The Forced Friendship: Russia's Uneasy Alliance with China
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 19 พ.ค. 2024
- As economic sanctions continue to tighten their grip on Russia, the nation is forced to seek assistance from whoever it can, turning to China not out of mutual interest but as a necessity. Yet, this support comes at a steep price, heightening concerns in Moscow that it's inadvertently solidifying a new, skewed power dynamic. As China capitalizes on Russia's vulnerabilities, one has to wonder if this is merely business or if there's a deeper play to settle historical grievances. Can Russia untangle itself from this precarious alliance? What are the obstacles in broadening their so-called "no-limits" friendship, and what implications will these have on future Sino-Russian energy deals? We ask our panel of experts:
On the panel this week:
- Keir Giles (Chatham House)
- Gavin Wilde (CEIP)
- Temur Umarov (CEIP)
Intro - 00:00
PART 1 - 04:07
PART 2 - 23:47
PART 3 - 38:47
Outro - 58:10
Also check out:
- Is the CSTO Facing Collapse: • Is the CSTO Facing Col...
- How Strong is the Chinese Economy: • How Strong is the Chin...
- Democracy in Central Asia: • Democracy in Central A...
Also check out our sister program: @context.matters
Follow the show on @TheRedLinePod
Follow Michael on @MikeHilliardAus
Support the show at: / theredlinepodcast
Submit Questions and Join the Red Line Discord Server at: www.theredlinepodcast.com/dis...
For more info, please visit: www.theredlinepodcast.com/
5 years? Russia just agreed with China that it will help China militarily on the Taiwan issue. Quite unprecedented already.
Russia is willing to cede some core interests to China (allowing long delayed central Asian railway, far east port openings, military research, etc.) all thanks to US and some of the EU nations. So all these negative frictions that used to bother both countries are now replaced by common interests instead, especially when US keep lumping them together as its main adversaries. What else can they do but come together?
Brilliant episode. Thank you most kindly for your work Michael Hillliard ... 👏👏👏
Can’t believe red line doesn’t have more subs. Excellent content. Keep plugging.
The relationship is somewhat difficult to predict. It is predicated upon how much each thinks it helps themselves, and twisted by how much power either has over the other. As the RF wallows deeper and deeper in its invasion of Ukraine, the power balance continues to shift more towards the PRC. Making predicting the relationship even more difficult, we know that both leaders deal with incomplete information environments, but we still dont know exactly to what extent their worldviews are shaped by fallacious internal assumptions.
The question I continue to ponder is, how far does the balance of power need to shift towards the PRC, and how deeply incomplete does the information environment in the Kremlin need to get, before the PRC is able to convince or coerce the RF to join as an actor in the looming Taiwan conflict. The answer to that question is likely different for non kinetic actions directed against the US than it is for kinetic actions against the US, and how likely is the former to precipitate the latter.
I personally fear we are far too focused on the kinetic aspect of a Taiwan conflict, when non kinetic actions can possibly also play a major role, but I also personally fear that the addition of RF assets to the conflict in the pacific will alter the equation enough to make the conflict far more devastating to the US and our allies than our planners appreciate.
I think that "Frenemies" sums this up well.
not really, as long as US exist as a superpower, it would be friends with benefits.
@@prastagus3 Maybe, but remember you can still sleep with someone you hate. Using that analogy. So frenemies is probably spot on.
@@tamamalosi "remember you can still sleep with someone you hate" -
Through more and more acts of friendship and genuine cooperation due to self interest and mutual enemies, they have past the stage of frenemies, if that was the case, since 2022.
Check the latest Russian popular poll on China vs 20 years ago, it is like day and night since 2022.
@@prastagus3 I suspect that the PRC wants Russia a) to win in Ukraine and b) to survive and grow strong. Though not as strong as they were when they were the USSR.
I can see Xi taking some of the oil-rich eastern lands from Russia informally, as a quid pro quo for the frenemyship without limits in the near future.
Would expect that Russians look favourably upon China, given their CSTO does not help out in Ukraine - and barring NKorea and Iran, few countires who can offer tangible suuport, actually do.
Still maintain, it is a marriage of convenience instead of actual allies.
I know it's hard to phantom, and Westerners cannot grasp this reality, but once again here is a truth you cannot digest:
Russia is not the USSR.
The USSR was a union of 15 seperate republics of which Russia was just one.
Most of the leaders of the USSR were either Ukranian or Georgian, not Russian.
Trosky was Ukranian Jewish
Stalin was Georgian
Beria was Georgian
Kruscherov was Ukranian
Breznev was Ukranian
Even Gorbachev was half Ukranian.
The leaders of the USSR were the rejects of the Russian Empire.
They absolutely detested the leaders of the Russian Empire
Leaders of the Russian Empire were the Russian Aristocracy.
They all got murdered had to flee to Western Europe to escape the leaders of the USSR
Russia today is much more pre 1917 Russiaan Empire than the USSR.
You cannot claim Russia today is the USSR.
They were completely different countries, systems of government, economic systems, cultures, and even peoples.
And? You wrote this just to tell the obvious? Or do you have a point too?! Ofc the modern Russian Federation is not the USSR. Isn't this obvious?
USSR built modern Russia. Well, Russia inherited it's military from the USSR. Most of the institutions Russia relies were built over the Soviet period.
This is a "miss the forest for the trees" sort of take. Most of what you say is factual, but it misses that the leaders of the RF currently view themselves as the heirs to the USSR, as the USSR itself was an heir to Czarist Russia. In the eyes of the leaders of the RF, all three are a continuation of the same super-entity, the Russian Empire, so while the words you say are mostly factual, the sum of their parts ends up being incorrect.
How many times do you have to be told that it is not an alliance ?
Captivating episode.....as always.
This destructive relationship should be encouraged.
Pretty evil 😂 you will have your fair share of karma. 😂
20:09 Tanu what?
👍👍🇧🇷🇷🇺🇮🇳🇨🇳🇿🇦➕️👍👍✌️
Best are jealous cos China and Russia are good friend because these are too strong ..
Russia's alliance with China sure is uneasy. It would be much nicer if Russia would be successfully integrated into Western hemisphere where it actually belongs. But at doing this, the Collective West, most notably the hegemon USA, failed. This was a failure of historic proportions. The Soviet empire collapsed because it was not able to compete with the Free World, yet the Western democracies didn't integrate Russia. This could only be possible by recognising Russia's true status as a regional superpower. But the West wanted to see Russian Federation disintegrated. And that was a strategic victory for China and a strategic defeat for the USA..
arguably losing China as a possible ally was a bigger failure than losing Russia. the potential China has is simply much greater. look up when the communists arose and spread in China. it was after the Western powers betrayed China at the treaty of Versailles.
of course at the time they couldn't know that this would backfire spectacularly, i suppose it's just a "what could've been" thought.
Yes, the US was absolutely complicit in the failure of the transition of Russia post USSR collapse, but so was Russia and the Russian leaders. The KGB takeover of education in the 70s, completed by the 80s was a huge factor. The redevelopment of the aristocracy in the name of the communist party was a huge factor. The cultural degradation under the USSR was real, and it was a huge factor in the failure as well. And, finally, the wanton looting of the nation's assets by a new class of wannabe aristocrats in the oligarchy was a huge factor.
For the US to have prevented this, they would have had to take a direct and forceful hand in managing the affairs of the RF immediately after the fall of the USSR. Russian citizens would not have allowed this. Russian leaders would not have allowed this. It would have been seen as turning the cold war hot when the Russians were their weakest, and it might have been one of the greatest chances for global nuclear war that humanity had seen.
You cant simply blame the US as if (ignorant) ideas like "shock therapy capitalism" represent any truth. They don't. They're revisionist marxist fantasy.
Was the US to blame for how the transition failed? Yes. Was Russia to blame for how the transition failed? Yes, and quite a lot more so.
An absolute disgrace from a platform which so far has been exceptionally good .
Very,very disappointing .
Why exactly?
Haven't watched this yet, but multiple high rank RF officials have made very grave comments about China's behaviour, the one I remember was Moscow mayor Sergei Sobyanin, who some months ago said that China was basically waging a trade war against RF.
@@NoHairMan too many negative assumptions about their relationship skewed the analysis unfortunately. When ultra-nationalist Russians like Aleksandr Dugin whom in 1990s advocated Russia to be suspicious of China, hostile to its foreign policies, even assist in breaking up of China, did a complete U-turn in 2015 and started to advocate closer relations, friendly ties, even ally with China on almost everything, the negativity of these two powers are too overblown in this analysis.
No doubt China will use the current closeness between them to foster closer ties in all aspects between Chinese and Russians in an attempt to bridge past suspicions. Thus as time goes on, new generations of Russians and Chinese will be much more closer which will help even more negative aspects and frictions between the two nations, especially in cultural differences, for long term relations.
@@prastagus3 I disagree and I don't think Dugin was mentioned? But I get what you mean, thank you for taking the time to explain.
@@NoHairMan Dugin was from my own research which seemed relevant to this analysis, hehe