All this Ukraine stuff is also supported by China. I bet they are ready to buy Russian oil and gas to compensate even if this costs them more than getting them from the open market.
Why? Because this is a wonderful test drive to check how the West (sorry for the approximation) is reacting to a country theoretically supported by the West being invaded by another one.
For me, the next one on the line is Taiwan.
Russia has no practical way to transfer gas designated for Europe to China, there is no pipe they can use as gas comes from different sources.
But yes, China is looking how Europe, USA, NATO is handling the situation as this will give some hints if "the West" is still capable to defend Taiwan, Philippines, Japan...
Come on, China is bad enough as it is, no need to overdo it with imaginary threats.
(Edit: wow impressed by how fast these downvotes came. I wonder if it was triggered by the “China is bad” part or my point that a Chinese invasion of Japan or Philippines is a complete fantasy. In case it's the second part, you should probably take a break from American news…)
Interestingly, the Philippines were previously invaded and occupied by Spain, the US, and Japan but never China although one of their nearest neighbour... Likewise although there were conflicts and Northern Vietnam was briefly taken over by China 600 years ago, Vietnam was only fully colonised by France. This is just to point out that China is not historically as aggressive as we are in the West.
Or that there were failed attempts to conquer Japan? Incompetence doesn’t equal a peacenik attitude.
It's FUD to claim that China plans to invade its neighbours. Having a growing influence, sure, but it's quite different and they have along way to go before they can get even halfway to the level of control and influence the US have over many countries, for instance.
That being said, history is a poor proxy for future behavior: Japan is really unlikely to ever resume its aggressive expansionist policy, and it's not because China doesn't have a terrible track record of neighbors invasion that it will not start in this century. But that doesn't really excuse rewriting history…
And here you are with vitriolic claims that I was rewriting history.
No, they did not say that. What they actually said:
> This is just to point out that China is not historically as aggressive as we are in the West.
Now talk about “bad faith”…
What is more likely is China’s Sphere of Influence extending well beyond Taiwan. No invasion needed or even the installation of a friendly government - just a government that won’t pushback.
But in addition it seems like you’re ignorant of China’s Nine Dash Line, which has impacted Philippines and others. And their demand for control of the Senkaku/Diaoyu Islands, which has impacted Japan.
Condescension + ignorance is a killer combination
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/a-property-sells-10-....
From another source: https://lngprime.com/asia/chinas-zhejiang-energy-to-buy-stak...
> Furthermore, A-Property said that the project involves building a 1358 kilometers long pipeline that would connect Yatek’s fields in Yakutia to the 18 mtpa LNG plant near Ayan on the Sea of Okhotsk.
From there, it seems to be pretty close to China.
I said this in another thread yesterday:
I very much think that this contract is what gave Russia the upper hand. When the Western Europe was the majority market gor Russian gas, things were status quo. Once China starts buying more and more gas from Russia, Russia doesn’t have to please Europe anymore and Europe can impose any sanctions it wants.
Yep. If Europe (and Germany in particular) retaliates with economic warfare (err... sanctions) then Russia will simply turn off Nordstream 1. Options to sell to China instead make this much easier for them to do. Maybe there isn't currently a good way to deliver, but have you seen how fast China can build stuff if they really want to?
This idea of Germany voting not to turn on a pipeline that is currently not turned on is just an attempt to make it look like they're doing something when in fact, they are not doing anything.
> The firm said it expects Yatek’s gas reserves to rise to 567 billion cubic meters in the third quarter of 2022.
So the dependency will be reduced on both sides.
Yeah, but they're a bit of an exception: The decreasing motor gasoline consumption is due to an ever larger share of cars on Norwegian roads being electric. On the whole, though, electric cars are still rather expensive, and Norway is among the countries where they have a larger market share than elsewhere because it is richer than most countries. (Ironically, in large part because it is a major exporter of... fossil fuels.)
> The firm said it expects Yatek’s gas reserves to rise to 567 billion cubic meters in the third quarter of 2022.
Those 567 billion cubic meters might be a big deal for Yatek, but they're a drop in the bucket for the country as a whole.
The logical next move if the pipeline to Europe falls through is for those speedy Chinese builders to build a pipeline. Russia isn't going to defect and even if they do it wouldn't cripple China. It's in China's interest to keep the current political climate in Russia, since if Putin falls to a pro-democratic group like Ukraine did, Russia will snap hard to Nato. And to keep that political climate Russia has to move hydrocarbons.
Personally, I don't really see a way out of this. China is going to be more powerful than Nato. There is no reasonable way out of it. The sooner we recognize this, the faster we'll isolate our economies from Russian and Chinese influence.
This is partially our fault for not doing a Marshal Plan Part Duex in Russia / Ukraine after the iron curtain fell, but really the main problem is that we extended a hand out in good faith to China and it didn't break the way we wanted it to. Rather than join the club and be the most influential member they've decided to real politik and be the next hegemon. It didn't have to be this way, even with the Chinese Communist Party in charge. Vietnam is perfectly capable of joining the club (TPP) without a functioning democracy.
This is a weird extrapolation. Assuming Europe remains impotent, the UK, Australia and U.S. are going to have more mobile firepower than China has total firepower for decades to come.
As for mobile firepower, it takes time to invest in deployment capabilities, yes, but if their task is to dominate a specific target (vs global power projection) then they'll outmatch us within ten years. We do not have long. We need to fix our posture.
This is still playing out, and I'm extremely sceptical of this take. China has a lot of domestic problems to deal with and a lack of allies due to their geo-politiking. Then you have India waiting in the wings, ready to be to China, what China was to America. Keeping in mind, we are all nuclear powers.
Indian democracy makes this a non-starter. We cannot get simple things done because every single issue gets tied up in protests and courts for decades on end.[1][2]
[1] Indian Neutrino Observatory (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India-based_Neutrino_Observato...)
[2] Tamil Nadu says ‘no’ in Supreme Court to neutrino observatory project (https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tn-says-no-in-supreme...)
China has 40% more population than Nato. Their culture is naturally harder to copy because of their extremely difficult language and tightened boarders. They work laughbly longer hours than we do in the west due to the 996 system. They're smart, make no bones about it. They're vicious when it comes to espionage and IP theft. They solve coordination problems with a brute force hammer of "do what I say" communism which cuts both ways, yes, but it will be a while before their generational concerns catch up to them. They are going to be the dominant power ten years from now and the only thing we can do in advance of this reality is to band together and limit our dependance on them.
The time for frienship making is over. The temporary strategy will be appeasement. The long term strategy will be disengagement. They'll go after gains in Africa and the Middle East and rule with an iron fist and we'll capture what we can from Eastern Europe before the next curtain falls on the world and hopefully Central and South America will come with us too. There will be two worlds. One in China's orbit with Russia as a strong second in the same way that the US and the UK operate and one in what we currently call The West or Nato for short. The Common Wealth, United States of America, European Union, Japan and some minor Asian states like Vietnam and South Korea, Mexico, Chile, and hopiful most of the rest of Latin America.
Being a nuclear power isn't enough. To use a nuclear weapon is to escalate to Defcon 1, which risks total castatrophe for your own nation. Real material still matters and China will outmatch us soon and the sooner we recognize that and prepare for it the better.
The fact is that China currently doesn't have an orbit. It doesn't have NATO, anything resembling the CT/TTP (the absence of the US is one of the major policy failures of the Trump presidency) or NAFTA. Belt and Road has developed the reputation of being completely exploitative, and a way to offload surplus construction capacity in China.
This ties in with the current problems we see in China, where the construction sector is far too large and not sustainable.
My point about nuclear is that China is very limited in where is can project its power.
For how much longer, as it is spreading its military / geopolitical power and economic / political model to Africa and the rest of the Third World? It'll be growing its own new customer / supplier markets along with its military / geopolitical allies / clients / satellites / puppets.
Tolerated is a better word. There was ample ex ante evidence that the offensive was to be delayed until after the Olympics. And Russia being more beholden to Beijing as an energy supplier is certainly not bad.
But supporting separatism, in any form, isn’t great for Beijing. And China has relations with Ukraine. Huawei has contracts. And China buys Ukrainian weapons.
Edit: seems like Ukraine services weapons bought from Russia after relations soured with Russia over claims of China copying the technology. (https://www.mei.edu/publications/why-ukraine-secret-weapon-c...).
RU actions are against PRC interests in terms of international norms. Also PRC has not spelled out alignment on RU/UKR issue in terms of sovereignty, while Russian did endorse PRC's sovereignty position on TW, PRC statement of the meeting side stepped RU position on UKR. PRC position has been RU security interests should be respected, preferably via political settlement (Minsk) that doesn't involve violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The parallel is PRC security interest in taking TW (again a domestic issue) should be respected, without outsiders like US violating Chinese sovereignty.
It's going to be interesting to see how PRC attempts to square the circle now that Putin has invaded and stated UKR has no sovereignty.
They are not and I don’t believe Russia would do what it is doing in Ukraine without Chinese approval. The timing of the recent agreement between Russia and China is pretty much proof that Russia has China’s blessing.
Since 1960 China has had military incursions against Vietnam, Soviet Union, and India. It has blatantly violated norms regarding the laws of the seas and used pseudo naval vessels to blatantly overfish in the territory of other countries. It has told VW that if it wants to sell cars in China then VW must stop doing business with a Lithuanian company. Your views on the subject of China and international norms is weird to me and not supported by history.
I will not convince you of anything and likewise I doubt you’ll be able to convince me of anything. I stand by my assertion that China approves Russia’s actions.
>Since 1960 China
You basically listed a bunch of events that are consistent with what PRC considers to be domestic issues since the 1960s, i.e. territorial disputes, supporting secessionist forces in TW. Vietnam land war was over security (like Korea), PRC retreated after operations, and ideally PRC would hope RU does as well, hence no recognition of Crimea annexation. CCP does not endorse private companies fish in other countries EEZs. Nor is PRC in violation of UNCLOS norms at UN. Nor do secondary sanctions blocking PRC market which PRC adopted from US toolkit a violation of German sovereignty. Regardless, the point is the spectrum is more than binary approval / disapproval.
https://www.businessinsider.com/china-editor-says-must-suppo...
My contention that Russia has China’s blessing is correct. It’s ok to admit when you are wrong.
It is probably not a coincidence that the big move yesterday happened just after the Beijing Winter Olympics ended.
First it's very short term thinking by China. Victory is assured for them if the boat isn't rocked too much and they continue the path of economic integration and economic growth. Their economy will be 2x the US economy and then they will be in a better position to assert their geopolitical interests.
Second consider the consequences to China of NATO expansion in the East, which the UK has started to discuss as a good idea in the last few days. That is not good for China's geopolitical position.
I also wonder how this will impact certain regions differently since for example the now very famous Uyghurs and some other minorities were exempt from one child policy till it ended in 2016. Will their regions fare better economically or is this taxation and application of it in elderly care, pensions, etc a more top down federal thing?
China is not really comparable since there is still a substantial reserve army of rural inhabitants that can be drawn into industry (900 mil urban/500 mil rural). Until the rural pop is drained you'll continue to see strong growth in china.
Artificial wombs are very controversial in the West, but they seem to be technically feasible (at least experiments in other mammalian species indicate so), and an authoritarian country like China, being squeezeed by demography while having significant scientific know-how, seem to be the most likely candidates for actually trying this out on humans.
The situation around Taiwan is fundamentally different and can't be compared.
The US or even EU just care soso about Ukraine. The lost of trust of partners, lost face and potential follow up actions and consequences are things they care about more then the Ukraine itself. Hence why they didn't get too much involved in recent years.
But at least the US cares _a lot_ about Taiwan and the EU should too.
TSMC is a Taiwaneese company down to the core, they likely won't be around anymore if Taiwan is gone.
Plus building semiconductor factories takes a long time, weather it's TSMC or Samsung. So China would need to wait for another ~8 Years.
The West can ban Chinese companies and dependent states (S.Korea, Vietnam, Malaysia, Taiwan) from exporting chipsets and devices containing them to Russia.
It'd be an interesting thing to see, how Russia would try to go around this. They will, but it will still be a big problem.
Agree that this is also somewhat of a test, how far can you go militarily against NATO before there is a severe reaction. Pretty damn far I'd guess. The tests have been done when it comes to money, buying legitimacy and freedom to do whatever you want as far as rich and repressive regimes are concerned. The Olympics, FIFA and others come to mind. As does whatever the Saudis are usually up to.
This behavior was always there, to some extend. When the freedom, pro-human rights West started doing the same shit during the war of terror, so, it gave carte blanche to everyone else.
I don't think China would have any objection to separatists of any nation who wanted to spread communism and get Chinese backing. Actually, the fact that there aren't Taiwanese separatists for China is probably a disappointment.
Or rather, it’s easy to turn it around.
Russia’s claim is basically, “this is ethnically Russian population speaking Russian”. That’s exactly the same claim that China could make about Taiwan.
It’s also the same claim Western non-Han China could make about itself, or India could make about Tibet.
This "if I apply the same logic to this other thing you did" simply doesn't work other than as a gotcha title for the media in opposition. Stories/opinions will be drown out by misinformation and propaganda.
It's even easier especially for autocrats, because if you ask them "isn't that the same claim Western non-Han China could make about itself?", they can just pretend not hearing the question and let the ministry of truth do the work.
And yet it's not China's claim over Taiwan (and the “speaking Russian” part is kind of difficult to transfer to China and Taiwan).
Isn't the main language in Taiwan the same as in south-east mainland China? (What used to be called Cantonese, but maybe it goes by another name nowadays?)
Cantonese is mainly spoken in Guangdong (historically known as Canton), and Hokkien mainly Fujian. They are two very different languages.
There are a lot of people in Taiwan speaking Hokkien.
Yeah, I thought I'd got that right: The region has been renamed (or, arguably, just had the spelling revised to be more in line with the native pronunciation?).
So why isn't the language now called Guangdongese? This modern PC-induced language revisionism can get pretty darn confusing in its inconsistency.
> There are a lot of people in Taiwan speaking Hokkien.
Which still seems to imply that even more people, i.e. a majority, speak Cantonese, right? I just meant that, since language is often a (sometimes minor, sometimes major) part of how "ethnicity" is defined, China could use an analogous "They even speak the same language!" argument. Not that I'm saying it's a valid argument -- just not logically impossible, as I think was argued or at least implied in some comment(s) above.
Logic is for PRC, UKR is sovereign, TW is not. RU invading UKR is international war. PRC invading TW is domestic civil war. RU is violating UKR sovereignty, whereas US intervening on PRC civil war with TW would be foreign power violating Chinese sovereignty. PRC would be UKR sorting out domestic issues whereas US would be RU, an outside aggressor. Note PRC has not endorsed RU annexation of Ukraine including Crimea. Doesn't mean PRC doesn't support RU security concerns, but PRC would like it addressed via diplomacy without normalizing violating sovereignty of countries recognized at UN, which again TW is not. PRC and RU are not aligned on invasion, but it doesn't mean PRC will loudly oppose RU if it's against PRC interest.
It'll also worsen their status in the States where we've got the strange situation of crystallizing the situation in the States of not being sure who the bad guy is: is it China or Russia? If they are allies then it is obvious they both are. Why Americans need an agreed upon bad guy to hate on is a different topic...
It's also a test to see what's left of America's power after the Afghanistan debacle.
As of today, the only operational pipeline carries about 3% of what Gazprom exports to Europe. It may be possible to boost that quickly, and the pipeline will eventually have a capacity of 30-40% of the European exports.
Even if Russia had as much pipeline capacity to China as it has towards Europe, simply switching its exports isn't possible like that. Diverting 20% of Russian exports from Europe would require increasing Chinese usage by 100%.
Doable, I'm sure, given the time to build a few dozen new gas-fired power plants and shutting down as much coal-fired capacity, but not done in a week.
Putin's invading Ukraine to distract from his own domestic issues and to try to boost his popularity with the general Russian population.
I don't think this has anything to do with China.
I guess we'll never know if I was right now, though, now that demand has fallen[0], supply has increased[1], and the people have been well distracted for some time to come.
0: https://www.politico.eu/article/germany-to-stop-nord-stream-...
1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas_in_Ukraine#shale_g...
Siding with Russia would further unify US and the EU, which is not something China desires.
China will stay out of this, they have absolutely nothing to gain and everything to lose by siding with Russia.
Yes, I think Taiwan will be back in China's hands by the end of the year.