What's new

Sino-Russian Alliance: Seven Arguments for a De Facto Alliance

Martian2

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Dec 15, 2009
Messages
5,809
Reaction score
-37
Sino-Russian Alliance: Seven Arguments for a De Facto Alliance

1. China-Russia Alliance is defense against US SIOP.


Since 1961, the United States has a battle plan called SIOP (Single Integrated Operational Plan) to nuke both China and Russia in the event of a war. In the view of the United States, only China and Russia have sufficient population, military technology, landmass, and economic size to generate global power.

Thus, the United States cannot only nuke either China or Russia. The United States has to nuke both China and Russia to prevent either country from dominating a post-nuclear war world.

In contrast, China has pledged a No First Use (NFU) policy. China will not use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states. The United States has rejected a No First Use pledge.

Russia has said it will only use nuclear weapons to defend the territory of the Russian Federation.

The nuclear posture of China and Russia are defensive. The US SIOP plan is clearly offensive against China and Russia.

I believe an informal Sino-Russian alliance already exists and is inevitable. At its core, China and Russia want to protect themselves from the US SIOP plan (and its successor).

WHY OBAMA CAN'T END NUKES | Newsweek

5CnyU81.jpg

----------

2. China and Russia are building ICBMs that are only useful in targeting the US and not each other.

The official policy of the United States is to threaten China and Russia with thermonuclear destruction if the United States goes to war with EITHER of them. Not surprisingly, China and Russia are building up their own thermonuclear arsenals to counter-threaten the United States.

ICBMs have a minimum effective range due to its sub-orbital flight path. Thus, China's DF-41 12-MIRV ICBM is effective only against the US and not Russia.

Similarly, Russian nuke trains are only effective against the US and not China.

Why Russia's Reviving Its Nuke Trains | Sputnik
"It was reported that the Russian Army may receive five Barguzin railroad ICBM systems by 2020."

China and Russia share a common interest in deterring the US SIOP nuclear strike plan. China's growing arsenal of DF-41 12-MIRV ICBMs and Russia's revival of nuke trains to fire ICBMs are proof of a de-facto Sino-Russian military alliance. China and Russia are both working toward a common goal of stopping the US SIOP.
----------

3. US technology sanctions against Russia has forced the Russians to rely on China for semiconductor chips and microelectronics.

After Russia "reclaimed"/"invaded" the Crimea, the United States sent a message to Russia by imposing crippling technology sanctions. Since Russia does not produce microchips or microelectronics, the Russians were in a tight spot. However, the Russians were able to find an alternative technology supplier in China.

The US technology sanctions have taught the Russians that China is an important "friend"/"ally" for microelectronic technology.

Chinese microelectronics will replace U.S. microelectronics in Russian space, defense industries - newspaper | Russia Beyond The Headlines

"Russian rocket and space and defense enterprises plan to buy batches of electronic components from China worth some $1 billion in the next calendar year, the newspaper Izvestia reported on Wednesday."

Uec1aAU.jpg

----------

4. US and European economic sanctions over Russian involvement in Eastern Ukraine has led to Russian dependence on oil exports to China.

The Russians made the common mistake of putting all of their economic eggs into one basket. The Russians think of themselves as strictly European. Thus, let's only export Russian oil to Europe and hinder China's economic development. There are two flaws in this line of reasoning.

Firstly, China exports to the world. China proved for 30 years that it could grow 10% economically per year without significant Russian trade. Hence, Russia never had the ability to accelerate or hinder Chinese technological and economic development.

Secondly, Russia was basically imposing an economic sanction on itself by restricting trade with the Chinese economic colossus next door. It's like Canada shutting off trade with the United States. It's called economic stupidity.

After the United States and Europe restricted economic relations with Russia, where could Russia go to earn hard currency? The only solution to Russia's economic problem was China. China has a domestic market of $10 trillion and hard currency reserves of $3 trillion. China's huge market could absorb billions of dollars of Russian oil exports and pay hard currency for them.

Russia has realized China is an important economic lifeline. This is another compelling reason for a de facto Sino-Russian economic alliance.

Russia beats Saudi Arabia as China's top crude oil supplier in 2016 | Reuters

NUcRqB4.jpg

----------

5. China and Russia are working together politically by casting UN veto votes against US resolutions on Syria.

I've lost count of the number of China and Russia tandem vetoes at the UN against US proposals on Syria.

Russian vetoes of UN resolutions on Syria | Daily Mail

"Russia has now blocked seven UN resolutions regarding Syria since unrest erupted there in 2011, almost always with support from China."

Gv9xVtU.jpg

----------

6. Trade between China and Russia is booming.

Mutually beneficial trade between two neighboring countries fosters economic interdependence. Over time, China and Russia will have an important stake in each other's economic well-being. A shared economic destiny tends to move countries toward a de facto alliance over time.

China-Russia Trade Turnover Grew by 28% in February | Sputnik

"BEIJING (Sputnik) – In February, Chinese exports to Russia increased by 14.9 percent to $2.02 billion, while imports from Russia increased by 44.3 percent to $3.014 billion, the customs statistics showed."

hdOHm8A.jpg

----------

7. China and Russia are holding an unprecedented number of joint military exercises on land and the sea.

In the past, China and Russia held joint SCO Peace Mission military exercises. The land-based military exercises have grown in scope over the years. Currently, thousands of troops are involved in the Peace Mission land-based military training. Furthermore, China and Russia have extended their joint military operations to the South China Sea.

China, Russia begin joint exercises in South China Sea | CNN

Abu3pnJ.jpg

----------

In conclusion, there is a multitude of economic, technological, political, and military reasons pushing China and Russia into a de facto alliance.
 
.
No country on Earth is dumb enough to start a direct war against EITHER China or Russia.

However an alliance would be really good, precisely because it's not needed. The fact that China and Russia are confident enough to defend themselves alone, is the best foundation point to have a full official alliance.

Whereas in NATO, it is a burden for the stronger NATO powers to defend the weaker NATO powers in Eastern Europe who have no chance to defend themselves against Russia alone.
 
.
I think the CPC have an unofficial policy of no alliances with anyone, only partnerships.
 
.
De Jure vs. De Facto Alliance

China avoids formal alliances (which entails signing a treaty), because China is worried that it will be dragged into a war by emboldening the alliance partner. For example, Iran may decide to start a war in the Strait of Hormuz. Thus, China has not signed any De Jure alliance treaties to date.

However, China does take action to protect its De Facto (ie. in fact) Alliance members. China has vetoed US resolutions against Syria over the past few years. In contrast, China abstained when the US proposed a resolution to bomb Libya and oust Qadafi.

Additionally, China has watered down US resolutions against Iran at the United Nations.

Countries like Syria and Iran are special, because they are De Facto members of an undeclared Chinese alliance. Libya was not a De Facto member of China's alliance and the Qadafi government was bombed into oblivion.

I have made the argument that Russia is probably the most important member of China's De Facto alliance. China pumped in billions of dollars to keep Putin's government afloat against Western sanctions on Russia.

When you look at the massive Chinese loans or aid to specific countries or regions, it is apparent which countries receive special treatment from China.

China's De Facto Economic Alliance: Russia, Brazil, Africa, Tajikistan, and Venezuela

China's De Facto Military Alliance: Russia, Iran, Syria, and Pakistan (see FC-1/JF-17 joint venture)
 
.
De Jure vs. De Facto Alliance

China avoids formal alliances (which entails signing a treaty), because China is worried that it will be dragged into a war by emboldening the alliance partner. For example, Iran may decide to start a war in the Strait of Hormuz. Thus, China has not signed any De Jure alliance treaties to date.

However, China does take action to protect its De Facto (ie. in fact) Alliance members. China has vetoed US resolutions against Syria over the past few years. In contrast, China abstained when the US proposed a resolution to bomb Libya and oust Qadafi.

Additionally, China has watered down US resolutions against Iran at the United Nations.

Countries like Syria and Iran are special, because they are De Facto members of an undeclared Chinese alliance. Libya was not a De Facto member of China's alliance and the Qadafi government was bombed into oblivion.

I have made the argument that Russia is probably the most important member of China's De Facto alliance. China pumped in billions of dollars to keep Putin's government afloat against Western sanctions on Russia.

When you look at the massive Chinese loans or aid to specific countries or regions, it is apparent which countries receive special treatment from China.

China's De Facto Economic Alliance: Russia, Brazil, Africa, Tajikistan, and Venezuela

China's De Facto Military Alliance: Russia, Iran, Syria, and Pakistan (see FC-1/JF-17 joint venture)
Yes, you r right Martian, there won't be any formal alliance, but de facto alliances of all kinds.
 
.
No country on Earth is dumb enough to start a direct war against EITHER China or Russia.

However an alliance would be really good, precisely because it's not needed. The fact that China and Russia are confident enough to defend themselves alone, is the best foundation point to have a full official alliance.

Whereas in NATO, it is a burden for the stronger NATO powers to defend the weaker NATO powers in Eastern Europe who have no chance to defend themselves against Russia alone.
Not entirely correct. The US would nuke China if it knows that the first strike will cripple China and kill half the population if they knew China cannot strike back. China need to get rid of NFU. The CPC doctrine is so outdated like occupying enemy territory but not seizing their land.
 
.
Not entirely correct. The US would nuke china if it know that the first strike will cripple China and kill half the population if they knew China cannot strike back. China need to get rid of NFU. The CPC doctrine is so outdated like occupying enemy territory but not seizing their land.

Except China can strike back, we have a robust second-strike capability based around road-mobile ICBMs and nuclear ballistic missile submarines.

The No First Use Policy only applies to non-Nuclear states anyway. It doesn't apply to other Nuclear weapons powers.
 
. .
Not entirely correct. The US would nuke china if it know that the first strike will cripple China and kill half the population if they knew China cannot strike back. China need to get rid of NFU. The CPC doctrine is so outdated like occupying enemy territory but not seizing their land.

John Pilger's documentary revealed that the US actually gave the order to nuke China (and perhaps DPRK as well) from Okinawa during the height of the Cold War. Luckily some rational officer forced the rest to stand down and told them to ignore the diabolic order. Americans :crazy:
 
.
John Pilger's documentary revealed that the US actually gave the order to nuke China (and perhaps DPRK as well) from Okinawa during the height of the Cold War. Luckily some rational officer forced the rest to stand down and told them to ignore the diabolic order. Americans :crazy:

It's been at several occasions that US avocated to use nukes such in Korea war, Vietnam war when they were frustrated of none-winning situation (恼羞成怒), China should be aware of this kind of bad loser, they will do anything, that's why China should achieve the Nuclear parity, any other nuclear doctrine is just a bullsh1t if we don't met this condition.
 
.
It's been at several occasions that US avocated to use nukes such in Korea war, Vietnam war when they were frustrated of none-winning situation (恼羞成怒), China should be aware of this kind of bad loser, they will do anything, that's why China should achieve the Nuclear parity, any other nuclear doctrine is just a bullsh1t if we don't met this condition.

There's nothing to worry, Russia has thousands of nukes and China probably in between 1000-3000. We are developing the train nukes, have mobile nukes and also possesses the capability to launch from subs. Now need to add the number. If US is that crazy to nuke us, our combined arsenal will more than enough send the Yankees to hell with us.
 
.
There's nothing to worry, Russia has thousands of nukes and China probably in between 1000-3000. We are developing the train nukes, have mobile nukes and also possesses the capability to launch from subs. Now need to add the number. If US is that crazy to nuke us, our combined arsenal will more than enough send the Yankees to hell with us.

How much chance that all these 1000-3000 to be delivered to enemy territory? we might inflict some damages but we will be doomed, by parity I mean we should ensure that enemy will be doom as well.
 
.
It's been at several occasions that US avocated to use nukes such in Korea war, Vietnam war when they were frustrated of none-winning situation (恼羞成怒), China should be aware of this kind of bad loser, they will do anything, that's why China should achieve the Nuclear parity, any other nuclear doctrine is just a bullsh1t if we don't met this condition.
Than Japan would have been nuked.

It's been at several occasions that US avocated to use nukes such in Korea war, Vietnam war when they were frustrated of none-winning situation (恼羞成怒), China should be aware of this kind of bad loser, they will do anything, that's why China should achieve the Nuclear parity, any other nuclear doctrine is just a bullsh1t if we don't met this condition.
Americans are genocidal . Look at the native Indians that used to number 50 million in north America. Where are they now?
 
.
Than Japan would have been nuked. Americans are genocidal . Look at the native Indians that used to number 50 million in north America. Where are they now?

I know that's why nuclear parity is the must to save China. Now our economy allow us to work to achieve nuclear parity compare to 1970s which we couldn't afford.
 
. .
Back
Top Bottom