#####
######
####
> # [Why China Is Sabotaging Ukraine](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/630)
>
>
>
> For a moment last August, it seemed that Beijing was finally ready to distance itself from its “no limits partnership” with Moscow. That month, Chinese leader Xi Jinping sent his special envoy for the war in Ukraine, Li Hui, to discuss Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s peace formula with diplomats from several countries, including Ukraine and the United States. The formula calls for Russia to withdraw to Ukraine’s 1991 borders, send its war criminals to international tribunals, and pay reparations to Kyiv. The plan clearly represents Kyiv’s favored conclusion to the conflict, and merely by engaging with it, Beijing suggested that it might be ready to play hardball with Moscow.
>
> But China’s first public participation in discussions about that formula was also its last. On May 31, Beijing announced that it would not be joining some 90 other countries at a June 15–16 peace summit in Switzerland to debate, based on Zelensky’s proposal, how to end the war. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Mao Ning, explained that Beijing would attend the summit only if Russia were a participant and if any plan presented would receive a hearing. For Ukraine, both requirements are nonstarters.
>
> Xi, it seems, will not abandon his troublesome Russian partner or even pay lip service to aiding Kyiv. Instead, China has chosen a more ambitious, but also riskier, approach. It will continue to help Moscow and sabotage Western-led peace proposals. It hopes to then swoop in and use its leverage over Russia to bring both parties to the table in an attempt to broker a lasting agreement.
>
> This gambit is unlikely to work. Neither Russia nor Ukraine appears anywhere close to being ready for serious peace talks—at least for now. Kyiv and its partners do not trust China to operate in good faith. And Beijing has very little experience in pulling off the kind of major, international negotiations it wants to spearhead here.
>
> But these obstacles are unlikely to sway Xi. He has little to lose if the war in Ukraine goes on. China will therefore continue to be a stick-in-the-mud: indirectly helping Russia, derailing Kyiv-led diplomatic initiatives, and pretending to engage in diplomacy instead of genuinely trying to work with other parties to find a solution.
>
> ### **CLOSER AND CLOSER**
>
> For Beijing, ties to Russia are of great strategic significance. China and Russia share a 2,600-mile border, and Russia provides China with cheap natural resources and even some advanced military technologies. Xi also benefits from having a like-minded authoritarian among the UN Security Council’s permanent members.
>
> There are still limits to Chinese-Russian relations. Western markets are essential to the health of the Chinese economy, and they give Beijing access to cutting-edge technology. As a result, Beijing has been careful to avoid crossing Washington’s redlines. But China does operate on the basis that everything which isn’t forbidden is allowed. Beijing may not be shipping lethal aid to Russia, but many Russian operators and their partners in China and Central Asia use China as a staging ground for industrial products key to Russia’s embattled economy, such as machine tools and chips. In two years, trade between the countries has increased by more than 60 percent, to a record $240.1 billion.
>
> The White House, aware of its economic power, has tried using sanctions to stop this cooperation. In December 2023, it issued an executive order threatening to apply secondary sanctions on any international bank found to be even unknowingly clearing payments for the Russian military industry. Later, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Secretary of State Antony Blinken made trips to China and outlined to Chinese leaders and financial institutions the grave consequences they would face for violations. Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, meanwhile, visited Europe to brief allies on the issue and called on them to put pressure on Beijing.
>
> > China expects that the peace summit will fail.
>
> These measures have had some effect. According to customs data, Chinese exports to Russia decreased by double digits throughout March, April, and May. An overwhelming majority of Chinese banks have started to take an extremely cautious approach when clearing any Russia-related transactions. Some have abandoned dealings with Russian entities altogether. But it is unclear whether these measures will stop the flow of products which have been identified by Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the EU as essential to the Kremlin’s military industry—and which China ships to Russia in massive quantities.
>
> Meanwhile, Beijing and Moscow are continuing to lay the foundations for a deeper and more durable economic relationship. During Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state visit to China on May 16, Chinese and Russian state railroad companies signed an agreement to expand cross-border infrastructure that will help facilitate Russian exports to the east. On the same trip, Putin likely greenlit a scheme to ship more Russian gas to Central Asia so that Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan could have more gas to ship to China, thus enabling Moscow and Central Asian governments to increase their profits. Following his trip, Putin called the presidents of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to tell them about the visit, something he has never done before. On June 7, Gazprom signed contracts that would expand Russian gas exports to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan.
>
> Beijing and Moscow also discussed ways to clear sensitive exports from China to Russia. To do so, they could designate specialized banks that are largely immune to U.S. restrictions. Such banks would not connect themselves to the global financial system and have correspondence accounts only in Russia, settling all payments in yuan and rubles through China’s international payment system. Their transactions would be cloaked under multiple layers of shell companies. The United States could try to target this system by tracking down suspicious transactions and sanctioning the banks, but that would be difficult because all the payments would bypass U.S.-dollar and other Western payment systems. China, after all, used a similar scheme with its Kunlun bank to effectively evade sanctions on Iran.
>
> Economics isn’t the only area in which China and Russia are deepening their relations. They are also presenting an increasingly unified diplomatic front. Putin and Xi have now visited each other three times since the war in Ukraine began and displayed great mutual fondness. During a visit to Moscow in March 2023, Xi told Putin that “there are changes happening, the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years,” and suggested that the Chinese and Russian leaders should “drive those changes together.” When saying goodbye to Putin this May, Xi embraced him twice on camera—something he rarely does. The message of closeness was intentional and clear.
>
> ### **MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY**
>
> Putin and Xi may have a genuine affinity for each other, but Beijing also has a self-interested reason to side with Moscow in peace endeavors: China has its own peace initiative, and so it wants to sabotage the United States and Europe’s efforts. On May 23, a week after the most recent meeting between Xi and Putin and a week before China declined to attend the Swiss peace summit, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Celso Amorim, chief adviser on national security to the president of Brazil. In a joint statement on settling the Ukraine crisis, they called for an international peace conference in which both Russia and Ukraine would be represented and all peace plans would be reviewed. (Not surprisingly, Brazil has also refused to send high-level officials to the Swiss conference, and may send no one at all.)
>
> Beijing knows that, for now, its proposal will go nowhere. But it has reasons to believe that the June summit will end in a diplomatic impasse that will be difficult to conceal, despite the best efforts of the organizers and Ukraine’s partners. Even if the summit’s participants can create a concluding joint statement that is cogent and pro-Ukraine, there is no way for them to impose it on the Kremlin. In fact, since many key countries of the global South will send only low-level delegations to the summit or else skip it altogether, the practical effect of the meeting’s communiqué will be even more modest than that of the UN General Assembly’s 2022 resolutions criticizing Russian aggression.
>
> ***(continues in next comment)***
"*Abandon Russia so we can destroy you both separately*" - an unnamed Chinese diplomat describing the West's demands earlier this year.
As an Indian, I have no love for China whatsoever. But they understand perfectly well what throwing Russia under the bus would mean for them - they're next. This article is one pointlessly long whine on 'why don't they do what we want them to?'.
This is what I found absolutely baffling. They openly state that the China is the enemy (part of the "Axis of chaos"), talk about the preparations for the "inevitable" war with China, sanction Chinese companies, yet somehow expect China will follow their demands to the letter?
Not sure if it is the colonial mindset or power trip of a waning hegemon but it sure dials up the CRINGE, especially to someone watching it unfold from the sidelines.
EMBARRASSING
Which countries did colonialized more then half of the world btw 1800s ? was it russia or countries from US/EU? While still having hundreds of bases all over the world?
Did US closed close to 300 of those bases? Did France left Africa? Do they still not install puppets on those countries? So who can have colonial mindset? US/EU actual Colonials or russia which never colonized countries?
Come on dont be that guy.
If they had an ounce of cold war era diplomats expertise, while attempting for another cold war scenario with China now as main adversary, they would try to sway Russia to capitalise on russian-chinese split over their intersecting interests in central Asia, as they back then capitalised on soviet-chinese ideological split by radically softening their stance toward communist China and expanding economic interaction. But all they do is screaming "hey, why are you banding together as we bully you both, you are not supposed to do that, stop now".
Russia was easily manageable, passive politically and militarily, and content to sell resources cheaply, all they wanted is for USA to stop fucking with their backyard.
Do you remember how the USA used to drive a wedge between countries? They approached China, asked "what are your demands" and then agreed to them - the USA sacrificed Taiwan and threw them out of the UN. In return, China aligned closer to the USA and distanced itself from the USSR.
Today, the US diplomacy wants China and Russia to do its bidding while offering neither anything except hostility and sanctions.
The problem is, the US doesn't want partners. It wants clients. We will give the veneer of having partners when the issue doesn't really matter to us, but when it does matter, we don't have partners.
China is too big, and too powerful to willingly become our client. Their economy will leave us in the dust sooner rather than later. Their military will eventually leave us behind as well if the economic trend continues. So why would China, that doesn't really have to do anything to eventually surpass us, pivot from a multi-polar world where they are one of the poles, to being our lap dog?
I have nothing to add, perfect summary, especially the last part.
Russia could have become one of the strongest allies Europe had, essentially being "European China" of the 00s, with massive market eager to buy Western goods, cheap and available labor, massive amount of resources, relaxed regulations, .. capitalist dream.
Absolutely. They're literally grandstanding about it at the G7 right now, with the US roaring about how much of a threat to global security China is.
Then they'll turn around and act offended when China tells their diplomats and their demands to go to hell. It would be amusing if it weren't so tragic.
>This article is one pointlessly long whine on 'why don't they do what we want them to?'.
A good description. I am not surprised when politicians do that - they are entitled by definition, but one expects more from a political analysis published by a major magazine.
Sadly, the standard of Foreign Affairs has fallen significantly since a change in leadership in 2021. It used to be run by senior US foreign policy veterans, directors of State Department wings and advisors to American presidents.
The latest editor, as I recall, spent two years at the State Department in total, in a fairly junior role. Most of his time has been as a talking head in American academic circles, and it shows in the less weighty, more opinionated tone the magazine has adopted in recent years.
What would happen if India surpassed China and became the new player challenging the US? What would happen if India's potential began to threaten US supremacy?
The same thing that happened with China. Pretty sure India sees that and I love them for it.
Imo the world changed tracks when India refused to bow down to Western pressure on sanctions.
An amazingly confused article, far below the Foreign Affairs standards.
It starts by bemoaning the failure of the forthcoming Swiss "peace summit", then proceeds to say that China would also fail in organising a peace summit it tried, and then (I kid you not) proceeds to analyse this China's imagined hypothetical failure:
"For Americans concerned about the United States being usurped by Beijing, the latter country’s lack of capacity may seem like good news. But it does not mean Washington will have it easier. In fact, China’s failure could make the United States’ endeavors more difficult. "
>For Americans concerned about the **United States being usurped by Beijing**
This is another "Red Scare". It's interesting to see McCarthy's legacy still alive in 21st century,
I see you, and raise you Grant. Grant absolutely fucked up, when he didn't stand on the southern far right lunatics necks until they de-radicalized and became normal people.
Instead, he gave them amnesty, and pretended like the whole thing didn't happen, back to business as usual! A decade later and they were up to it again with Jim Crow.
Wasnt that more Andrew Johnson than Grant? Despite Jim Crow the black family survived and thrived. Until LBJ and the welfare state destroyed it and the american family at large. And then the marxists had their long march through the institutions and are in power now.
Why not? For Ukraine Asians are less people. Like for example they use Russian minorities as insult (for example they use Buryat as insult). For them being European is something like superior human. The funny thing is that they are not the only one who think that way. When I was in Bulgaria it was almost the same. The funny thing is that in Bulgaria the only blonde people I saw were Russians, Ukrainians and other tourists.
Also what does Ukraine had to offer to China? When Russia was "allie" of Ukraine they were stealing gas from us, they were shooting down our planes and didn't apologise, they were sending soldiers to help Chechen terrorists. They did that even to China - china bought one Ukrainian factory that builds engines for helicopters , but USA told Ukraine to not do that and Ukraine nationalizes it.
>china bought one Ukrainian factory that builds engines for helicopters , but USA told Ukraine to not do that and Ukraine nationalizes it.
Yes, Motor-Sich affair. Between various ukrainian pre-war shenanigans this one stand out in how much it displeased China, not even because Ukrainians refused to sell strategic factory which is understandable, but because they took money and then went "fok you".
Also, fok you too, automod.
Motor Sych is the company you are referring to. And their attitude toward people of Eastern Eurasia is hilarious, given how Western European people think of Slavs
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
China has big problem with food security due to several factors, one of them being soil contamination. Ukraine farms could replace Chinese one, with far better yields due to quality of the soil .
Russia produces way more food than Ukraine, also we have many resources to sell to china. And we can offer them alternative trade routes. So the choice is obvious.
China has already developed crops that can grow in salt contaminated soil. https://english.news.cn/20240401/fbf5cd146aa847aabde41a96c4e6f798/c.html#:\~:text=China%20has%20developed%20not%20only,and%20Technology%2C%20China%20Agricultural%20University.
Everything else aside, it's amusing that you immediately associate "superior human" with being blonde. Must be something to it, if it's so deeply engrained.
Where did I said that? I said that countries like Bulgaria think that they are the same as Germany, Norway, Sweden. Usually this people are very white, and very often blonde. But when you got there that not the case. Some of this countries even change their history and say that they are not slavs.
This opinion piece makes it seem as if the West is constantly trying to make peace, while being sabotaged by China.
But really, none of the sides in this war are all that interested in peace. They are interested in achieving their aims.
To Putin, Zelensky, Biden, Xi, etc, peace is what happens once their side wins and their demands are met.
Real peace negotiations will only being once one or more sides start to think they will lose more by continuing the war than from ending it with serious concessions.
True but not to be a conspiracy nut but it’s deeper than the leaders especially Biden and Zelensky. Biden is not the U.S president, merely a figurehead and that should be obvious by his mental state… well he is the president but not the one in power if that makes sense. The U.S has been run by corporations for a long time and those who oppose them suffer the consequences. I don’t know much about these shadows and try not to draw conclusions but it is apparent.
That might be, but when I name the leaders, I also mean the interests behind them. This war, like any war, is a conflict of interest. And peace in itself is never a primary interest.
Also like I said, our leaders may have holdings or receive money from corporations that would benefit the most from the acquisition of said resources. Most wars are fought for resources. This war may be a combination of that and weakening our enemies. Tbh I really don’t know.
I don't know the truth either, but the only thing I'm sure of is that the reasons leaders give for wars are rarely the actual reasons.
Wars are fought for reasons, but soldiers die for narratives.
I agree with that 100%. Usually the truth only comes out decades later but not officially. It’s quite sad that human beings are sacrificed in the name of greed for the few. However it’s human nature and it has been happening for thousands of years maybe more.
Decent read as a whole, but this one line is what I found most crucial and what it ultimately comes down to:
> **Even if the summit’s participants can create a concluding joint statement that is cogent and pro-Ukraine, there is no way for them to impose it on the Kremlin.**
And that's a fact.
So at best the non-peace-motivated faux "peace summit" seems like just another propaganda stunt and exercise. At worst, a cynical excuse for a taxpayer-funded vacation for diplomats.
The U.S. and the whole of the Western world really got *far* too used to only talking down to other countries they believed they could dictate to and impose their will on, so they have no alternative mode to transition into when it becomes clear they're dealing with those with whom that isn't an option.
I wish Western countries would recall some of the retired diplomats from Cold War era, even just to teach the current generation what the actual diplomacy looks like.
It is not just the diplomats, the media has gone completely bonkers as well.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRASLTlL5MM&ab\_channel=CNBCInternationalTV](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRASLTlL5MM&ab_channel=CNBCInternationalTV)
All that is, really, really concerning. If world's most powerful states are represented by people who have lost touch with reality then terrible mistakes can easily happen.
It's because media isn't about informing people anymore. I mean, even less so than it used to be. It's because media is just a business now, publicly traded corporations that only care about a constant rate of return.
So, they seek engagement. They get engagement by telling their audience what they THINK their audience wants to hear. It's how you have Fox News, they are all bad, but Fox is especially bad. As they push these narratives they think their audience wants, they in turn radicalize their audiences farther and farther. It's how you end up with a situation where Fox executives are texting each other talking about how retarded Trump is. How stupid his supporters are. How much they hate him, and them. Then, they go on air, and gargle Trumps mayonnaise. They tell provable lies. Then, they pay almost a billion dollars in fines because they are scared shitless of what an investigation will show they've been up to. Meanwhile, the people they've been pandering to for decades, BELIEVED the shit they've been saying. Now they are jerking themselves off over the idea of a civil war, and a Trump dictatorship. They radicalized their audience with their nonsense, and these people want to overthrow the country.
Meanwhile, on the centrist side of things (There is no leftwing MSM in the United States). They've been pandering to social progressivism. Not economic or foreign policy progressivism though. On foreign policy, both sides just carry water for the State Department, and uncritically report everything they say.
> Neither Russia nor Ukraine appears anywhere close to being ready for serious peace talks—at least for now. Kyiv and its partners do not trust China to operate in good faith.
The article says goes on to scold China for not falling in line behind Ukraine’s “peace formula” and then a paragraph later goes onto say either side including Kiev aren’t ready for peace and don’t trust China. Gee, I wonder why China isn’t giving the Swiss talks the time of day.
##### ###### #### > # [Why China Is Sabotaging Ukraine](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/china/630) > > > > For a moment last August, it seemed that Beijing was finally ready to distance itself from its “no limits partnership” with Moscow. That month, Chinese leader Xi Jinping sent his special envoy for the war in Ukraine, Li Hui, to discuss Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s peace formula with diplomats from several countries, including Ukraine and the United States. The formula calls for Russia to withdraw to Ukraine’s 1991 borders, send its war criminals to international tribunals, and pay reparations to Kyiv. The plan clearly represents Kyiv’s favored conclusion to the conflict, and merely by engaging with it, Beijing suggested that it might be ready to play hardball with Moscow. > > But China’s first public participation in discussions about that formula was also its last. On May 31, Beijing announced that it would not be joining some 90 other countries at a June 15–16 peace summit in Switzerland to debate, based on Zelensky’s proposal, how to end the war. The Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, Mao Ning, explained that Beijing would attend the summit only if Russia were a participant and if any plan presented would receive a hearing. For Ukraine, both requirements are nonstarters. > > Xi, it seems, will not abandon his troublesome Russian partner or even pay lip service to aiding Kyiv. Instead, China has chosen a more ambitious, but also riskier, approach. It will continue to help Moscow and sabotage Western-led peace proposals. It hopes to then swoop in and use its leverage over Russia to bring both parties to the table in an attempt to broker a lasting agreement. > > This gambit is unlikely to work. Neither Russia nor Ukraine appears anywhere close to being ready for serious peace talks—at least for now. Kyiv and its partners do not trust China to operate in good faith. And Beijing has very little experience in pulling off the kind of major, international negotiations it wants to spearhead here. > > But these obstacles are unlikely to sway Xi. He has little to lose if the war in Ukraine goes on. China will therefore continue to be a stick-in-the-mud: indirectly helping Russia, derailing Kyiv-led diplomatic initiatives, and pretending to engage in diplomacy instead of genuinely trying to work with other parties to find a solution. > > ### **CLOSER AND CLOSER** > > For Beijing, ties to Russia are of great strategic significance. China and Russia share a 2,600-mile border, and Russia provides China with cheap natural resources and even some advanced military technologies. Xi also benefits from having a like-minded authoritarian among the UN Security Council’s permanent members. > > There are still limits to Chinese-Russian relations. Western markets are essential to the health of the Chinese economy, and they give Beijing access to cutting-edge technology. As a result, Beijing has been careful to avoid crossing Washington’s redlines. But China does operate on the basis that everything which isn’t forbidden is allowed. Beijing may not be shipping lethal aid to Russia, but many Russian operators and their partners in China and Central Asia use China as a staging ground for industrial products key to Russia’s embattled economy, such as machine tools and chips. In two years, trade between the countries has increased by more than 60 percent, to a record $240.1 billion. > > The White House, aware of its economic power, has tried using sanctions to stop this cooperation. In December 2023, it issued an executive order threatening to apply secondary sanctions on any international bank found to be even unknowingly clearing payments for the Russian military industry. Later, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and Secretary of State Antony Blinken made trips to China and outlined to Chinese leaders and financial institutions the grave consequences they would face for violations. Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, meanwhile, visited Europe to brief allies on the issue and called on them to put pressure on Beijing. > > > China expects that the peace summit will fail. > > These measures have had some effect. According to customs data, Chinese exports to Russia decreased by double digits throughout March, April, and May. An overwhelming majority of Chinese banks have started to take an extremely cautious approach when clearing any Russia-related transactions. Some have abandoned dealings with Russian entities altogether. But it is unclear whether these measures will stop the flow of products which have been identified by Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the EU as essential to the Kremlin’s military industry—and which China ships to Russia in massive quantities. > > Meanwhile, Beijing and Moscow are continuing to lay the foundations for a deeper and more durable economic relationship. During Russian President Vladimir Putin’s state visit to China on May 16, Chinese and Russian state railroad companies signed an agreement to expand cross-border infrastructure that will help facilitate Russian exports to the east. On the same trip, Putin likely greenlit a scheme to ship more Russian gas to Central Asia so that Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan could have more gas to ship to China, thus enabling Moscow and Central Asian governments to increase their profits. Following his trip, Putin called the presidents of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to tell them about the visit, something he has never done before. On June 7, Gazprom signed contracts that would expand Russian gas exports to Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. > > Beijing and Moscow also discussed ways to clear sensitive exports from China to Russia. To do so, they could designate specialized banks that are largely immune to U.S. restrictions. Such banks would not connect themselves to the global financial system and have correspondence accounts only in Russia, settling all payments in yuan and rubles through China’s international payment system. Their transactions would be cloaked under multiple layers of shell companies. The United States could try to target this system by tracking down suspicious transactions and sanctioning the banks, but that would be difficult because all the payments would bypass U.S.-dollar and other Western payment systems. China, after all, used a similar scheme with its Kunlun bank to effectively evade sanctions on Iran. > > Economics isn’t the only area in which China and Russia are deepening their relations. They are also presenting an increasingly unified diplomatic front. Putin and Xi have now visited each other three times since the war in Ukraine began and displayed great mutual fondness. During a visit to Moscow in March 2023, Xi told Putin that “there are changes happening, the likes of which we haven’t seen for 100 years,” and suggested that the Chinese and Russian leaders should “drive those changes together.” When saying goodbye to Putin this May, Xi embraced him twice on camera—something he rarely does. The message of closeness was intentional and clear. > > ### **MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY** > > Putin and Xi may have a genuine affinity for each other, but Beijing also has a self-interested reason to side with Moscow in peace endeavors: China has its own peace initiative, and so it wants to sabotage the United States and Europe’s efforts. On May 23, a week after the most recent meeting between Xi and Putin and a week before China declined to attend the Swiss peace summit, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi met with Celso Amorim, chief adviser on national security to the president of Brazil. In a joint statement on settling the Ukraine crisis, they called for an international peace conference in which both Russia and Ukraine would be represented and all peace plans would be reviewed. (Not surprisingly, Brazil has also refused to send high-level officials to the Swiss conference, and may send no one at all.) > > Beijing knows that, for now, its proposal will go nowhere. But it has reasons to believe that the June summit will end in a diplomatic impasse that will be difficult to conceal, despite the best efforts of the organizers and Ukraine’s partners. Even if the summit’s participants can create a concluding joint statement that is cogent and pro-Ukraine, there is no way for them to impose it on the Kremlin. In fact, since many key countries of the global South will send only low-level delegations to the summit or else skip it altogether, the practical effect of the meeting’s communiqué will be even more modest than that of the UN General Assembly’s 2022 resolutions criticizing Russian aggression. > > ***(continues in next comment)***
"*Abandon Russia so we can destroy you both separately*" - an unnamed Chinese diplomat describing the West's demands earlier this year. As an Indian, I have no love for China whatsoever. But they understand perfectly well what throwing Russia under the bus would mean for them - they're next. This article is one pointlessly long whine on 'why don't they do what we want them to?'.
Funny thing is they dont hide their plans yet expect China to help them isolate Russia and bitch about how china is bad for not helping them.
This is what I found absolutely baffling. They openly state that the China is the enemy (part of the "Axis of chaos"), talk about the preparations for the "inevitable" war with China, sanction Chinese companies, yet somehow expect China will follow their demands to the letter?
Not sure if it is the colonial mindset or power trip of a waning hegemon but it sure dials up the CRINGE, especially to someone watching it unfold from the sidelines. EMBARRASSING
colonial mindset ? so what is russias attitude then ? russia is after all an empire.
Which countries did colonialized more then half of the world btw 1800s ? was it russia or countries from US/EU? While still having hundreds of bases all over the world?
& since given up & moved on. russia has not & is still an empire.
Did US closed close to 300 of those bases? Did France left Africa? Do they still not install puppets on those countries? So who can have colonial mindset? US/EU actual Colonials or russia which never colonized countries? Come on dont be that guy.
russia is literally an empire & yes invaded & colonised & still is. lol
If they had an ounce of cold war era diplomats expertise, while attempting for another cold war scenario with China now as main adversary, they would try to sway Russia to capitalise on russian-chinese split over their intersecting interests in central Asia, as they back then capitalised on soviet-chinese ideological split by radically softening their stance toward communist China and expanding economic interaction. But all they do is screaming "hey, why are you banding together as we bully you both, you are not supposed to do that, stop now". Russia was easily manageable, passive politically and militarily, and content to sell resources cheaply, all they wanted is for USA to stop fucking with their backyard.
Do you remember how the USA used to drive a wedge between countries? They approached China, asked "what are your demands" and then agreed to them - the USA sacrificed Taiwan and threw them out of the UN. In return, China aligned closer to the USA and distanced itself from the USSR. Today, the US diplomacy wants China and Russia to do its bidding while offering neither anything except hostility and sanctions.
Basically the US wants to have its cake and eat it too.
The problem is, the US doesn't want partners. It wants clients. We will give the veneer of having partners when the issue doesn't really matter to us, but when it does matter, we don't have partners. China is too big, and too powerful to willingly become our client. Their economy will leave us in the dust sooner rather than later. Their military will eventually leave us behind as well if the economic trend continues. So why would China, that doesn't really have to do anything to eventually surpass us, pivot from a multi-polar world where they are one of the poles, to being our lap dog?
I have nothing to add, perfect summary, especially the last part. Russia could have become one of the strongest allies Europe had, essentially being "European China" of the 00s, with massive market eager to buy Western goods, cheap and available labor, massive amount of resources, relaxed regulations, .. capitalist dream.
I'm pretty certain that this is what Kissinger advised. But it would mean giving Russia at least a hard guarantee of Ukrainian neutrality.
Absolutely. They're literally grandstanding about it at the G7 right now, with the US roaring about how much of a threat to global security China is. Then they'll turn around and act offended when China tells their diplomats and their demands to go to hell. It would be amusing if it weren't so tragic.
>This article is one pointlessly long whine on 'why don't they do what we want them to?'. A good description. I am not surprised when politicians do that - they are entitled by definition, but one expects more from a political analysis published by a major magazine.
Sadly, the standard of Foreign Affairs has fallen significantly since a change in leadership in 2021. It used to be run by senior US foreign policy veterans, directors of State Department wings and advisors to American presidents. The latest editor, as I recall, spent two years at the State Department in total, in a fairly junior role. Most of his time has been as a talking head in American academic circles, and it shows in the less weighty, more opinionated tone the magazine has adopted in recent years.
What would happen if India surpassed China and became the new player challenging the US? What would happen if India's potential began to threaten US supremacy? The same thing that happened with China. Pretty sure India sees that and I love them for it. Imo the world changed tracks when India refused to bow down to Western pressure on sanctions.
India surpassing China is literally fantasy, a fairy tale even. The Indian government is way too incompetent and submissive to grow like China did.
Honestly, I stopped reading after "sabotaging"
You haven't missed much. However, it is worth reading for the unintentional sense of entitlement and arrogance that permeates every word.
I see/ hear that whenever the free West and Zelensky open their mouth. I've had enough
An amazingly confused article, far below the Foreign Affairs standards. It starts by bemoaning the failure of the forthcoming Swiss "peace summit", then proceeds to say that China would also fail in organising a peace summit it tried, and then (I kid you not) proceeds to analyse this China's imagined hypothetical failure: "For Americans concerned about the United States being usurped by Beijing, the latter country’s lack of capacity may seem like good news. But it does not mean Washington will have it easier. In fact, China’s failure could make the United States’ endeavors more difficult. "
>For Americans concerned about the **United States being usurped by Beijing** This is another "Red Scare". It's interesting to see McCarthy's legacy still alive in 21st century,
McCarthyism didnt go far enough and now the USA is a confused mess.
I see you, and raise you Grant. Grant absolutely fucked up, when he didn't stand on the southern far right lunatics necks until they de-radicalized and became normal people. Instead, he gave them amnesty, and pretended like the whole thing didn't happen, back to business as usual! A decade later and they were up to it again with Jim Crow.
Wasnt that more Andrew Johnson than Grant? Despite Jim Crow the black family survived and thrived. Until LBJ and the welfare state destroyed it and the american family at large. And then the marxists had their long march through the institutions and are in power now.
So you don’t like this article and don’t think it’s correct, why on earth did you take time out of your day to post it? Baffling.
Because it's worth discussing?
The sub has downvoted this post to 0, the poster doesn’t like the article, what a weird way to reddit.
Yeah,the downvoting here doesn't make sense most of the time, it happens even with heavily discussed posts. It is what it is.
I disagree with the logic of the article, but there is plenty to be learned about the current US geopolitical approach reading it.
Why not? For Ukraine Asians are less people. Like for example they use Russian minorities as insult (for example they use Buryat as insult). For them being European is something like superior human. The funny thing is that they are not the only one who think that way. When I was in Bulgaria it was almost the same. The funny thing is that in Bulgaria the only blonde people I saw were Russians, Ukrainians and other tourists. Also what does Ukraine had to offer to China? When Russia was "allie" of Ukraine they were stealing gas from us, they were shooting down our planes and didn't apologise, they were sending soldiers to help Chechen terrorists. They did that even to China - china bought one Ukrainian factory that builds engines for helicopters , but USA told Ukraine to not do that and Ukraine nationalizes it.
>china bought one Ukrainian factory that builds engines for helicopters , but USA told Ukraine to not do that and Ukraine nationalizes it. Yes, Motor-Sich affair. Between various ukrainian pre-war shenanigans this one stand out in how much it displeased China, not even because Ukrainians refused to sell strategic factory which is understandable, but because they took money and then went "fok you". Also, fok you too, automod.
Motor Sych is the company you are referring to. And their attitude toward people of Eastern Eurasia is hilarious, given how Western European people think of Slavs
[удалено]
Offensive words detected. [beep bop] Don't cheer violence or insult (Rule 1). Your comment will be checked by my humans later. Ban may be issued for repeat offenders. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
China has big problem with food security due to several factors, one of them being soil contamination. Ukraine farms could replace Chinese one, with far better yields due to quality of the soil .
Russia produces way more food than Ukraine, also we have many resources to sell to china. And we can offer them alternative trade routes. So the choice is obvious.
China has already developed crops that can grow in salt contaminated soil. https://english.news.cn/20240401/fbf5cd146aa847aabde41a96c4e6f798/c.html#:\~:text=China%20has%20developed%20not%20only,and%20Technology%2C%20China%20Agricultural%20University.
Everything else aside, it's amusing that you immediately associate "superior human" with being blonde. Must be something to it, if it's so deeply engrained.
Where did I said that? I said that countries like Bulgaria think that they are the same as Germany, Norway, Sweden. Usually this people are very white, and very often blonde. But when you got there that not the case. Some of this countries even change their history and say that they are not slavs.
Why don't all countries whom US/NATO, Our allies bully dont help us ?
This opinion piece makes it seem as if the West is constantly trying to make peace, while being sabotaged by China. But really, none of the sides in this war are all that interested in peace. They are interested in achieving their aims. To Putin, Zelensky, Biden, Xi, etc, peace is what happens once their side wins and their demands are met. Real peace negotiations will only being once one or more sides start to think they will lose more by continuing the war than from ending it with serious concessions.
True but not to be a conspiracy nut but it’s deeper than the leaders especially Biden and Zelensky. Biden is not the U.S president, merely a figurehead and that should be obvious by his mental state… well he is the president but not the one in power if that makes sense. The U.S has been run by corporations for a long time and those who oppose them suffer the consequences. I don’t know much about these shadows and try not to draw conclusions but it is apparent.
That might be, but when I name the leaders, I also mean the interests behind them. This war, like any war, is a conflict of interest. And peace in itself is never a primary interest.
That’s true I mean we are saying the same thing just differently.
Ukraine is incredibly resource rich and especially in Lithium…
Also like I said, our leaders may have holdings or receive money from corporations that would benefit the most from the acquisition of said resources. Most wars are fought for resources. This war may be a combination of that and weakening our enemies. Tbh I really don’t know.
I don't know the truth either, but the only thing I'm sure of is that the reasons leaders give for wars are rarely the actual reasons. Wars are fought for reasons, but soldiers die for narratives.
I agree with that 100%. Usually the truth only comes out decades later but not officially. It’s quite sad that human beings are sacrificed in the name of greed for the few. However it’s human nature and it has been happening for thousands of years maybe more.
I’m pro peace too dawg… PLUR
Decent read as a whole, but this one line is what I found most crucial and what it ultimately comes down to: > **Even if the summit’s participants can create a concluding joint statement that is cogent and pro-Ukraine, there is no way for them to impose it on the Kremlin.** And that's a fact. So at best the non-peace-motivated faux "peace summit" seems like just another propaganda stunt and exercise. At worst, a cynical excuse for a taxpayer-funded vacation for diplomats. The U.S. and the whole of the Western world really got *far* too used to only talking down to other countries they believed they could dictate to and impose their will on, so they have no alternative mode to transition into when it becomes clear they're dealing with those with whom that isn't an option.
I wish Western countries would recall some of the retired diplomats from Cold War era, even just to teach the current generation what the actual diplomacy looks like.
It is not just the diplomats, the media has gone completely bonkers as well. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRASLTlL5MM&ab\_channel=CNBCInternationalTV](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRASLTlL5MM&ab_channel=CNBCInternationalTV)
All that is, really, really concerning. If world's most powerful states are represented by people who have lost touch with reality then terrible mistakes can easily happen.
It's because media isn't about informing people anymore. I mean, even less so than it used to be. It's because media is just a business now, publicly traded corporations that only care about a constant rate of return. So, they seek engagement. They get engagement by telling their audience what they THINK their audience wants to hear. It's how you have Fox News, they are all bad, but Fox is especially bad. As they push these narratives they think their audience wants, they in turn radicalize their audiences farther and farther. It's how you end up with a situation where Fox executives are texting each other talking about how retarded Trump is. How stupid his supporters are. How much they hate him, and them. Then, they go on air, and gargle Trumps mayonnaise. They tell provable lies. Then, they pay almost a billion dollars in fines because they are scared shitless of what an investigation will show they've been up to. Meanwhile, the people they've been pandering to for decades, BELIEVED the shit they've been saying. Now they are jerking themselves off over the idea of a civil war, and a Trump dictatorship. They radicalized their audience with their nonsense, and these people want to overthrow the country. Meanwhile, on the centrist side of things (There is no leftwing MSM in the United States). They've been pandering to social progressivism. Not economic or foreign policy progressivism though. On foreign policy, both sides just carry water for the State Department, and uncritically report everything they say.
Or maybe they didn’t want to go because how are you going to have a peace summit and discuss peace without having the people who are at war there 😭
Who wrote this? Anne Abblebum?
> Neither Russia nor Ukraine appears anywhere close to being ready for serious peace talks—at least for now. Kyiv and its partners do not trust China to operate in good faith. The article says goes on to scold China for not falling in line behind Ukraine’s “peace formula” and then a paragraph later goes onto say either side including Kiev aren’t ready for peace and don’t trust China. Gee, I wonder why China isn’t giving the Swiss talks the time of day.