“Biden is wrong anyway”: how Russia, China and the United States will divide the world
Gazeta.Ru: How far can Russia and China go in rapprochement? For example, The Jerusalem Post recently wrote that Russia and China could create a military alliance. From your point of view, is it real? And if so, under what circumstances?
Nelson Wong: I can say that over the past 10-odd years there has been very significant progress. This can be seen both in the growing confidence of the leaderships of our countries, and in the fact that both sides respect and understand well the main interests of each other.
The main thing is that both China and Russia see multipolarity in the same way and recognize the UN as a platform for resolving global issues. Both countries are categorically against the intervention of third countries in the internal affairs of others, as well as unilateral measures, which the United States often resorts to.
It is also worthy of respect that Russia always responds well and in a timely manner to all major problems on the world stage, what it considers right or wrong.
– Still, what about further rapprochement between Moscow and Beijing?
– China speaks of its commitment to external peaceful coexistence and non-alignment to alliances. As the Chinese leadership has repeatedly stated, the scale and reach of the comprehensive partnership between China and Russia is such that the sky is the limit.
For anyone who understands Chinese culture, these kinds of high-ranking Chinese diplomas, which are rarely used, already reflect the PRC’s utmost confidence in Russia.
However, I still believe that in order to strengthen our bilateral relationship, both sides have more work to do to build trust between peoples. It is a lengthy process that requires enthusiasm, patience and persistence. In one economy, I personally see great opportunities, but a number of things need to be done first.
– For example?
– Exchanges between our governments at national and local levels.
– energy, agriculture, public transport and electric mobility, travel and hospitality, banking and financial services, aerospace and technology, etc.
And if cooperation extends from state-owned companies to the private sector, it will be a decisive factor in building the confidence of our peoples. To achieve this goal, it will be necessary to conduct educational forums, promotional events. All this will help our business communities to jointly find and improve new business and investment opportunities.
– Is it true that some Chinese experts believe that Russia can, under certain conditions, quickly change its attitude towards friendship with the United States, which will change the balance of power? Can Moscow play a key role in this scenario?
– I have not heard such discussions, to be honest. But look at what thing here.
The Chinese leadership declares the country’s commitment to a peaceful recovery and that China will never strive to become a hegemon. And I have said many times that a better future cannot be achieved if the world is again divided into two competing camps, as was the case during the Cold War.
Disagreements and disputes between America and China on some issues may be inevitable. This so-called “US-China rivalry” is far too much of an exaggeration caused by the widespread fear of a gaining momentum in China. At the same time, Beijing has never called Washington a rival.
Take the recent 3.5-hour meeting of the Chinese and American leaders on November 16. She is believed to have been quite constructive. On it, both sides are completely frank and open about their interests. And the details of the meeting are unknown to the public, we saw obvious signs of a reduction in the risk of mutual confrontation. This testifies to the achievement of a certain level of mutual understanding between the governments of the two countries.
As for the role of Russia. As the largest power in a multipolar world, located between Europe and Asia, Russia itself is an important power in a multipolar world. She is too strong and proud to take sides or switch between China or the United States to equalize power.
– How do you assess the US factor in the issue of the reunification of China and Taiwan? How far is President Joe Biden ready to go on this issue, and what can US participation here lead to?
– He did not tell me anything about this, we do not know each other. Whatever he chooses to do by continuing to interfere in China’s internal affairs, he will be wrong anyway.
It is shameful that, while recognizing the “one China” policy and the PRC as the only legitimate government, the United States contradicts itself, adhering to its 1979 Taiwan Relations Act (according to it, Washington obliges the island to help in the event of a military threat. Gazeta.Ru ” ).
The US still hasn’t given up on its strategic ambiguity. They are still trying to use the Taiwan issue as a strategic leverage, or rather, as one of the “cards” that the US believes is holding China back. All this time trying to go beyond the possible.
China adopted the Anti-Secession Law in 2005 and it became clear that the red lines were clearly marked. He has already physically demonstrated this to the United States and to everyone who dares to continue to interfere in the internal affairs of China.
And it is now possible to ease tensions in the Taiwan Strait when the US realizes it has a broader agenda with China.
– Do you agree that, in general, Biden’s policy towards China is softer than Trump’s? Or is there no difference globally?
– I would not say that Biden is softer towards China. But yes, being a career politician with a wealth of foreign policy experience, he is certainly more resourceful. He is able to assemble a team of experts and advisers who can offer a smarter, more practical and balanced set of actions for China.
– Is there any chance to stop it at its current level?
– Recent events show that the White House has realized that the United States is not about containing China and not a new Cold War. It is obvious that, on the one hand, the US administration is faced with internal political, economic and social challenges, in which someone sees a split in the nation. On the other hand, there are the challenges of a rapidly changing world that Biden’s predecessors did not face.
And while the pandemic caught the world by surprise, caused economic downturn and human loss, it is also a wake-up call for all countries, including the United States. Perhaps it was against this background that the United States finally came to the conclusion that China is not their enemy, even though the time is preparing to go against the United States here and there.
If this assumption of mine can withstand criticism, then both countries will cope with the further escalation of tensions or stop it.
– What is most effective in the regional issue, in particular in Central Asia, after the Taliban (the organization is banned in Russia) came to power in Afghanistan? SCO? Bilateral agreements? Something else?
– Bilateral agreements between countries are always necessary in any case. But in order to ensure regional security, multilateral platforms such as the SCO are important and, in principle, be more effective.
Equally important is the cultural tolerance of all participants in such organizations, the skills of communication and leading the main main delegates.
Regional security often involves complex issues of national interest. They can also intertwine with both bilateral and multilateral relationships. And so sometimes it would be good to think outside the box.
For example, a good and smart business negotiator will tell you that a bad deal is the result of not only the wrong price, but possibly also the wrong deal structure and, usually, the exclusion of creative thinking.
At the same time, I am of the opinion that regional security is always a matter of the leading countries of the region, without the involvement of external forces. Instead of clinging to gunboat diplomacy, leading countries can tackle regional security by respecting the address and privileged countries. As the old saying goes: Respect must be earned.