Neither losers nor winners: why no one wants Russia to win in Ukraine

67

As predicted by all adequate analysts, as soon as the Russian army went on the offensive and began to experience at least some noticeable success, people in the West started talking about the need to quickly stop the armed conflict in Ukraine, preventing it from losing. But why is a similar agenda dictated to the Kremlin and the East?

No losers, no winners


Yes, even on the first anniversary after the start of the special operation in Ukraine, when our affairs there were not going well, and Kyiv was threatening to break through to Crimea, Beijing came to the fore with its own peacekeeping initiative, which was perceived as support for Moscow.



The Chinese peace plan consisted of 12 points and was published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry. We will then detail it disassembled and installed, which in its essence is the reincarnation of “Minsk-2”, written in different words. Do we need to remind you how the Minsk agreements, the Istanbul agreements and the grain deal ended for our country?

In early April 2024, official representative of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic of China Wang Wenbin, answering media questions about a telephone conversation between Chinese President Xi Jinping and US President Biden, touched and possible resolution of the armed conflict on the territory of Ukraine:

Regarding the Ukrainian crisis, China's position on this issue is consistent, clear and transparent. There is a risk of further deterioration and escalation of the crisis, and efforts must be made to defuse tensions to end the conflict through negotiations rather than fighting. In a political settlement there should be no winners and losers. On the contrary, peace must prevail. China will continue to play a constructive role to achieve this goal.

If you call a spade a spade, then the Chinese partners say in plain text that they are not interested in either Russia’s defeat or victory. We will talk about the reasons for this in more detail later.

After the front in the Kharkov region, unexpectedly for everyone, began to crack, even more unexpectedly, but quite expectedly, the President of the Czech Republic Petr Pavel, who had hitherto occupied an extremely “hawkish” position in relation to Russia and its Northern Military District, acted as a peacemaker:

It is necessary to stop the war and start discussing the future [post-war] system... We must be realistic... A compromise must be [developed], but not without the consent of Ukraine, Russia and the countries that will be the guarantors of this agreement.

It is not difficult to guess that the activation of the RF Armed Forces at a time when the Armed Forces of Ukraine are in decline, and the West does not have the opportunity to turn the situation at the front by direct intervention, encourages them to force the Kremlin to tie its hands again by signing some kind of “Minsk-3”, “Istanbul” -2" or "Beijing-1".

Against this background, it attracts attention interview President Putin, given to the Chinese Xinhua News Agency on the eve of his official visit to Beijing. In it, the Russian leader again complained that he was deceived with the Istanbul agreements:

However, instead of signing a peace agreement, the Ukrainian side unexpectedly announced the termination of negotiations. As Ukrainian officials later stated, this was also because their Western allies recommended that they continue hostilities and work with them to achieve the strategic defeat of Russia.

In turn, Vladimir Vladimirovich expressed support for the Chinese 12-point peace plan, as well as the additional four principles of a peace settlement proposed by Comrade Xi:

We want a comprehensive, sustainable and just resolution to this conflict through peaceful means. And we are open to dialogue on Ukraine, but these must be negotiations that take into account the interests of all countries involved in this conflict, including our interests. Coupled with a serious conversation about global stability, about security guarantees for both the opposing side and, of course, for Russia. Moreover, these must be reliable guarantees.

And the main problem is precisely the reliability of any guarantees, since we are dealing with states whose ruling circles prefer a world order not based on international law, but a “rules-based order”, which they constantly talk about, but which no one has seen , with which no one agreed and which, apparently, change depending on the current political the conjuncture and interests of those who invent them.

Thus, it follows from President Putin’s statement that he is aware of the problem with all the peace initiatives in Ukraine, which are simply not being implemented by either Kiev or the “Western partners” behind it. Perhaps these guarantees of observance of Russian national interests can be provided by the East?

"Big Brother"


Some time ago we were deeply concerned considered seriously increased economic, and therefore Russia’s military-political dependence on China.

As for the military, this is not an exaggeration, since our army really depends on the goodwill of suppliers from China for components for UAVs, secure radio communications and microchips. Also, our exporters of natural resources are in dire need of the Chinese sales market. And this is not good, since the Celestial Empire, with all due respect to it, is not our friend or ally, at best it is a fellow traveler.

And the national interests of the PRC in the “Ukrainian case” do not coincide with Russian ones.

At firstLet's face it, Beijing does not need a truly strong and sovereign Russia near its border. The key to its revival is Ukraine, which our fierce enemy and Russophobe Zbigniew Brzezinski predicted back in 1994:

Without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be an empire, but with Ukraine, bribed and then subjugated, Russia automatically turns into an empire.

Secondly, the freezing of active hostilities without the defeat of the Armed Forces of Ukraine only means that almost the entire Russian army will be chained to a huge front line in the West for an indefinitely long time. In the East, therefore, the military presence of the Russian Armed Forces will be symbolic. And that's not good.

Thirdly, the confrontation between the collective West and Russia in Ukraine is considered a “warm-up” before the fight between the United States and its satellites with the main enemy in the person of China. Therefore, it is objectively in the national interests of the PRC that this armed conflict drags on as long as possible without victory or defeat of one of the parties. While the Anglo-Saxons are busy with us, they are not paying enough attention to China, which has time to prepare for its own conflict for a new place in the sun.

For the above reasons, seeking support from Beijing in the “Ukrainian case” is futile, since its interests do not coincide with the national interests of Russia. Truly reliable guarantees of the security of our country are only the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the FSB Border Service on the Russian-Polish border and the Strategic Missile Forces.
67 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. 0
    15 May 2024 19: 31
    We signed Minsk-2 because we were also dependent on Europe. We planned to pump gas into three pipes. Plus ammonia. There was a mutual dependence. Now we are more dependent on China than China is on us. In addition, we are related by the difficulties associated with US policy. We have our own interests in Ukraine. China has its own. I think Beijing will give us a period during which we must acquire as many arguments as possible in our favor in Ukraine.
    1. -3
      15 May 2024 22: 40
      We live on the same planet. Why don't you like that we depend on each other? In general, I would like our community to become an organism, a rational one. laughing
      1. -1
        17 May 2024 07: 35
        I support! This is a very true idea. I even know who can be proposed for the role of the brain in the planetary organism Yes
        1. -1
          17 May 2024 09: 43
          The brain will be behind a solid wall. There will be new thinking. I think that your imagination is limited to only one person. smile
          1. 0
            17 May 2024 15: 00
            Well.. not bad either.. rose above the crowd feel
            1. 0
              17 May 2024 16: 02
              Economics can be used, proven. But of course these are my fantasies. laughing hi
    2. +4
      16 May 2024 09: 35
      Quote from: unc-2
      I think Beijing will give us a period during which we must acquire as many arguments as possible in our favor in Ukraine.

      “The defeat of Russia” is an inevitable attack on China, including by the troops of defeated Russia (as a captive party). A victorious Russia is not only a strong ally, but also a raw material base in the confrontation with the West. It is quite possible that if Russia wins, the West simply will not dare to launch provocations against China.
  2. 0
    15 May 2024 19: 33
    Everything is clear with the Chinese. They just want peace and trade with everyone: with the West, with Ukraine, and with Russia. Of course, they are on the side of our claims to the West and to Ukraine.
    1. 0
      15 May 2024 19: 58
      Now we are more dependent on China than China is on us.

      Controversial statement

      Trade turnover between Russia and China grew by 26,3% over the year and reached a record $240 billion. Russia has a positive balance of $18 billion

      That is, China buys more from Russia than it supplies to Russia. Who depends on whom?
      1. +5
        15 May 2024 21: 37
        As soon as China holds back on microelectronics, the situation in the Russian military-industrial complex will become sad.
        1. +2
          15 May 2024 22: 19
          Everything is mutual. As soon as Russia holds back on hydrocarbons, China’s position will become unenviable.

          Again a misinterpretation of what was written. We are not talking about any specific products or group of products. If there is an imbalance between countries in the export-import group, then it is not known who depends on whom.
          Why did the trade war break out between the United States and China? Comrade Trump clearly explained that the United States has a negative trade balance with China of tens or hundreds of billions. It is unacceptable. The Russia-China trade balance has a surplus in favor of Russia. Who depends on whom?
      2. 0
        16 May 2024 06: 31
        It is necessary to distinguish who supplies what. We supply raw materials - we supply finished products. It is impossible to supply us with a ton of finished products per ton of oil.
        1. +2
          16 May 2024 07: 39
          The fact of the matter is that in this case it is NOT necessary to distinguish what exactly is being supplied. It's about addiction. In addition to hydrocarbons, Russia also supplies agricultural products. In particular, huge supplies of pork. You can’t make a lot of “finished products” on an empty stomach. And without hydrocarbons too.
          It's about dependence on each other. At one time, Hitler made the same arguments.

          We depend on Russia for the supply of raw materials and Stalin can blackmail us. We will attack the USSR and get everything for free.

          As a result, I received a complete blockade.
          Trade relations always imply dependence on each other.
          In this particular case, Russia depended on the supply of finished products and technologies from Europe. And Europe depends on energy supplies from Russia. Now they don't depend. Russia had to reorient itself to China, and Europe had to look for oil and gas from other sources. Who got better?
          1. 0
            16 May 2024 14: 36
            It's about addiction. In addition to hydrocarbons, Russia also supplies agricultural products. In particular, huge supplies of pork.

            To keep your comment from sounding strange, provide specific numbers (if you can). And then they write on the Internet that this will happen for the first time since 2008:

            According to the National Union of Pig Breeders, Russia can supply up to 200 thousand tons of pork to China annually.

            https://www.agroxxi.ru/agroeconomics/rossiiskim-yeksporteram-svininy-otkrylsja-dostup-na-kitaiskii-rynok.html

            In May, the head of the National Meat Association, Sergei Yushin, said in an interview with TASS that Russia in 2024 maybe supply about 30-35 thousand tons of pig products to China, which is approximately 15% of all Russian pork exports.
            1. +1
              16 May 2024 16: 58
              Well, you wrote the numbers yourself. Information for the beginning of 2024.

              Russian agricultural products ranks second in terms of export volumes from Russia to China, second only to hydrocarbon supplies. This was announced by presidential aide Yuri Ushakov after a telephone conversation between Russian head of state Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, TASS writes. Ushakov noted that in 2023, trade turnover between the two countries reached $227,7 billion, which is 23% more than in 2022, exceeding the set target of $200 billion ahead of schedule. However, according to Chinese statistics, this figure amounted to $240,1 billion. Ushakov emphasized that since 2010, China has been Russia’s largest trading partner, while Russia ranks fourth for China after the United States, Japan and South Korea.

              According to Rosselkhoznadzor, by the end of 2023, China has become the main buyer of Russian poultry and beef. This information was presented by the deputy head of the service, Artem Daushev, during a round table at the international exhibition Prodexpo-2024, Interfax writes.
              Thus, last year China purchased 132,9 thousand tons of poultry meat and 21,5 thousand tons of beef from Russia.
    2. 0
      Yesterday, 18: 42
      You are very much mistaken. Firstly, eastern diplomacy is not a box with a double bottom, but a much larger one. It is about this eastern diplomacy that I don’t remember who said it a long time ago - in the East you can be met and received as your dearest friend and immediately treated with a smile to a cup of coffee with poison. Secondly, paradoxically, China today does not need either a Russian victory in Ukraine or peace as a result of this victory, just as it does not need Russia’s defeat. Because as long as there is a confrontation between Russia and Ukraine and the West, the possibility of an armed conflict between China and the West is practically excluded. That is why China today comes out with its “peace program”, fully understanding that this will not be peace, but just a truce.
  3. +3
    15 May 2024 19: 54
    China is interested in wearing out both sides as much as possible. And even better - for them to start a nuclear war and practically exterminate each other, and he begins to dominate the world without limit. Actually, this is already happening, but it is not too obvious yet and Beijing has to show some caution in its behavior. I would not be surprised if it turns out that China was the main initiator of the current military campaign.
  4. -5
    15 May 2024 21: 41
    Whether the author likes it or not, there is no alternative to freezing the conflict; there will be no winners in this war
    1. +4
      15 May 2024 22: 20
      A conflict freeze is not visible on the horizon. There may not be a winner. But the loser is already clearly visible. It is Ukraine.
      1. 0
        16 May 2024 06: 52
        When the parties to the conflict are in a strategic impasse, there is no alternative to freezing, when there is no winner, there is no loser, for today’s Ukraine, maintaining control over 23 out of 27 regions is no longer a loss.
        1. +2
          16 May 2024 07: 50
          Who said that Russia is in a “strategic dead end”? For Ukraine, losing 4 regions, hundreds of thousands of dead, a destroyed economy is not a loss? We clearly have different ideas about winning and losing.
          In geopolitics there may be provisions that there is no loser and no winner. Russia is clearly not the losing side. Ukraine clearly lost.
          The stupidity of Ukrainian (and many pro-Western politicians) lies in the lack of logical constructions.
          Let's take Ukraine, the Baltic states and Finland. They have joined or want to join NATO in order to protect themselves from “aggressive Russia.” The bottom line is that joining NATO does not strengthen, but weakens their security. Until 2014, Russia laid claim to Crimea or 4 regions of Ukraine? Has Finland strengthened its security or weakened it? Should the Baltic states pay more for defense or not? They received foreign military bases on their territory, lost their sovereignty and became targets for nuclear strikes from Russia.
          Question: does joining an aggressive military bloc increase or decrease the country's security?
      2. +2
        16 May 2024 11: 09
        Are we not a winning country? Then you can give up on the country. We must win. They won't give us another chance. In 1991, the West did not give us a “control shot”, but it could have, and now it will not repeat the mistake, it will finish it to the end with a guarantee of non-recovery.
        1. +1
          16 May 2024 11: 40
          What do you understand by Victory?
          Axiom of Geopolitics

          "The war is being fought for PEACE, which must be better than the pre-war one. At least for one side."

          The goal of war is always peace. Suppose Russia won on the battlefield (there is no need to focus on the word “suppose”. I am sure of it). But we are considering assumptions. So, Russia's victory on the battlefield. Will the world be better than before the war? For Russia, peace lies in eliminating the threat from the Western direction. This will be Victory. So Ukraine is a secondary issue for Russia. Is it possible to achieve Victory over a united Europe?
          1. 0
            Today, 06: 18
            Так что Украина это вопрос для России второстепенный

            It was not possible to push NATO back to the borders of '97?
      3. +1
        17 May 2024 07: 38
        Tactically - yes. But strategically nothing is clear at all.
        1. -1
          17 May 2024 08: 35
          Everything is very clear.
          At the strategic level, the West's goal was to defeat Russia. First on the economic front. Did not work out. Then on the battlefield. Did not work out. Now the West wants to freeze the conflict. But he cut off all the possibilities of a “negotiation” for himself. Merkel actually openly stated that the signature of any Western politician is worth nothing. Russia endured for a long time, but now it has openly declared that if the West wants to solve everything on the battlefield, then so be it. And went on the offensive in the north.
          Summary. At the strategic level, the complete defeat of the West is still visible. None of the goals have been achieved. All that remains is a full-scale NATO war against Russia. But Faberge is still a fragile thing and you don’t really want to get a nuclear-powered Iskander, say, in Warsaw.

          At the tactical level, the Ukrainian Armed Forces are being ground down on the battlefield. Of course I would like it faster. But if Stalin is criticized for the fact that he actively attacked Nazi Germany and suffered heavy losses, then Putin is now criticized for the fact that he does not want to suffer large losses and is slowly advancing on Nazi Ukraine. The detractors need to decide what they want.
          1. 0
            Today, 06: 20
            Резюме. На стратегическом уровне пока видно полное поражение Запада.

            How???? Fresh! Fresh look.
            (We need to tell the West about this.)
  5. +1
    15 May 2024 23: 29
    Thank you. The article is objective, although incomplete, but you can’t fit everything here. On maps in schools in China, the Far East and a huge part of Siberia are colored yellow. In the 1960s, the PRC, together with the United States, opposed the USSR (Russia). The PRC and the USA have the same strategic goals regarding the Russian Federation. Liquidation and dismemberment of Russia. The lands of the Far East and Siberia are ceded to the People's Republic of China. There is a lot of material on this topic, how the Russian Federation was divided and what went to whom. Now the PRC is a forced fellow traveler of the Russian Federation, it has the problem of Taiwan, which the PRC wants to annex peacefully. In accordance with the legal documents of the People's Republic of China, Taiwan is an integral part of the People's Republic of China, this is recognized by everyone, including the United States. The Russian Federation has no legal documents at all regarding the SVO in Ukraine. The actions of the PRC are aimed at creating a long-term smoldering conflict in Ukraine, so that there would be no war, but there would be conflict, there would be occasional skirmishes, there would be tension between the Russian Federation and NATO, and so that the Russian Federation would not develop. As a result, the armies of the Russian Federation and NATO will be in constant readiness. Russia needs Victory, all of Ukraine must return to Russia.
    1. -1
      18 May 2024 23: 02
      This is precisely what the West is counting on for the ruins to be returned to Russia. Even before the SVO, Putin said that you will take a bite. Russia will not feed the pigsty.
  6. 0
    16 May 2024 00: 34
    When you are unable to change something, you are left blaming everyone around you. Our strategist does just that. Everyone around is to blame, only he is D'Artagnan. If everyone around you is fooling you, it means you are not a brilliant strategist.
    1. -1
      16 May 2024 13: 35
      So you blame the strategists! laughing love
    2. 0
      Today, 06: 24
      Детская считалка - И ты Дон дон, и ты Дон дон, а я Маркиз де Фан Фарон?
      In a talented performance? fellow
  7. +6
    16 May 2024 00: 53
    Over 30 years of cautious euphemisms, we have descended into an insane large-scale war with Ukraine. Well, it is impossible to directly admit that our own, so to speak, elite all these years completely consciously acted in the interests of a narrow group of compradors, and not the country. 99% of all problems and disasters come from here, regardless of China, Europe, America and, in general, everything. But it is absolutely impossible to say this directly or write in the freest press. Maybe that’s why America is bombing Donbass, and not we are bombing California, that it is possible to criticize there, even in the most scandalous way, and call by the names of those who are here and now, and not just foreign figures and Alexander the Great.
    1. 0
      16 May 2024 14: 53
      Who was going where? This is a relative concept. We will no longer save Ukraine, but yes, we can support people. There is no need to explain that we need to support pro-Russian Ukrainians, and not those who destroyed the country. There is a lot of evidence of non-Russian Ukrainians expelling other Ukrainians in order to take over all of Ukraine. Yes

      It turns out you have to love the land more than your opponents, and you can steal.

      1. -1
        18 May 2024 23: 04
        Little Russian will change his shoes faster than you can snap your fingers...
        1. 0
          Yesterday, 00: 01
          Every Ukrainian cannot be called a Ukrainian. It is necessary that his ancestors wore the appropriate hairstyle. Zelensky is not a crest, he is a Ukrainian who sent his parents to Israel while he himself is expelling pro-Russian Ukrainians from the land he loves. laughing
          1. -1
            Yesterday, 20: 22
            everyone is possible. This is what they wore before they were renamed Little Russians. and the name is not from the hairstyle, but from the German word “hypocrite”. they were called that under Peter the Great
            1. 0
              Yesterday, 20: 30
              Still, it’s better to somehow classify this bunch of Ukrainians. Because it all started with the fact that non-Russian Ukrainians decided to expel other, pro-Russian Ukrainians.
              1. -1
                Yesterday, 20: 33
                how they are classified as a set of donor organs... there are no pro-Russian Ukrainians. They quickly change places when they sense that their neighbor has something tastier in his trough. Farion is a former member of the Communist Party and Zeltsman is the grandson of a WWII veteran.
                1. 0
                  Yesterday, 20: 43
                  Classification is just logic. When dividing a set into classes, a number of conditions must be met. Organs can also be classified, but we are not talking about them. Dichotomy is a special case. laughing
                  1. -1
                    Yesterday, 20: 45
                    The classification of primates into higher and lower ones has long been invented.
                    1. 0
                      Yesterday, 20: 56
                      I gathered into one phrase - “non-Russian Ukrainians”, those who kicked out other Ukrainians. Calling them Muscovites, Russians, pro-Russian.
                      1. -1
                        Yesterday, 21: 00
                        an attempt to divide manure by variety? a Ukrainian is a Ukrainian. There are no Russians and non-Russians there. This is a proxy war. These “pro-Russian” people are already calling themselves supra-people and are going to pand over the inhabitants of Russia. Drive them out of Russia, just as the Europeans are now driving them out of Europe. before they ran to each other across the front line. some for lard and a Khokhlyak pension, and others for Russian medicines
                      2. 0
                        Yesterday, 22: 07
                        Only non-Russian Ukrainians could come up with the idea of ​​expelling pro-Russian Ukrainians. Or have you already forgotten who doesn’t gallop is the Muscovite? laughing
  8. +2
    16 May 2024 00: 59
    China wants to delay its war with America longer. Like let Russia butt heads with her for as long as possible. And here anything goes. Simple and clear. The Chinese peace plan would be good if Russia received real guarantees. But who will give them to her? And there is already a sad experience, alas. The war in Ukraine is essentially a civil war, the winner will face the hardest work in relation to the losing side...
  9. 0
    16 May 2024 07: 32
    There is one more simple reason why Joe can't give up on 404. Clown holds so much sh$t on him that he can blackmail all the Joe's family for the next 100 years. Funny that nobody mentioned this.
    1. 0
      16 May 2024 14: 31
      404 is very beneficial to the deep state and this is much more important than the problems of the Biden family.
  10. +5
    16 May 2024 08: 52
    Manufactured surprise. Even Old Man Crimea didn’t recognize it here.
    Naturally, any country wants to be the strongest, and its neighbors weak.
    And China too. And exchange beads for resources at competitive prices.
    1. 0
      Yesterday, 01: 01
      Actually, Lukashenko recognized Crimea. Do not mislead people. He even explained that if necessary, there would be a decree.
      1. 0
        Yesterday, 08: 32
        This is an argument for such English trolls who cling to everyone (and not about the article).
        But officially, no.
        1. 0
          Yesterday, 12: 57
          It was said publicly, in the presence of the press. What don't you understand? But you write that Lukashenko does not recognize. Although he admits. Do you need a piece of paper? laughing love
          In short, stop lying.
          1. 0
            Yesterday, 20: 15
            You are deliberately pretending to be a naive, clingy troll.
            blah blah almost anything is possible.
            But the paper has been missing for 10 years...
            1. 0
              Yesterday, 21: 04
              Where does Lukashenko not recognize Crimea as Russian, on paper? Don't act like an idiot. laughing
              1. 0
                Yesterday, 21: 28
                You appear to be an idiot.
                There is no paper and no paper. And there are a lot of things to do with verbal nonsense.
                1. 0
                  Yesterday, 21: 52
                  So wait for a piece of paper where Lukashenko recognizes or does not recognize Crimea as ours, Russian. He said everything verbally, there is even a video.

                  Instead, by not paying attention to anything, you are misleading people. laughing
  11. 0
    16 May 2024 09: 33
    The Americans, according to their experts, are planning a war with China for about 27 years. By this time, they will have time to prepare around Taiwan and transfer all chip production to themselves. The Chinese also need these 3 years, at a minimum, but more is better. Therefore, we will have a war on the outskirts at least until the fall of 26! And after that, the Americans will completely stop supporting Bandera’s supporters and focus on Taiwan and Israel. Unless, of course, Iran starts an open and massive war with the Jews first.
    1. 0
      16 May 2024 12: 38
      IHMO. There will be no hot war between China and the United States. Taiwan will be annexed to the PRC peacefully. The United States recognized Taiwan as an integral part of the People's Republic of China. After the annexation of Taiwan, China will become the First Superpower on Earth. In the future, in order for the United States not to slide from the position of a superpower to third place, it will have to be friends with Russia, develop and invest new technologies in Russia as opposed to China. Here you need to take into account that in terms of mentality, Russians and Americans are closer than Russians and Chinese. The United States has no plans to seize Russian territory, unlike China. Already now, part of the US elite is beginning to understand this, but is still moving by inertia. In 1991, the United States, having destroyed and eliminated the Soviet Union, won tactically, but lost strategically. In the long term, the liquidation of the USSR turned out to be a defeat for the United States. 1991 was a loss for the United States. The common goal of the United States and China, formed in the 1960s, that with the destruction and dismemberment of the USSR (Russia) they would receive the lands of Russia and its wealth, turned out to be erroneous.
      1. 0
        17 May 2024 07: 43
        Why should the States grow Russia into a superpower through technology transfer and development? In opposition to China and to the detriment of ourselves? Everyone knows that Russia is not the most reliable ally, and by betraying China (in your case) it will only confirm this opinion. History teaches that the United States, despite all the difficulties in relations with Great Britain, for example, has always remained its faithful ally in difficult moments of history. Russia has no such examples. Russia has two allies - the army and the navy.
        1. 0
          17 May 2024 15: 53
          You've had a great tour of the Russian Federation. The PRC betrayed the USSR, 1960, the USSR for 10 years invested up to 10% of its GDP in the development of the PRC, the numbers are astronomical, do not forget that the liberation, birth, and formation of the PRC took place only at the expense of Soviet (Russian) citizens. And who betrayed whom here? The Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China are not allies or partners; in simple words, they are traders and neighbors who have a temporary coinciding interest. To maintain second place, the United States will have to be friends with Russia, this is not in opposition to the PRC. The Russian Federation's place in the world will be 4-6, what kind of superpower it is.
          1. 0
            17 May 2024 17: 30
            It is you who think that you are not partners or allies. The President thinks differently. This is first of all. Friendship with the United States (by the way, supporters of non-traditional values ​​and other obscenities, unspiritual and deceitful) and not in opposition to China? Can this be explained to China? This is secondly. Can you name a country with which we have had close allied relations for at least a hundred years? This is third.
            1. 0
              17 May 2024 20: 27
              I don’t know what China and the Chinese are from TV and media, it just happened that way. I know people who have devoted their lives to studying China. There is no point in discussing or arguing. I expressed my thoughts above, time will tell who is right.
  12. +1
    16 May 2024 11: 04
    ..reliable guarantees of the security of our country are only the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and the FSB Border Service on the Russian-Polish border and the Strategic Missile Forces

    you can’t say better.
    Good article and the author, as usual, is forward-thinking
  13. 0
    16 May 2024 18: 20
    But we don’t care what anyone wants or doesn’t want?
  14. 0
    17 May 2024 17: 07
    Quote: Bakht
    Well, you wrote the numbers yourself. Information for the beginning of 2024.

    Russian agricultural products ranks second in terms of export volumes from Russia to China, second only to hydrocarbon supplies. This was announced by presidential aide Yuri Ushakov after a telephone conversation between Russian head of state Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping, TASS writes. Ushakov noted that in 2023, trade turnover between the two countries reached $227,7 billion, which is 23% more than in 2022, exceeding the set target of $200 billion ahead of schedule. However, according to Chinese statistics, this figure amounted to $240,1 billion. Ushakov emphasized that since 2010, China has been Russia’s largest trading partner, while Russia ranks fourth for China after the United States, Japan and South Korea.

    According to Rosselkhoznadzor, by the end of 2023, China has become the main buyer of Russian poultry and beef. This information was presented by the deputy head of the service, Artem Daushev, during a round table at the international exhibition Prodexpo-2024, Interfax writes.
    Thus, last year China purchased 132,9 thousand tons of poultry meat and 21,5 thousand tons of beef from Russia.

    Everything is clear, so I will help you. From your lengthy comment it directly follows that there are no huge (or small) supplies of pork to the PRC from the Russian Federation after all did not have. As for the rest:

    “In 2023, Russia became the 3rd largest food supplier to China, overtaking France and Indonesia. In terms of growth rates, we are second after Brazil. Russia's share in Chinese food imports in 2023 was 8,5% and continues to grow," Magrilov said. According to his estimates, in the next 1-2 years Russia will have opportunity reach 2nd place among leading suppliers.

    https://www.agroxxi.ru/agroeconomics/dolja-rossii-v-kitaiskom-importe-prodovolstvija-rastet-chto-polzuetsja-sprosom.html
    1. 0
      17 May 2024 17: 11
      And yes, about pork:

      By the way, an important achievement of Russian farmers was that they recently managed to obtain permission to import Russian pork into China. But there is no certainty that these supplies will be able to be scaled up, because at the moment China as a whole is reducing imports of pork and its dependence on foreign supplies of this product.

      In the next decade, the reduction in pork supplies to China could be up to 60%, experts warn, so Russian producers should definitely take this trend into account.

      https://logisticos.ru/
  15. -1
    17 May 2024 17: 51
    Author, based on the title of the article, do you personally also not want Russia to win? Or are you ready to blatantly lie to everyone for the sake of hype? Or, judging by the title of the article, do you not consider the people of Russia and the members of the Armed Forces taking part in the Northern Military District to be people and they are nothing to you? They don’t want victory in the Northern Military District either? You will decide in the end. Indeed, how gradually foreign agents instill in everyone the idea that the opinion of the people of Russia is empty space. Just the title of the article is enough.
  16. 0
    Today, 05: 46
    China knows very well that Russia is depopulating (dying out) and impoverishing!
    In no way interested in increasing military power.
    The Celestial Empire needs a hunted partner to buy strategic resources from him cheaply, and who can always be shoved into a closet in the far corner.
    In this he helps the West and plays along with duplicity with Russia.