For first time in last 500 years, China is stronger then Russia, who is to blame?

[GumNaam]

I feel bad for Gorbie it was all Breznev thst fcked up the whole thing in Afghanistan

You do realize that the soviet misadventure in afghanistan only happened because they wanted to gain access to Pakistani waters. All they had to do was just ASK General Zia and we would've made it happen, both thru afghanistan and thru China. after all this, they eventually had to ask us anyway and ended up getting it. that entire decade of war and ussr breakup could've all been avoided. ussr could've still been intact, exporting oil and gas thru Pakistan and america could've been on a total defensive right now had they just used their noggin and simply had asked!

 

[Nilgiri]

I feel bad for Gorbie it was all Breznev thst fcked up the whole thing in Afghanistan

Brezhnev was one huge nothing burger for USSR. They needed at least a kruschev 2.0 who kept things dynamic but also was pragmatic enough on certain key strategy.

Anyway they got Putin now, and they should be fine overall here on out with what they got. I have confidence Putin will find an appropriate successor (or a few) to choose from for Russian people.

whole thing in Afghanistan

At this point it wasn't really Brezhnev himself making this call. He was bit of a showpiece puppet for the real brokers/policy-makers in the party (who were themselves devoid of any real ideas and dynamism). Guy became more and more senile....weekend at bernies kind of thing going on with that dude last chunk of say 8 years....sorta like RBG and killary these days.

I give credit to Gorbachev because he was trying to kick things into gear...like at least try some stuff, but it was too late.

 

[Yankee-stani]

Brezhnev was one huge nothing burger for USSR. They needed at least a kruschev 2.0 who kept things dynamic but also was pragmatic enough on certain key strategy.

Anyway they got Putin now, and they should be fine overall here on out with what they got. I have confidence Putin will find an appropriate successor (or a few) to choose from for Russian people.

Khrushchev mistake was causing the Sino Soviet spilt but he was at least pragmatic when Kennedy was President Breznev at first was like Khrushchev but he fcked up in Czechoslovakia in 1968,continued the Sino Soviet and Yugoslav spilt basically giving America perfect cleavage to take advantage Yup And Kissinger took advantage of that plus the policy towards South Asia was a mix bag

Brezhnev was one huge nothing burger for USSR. They needed at least a kruschev 2.0 who kept things dynamic but also was pragmatic enough on certain key strategy.

Anyway they got Putin now, and they should be fine overall here on out with what they got. I have confidence Putin will find an appropriate successor (or a few) to choose from for Russian people.



At this point it wasn't really Brezhnev himself making this call. He was bit of a showpiece puppet for the real brokers/policy-makers in the party (who were themselves devoid of any real ideas and dynamism). Guy became more and more senile....weekend at bernies kind of thing going on with that dude last chunk of say 8 years....sorta like RBG and killary these days.

I give credit to Gorbachev because he was trying to kick things into gear...like at least try some stuff, but it was too late.

The thing is yeah he was kinda a showpiece but he did wield power in the politburo and made that decision

You do realize that the soviet misadventure in afghanistan only happened because they wanted to gain access to Pakistani waters. All they had to do was just ASK General Zia and we would've made it happen, both thru afghanistan and thru China. after all this, they eventually had to ask us anyway and ended up getting it. that entire decade of war and ussr breakup could've all been avoided. ussr could've still been intact, exporting oil and gas thru Pakistan and america could've been on a total defensive right now had they just used their noggin and simply had asked!

I buy this theory Moscow made some terrible policy calculations that time

 

[Cthulhu]

That wasnt Gorbachev fault he came in power in 1985 USSR invaded Afg in 1979 under the drunkard Leonid Breznev Gorbachev was blackmailed he wanted to save USSR but failed the past leadership screwed up his reforms

USSR itself was a union of occupied countries, Afg invasion is irreverent.

That wasnt Gorbachev fault he came in power in 1985 USSR invaded Afg in 1979 under the drunkard Leonid Breznev Gorbachev was blackmailed he wanted to save USSR but failed the past leadership screwed up his reforms

In the upcoming years, While the U.S. is busy bleeding in the middle east, The Russia will restore it's influence in the Eastern Europe, China will spread it's economic tentacles around the globe, And the rest of the world will be where they are today. But the joke is on the Americans who want to play the "white men" card to counter China.

 

[Nilgiri]

Khrushchev mistake was causing the Sino Soviet spilt but he was at least pragmatic when Kennedy was President Breznev at first was like Khrushchev but he fcked up in Czechoslovakia in 1968,continued the Sino Soviet and Yugoslav spilt basically giving America perfect cleavage to take advantage Yup And Kissinger took advantage of that plus the policy towards South Asia was a mix bag



The thing is yeah he was kinda a showpiece but he did wield power in the politburo and made that decision

It kind of went both ways for the sino-soviet split. Mao was hell bent on continuing the Stalin type understanding etc...to consolidate power and stability at all costs internally and export the revolution as 1st priority externally....and he didnt take kindly to krushchev doing the de-stalinisation (and start opening up pragmatic dialogue with the Western World) and throwing that whole legacy/basis away from the communist cause/strategy.

But what other choice did kruschev have? He had to do that for his own political founding and survival in first place...otherwise he would be gone quickly by whatever stalin-type sleeper agents and such in the party...that would counter-purge him easily.

Mao was too unforgiving on that imo. But Kruschev should have also explained it in more reasoned terms to Mao. Both just didnt trust the other enough to do that...is what it boiled down to.

Brezhnev also was good in initial years like you said....like kruschev they both knew WW2 commisar kinda stuff first hand. But he simply aged terribly and became a shambles...and then you just have no actual presence/pressure to exert back on the "meh/status quo stronk" forces in govt.

The thing is yeah he was kinda a showpiece but he did wield power in the politburo and made that decision

Its rubber stamped kinda stuff tbh. The idea for a quick short intervention was sold to him little too easily. Soviets were also getting into precarious situation overall with their economy at that point.

 

[Arsalan 345]

russia is still much powerful than any other counrty on this planet.americans have weapons but russians can easily die for their country.examples are ww2 and siege near moscow.basically nazi germany made a big mistake by attacking russia.russia isn't doing well economically and therefore china is making more weapons but americans are a totally different story.americans can't fight a war with countries like china and russia.their problem is their need of allies.they depends on allies.without allies,americans are weak.soviet union was indeed super power but right now,america is super power but their dependency on allies are their biggest weakness.

 

[MrSato1]

Without Russia, China is doomed.

Just think of US+ Europe+ India+ Japan + Russia ANTI Chinese coalition.



My friend, point of this topic is to question what is the reason of Russian stagnation. Thats why I compare Russian Empire and Soviet Russia dominence over China with modern times.

I’m pretty sure any country is doomed with such opponents, so thats not reslly a knock against china

 

[infinity73]

Chinese president on his recent trip to russia said, 'Putin is my best friend and I visit Russia the most'. They now have a strong strategic partnership that's unprecendented in big power politics, at least to my knowledge, thanks to American bullying. Xi has met Putin close to 30 times in last six years or so. They intend to do bilateral trade in local currencies as well. They coordinate closely on global affairs as well like in Venezuela.

So the question asked is not really relevant as they themselves don't see it that way. There will always be differences but they always show willingness to sort them out. A more relevant question should be: Do Russia-China combined pose any threat to US hegemony?

 

[GriffinsRule]

If Russia cant revive its power like it did in early 19th century or after WW2, then i will favor USA superpower status rather then Chinese. Dont believe them.

They torture their own citizens (Tiananmen massacre, mass labour camps) what will stop them from torturing other nations?

Americans also put their Japanese citizens in similar camps during WWII so dont expect anything better from them either.

 

[Feng Leng]

Russians have some Mongoloid blood and a huge amount of Asian (Chinese) culture. They are not really a European nation. That is why they are shunned by Europe.

Russia now realizes they are better off working together with China to reduce American power. It will help relieve the NATO threat. If they move earlier it will be an equal partnership. If they move too late it will become a senior-junior relationship.

 

[dani92]

Russians have some Mongoloid blood and a huge amount of Asian (Chinese) culture. They are not really a European nation. That is why they are shunned by Europe.

Russia now realizes they are better off working together with China to reduce American power. It will help relieve the NATO threat. If they move earlier it will be an equal partnership. If they move too late it will become a senior-junior relationship.

Russia is interesting because they inherited both the Byzantine and Mongolian empires with their local Slavic and Viking cultures

 

[That Guy]

Russia's geography and population loss is to blame. Russia's economy is suffering, not because of sanctions (though they do hurt), but because it's population growth is low, and it's geographical size forces it to spend billions on maintaining its aging infrastructure across Russia. Because the population of Russia is so spread out across its gigantic land mass, it has had to spend more money on trying to develop its road and cross-Russia trade infrastructure, in order to maintain central government authority. This had resulted in a decrease in defense spending, and with Russia oil not making as much money anymore, as well as (as previously mentioned) the enormous cost of maintaining its spread out infrastructure, it has little money to spare right now.

With a declining population, the Russian economy has very little hope of gaining more man power, as well as a larger tax base, in the future.

Thus is why authoritarianism is the popular in Russia, because without a central strongman to keep everyone and everything in line, Russia would fall apart.

Russia's biggest concern now is Putin's successor, as Putin is getting quit old now. After Putin, if there is no "heir to the throne" so to speak, than Russia may not survive this century with its current borders intact.

 

[MReynolds]

Your choice of who to blame is rather limited if you must focus on an individual. Sometimes the root cause can be attributed to circumstances outside of one's control and not on an individual. But, if I must choose an individual then I'd blame Alexander III of Russia.

China as a country and civilization is much older than Russia so no surprise there. The only surprise is that China was behind Europe despite the fact China invented the printings, gunpowder and rockets also china explored the oceans thousands years before the Europeans did in the 16th century

1) Chinas decline was an anomoly in human history, driven by external factors...

There shouldn't be any surprise. When you've been top dog for a long time, complacency creeps in, allowing degeneracy to take over. Civilizational decline is gradual.

 

[Han Patriot]

How long you expect a certain country to be far more powerful than a far more populated country is the true question.

Over time with enough peace and stability, the far more populated country is simply going to become far more powerful relative to its population...compared to some earlier snapshot in history where whatever factors created something to skew away.

The skewing goes both ways too, just look at Russia's nuclear stockpile and military strength still....it is from the earlier era where it primed and peaked....and that (along with sheer land + resource size) makes it very competitive today (relative to its population) in the hard power metric.

Ahh the demographic dividend. Ooooo water crisis starvation pollution open defecation. So much dividend is gonna come. Lol

 

[从八品主簿]

If Russia cant revive its power like it did in early 19th century or after WW2, then i will favor USA superpower status rather then Chinese. Dont believe them.

They torture their own citizens (Tiananmen massacre, mass labour camps) what will stop them from torturing other nations?

So the Soviet Union is very good governance? In the face of the Soviet Union, China was only a student, in terms of massacres and tyranny.

China as a country and civilization is much older than Russia so no surprise there. The only surprise is that China was behind Europe despite the fact China invented the printings, gunpowder and rockets also china explored the oceans thousands years before the Europeans did in the 16th century

The civilization system is different. The origin of European civilization is maritime civilization, which leads to the European civilization, which is led by Greece, Rome and Britain. It has opened up the world's colonial era. The maritime civilization of Europe has made business and trade very important. On the contrary, the ancient Chinese society was a farming civilization. He was more conservative and introverted. The ancient Chinese society did not pay much attention to trade and commerce, and the status of merchants was very low. So-called taxis (intellectuals, bureaucratic systems), farmers (farmers), workers (artisans), businessmen (businessmen). In general, ancient China was a continental civilization. It did not pay much attention to the oceans, especially the policy of the last dynasty, which basically refused to interact with the international community. This also led to China missing the opportunity to learn in Europe until the end of the 19th century. There were some contacts during the period.

Was this what you were referring to?
I wonder if the Chinese members on here agree with this...

Vladivostok Lures Chinese Tourists (Many Think It’s Theirs)
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/24/world/asia/vladivostok-china-haishenwai-tourists.amp.html

In 1860, the Russian government forced the Chinese government to sign the Sino-Russian Beijing Treaty and the Russian Federation signed the treaty on November 14, 1860. The Russian representative was the Count of Ignatiev. The French-Chinese article is 43 pages.

At the end of the battle between the British and French forces, Russia claimed that it had made meritorious efforts to mediate the war between Britain and France, forcing the Qing court to sign the treaty. At that time, the Emperor Xianfeng left the Rehe, responsible for all the pleading and enthusiasm of the aftermath, and signed the Sino-Russian Beijing Treaty. The Treaty recognizes the validity of the 1858 Treaty of Plutonium and has previously set aside about 400,000 east of the Ussuri River (including Sakhalin Island and the non-freezing port of Vladivostok). The square kilometers are owned by Russia. Since then, China has lost its estuary to the Sea of Japan in the northeast, and opened Zhangjiakou, Cullen and Kashgar as commercial ports. The two treaties delineate the eastern borders of modern China and Russia. In addition, the treaty provides principles for the boundary of the western section of China and Russia, and becomes the boundary of the later Sino-Russian survey of the northwestern boundary.

Yeah I was referring to that article but nevertheless it proves my point

So the Chinese name of Vladivostok before it was ceded to Russia has always been haishenwei