashev
      +6
      11 February 2015 19: 29
      Quote: Portoss
      China is getting stronger. Uncle SAM bites his elbows more and more.

      I am in favor of the fact that Russia has only two allies: the army and the navy. Therefore, any state, no matter how warm and friendly relations we were with, should be considered both a potential partner and a potential adversary. We are too huge to have friends.
      1. -1
        11 February 2015 21: 05
        But allies must be constantly sought and used, based on common interests. And then North Korea will have to sit behind an iron curtain with soldering rice on one face ...
      2. +1
        11 February 2015 22: 11
        Dear Colleague Yes , the quote of Alexander III about the presence in Russia of only 2 allies of the Army and Navy is not disputed by the author of the article. He introduced the issue of the direction of development of the country. Choosing strategies and tactics.
        Our experience of surviving among the same "partners" and, in fact, the revival of the country after the 1st World War, VOSR, civil war (devastation), after the victory in the Great Patriotic War ...
        Not taken into account the current experience of China, etc. See current events ...

        As for the allies, the following rule applies in the world:
        England has neither permanent allies, nor permanent enemies. England has only permanent interests

        Henry Temple, 3rd Viscount Palmerston
        Otherwise, again the slap from the former prisoners and brothers.
        Something is not remembered that someone would "throw" the United States. Remember that when you step to the right (left) or jump in place, they will lose and how much.

        It is necessary to choose from history and life useful for Russia and apply. The faster, the more painful the growth of both economic and military power and the well-being of the people!
        hi
    3. Denis fj
      +5
      11 February 2015 19: 35
      After reading the article, initially I also thought that we need to learn from the Chinese, and then I understood a little, we need to turn to our historical memory, and learn from our grandfathers, or relatively close ancestors. And then everything will fall into place.

      We forgot how to plow rolled up our sleeves, but forgotten how to rule the government without self-interest, and there is no ideology. The tops cannot, the lower classes do not want. That is, as soon as the lower classes want, then the upper ones will be able to, but will not be able to replace them, as was most recently, 100 years ago
    4. Denis fj
      +1
      11 February 2015 19: 40
      Quite a strange idea ... all the time trying to invite foreigners.

      To be interested in the secrets of success, to learn the best - of course. And having learned, having understood the predecessors, the deepest mistakes, to independently develop, build, promote.

      It is much more important to educate the domestic elite that loves Russia, its development, its people, as well as improve the quality of the people, inspiring and inspiring them to develop and build, and trying to orient them only to consumption, and comparison with others related to consumption .
    5. 0
      11 February 2015 20: 39
      Quote: Portoss
      China is getting stronger.

      Yes, and we can not weaken! The policy of the East is such a slippery thing, sometimes turning into a betrayal, that you involuntarily recall the words of Alexander the Third: Army and Navy, here are our allies!
      1. -1
        11 February 2015 21: 52
        To the author, Andrey Vinogradov.
        The idea of ​​the Silk Road, the CICA (analogous to the OSCE in Europe) and the SCO belonged to the National Academy of Sciences. And we started to sell it FIRST (the transshipment capacities at Druzhba station were built with Japanese loans) - the PRC looked at this with disdain at first. And when the United States began to "put a spoke in its wheels," the PRC turned its attention to overland trade routes. It was then that he began to push through the Silk Road project.
        From Kazakhstan, the railway infrastructure is ready (the second railway station has been opened on the border, the Kazakhstan-Turkmenistan-Iran branch has been commissioned - the branches to the Persian Gulf and Armenia via Iran), the autobahn should be delivered to the Russian Federation by the end of next year. A high-speed railway project is under consideration.
        RESPECT FOR THE AUTHOR, hi .
  2. +1
    11 February 2015 19: 02
    To all of the above, you can add a Chinese proverb: "If you can't strangle - hug." While the Chinese Dragon hugs ...
  3. 0
    11 February 2015 19: 06
    I think the point here is not the ability to do something. The point here is the will and desire to implement the plan. In the presence of popular support.
  4. Leonidych
    -1
    11 February 2015 19: 17
    China will show mother Aderdos Kuzkin ....
    1. +1
      11 February 2015 20: 19
      Quote: Leonidych
      China will show mother Aderdos Kuzkin ..

      http://riafan.ru/211510-kitay-prigrozil-ustroit-revolyutsiyu-na-rodine-baraka-ob
      amyi /
      Yes
      Honolulu, February 11th. China has offered to supply weapons to Hawaii’s independence fighters. This will be a response to the supply of American weapons to Taiwan.
  5. +1
    11 February 2015 19: 21
    The Chinese act in full accordance with the parable of the two tigers and the peasant, and besides they follow Eastern wisdom about the enemy and calm. They don’t seem to be doing anything, but they have already filled half the world with quiet glanders. At one time, they had a tactic of seepage - this is when a military unit (no matter what size) seeps through the border alone and in small groups, and at a certain time it gathers in a fixed place and delivers a sudden blow. Nothing in the Celestial Empire has still not changed.
    As the principles of Eastern diplomacy (Chinese) say: "Whoever spoke first has already lost."
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. 0
    11 February 2015 19: 30
    these are all sun h .. they talk beautifully in teas, they speak floridly. but never a word will save you from a fist if there is no corresponding or bigger fist behind a word. Genghis Khan proved it easy. Danish also confirms the right to power. And while we are strong, America they will only squint with China. and between themselves they will not collide, even on the islands of Japii. The Yankees will retreat, hoping to have more
  8. 0
    11 February 2015 19: 31
    With all due respect to the author, in the army, I was taking a nap while reading such clever articles .. and I'm not alone .. laughing too provocatively and abstruse .. or is it for the especially smart? .. what
    1. 0
      11 February 2015 19: 55
      Quote: el.krokodil
      With all due respect to the author, in the army, I was taking a nap while reading such clever articles .. and I'm not alone .. laughing too provocatively and abstruse .. or is it for the especially smart? .. what

      Here about our economy, the same thing happened ...))) Tipo give up ..! bully Well, what do you have to read and shake on your mustache .. laughing
      1. Anatoly_39
        0
        12 February 2015 02: 13
        It is necessary to wind on the mustache. To you +. It hurts them to hu .... I
  9. +1
    11 February 2015 19: 44
    Quote: Portoss
    China is getting stronger. Uncle SAM bites his elbows more and more.

    The Chinese are well done. They showed how to talk with the United States. Americans only understand such a language.
    "Michael Pillsbury, a Pentagon adviser, said that the Chinese military hawks, known as Ying Pai, told him in private that they are ready to provide Hawaiian activists with weapons in retaliation for the US arms sales to Taiwan.

    "Beijing reacts very sensitively to the supply of American weapons to Taiwan - even when it comes to one pool or a spare tire for a jeep - and this always provokes furious rhetoric from China," said Pilssbury, who recently spoke to 35 Chinese generals.

    “These In Pai were asking me, 'How will the Pentagon sing if we deliver a shipment of weapons to our friends from the Hawaiian independence movement?' He said. “I was extremely surprised, as I had never heard before that there is such a movement in Hawaii. But I made inquiries - yes, there really is. "
    http://warfiles.ru/show-80426-kitay-prigrozil-vooruzhit-opolchencev-gavayev.html
  10. +1
    11 February 2015 19: 51
    Will SEA countries return their plants, factories, technologies back to the West? Why do they need it? The West decided to wake up and return production - at least for now, but they don’t think about asking the current owners, because they are in economic bondage. As if. Nobody will give now either money or production! They just will not give it back - and en masse, and with greetings to all the Rockefellers. In the east, neither the aforementioned, nor their other drugan bankers from City and Wall Street are interesting. They always knew how to bow (with a cookie under the straw hat of a tramp).
    This is as a hypothetical perspective. Although the forces and economic power of the countries of this half of the world are plenty.
  11. +3
    11 February 2015 19: 58
    Well, under the article a bit of humor ... Stop scaring us with China! bully
  12. Tarhan
    0
    11 February 2015 21: 18
    Yeah!
    Over time, China will become the first superpower in the world. In 20 years or 50, but will be. And it will become so without opposing itself to the whole other world, without artificial confrontation, without exposing itself as the only righteous country.
    China is moving towards this goal not confronting with developed countries, but adopting technologies, know-how, ideas, methods, forms from them.
    China has problems with Taiwan, with a Chinese-speaking multi-million population in Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand, Sri Lanka, but China does not exacerbate them to the detriment of its development.
    And when China becomes the first, ahead of the USA and Europe, it will become the first enemy of the Urashniki. What they are now raining down on the west will raining down on China. China will be to blame for everything.
    1. Anatoly_39
      0
      12 February 2015 02: 17
      Will not be. spirit is not enough.
  13. 0
    12 February 2015 11: 25
    Quote: mamont5
    “These In Pai were asking me, 'How will the Pentagon sing if we deliver a shipment of weapons to our friends from the Hawaiian independence movement?' He said. “I was extremely surprised, as I had never heard before that there is such a movement in Hawaii. But I made inquiries - yes, there really is. "
    http://warfiles.ru/show-80426-kitay-prigrozil-vooruzhit-opolchencev-gavayev.html

    Still, he would not have been, given the way Hawaii became the state of America. This fate could befall the Philippines, but it did not grow together.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"