Putin to visit China after skipping US

[iajj]

Well, for decades, it seems that the one keeping knocking China door for rents is russia, not gulf states including saudi.

As far as your love for putin, well, I do not think he has the same love for you through his actions against Chinese interest either inside russia or outside russia.

To be honest, I would rather China has a better relationship with U.S. than with the hideous russia. I do think russia can ever be a friend even though I do not want to have a constant foe from north.

i don't understand why you are praising saudis for not seeking rent - rent-seeking is by definition the prerogative of those who control small countries: saudis cannot seek rent because americans are collecting political rent for regulating access to saudis; if saudis started to collect rent themselves, then americans won't be able to and they won't allow it. so do americans collect rent for chinese relations with american puppets? of course! not just on saudi but on bazi, bonzi, nipponzi. we need to stop our rent payments to americans asap, which is why we are so vested in the soveriegnty and security and independence of countries like iran, venezuela, europe, russia, etc.

now in dealing with iran, europe or russia, they are still going to drive hard bargains with china and i understand that you are noticeable upset. but all countries want good bargains, and it is our economic and military prowess and diplomatic skills that will secure us square deals from them. but negotiation with iran and russia has one key difference with any negotiation with saudis - with the arabs, the less we pay them, the more we pay US! therefore, to say that saudis have been nice to us in the past decades is dangerously misleading because you are sweeping under the rug the political price americans extracted from us in their "conditioning" of the arabs in sino-arabic relations. it is akin to wall street's innovative accounting to say that relationship with saudis have cost us less than our relationship with russians because you are exaggerating the benefit of this relationship while hiding the true, principal cost of sino-arabic relationship, i.e., the huge rent we were forced to pay to the devious, sinister, subhuman, anglo-american species. of course our balance sheet with the arabs looks nice if you discount what americans are taking from us!

now did the soviets do the same? i am sure every power wants to extract rent from people who want to have a relationship with countries that fall under its influence. soviets certainly did. but in the end chinese made a decision not to pay. both sides have gone through that phase in our relationship and have understood each other. right now russia and china conduct diplomacy with third countries without much interference and rent-seeking from each other, which is good - and this is also why i don't care about russians' selling arms to vietnam and india: if russia profits from the arms sale, it means russia is bankrupting india and vietnam very soon and we shouldn't be afraid; if russia subsidizes viets and hindus, it means russia is bankrupting itself, and china has even less reason to be afraid.

 

[shuttler]

I do not know how you measure "reliable". If by consistent and constant supplying China will Oil and GAS, I think gulf states are way more reliable than russia has ever been.

Historically, russia has done way more harm to China than any other countries including japs.

Even today, russia does not want to see a stronger China. I bet even U.S. is not that reluctant to see China's rise.

As far as alienating russia??? Well, why does russia want to alienate China by providing all types of weapons to vietnam, phillipines, and working with vietnam on scs to mess up with China and etc???

Nowadays, between China and russia, russia is the weaker one. russia is now facing NATO missile shield issue, syria's issue and many other issues that desperately need China's help.

While China helps russia on Syria (syria is way more important to russia than to China), that is what China gets for return in SCS???

Do not act stupidly while you should do things otherwise. This should apply to russia and China both.

You are a moron. are you able to connect all the dots that are affecting China's core interests: Taiwan, Xinjiang. Xizang, containment, SCS, weapon and hi tech embargo, advancement in space?

when did gulf states do that to China???

who is the boss behind them?

 

[Speeder 2]

Agreed with the most, particularly on Vladivostok, supply diversity and type of responses to Russo-Viet weapon deals.

Some other issues though:

Russia’s birth rate is sharply rising again instead of declining.

Russia is not a declining power. It appears such only in relation to China. Actually with its size (land, natural resources, population, nuke pile), geo position and average IQ, Russia in the long run will logically always be a great power contrary to any temporal decline after they manage to put their house in order.

Russia has 2 big internal headaches that China doesn’t have. One is International Jewish (Russian Jews) control on its economy, the other being that economic income is overly dependent on energy exports. Putin is a guy who gives Russian folks hope on these 2 fronts. That’s why Jewish-controlled international mass media vilifies him on many issues. 2 biggest promises of Putin during the election are to diversify the economy and modernise the military. The latter depends on the former which in turn needs huge capital investments and human resources, both of which Russia is lack of yet are abundant in China. My guess is that the fast track development of Russian Far East will remain as one of the key goals of Putin’s visit. With potential huge business deals/loans on the line China could easily put forward basic principles like CSC and certain Viet or Indo arms sales of critical tech, if required.

There's some interesting discussion here. I just want to say that 'friendship' and 'trust' are such emotionally laden words, and as such, they have little use when discussing geopolitics because China's foreign policy should be based on pure realpolitik. Russia can never be a 'true' friend, based on the standard we have with Pakistan, simply because it has its own great-power aspirations. Our interactions will never be spontaneous, but based on careful cost-benefit analyses. In the past when we didn't understand this, we got screwed us over like during the Korean War, because Stalin approached everything with careful calculation while Mao was consumed by ideology. But now that we've switched to a realpolitik based approach, we shouldn't make these mistakes anymore. Our relationship is between two seasoned business partners, not family members, and that's perfectly acceptable.

In the long run, it's true that Russia has done the worst damage to us. The international concessions in Shanghai were returned. The British and Portugese recently returned Hong Kong and Macau. Japanese imperialism was probably the most pernicious after Russia, and Taiwan is still outside our administration (but technically under Chinese administration) but this will most likely be rectified in the future. In contrast, the Russians managed to pry off Outer Mongolia, Outer Manchuria and Sakhalin, and these losses are probably permanent. This is a fait accompli, and we should learn to live with it. Keep in mind that most of Outer Monglia is a desert wasteland, has little strategic value, and its mineral wealth can be obtained through trade. The worst lost was of Vladivostok (Haishenwei) that cut us off from the Sea of Japan, and if an opportunity arises to redraw the border down the Ussuri river (instead of across Lake Khanka), then we should seize it. Otherwise, I am fairly unmoved by these losses to Russia, and I would consider maintaining good relations more important.

Russia's support to Vietnam is a remnant of the Sino-Soviet split, and annoying of course, but it's absurd to expect Russia to curtail these relations simply on our insistence. What we can do is adopt a symmetrical response, by enhancing relations with the Baltic states, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, etc, and squeeze Russia whenever they squeeze us. The other thing is that we should not have vetoed the Syria resolution, because Syria is far less important to us than to Russia, and it only pissed off the Arabs. Of course, when Russia co-operates with us by snubbing Vietnam, India, etc, then we should recognize this and co-operate in other areas they demand. Business relationship.

About the oil issue: I don't know why you guys keep emphasizing 'trustworthy' or 'friendship'. There's no need to buy oil only from 'trustworthy' states or'friends' of course. It doesn't matter that we have our difference with Russia, or that the Gulf countries are US client states; makes no difference to the oil. What's important is to not become dependent on one side, and in this sense we should diversify our sources so that no one supplier can induce supply shocks.

Looking ahead to the future, it's evident that Russia is a declining power. It's demographics are screwy, and it hasn't been able to diversify its economy away from oil and weapons sales. It's GDP is growing quite fast, but that's because its economy has been unnaturaly depressed by mismanagement during the 90's. Once it reaches roughly Germany's GDP, it will have reached equilibrium. There's no need to antagonize a declining power. Another issue is that Russia and US interest will collide in the future over the Arctic:

Petroleum exploration in the Arctic - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

As more of the ice caps melt, more petroleum will be available and this will inevitably lead to disputes. Right now, US-China antagonism is simply based on tension generated from China's rise. Keep in mind that our spheres of influence don't actually overlap. In contrast, the Arctic issue will be a proper teritorrial dispute between great powers and will considerably lessen the pressure on China. This distraction will give us considerable space to make geopolitical manouevres.

 

[ephone]

I have explained myself clearly enough.

We have been stabbed in the back many times by russia, even nowadays, and still idiots like you praise russia and say it is just the way it is, it has no ill intention or just inheritance from historical relationship and etc.

For people as stupid as you are, I have nothing further to explain.

Not it's rather you who is the idiot, you bring up chechens when that has noting to do with the issue also want to sell weapons to Georgia who is a pro western ally Vietnam - Russia relations goes back to soviet times when you saying china should sell weapons to georgia whose the idiot starting to look like you doesn't it ?

If you know anything Gaddafi was in for recognizing taiwan not to mention he left the alliance with China to the west, Gaddafi got his own making.

Syria is rather more important it is a key factor in middle east geopolitics. this has noting to do with the japanese, Russia and Us have solved our dispute it seems you have a small minority view on getting land that will never get back. simple Russia is one of our best strategic partner unless you want to replace with Georgia or saudi arabia as you say they are more reliable, please stop with your idiotic views that is a minority right now the CCP sees Russia as a partner and has solved disputes them.

Well, I suppose idiots like you only look at history from a 10 year period, don't you?

What a retard.

You are a moron. are you able to connect all the dots that are affecting China's core interests: Taiwan, Xinjiang. Xizang, containment, SCS, weapon and hi tech embargo, advancement in space?




who is the boss behind them?

I hope you can get some intelligence by reading carefully what I have written.

Where did I praise saudi???

Personally, I have no respect for Saudi at all. China and saudi relationship is purely business.

However, even in such a religious "backward" country, it has not treated China that badly as russia did.

As for whether Saudi is able to extract rent from China or whether it dares to, well, Saudi has shut down oil export to U.S. in the past, what is so special about its ability to do so against any other country???

What I have written there is simply to answer questions from others above. You need read those first before reading my replies to understand the contents as a whole.

i don't understand why you are praising saudis for not seeking rent - rent-seeking is by definition the prerogative of those who control small countries: saudis cannot seek rent because americans are collecting political rent for regulating access to saudis; if saudis started to collect rent themselves, then americans won't be able to and they won't allow it. so do americans collect rent for chinese relations with american puppets? of course! not just on saudi but on bazi, bonzi, nipponzi. we need to stop our rent payments to americans asap, which is why we are so vested in the soveriegnty and security and independence of countries like iran, venezuela, europe, russia, etc.

now in dealing with iran, europe or russia, they are still going to drive hard bargains with china and i understand that you are noticeable upset. but all countries want good bargains, and it is our economic and military prowess and diplomatic skills that will secure us square deals from them. but negotiation with iran and russia has one key difference with any negotiation with saudis - with the arabs, the less we pay them, the more we pay US! therefore, to say that saudis have been nice to us in the past decades is dangerously misleading because you are sweeping under the rug the political price americans extracted from us in their "conditioning" of the arabs in sino-arabic relations. it is akin to wall street's innovative accounting to say that relationship with saudis have cost us less than our relationship with russians because you are exaggerating the benefit of this relationship while hiding the true, principal cost of sino-arabic relationship, i.e., the huge rent we were forced to pay to the devious, sinister, subhuman, anglo-american species. of course our balance sheet with the arabs looks nice if you discount what americans are taking from us!

now did the soviets do the same? i am sure every power wants to extract rent from people who want to have a relationship with countries that fall under its influence. soviets certainly did. but in the end chinese made a decision not to pay. both sides have gone through that phase in our relationship and have understood each other. right now russia and china conduct diplomacy with third countries without much interference and rent-seeking from each other, which is good - and this is also why i don't care about russians' selling arms to vietnam and india: if russia profits from the arms sale, it means russia is bankrupting india and vietnam very soon and we shouldn't be afraid; if russia subsidizes viets and hindus, it means russia is bankrupting itself, and china has even less reason to be afraid.

 

[zzzz]

Russia's support to Vietnam is a remnant of the Sino-Soviet split, and annoying of course, but it's absurd to expect Russia to curtail these relations simply on our insistence. What we can do is adopt a symmetrical response, by enhancing relations with the Baltic states, Poland, Ukraine, Georgia, etc, and squeeze Russia whenever they squeeze us. The other thing is that we should not have vetoed the Syria resolution, because Syria is far less important to us than to Russia, and it only pissed off the Arabs. Of course, when Russia co-operates with us by snubbing Vietnam, India, etc, then we should recognize this and co-operate in other areas they demand. Business relationship.

About the oil issue: I don't know why you guys keep emphasizing 'trustworthy' or 'friendship'. There's no need to buy oil only from 'trustworthy' states or'friends' of course. It doesn't matter that we have our difference with Russia, or that the Gulf countries are US client states; makes no difference to the oil. What's important is to not become dependent on one side, and in this sense we should diversify our sources so that no one supplier can induce supply shocks.

Looking ahead to the future, it's evident that Russia is a declining power. It's demographics are screwy, and it hasn't been able to diversify its economy away from oil and weapons sales. It's GDP is growing quite fast, but that's because its economy has been unnaturaly depressed by mismanagement during the 90's. Once it reaches roughly Germany's GDP, it will have reached equilibrium. There's no need to antagonize a declining power. Another issue is that Russia and US interest will collide in the future over the Arctic:

The double-headed eagle is a common symbol in heraldry and vexillology. It is most commonly associated with the Byzantine Empire, the Holy Roman Empire and Russia. In Byzantine heraldry, the heads represent the dual sovereignty of the Emperor (secular and religious) and/or dominance of the Byzantine Emperors over both East and West.

Whatever your moves, strengths or weaknesses - we will benefit from them.

 

[below_freezing]

Whatever your moves, strengths or weaknesses - we will benefit from them.

We will see about that. Russia's stability is of major concern to us as well.

 

[iajj]

I hope you can get some intelligence by reading carefully what I have written.

Where did I praise saudi???

Personally, I have no respect for Saudi at all. China and saudi relationship is purely business.

However, even in such a religious "backward" country, it has not treated China that badly as russia did.

As for whether Saudi is able to extract rent from China or whether it dares to, well, Saudi has shut down oil export to U.S. in the past, what is so special about its ability to do so against any other country???

What I have written there is simply to answer questions from others above. You need read those first before reading my replies to understand the contents as a whole.

we cannot really compare american patronage and dominance of saudi security policies today to its influence over arabs three decades ago

and i think you aren't familiar with the way the term "rent" is used in a political context, but it is fine, no need to insult people's intelligence just because they don't get something you said. and most importantly, don't insult me - you can trade insults with those who insulted you, but not with me.

at any rate, i don't need to go through all the pages to disagree with your comparison of sino-arabic and sino-russian relations - it is an insult to china's strategic aspirations when you want to apply the same diplomatic/trade calculus when talking about saudis and russians.

 

[iajj]

Whatever your moves, strengths or weaknesses - we will benefit from them.

i am advocating sino-russian friendship in every venue and opportunity i found myself in in the past five years or so. but that doesn't mean i like one bit what czarist russia did to china. and my advocacy of sino-russian friendship is the bitter, paradoxical fruit of russian theft of vast patches of chinese land. to put it simply: by grabbing so much chinese land, russians ensured that the two countries now have a strategic border longer than the national border between US and canada (which is completely non-strategic, non-militarized, and harmless and thus costless) and that our torsos and bellies are dangerously exposed to each other. to put it in another way, stalin should have never consented to the partition of poland with nazi germany, which put both countries in a position to start and have a total war (along a dangerously long border, either side can have a total war and there is no way the other side can say no to it). this intimate contact along the newly created border between nazis and soviets proved catastrophic for both sides: well, more ruinous of nazis, but i bet even the most cold-blooded russian strategic planner didn't welcome a total war with germany at such an astronomical cost to his own motherland. it is the same situation with russia and china - russia took so much land from us in the 19th and 20th centuries that we are now pressing our chests and bellies against each other and this must be taken as a bad omen for both russia and china (and i am not afraid to claim that if things go really, really ugly between us, it is going to russia that will get the uglier end of the war this time). and it is only because of this fateful embrace that russia and china should do everything in their power to stay strategic allies from now on. so, like i said, russians may well find their theft of chinese land in the czarist expansion a bitter curse two hundred years after the conquest, but at this point no chinese should wish to inflict this curse on russians, no matter how many rightful claims and how much justice chinese have on our side.

 

[below_freezing]

It would be in the best interests of Russia to arrange a purchase of limited amounts of empty, undeveloped, useless land. We'd be glad to take such burdens off your hands in return for trillions of dollars.

 

[Fanling Monk]

There are just 6 million Russians left on the Siberian side of the border with China. Ninety million Chinese, backed by a voracious economy, live on the other side. China's influence in Russia's far east is growing rapidly and Siberia has become the raw material supplier to Beijing's economic miracle.

Change in Russia's Far East: China's Growing Interests in Siberia - SPIEGEL ONLINE


All Russia has to do is to allow Chinese the rights to buy land(?), then many of her Siberian Far East problems are solved.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

skipping the G-8 summit? that is pretty symbolic

 

[Raphael]

@Speeder 2

I definitely agree that Russia has issues with Jews, although I didn't want to mention it because it's so politically incorrect. I laughed so hard when Putin was elected and the Western media went into an enraged frenzy. The vulnerable Russia of the 90's that was ripe for Jewish profiteers is gone, and now most of them have escaped to Israel/USA, albeit with their loot intact.

Russia's average IQ is 97, according to Lynn and the PISA tests. It's not abysmally low like India's, but at the same time, it is a bit iffy compared to Western European powerhouses. Even USA, with blacks/hispanics dragging it down, still has an average of 98. Russia's fertility rate has stopped free-falling, but that doesn't mean it'll reach 2.1 replacement rate any time soon. A population decrease in the long run is inevitable. At the same time, I of course expect it to stay a great power, just on par with the Western European states but not any greater.

And in the end, it does come down to nukes as you mentioned. Direct war and eritorrial exchanges between great powers just doesn't happen any more because of nukes, and unless China designs a foolproof missile defence (insanely difficult), borders will stay static.

 

[Audio]

It would be in the best interests of Russia to arrange a purchase of limited amounts of empty, undeveloped, useless land. We'd be glad to take such burdens off your hands in return for trillions of dollars.

Never ever gonna happen. Russia's future money pits are in those empty, undeveloped lands.

Making this decision would be political suicide for whoever took it.

Moar Chinese wet dreams!