Sure you can.
If this is true, the EU better be figuring out how to change that price calculus for them.
Which makes me doubt an open admission actually did happen, since China would understand the possibility for blowback.
I used to joke that China wants to trade Ukraine for Taiwan, now it is very clear: you shut up about helping/recognizing/arming Taiwan and we keep a leash on russia…until next time…
Taiwan for Ukraine would actually be a trade worth considering for Europe. The major problem, besides values like freedom and democracy, international law, is the interruption of supply lines from Taiwan caused by a Chinese takeover.
Interruption? You mean ceasing, as all semiconductor industry would be levelled by the usa
Exactly, Taiwan made sure it was worth defending, but I fear that this will lose value over time. Besides you never know what stupid shit is going to come out of tramp’s brain the day anything escalates.
Trump like the military because he does like everything powerful and strong. I think he truly is opposed to long and costly wars. So far his actions track that pretty well.
Trump is looking for deals to enrich himself or become more famous and powerful.
…so was putin (who is smarter than him), it was supposed to be a 2-week SMO in the Donbas. But the problem with these megalomaniac gamblers is that it is easy for them to miscalculate, because they think war is easy, quick, simple and they think that their opponents are no match.
China is clearly responding to EU leaders like Kallas saying China is next.
Maybe.
To be clear this is an outlet for pro-Ukrainian propaganda with stories that have quite often never been verified or repeated. I get it, they’re fighting a war for survival, but I still will take it with a grain of salt especially when it sounds unlikely.
This does not seem likely.
There has to exist a reason for Wang Yi opening some cards, but Kaja Kallas is not that reason. Wang Yi does not make uncoordinated statements and Kaja Kallas isn’t attempting to achieve that either.
Somewhere in the CCP political bureau, it was agreed that Wang Yi will send this public singlal.
The reason could be something in China, something in Russia, something in Europe or in the US. What is the reason? I don’t know currently, but I’m not the only one solving this puzzle.
“Take on” is doing the heavy lifting in that whole video. It means dealing with all sorts of hybrid warfare on the part of China, like cyberattacks or funding Orban and far-right parties or taking on the cheap electric vehicles. It does not mean going to war with China. Even if you look at NATO’s documents, it is referred to as a long-term challenge, not a direct threat.
Again, this is in the context of Obama’s pivot to Asia. China sees what your saying as excuses and wants the EU to prove their not just following US orders. Which you’ve said over and over again they won’t decouple so China doesn’t believe them.
Well, things were slightly better before COVID, after that, the EU decided to derisk, because trust in China actually decreased across the board. In other words, the US is not as untrustworthy as China…yet.
Ok well we are talking in the context of if true then EU should x. Well it’s only true if the EU continues to want to confront China. China is simply saying that’s up to you
yeah…really puts the maga view of Europe of “pathetic freeloaders” into context…I just don’t believe that leaving the US would make Europe safe. On the contrary. I actually fear a grand bargain to finally destroy liberal democracy between idiot dealmaker trump and rising power Xi. Their interests are aligned in this respect: as long as it exists anywhere, liberal democracy is a threat to their political projects.
Well, this puts us well out of the realm of is what China saying evil, it’s not it’s just telling the EU to choose. And instead into the realm of grand strategy of nations. I would love to continue the conversation, but this will be rife with opinions and wild inaccuracies. I don’t agree with what your saying but for me to explain would be long, as well as I can’t be sure I am right.
Sure they can
True, they can demand Haishenwai and Outer Manchuria all the way to and including lake Baikal to help russia keep what it has stolen from Ukraine. Or else…geh fuck yourselves.
“Because that would be totally devastating to our plans for Taiwan.”
💩
They don’t have those plans. That’s insinuated to distract from what the minister actually said and implied.
I have poined this out in the other post: https://feddit.org/post/15221478
This article is slightly misleading if compared with the SCMP article which has big implications on understanding the global power dynamics. Draw your own conclusions.
SCMP:
Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told the European Union’s top diplomat on Wednesday that Beijing does not want to see a Russian loss in Ukraine because it fears the United States would then shift its whole focus to Beijing, according to several people familiar with the exchange.
vs
As the war in Ukraine drags on, Wang’s reported comments suggest that Russia’s war in Ukraine may serve China’s strategic needs as focus is deviated away from Beijing’s mounting preparation to launch its own possible invasion into Taiwan.
It’s subtle, but the attack on Taiwan is an interpretation. The minister means something else.
If the economic development continues, Taiwan will want to join China. Thus the focus of the US is interpreted differently by China, more like the focus Iraq or Afghanistan received.
SCMP:
During a marathon four-hour debate on a wide range of geopolitical and commercial grievances, Wang was said to have given Kallas – the former Estonian prime minister who only late last year took up her role as the bloc’s de facto foreign affairs chief – several “history lessons and lectures”.
Some EU officials felt he was giving her a lesson in realpolitik, part of which focused on Beijing’s belief that Washington will soon turn its full attention eastward, two officials said. One interpretation of Wang’s statement in Brussels is that while China did not ask for the war, its prolongation may suit Beijing’s strategic needs, so long as the US remains engaged in Ukraine.
vs
that they believed Wang was providing Kallas with a lesson in realpolitik during the four-hour encounter.
No mentioning of the “history lessons and lectures”, which is a friendlier way of saying that he has referenced past behavior that suggest that the EU is in the wrong.
There seems to be ignorance about what is going to happen even right at the top of the EU. The Chinese minister is calling bullshit. Yet Kallas must have already known better.
It’s actually interesting! It means that there is a way out: If europe accepts to help keep the US out of Beijings business. I don’t actually know how that could be done. And the EU doesn’t have that kind of coesion.
The US wants to stay the hegemon but China is advancing technology faster than the US. The conflict is about the multipolar world. Unfortunately the US, and the EU, haven’t explained why they don’t want to be part of a multipolar world.
This sentence makes no sense:
Unfortunately the US, and the EU, haven’t explained why they don’t want to be part of a multipolar world.
Is a multipolar world what russia is doing in Ukraine? If you’re going to have a world of trade blocks: NAmerica, SAmerica, EU, Africa, ME, russia?, China, India, Pacific. Europe is perfectly prepared to enter a multilateral or multipolar world order…but not the way russia announced it.
You can’t simply invade one of the members whenever they try to leave your block. Otherwise you’ll have constant wars in the borders between the blocks. I can tell you already why I would not want to regress to the kind of chaos and constant wars of multipolar unstable alliances of the 17th century, now with nukes and proliferation. Fun! Who wouldn’t want that?
A multipolar world can work, but you need stronger international institutions and law, not the mockery that russia, the US and israel turned the UN into.
a multipolar world means the west (namely the us) can’t unilaterally call all the shots, and other countries can say no.
It also means that russia can’t unilaterally claim all of Ukraine, other countries can say no…it works for everyone. Welcome to the multipolar world too, russia.
And let me repeat: if the only thing other countries can do to stop anyone’s actions is war and countries just ignore borders, then it will be an extremely unstable system, like in the 17th century. Bipolar is more stable, like in the cold war. Unipolar is relatively stable, but there is no accountability, like in a 1-party system.
do to stop anyone’s actions is war
thats literally what the us has been doing for a century or more now, plus economic coercion. there was never stability in the first place for anyone but the west.
It also means that russia can’t unilaterally claim all of Ukraine
welcome to the multipolar world where russia can say no to western institutions and put up a fight. unlike when the west claimed the middle east. or africa. or latin america.
Bipolar is more stable, like in the cold war, unipolar is more stable.
citation needed. you are literally calling the constant threat of nuclear war “stability” lol
you are calling unbridled imperialism stable, man, wtf.
stability for whom.
Ukraine seems to be more of a unipolar project than a multipolar project. The important part is the last part of the last sentence.
David C. Hendrickson, in his article in Foreign Affairs on November 1, 1997, saw the core of the book as the ambitious strategy of NATO to move eastward to Ukraine’s Russian border and vigorously support the newly independent republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus, which is an integral part of what Hendrickson said could be called a “tough love” strategy for the Russians. Hendrickson considers “this great project” to be problematic for two reasons: the “excessive expansion of Western institutions” could well introduce centrifugal forces into it; moreover, Brzezinski’s “test of what legitimate Russian interests are” seems to be so strict that even a democratic Russia would probably “fail”.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Grand_Chessboard
Of course there can also be wars in the multipolar world. But there are enough started by the US that peace seems to be secondary.
Ukraine is as multipolar as it gets: they don’t want to be russia’s bitch, so they asked everyone else for help, some helped.
Sure. Unfortunately that’s not what counts. Also history is more complicated and doesn’t start in 2014.
Wang was said to have given Kallas – the former Estonian prime minister who only late last year took up her role as the bloc’s de facto foreign affairs chief – several “history lessons and lectures”.
It still baffles me how people manage to justify China’s position on Russia. Sure it’s “geopolitics” but if you take a look at domestic propaganda in China itself it’s certainly much more than that.
Check out videos of what Ukrainians deal with while living in China - its down right disgusting how brainwashed Chinese are equating Zelenskyy to the likes of Hitler in Ukrainian’s faces and thsse are just normal people in apolitical contexts like nurses in hospitals. It’s absolute insanity.
That’s just Chinese people in general on any subject. Anyone who’s actually been to that country would notice pretty quickly that things are NOT OK. The Chinese population has never not known abuse and it shows.
I lived and worked in China for a year (Shenzhen). There was a palpable sense of brainwashing and/or an overpowering air of unhealthy patriotism there. Which made it stranger for me as I had Chinese friends and coworkers that seemed like decent normal people, we went to bars and drank and joked together. But whenever the topic of China as a country and its policies came up, everyone had a similar change in attitude and unwavering loyalty to the government.
I never felt that I was being targeted specifically, but I also never felt truly comfortable for a number of reasons. I’m glad I got to expand my horizons and experience a bit of what the country/city had to offer, I don’t think I would willingly go to live there again.
This roughly aligns with my xperience, although if they really get to know you some will be more forthright about their politics. Many look longingly to what we have in the west.
That is a startlingly weak position for China to be in.
Not really startling. No big player other than Russia has ever been on China’s side RE Taiwan.
I feel like Russian support is pretty much a rounding error when it comes to Chinese power.
All the better if they can use foreign troops in the meat grinder. Like Russia has been using North Korean troops for.
Implying that the US could be too focused on Russia right now to help Taiwan defend against a Chinese invasion sounds like wishful thinking considering how little they are doing to help Ukraine.
Well, they need to help Israel fight a multi-front war and commit genocide at the same time. That’s more than just walking and chewing gum at the same time.
China has chosen to be the enemy the west and rules based order then.
rules based order
The rules based order is allowing genocide to happen in Gaza.
The thread is about Ukraine. I am all for the genocide in Gaza to stop but can you try not to hijack any post about every other conflict?
Aww beeboo, are we ruining your wittle game of Civiwization??
It looks like you think genocide is a game. Sad you think that. Hopefully you never become victim of it.
I don’t see Xilly old bear and Puddin lifting any fingers, either. I guess they do agree on the US on something!
China has acknowledged Palestinians’ right to armed resistance and recognizes Palestinian statehood unlike most Western countries. But it is unfortunate that they didn’t do more.
China literally sent aid to Gaza, so I guess it’s just you guys and your buddies in Russia.
https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202403/21/content_WS65fb793fc6d0868f4e8e54c8.html
Eu and US did send aid too, your point?
Right. They also sent bullets and untrained security personnel to shoot unarmed civilians seeking to access said aid.
Two US contractors describe chaos and gunfire as Palestinians seek food in Gaza | AP News https://share.google/I3cXJybvFlqB4KsHE
Using aid as a honey pot to shoot civilians doesn’t count
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-announces-funding-gaza-humanitarian-foundation-despite-deaths/
UN Security Council resolutions have demanded Hamas release the hostages taken. This has been ignored by Hamas and thus provided Israel with a reason to continue the war.
tramp has chosen to be the enemy of the west and the rules based order, China’s just been having a wonderful time flying under the cover of the daily orange meltdown since the clown show started.
PS: they don’t even have to do anything, they just have to point at trump and say “democracy, you mean THAT?” And they’ll be using it as evidence against the “chaos of democracy” worldwide.
No, you’re not understanding what is being said here. The west has always declared China the opponent and they’ll take China on when they finish their other conflicts like Russia. The EU has consistently asked China to stop Russia. China’s just saying the quiet part out loud. Who in their right mind would help you after you constantly called me a threat and told me if Russia falls you’re coming after me?
Edit for those down voting me, here’s Kallas saying China is next, the person China is talking to in the article.
The west has always declared China the opponent and they’ll take China on when they finish their other conflicts like Russia.
Always? Citation needed. After COVID, maybe? Or did it start with tramp in 2016, maybe sooner at the 2008 olympics? Certainly in 1993 that was not the case when China entered the WTO.
And of course: nearly nobody in the EU wanted to fight russia or spend more on defense until forced to open their eyes on russia’s reinvasion of Ukraine in 2022.
Since the Opium Wars. Churchill even talked about breaking China apart a la the Muslim World so that it can never rise again.
Yeah, that guy’s gone. The policy with China was to encourage it to become the Germany of Asia in the hopes that it would liberalize as it developed. Well…no…shit happens…
Yes, go on from there. Shit happened. What will be next?
I don’t think anybody planned beyond that, by everyone’s reactions. But it looks as if people read too much Fukuyama uncritically and not enough Huntington.
deleted by creator
How about this from 2025?: Kaja Kallas: EU Must Focus on Russia Before Taking on China | Dawn News English
It is not like Sinophobia and Yellow Perilism suddenly stopped in the West. China sees what the West is doing to Gaza and the Middle East as a whole, and knows if it weren’t for its might they would do the same to it. I see Westerners online openly daydream of breaking up China and post their maps of a broken-up China. Breaking up the Middle East and the Muslim World doomed it for over a century, why would China allow that for itself? They know they are next.
Also, why is liberalism mandatory? I don’t want my country <insert bad evil illiberal arab country> to liberalize. There are other systems that work just as well if not better than [mandatory] Liberalism. If Chinese liberalize that’s their own business and if they don’t that’s their choice.
At least since Obama.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Asian_foreign_policy_of_the_Barack_Obama_administration
Here’s an EU based article saying that really it’s been happening since Clinton.
https://ecpr.eu/Events/Event/PaperDetails/25139
Always as in before anyone currently in power was in power.
Now, China is just saying what your thinking. If EU isn’t supporting USA on this, we can talk. Otherwise what do we gain from not keeping Russia afloat?
Edit btw the point of all of this is China is literally telling the EU how to stop the war. Turn on the US
Yeah, the 1st paper is from 2015, that’s after the Hong Kong protests, when it was finally clear that China was going to stamp out democracy in Hong Kong and Xi Jinping’s new Wolf Warrior diplomacy. Excuse us for being…unimpressed.
Eh, but I’m not making any predictions, but if russia implodes by repeatedly hitting their head against a wall, you’re cleaning up that mess, not us, he’s your drunken psychotic friend now. We already got plenty scalded trying to rehab them and getting blamed for everything that went wrong.
The crackdown on the George Floyd protests was far more violent and deadly. You can’t point at China when your own house is a mess.
Yes any talk about democractic reason to stop China is stupid considering they “NATO allies” are committing a full blown genocide in Gaza.
In reality China is a natural threat to wealthy people in the west because they have the population and the technology to: 1) fight any attempt to be exploited , 2) Exploit other countries.
There are wealthy people in China too (and a disgusting cult of wealth to go with it to make any communist nauseous or any oligarch envious) and they’re obedient little piggies, just like those idiots at tramp’s inauguration
That was a paper talking about history. That it started before Obama even. Though, as the wiki article states at a minimum it started with Obama. Also, why would Russia lose? The implied threat is your going to be facing down J20s if it gets bad enough.
Clarity is actually better in these things.
I’m clear. The EU talks about wanting to stop Russia, but doesn’t actually work with the partner that can stop Russia. That’s as clear as it gets.
As a side note: there is speculation that China may be approaching a change of leader due to Xi experiencing health issues (not a change of leadership in the wider sense - the collegial system of the CCP is considered to be functioning).
Thus, it may be impossible for the Chinese foreign minister to be fully confident of what China’s policy will be in the future.
Obviously, China views it as unacceptable for Russia (its ally and soon enough, practically its vassal) to all-out lose. (The easiest way to not lose, of course, is not starting a war, but that train is long gone and behind the hills.)
Prolonging the war does not eliminate this risk well, however - exhaustion could spread in Russian society and morale could collapse despite the state spewing its propaganda, or the economy could collapse. So, simply propping up Russia by letting them buy the goods they shouldn’t be getting is not a very elegant solution. Direct interference on behalf of Russia would lead to open hostility with the EU, which is currently ambivalent about China.
What remains is nudging Russia to negotiate. But Putin is hard-headed and only willing to negotiate Ukraine’s surrender, on terms which Ukrainians will laugh out of the door.
As for the US being able to focus on China, well I guess they’re a bit concerned about it, but given the mental and organizational capability of the current US leadership, I don’t think Chinese analysts are particularly worried.
I only see news relating to General Zhang Youxia and replacing Xi Jinping with Wang-Yi in Indian news sites, is this related to their recent renewed support for the Dalai Lama out of the blue?
Chinese foreign policy regarding Russia is unlikely to change under a new leader. Supporting Russia‘s war by continued trade while publicly calling for a diplomatic solution is a very comfortable position. They weaken the West while making Russia more dependent on them. All of that while getting financial advantages from importing cheap energy from Russia and exporting goods.
The posturing regarding Taiwan could change in tone, but fundamentally China‘s goals and interests are unchanged.
Things are going pretty well for China on many levels.
any sociological doctorates in here? What does it say about the state of the ruZZian war, when chinas FM weighs in on their vision for the war?
Russia is hugely dependent on trade with China to continue the war effort. They have replaced western imports with Chinese goods, including parts for weapons. North Korea would not sell arms and send troops to Russia without Chinese approval either. China buys Russian oil and gas as well.
The Russian war effort is going well and looks like it will be sustainable for years while Chinese support continues.
Not just Beijing.
Ahh, so Trump gets his orders from the Chinoruskie empire…
For now. Ideally they lose in a few years once China has a better position
You can count on tramp and his fascist toadies to lose their proxy war with China without a fight by refusing to acknowledge it until no asian ally is willing to resist or share intel out of fear of getting betrayed, like the EU and Ukraine.
5 eyes and 14 eyes are both falling apart
Wang’s reported comments suggest that Russia’s war in Ukraine may serve China’s strategic needs as focus is deviated away from Beijing’s mounting preparation to launch its own eventual invasion into Taiwan.
I doubt anyone has said that so clearly, but if everyone in the west has been thinking that for 3 years, I’m sure the Chinese have too.
Wang hasn’t said it. He almost said the opposite. Please check my other comment for details.
Ok, thanks!
U.S. President Donald Trump, who has not managed to broker a promised ceasefire between Moscow and Kyiv, has long viewed China as the United States’ main adversary and is predominantly focused on relations between the two nations.
Heys the only one that can negotiate a peace. On day one!
