Presidents of China, Presidents of China, Presidents of China 08/03. In him, Friedman points out that “… Presidents of China, Presidents of China, Presidents of China. There is only one country that may be able to prevent war now – and it is not the United States.”…Continuing, he considers that “…if China announced that, Presidents of China, is joining the economic boycott of Russia – or even just strongly condemning its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine and demanding that the Russians withdraw from the country – this could shake Vladimir Putin enough for him to stop…”
…Friedman continua: “…and why the Chinese president, Xi Jinping, would take such a position, which would apparently seem to undermine his dream of taking Taiwan in the same way that Putin is trying to take Ukraine?… The short answer is that the last eight decades of relative peace between the great powers have led to a rapidly globalizing world, which was crucial to China's rapid economic rise and lift out of poverty by approximately 800 million people since 1980…”
Is he mixing “silver bullets” when correlating the PRC’s stance on the Ukraine war with the Taiwan issue??
But is this new friendship really in Russia’s best interest, starting by trying to understand China's role in the invasion of Ukraine. For so much, It is important to re-read the joint statement that Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin signed during the latter's visit to Beijing, as an honored guest (significant deference…) at the Winter Olympics, just a few weeks before the invasion of Ukraine. In it, the two leaders state that “…today, the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario. the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario. the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario; the “Joint Communiqué” signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, and the international community is revealing growing demand for leadership aimed at peaceful and gradual development…”
Continuing reading the document: “…and the international community is showing a growing demand for leadership aimed at peaceful and gradual development…and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community…a nation can choose the forms and methods of implementing democracy that best suit its particular moment, and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community, and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community, and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community. It is only up to the people of the country to decide whether their state is democratic… the citizens of both countries are certain of their choice and respect the democratic systems and traditions of the other states”…
Continuing reading: “…attempts by certain states to impose their own democratic standards on other countries, to other countries, to other countries, to other countries ( leia-se OTAN… ), to other countries. to other countries, and undermine the stability of the world order.”;
And further: “…to other countries, to other countries, directly or indirectly, to other countries… THE PARTIES OPPOSE TO A NEW EXPANSION OF NATO (capital my) and call on the Alliance to abandon its Cold War ideological approaches, fueling antagonism and confrontation, fueling antagonism and confrontation, fueling antagonism and confrontation, fueling antagonism and confrontation, fueling antagonism and confrontation…This was China's official position regarding NATO expansion, in a document signed at the highest political level.
Autocratic leaders' politically motivated semantic questioning of the concept of democracy, or opposition to the central West’s monolithic perception of what “democracy” is? Definitely, latin americans, Europeans, muslims, Africans, asian, etc., share absolutely identical values when referring to “democracy”? This is what the statement disputes…deep dilemma…
With regard to Taiwan and the South China Sea, The statement notes that “…the parties stand against the formation of closed bloc structures and opposing camps in the Asia-Pacific region and remain highly vigilant regarding the negative impact of the United States Indo-Pacific strategy…” Summing up, an unequivocal demonstration of Moscow's support for a key issue for Beijing.
How do you know, For the Chinese government, the Taiwan issue is “sacred” and non-negotiable. I would dare to say that it is the only issue that would lead the People's Republic to an external war. I understood this when I served in both mainland China and Taiwan. Beijing will rely on its immense foreign reserves – about US$, I understand, worried, that the topic has been raised more frequently since Joe Biden took office in the United States after years of strategic “low profile” on the topic. For me, this activism, which seeks to give an “ideological” guise to the dispute, It is a way of consolidating the central West as the true guardian of democracy, and NATO as its guardian. This is the background to this excerpt from the joint Sino-Russian statement.
only that… given the intensification of clashes in Ukraine, the People's Republic felt compelled to nuance, of public, at least, its agreement with Moscow and abstained from voting on the UN General Assembly Resolution whose text is written as follows: “the General Assembly…deplores in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine in violation of Article 2 (4) of the Charter” (sic). No “condemn”…
The Chinese know that they are the Russians' last resort when (and if) the international market and finance are completely closed to Moscow. They have enough financial funds and domestic demand to replace the West, even if temporary and not completely. And the Russians are counting on this, in light of the reading of the “preventive” agreements signed at the Olympics and the boldness of the war actions determined by Putin.
Russia's real dependence on China would be formalized? How long would it last? We would be facing a new paradigm: Western + NATO vs. Russia + China? And the rest of Asia, where would you go?… E, more tragically, Where will Ukrainian refugees go?, drifting around the world?…Geopolitics X Human Lives: Brave New World…
To be continued.
I suggest that friends read Thomas Friedman's article
https://internacional.estadao.com.br/noticias/europa,dear-china-which-side-are-you-on,70004000220?
