American scholars: How the Russian-Ukrainian war increases the threat to China's border
September 25, 4 days have passed since Putin issued a mobilization order, and the referendum on Russia in the four eastern Ukrainian states has also entered the third day. Lao Mo observed that Russia's work is basically in full swing. Like , the Russian Ministry of Defense issued the implementation of the "partial mobilization order", showing the scene of a large number of males of appropriate age enlisting in the army and receiving weapons. Among them, the filming location was specially selected in the Kamchatka area of Far East , which seemed to be trying to convey a message that recruitment would not involve the wealthy Moscow and St. Petersburg areas to appease the emotions of the domestic elite.
At the same time, Putin also replaced the deputy defense minister in charge of logistics, and was replaced by Mizinsev, director of the Russian Center for Defense Control, who is also the general coordinator of the various departments of the Russian army stationed in Ukraine. Apparently, with the arrival of 300,000 mobilizers, Putin has already started preparing for their logistics supply. This also indirectly reflects that the "partial mobilization order" is not a bluff, but will really recruit a very large army.
Western scholars and media generally disagree with these preparations of Russia . Some of them believe that after Putin announced a "partial mobilization order", China called on all parties to the conflict to cease fire as soon as possible, which shows that China has "lost patience" with Russia, and without China's support, Putin is doomed to fail. Some people believe that Putin's threat to use tactical nuclear weapon is a sign that Russia has "lost skills". If the mobilization order is really useful, why should we wield a nuclear stick to scare people?
Among many opinions, Lao Mo wants to choose one that is more interesting to tell you. On September 24, Bruce Elleman, a professor at the U.S. Naval War Academy, published an article in the South China Morning Post titled "How the Russian-Ukrainian War Increases Threats to China's Border and Economy." The difference between this article
and other views is that not only criticizes Russia, but also criticizes China, believing that as the war drags on longer and longer, Russia will become weaker and weaker, and will even "collapse" within 5 years . After the collapse, Russia will fall into a civil war, and various military frictions will break out in the entire Central Asia region, such as the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan , Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan , as well as the conflict in Chechnya, as well as the increasingly tense situation between Afghanistan , Pakistan and India, etc. In short, once Russia collapses, Central Asia will soon be in full swing, which will greatly increase China's border pressure and China's economy will also be affected. The article
further pointed out that the biggest impact of Russia's collapse on China is that China's attempt to transform into a maritime state in the past 30 years may fail, and China will have to draw more resources from the air force and navy to build the army, and China's northern border will also return to a highly militarized state during the Cold War. In this way, China's attention in , South China Sea will be restrained. In addition, the defeat of Russian-made weapons in the Ukrainian battlefield is well known, and China is one of the largest buyers of Russian-made weapons. Therefore, countries around the South China Sea may no longer be afraid of China's military strength, and no one will buy the requirements and claims made by China. The final article concluded that although the Russian-Ukraine war has not yet been decided, it exposed the reality of Russia's rapid decline and the possibility of civil war and disintegration, which will pose a huge threat to China.
Russia cannot fall, nor will it fall
. Lao Mo has two views on this article.
From a factual perspective, the content of the article is not objective, full of exaggerated words and self-righteous imaginations, and is suspected of "landslide fallacy". It is true that the current situation facing Russia is indeed not optimistic. Not only did it lose Kharkov , it was also forced to carry out partial mobilization, even to the point where it had to show its nuclear trump card.But we cannot simply deduce that the Russian army fails on the battlefield, and then a coup will occur in Moscow, and then Putin will step down, and eventually Russia will collapse within 5 years. There is actually no necessary causal connection between these events. Otherwise, if it would be disintegrated if it was defeated, then as a country that has experienced countless wars such as the Northern War and the 100-year Russian-Turkey War, Russia should have disintegrated N times long ago. Why does it have such a vast territory as today?
Lao Mo feels that this view of American scholars is essentially using the experience of the Cold War to force it on real issues. They take it for granted that since the Soviet Union disintegrated after the Afghanistan War , Russia will definitely disintegrate after the Ukrainian War. But in fact, collapsed because of the outbreak of ethnic conflicts between the member states, causing Russia to lose control of them. This contradiction has accumulated for many years before it disintegrated, and only when encountering some accidental events can it be expressed in the form of independence of each member state.
But there is obviously no such contradiction in Russia at present. On the contrary, under the influence of the bond of nationalism, the Russians actually show a strong sense of unity. The latest poll released in September showed that as many as 81.1% of Russian respondents expressed trust in Putin, and 78.1% of respondents expressed their approval of Putin's work, both of which increased compared with before the war.
Therefore, Lao Mo believes that in the foreseeable future, Russia may fail temporarily, but it will definitely not disintegrate. In the face of a crisis, the Russian people will only seek a harder politician to lead them, and will not choose to bow their knees to surrender to the West.
Let’s talk about Lao Mo’s second view. Lao Mo thinks that although the views of this article by American scholars are quite bizarre, at the strategic level, it actually reminds us that Russia must not fall, otherwise the strategic environment in which China is located will deteriorate sharply . In fact, the reason why China chose to form a strategic partnership with Russia is mainly due to two considerations: First, in terms of economy, Russia is not only an important energy supplier, but also a transit country under the Belt and Road Initiative. Being in good relations with Russia will be of great benefit to China's economic development; Second, in terms of military, Russia and China have the longest border. Handling relations with Russia well can relieve China's worries on land and are crucial to the development of maritime strategies.
So the article mentioned that when Russia collapses, China will face three major threats: is , the South China Sea dispute re-emerges, the Belt and Road Initiative was shelved, and the militarization of the Sino-Russian border.
Lao Mo believes that although the above prediction is unlikely to become reality, we should consider everything from the worst, have bottom-line thinking, and prevent problems before they happen. To avoid these most unfavorable things to China, must ensure that Russia can continue to hold on and will not easily fall in the process of fighting against the West.
So, how do we make sure that Russia does not fall easily? Lao Mo noticed that someone had already started to worry about this issue.
Saudi mediated, Russia released British and American mercenaries
On September 21, Russia released 10 foreign mercenaries captured on the Ukrainian battlefield, including 5 British and 2 Americans. These mercenaries were originally sentenced to and . The reason why they were saved was mainly because Saudi Arabia took action to mediate.
According to Reuters , has recently been a transaction between Russia and Ukraine. The Russian side intends to use 200 Ukrainian prisoners of war and 5 Azov battalion commanders to exchange for pro-Russian politician Medveduck who were imprisoned by Ukrainian and 55 other Russians. However, Ukraine put forward a very excessive condition, requiring Russia to release 10 foreign mercenaries to show sincerity before the exchange begins.The condition of
is obviously not fair to Russia and is difficult to accept. However, with the mediation and running of Saudi Crown Prince Salman Jr., Russia finally agreed to Ukraine's request, and the prisoner exchange activity was successfully completed. For this purpose, White House also expressed his gratitude to Salman Jr. on the 23rd.
can be seen that in this prison exchange transaction, the Saudi crown prince played a relatively critical role and thus won a certain political reputation. But many people in the West are not satisfied. They pointed out that the Saudi crown prince once became infamous in the murder of American journalist Khashoggi . Now he suddenly made an attempt to match Russia and Ukraine to replace prisoners, and he must have wanted to take the opportunity to improve his image and "whitewash" himself.
Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal denied the accusations from the West, claiming that this was a "very cynical" view and stressed that Saudi Arabia just wanted to help both sides resolve the negotiation differences. He also said that the Crown Prince was able to convince Putin to release prisoners of war, which was an important humanitarian gesture and a way for Saudi Arabia to facilitate a negotiated solution.
But in Lao Mo's view, the nature of the Saudi crown prince pushes Russia and Ukraine to complete the prisoner exchange transaction is definitely not as simple as "humanitarian", but has Saudi Arabia's own strategic interests. On the one hand, after a series of incidents such as the defeat of the Russian military on the battlefield, the referendum between Ukraine and Eastern Ukraine, Putin issued a mobilization order and issued a nuclear deterrence, countries with relatively friendly relations with Russia, such as China, India, and other countries with relatively friendly relations with Russia have actually fallen into a very embarrassing situation. Although these countries are very close to Russia and hope that Russia will not fall easily, at this moment, it is not convenient for them to publicly support Russia and play the role of mediators. After all, Russia is now at any time to showdown to the West, and really annex the four states in eastern Ukraine or use the nuclear weapon . At that time, how countries such as China and India get along with Russia will be a headache. In addition, China and India's refusal to reduce imports of Russian energy also makes it difficult for them to gain the trust of Ukraine and the West, and are not suitable for appearing as a mediator.
As long as Russia is still there, the West will never dare to attack Saudi Arabia
. In this case, the importance of Saudi Arabia will be highlighted. As a strategic ally of the "oil dominance" of the Middle East and the United States, Saudi Arabia can be said to be "no taboos" in many things, and no one can blame or threaten it. At the same time, since both sides are members of "OPEC+", Saudi Arabia has a close relationship with Russia, and the Saudi Crown Prince and Putin have a good personal relationship. When other countries retreat and are unwilling to touch the muddy waters of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, Saudi Arabia can play its unique role and act as a bridge between Russia and Ukraine, thereby enhancing its position in the West and Russia.
As for the other hand, it is Lao Mo’s personal guess. Lao Mo thinks that Saudi Arabia, according to Western standards, is actually worse than Russia. If it weren't for the need to maintain oil hegemony, the United States might have long regarded Saudi Arabia as a "rogue state". Therefore, when Saudi Arabia witnesses Russia's sanctions against the West, it will definitely feel afraid of . If Saudi Arabia's relations with the West break down in the future, will Saudi Arabia also end up with the same fate as Russia, or even worse? Considering that the world is accelerating its transformation to clean energy, the day when oil becomes a secondary energy will come sooner or later, what will Saudi Arabia do then? You should know that Saudi Arabia does not have a broad strategic depth and a huge nuclear arsenal like Russia. If Saudi Arabia loses the pillar of oil, it will definitely be abandoned or even eliminated by the West. After all, Saudi Arabia's strategic position is too important. Without the protection of the United States, the Saudi royal family's rule may not be able to persist for a year.
Therefore, one of Saudi Arabia's solutions is to strengthen relations with Russia, or even form some form of alliance, to share the pressure from the West by "transfusion" to Russia. As long as Russia is still in one day, Western countries will never dare to attack Saudi Arabia .This may be one of the reasons why Saudi Arabia chose to intervene in this muddy waters as countries stayed away from the Russian-Ukrainian conflict.
Russian Ambassador to India: Don't want to intervene in the Sino-India dispute
Lao Mo noticed that Just as China, India, Turkey and other countries began to keep a distance from the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Russia is actually adjusting its diplomatic policy . On September 23, Russian Ambassador to India Alipov said in an interview that the Sino-Indian border standoff is a "bilateral matter" between the two countries and Russia does not want to intervene. He pointed out that regarding the Sino-Indian border dispute, Russia has always believed that this is a problem between China and India. Russia does not want to intervene, and will only find a way to resolve the dispute quickly and peacefully. Unlike some countries, it will only incite mutual suspicion between China and India on the border issue.
It is not difficult to see that the "certain countries" Alipov actually refers to the United States. In this regard, Lao Mo believes that the reason why the Russian ambassador to India emphasized that Russia does not want to intervene in the Sino-Indian dispute is that it hopes to express an attitude that the exchanges between China and Russia, as well as the exchanges between Russia and India, should be one code and should not affect each other. Although Russia is moving quickly towards China recently, Russia will not take advantage of the special relations between Russia and India to put pressure on India or stand on China's side . In fact, this is similar to China-India's attitude towards the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. Although the Russian army failed on the battlefield, Putin issued a mobilization order, and the European war was about to break out. However, China and India are all about attitudes: although we pay great attention to this matter, we will not intervene too much, and we will not favor either side.
Lao Mo feels that this diplomatic policy of China, Russia and India is more realistic and can eliminate many unnecessary misunderstandings. After all, although China and Russia and India are neighboring countries, they are far away from each other's core areas. As long as countries do not interfere in each other's affairs at will, they can maintain long-term peace and stability. In addition, China, Russia and India must also be vigilant against the United States and refuse to provoke disagreements between China, Russia and India, and avoid , Eurasian , and cause chaos.
For this kind of , the United States is sowing discord, but China, Russia, India and other countries do not buy into . Some people point out that should have long recognized the reality , accept that emerging countries have greater influence in global decision-making and meet their development interests, rather than maintaining their own hegemony and making the world a frenzy.
ends the war and maintains hegemony, the United States can only choose one of two
On September 24, Jorgen Muller, former secretary of the Danish Foreign Ministry of State, published an article in the US National Interest magazine, saying that between ending the Ukrainian war and maintaining the United States' hegemony, the United States can only choose one of two . The article believes that over the years, the United States has faced two options: one is to consolidate American hegemony and emphasize that the United States' view on global affairs is absolutely correct, and the United States has the right to lead the world to develop in a model that conforms to its values; the other is to realize that the world has changed, and emerging powers such as China and India are willing to participate in the global system and have the ability to question the United States' power to formulate rules. In response to this, the United States initially chose the first option. But now it is time to reexamine whether the move is still in the interests of the United States.
article points out that if the United States wants to end the Russian-Ukrainian war, it must obtain support from China, India and Turkey, but these three countries will certainly not participate in an initiative that will help maintain US hegemony . In fact, China, India and Turkey acquiesced to some of Russia's practices is because they are dissatisfied with the hegemony of the United States. If the war is to end, the United States must meet its requirements, no longer regard values as the criterion of foreign policy, and modify and reform the international system so that it no longer serves only American interests, but is used to provide guarantees for global policies.
However, this may be difficult for American policy makers, but if another option is chosen, the war may get worse. In this regard, the article believes that the United States should have accepted this fact long ago.Because the demands of China, India and other countries are not to overturn the existing international system, but to repair the international system. After the restoration is completed, it will not change much compared to the appearance designed by the United States and Britain 70 years ago, but it will give full play to the influence of China, India and other countries and reflect their interests. Of course, the United States can also refuse to repair the international system and rely on its own military strength to push Russia back to the border alone and safeguard the United States' power as a global leader, but the risk of doing so will be higher.
Overall, although the possibility of a "collapse" in Russia is low, China still needs to be prepared for this and do its best to avoid this. At the same time, China, Russia and India also need to handle their relationship well and reject the United States' provocation and disagreement. Only when emerging countries maintain unity can the United States force concessions and accept a new international order that is more in line with the interests of developing countries.
