What's new

Why China Will Reclaim Siberia

Status
Not open for further replies.

kuge

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jul 22, 2014
Messages
1,477
Reaction score
-1
Country
Malaysia
Location
Malaysia
Why China Will Reclaim Siberia - NYTimes.com
Frank-Jacobs-thumbStandard.jpg

Frank Jacobs, the author of "Strange Maps: An Atlas of Cartographic Curiosities," blogs at Big Think.

Updated January 14, 2015, 8:23 AM

map-articleLarge.png
Joe Burgess/The New York Times
“A land without people for a people without land.” At the turn of the 20th century, that slogan promoted Jewish migration to Palestine. It could be recycled today, justifying a Chinese takeover of Siberia. Of course, Russia's Asian hinterland isn't really empty (and neither was Palestine). But Siberia is as resource-rich and people-poor as China is the opposite. The weight of that logic scares the Kremlin.

Moscow recently restored the Imperial Arch in the Far Eastern frontier town of Blagoveshchensk, declaring: “The earth along the Amur was, is and always will be Russian.” But Russia's title to all of the land is only about 150 years old. And the sprawl of highrises in Heihe, the Chinese boomtown on the south bank of the Amur, right across from Blagoveshchensk, casts doubt on the “always will be” part of the old czarist slogan.

Like love, a border is real only if both sides believe in it. And on both sides of the Sino-Russian border, that belief is wavering.
Siberia – the Asian part of Russia, east of the Ural Mountains – is immense. It takes up three-quarters of Russia's land mass, the equivalent of the entire U.S. and India put together. It's hard to imagine such a vast area changing hands. But like love, a border is real only if both sides believe in it. And on both sides of the Sino-Russian border, that belief is wavering.

The border, all 2,738 miles of it, is the legacy of the Convention of Peking of 1860 and other unequal pacts between a strong, expanding Russia and a weakened China after the Second Opium War. (Other European powers similarly encroached upon China, but from the south. Hence the former British foothold in Hong Kong, for example.)

The 1.35 billion Chinese people south of the border outnumber Russia's 144 million almost 10 to 1. The discrepancy is even starker for Siberia on its own, home to barely 38 million people, and especially the border area, where only 6 million Russians face over 90 million Chinese. With intermarriage, trade and investment across that border, Siberians have realized that, for better or for worse, Beijing is a lot closer than Moscow.

The vast expanses of Siberia would provide not just room for China's huddled masses, now squeezed into the coastal half of their country by the mountains and deserts of western China. The land is already providing China, “the factory of the world,” with much of its raw materials, especially oil, gas and timber. Increasingly, Chinese-owned factories in Siberia churn out finished goods, as if the region already were a part of the Middle Kingdom's economy.

One day, China might want the globe to match the reality. In fact, Beijing could use Russia's own strategy: hand out passports to sympathizers in contested areas, then move in militarily to "protect its citizens." The Kremlin has tried that in Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and most recently the Crimea, all formally part of other post-Soviet states, but controlled by Moscow. And if Beijing chose to take Siberia by force, the only way Moscow could stop would be using nuclear weapons.

There is another path: Under Vladimir Putin, Russia is increasingly looking east for its future – building a Eurasian Union even wider than the one inaugurated recently in Astana, the capital of Kazakhstan, a staunch Moscow ally. Perhaps two existing blocs – the Eurasian one encompassing Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – could unite China, Russia and most of the 'stans. Putin's critics fear that this economic integration would reduce Russia, especially Siberia, to a raw materials exporter beholden to Greater China. And as the Chinese learned from the humiliation of 1860, facts on the ground can become lines on the map.
 
Obviously an attempt to wedge some discord/distrust between the two strategic partners.

Why? Sanctions not working as hoped, or not fast enough? Instead of working to put a dent on China-Russia strategic partnership and cooperation, these experts are better produce ideas to convince the Gulf sheikhdoms to stay steadfast to keep the oil prices low.

***

Putin’s biggest challenge is public support
By Dmitri Trenin


a3c09658-005a-4d08-973a-ee8d41242c91.jpeg

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT


This year is going to be very challenging for Russia. The country has entered recession, with GDP probably contracting by 5 percent or more, inflation soaring to 15-20 percent, unemployment climbing to 7 percent, and the ruble losing over half of its value against the major currencies.

Western sanctions, the plummeting oil prices and the structural problems of the Russian economy are to blame. Russians have seen it before, in 1998 and again in 2008-09, but this time the crisis is likely to last longer, and exiting from it will be harder.

What does the worsening economic situation suggest for the politics of Russia?

The existing political regime in Russia is based on a social contract between President Vladimir Putin's Kremlin and the bulk of the Russian people. Since Putin first came to power on New Year's Eve, 2000, the real disposable incomes of Russians have never stopped growing, even during the global financial crisis, at times at 10 percent per annum. In return for this, Russian voters have elected Putin to the presidency three times, and his protégé Dmitry Medvedev once.

They also gave the Kremlin full control of the federal and regional parliaments, governors and mayors. Opposition to this system was usually vocal, occasionally visible in the streets, but essentially impotent, lacking broad popular support.

Now the fat years are definitely over for Russia, and lean years lie ahead. If people continue to stick with Putin, it must be for other reasons.

One such reason is patriotism. By "bringing Crimea back home," Putin not only received enormous support, but altered the political landscape of the country. Putin did not recreate Russian patriotism and nationalism, but he reinstated it as the supreme national value and turned himself into its leader. "I am the biggest nationalist in Russia," he proudly proclaimed at a press conference last year.

Another reason is the sanctions. Russians see Western sanctions against their country as a form of warfare, which brings back their hallowed traditions of national resistance. Putin is no longer merely president; he is commander-in-chief defending Russia against the most powerful country of the day and its allies.

Whatever their offensive capabilities, Russians are historically best in defense of their motherland. Whatever their doubts or reservations about their national leaders, they rally around them, for the duration of the struggle. In exchange, they expect their leaders to stand firm, be resolute, and take them to victory.

Russia is essentially invincible when facing a foreign adversary. But the same people who successfully defended their country against Napoleon and Hitler, and eventually defeated and destroyed them, brought down their own country twice within a single century: in 1917 and again in 1991.

Russia is vulnerable inside. Putin knows it. He carefully analyzed his predecessors, Nicholas II, the last tsar, and Mikhail Gorbachev, the last Soviet leader, and has built elaborate defenses against a new revolution in Russia. Putin's main recipe for staying in power is to stay in close touch with the bulk of the people, and anticipate emerging trends.

Revolutions are not the only hazard for Russian leaders. Interestingly, at a recent meeting with journalists, Putin allowed a question about a "palace coup." "We do not have palaces here," he quipped, rather unconvincingly, "but only official residences."

Cabals of senior officials against the top leader, however, are not rare in Russian history. In 1964, Nikita Khrushchev was ousted by his colleagues. The end of the communist party rule was precipitated by the putsch against Gorbachev, led by his top aides. The technique of "color revolutions" necessarily includes, in the final stage, the betrayal of the head of the regime by his siloviki.

Russia has entered uncharted waters. If Putin's goal is mere survival of the regime, which is widely believed to include too many crooks, he will eventually lose.

During the years of national sacrifice, Russians may not tolerate something so crassly unjust. They may still like the tsar, but if he cannot rein in his boyars, he may be in trouble.

And wars here are usually a double-edged sword. Despite the official propaganda, the bulk of Russian peasants did not accept WWI, which broke out in 1914, as a truly patriotic effort, the middle classes saw the tsarist government as incompetent, and nearly all viewed the court camarilla as a disaster for the country. Less than three years later, the monarchy collapsed, and shortly thereafter the empire.

A hundred years ago, Russia was not doomed. It is anything but doomed today. To escape the analogy of a revolution, Putin must rise above the rapacious elite, and to avoid being overthrown, he must replace it. No easy task, but he will be judged by history by how he meets his biggest challenge.
 
One of the reasons why Russia still maintains it's nuke weapon stockpile.
 
It'll be hard to do that due to nuclear weapons from Russia.

What China should try to reclaim is Mongolia. It has 3 million people, just do to Mongolia what China did to Tibet.

Also, making some negotiation with North Korea so China gets accessed to Sea of Japan (or East Sea if you are Korean) via extraterritorial jurisdiction. China could probably just buy a small piece of land from North Korea so that Manchuria is no longer landlocked. Losing access to Sea of Japan to Russia in 1860 seriously limits China's maritime power.
 
To be frank ,Some of Chinese actually want to reclaim it , but i think the thinking is not realistic.
Siberia is not very critical. More valuable land is at southern China. Good weather and arable land. And Sea of Japan is useless since it will be surrounded by Japan too.
 
Siberia is not very critical. More valuable land is at southern China. Good weather and arable land. And Sea of Japan is useless since it will be surrounded by Japan too.
Siberia is very valuable as it is mineral rich. This is one the main reason why Russia won't let anybody take even one square meter of that land.
 
Siberia is very valuable as it is mineral rich. This is one the main reason why Russia won't let anybody take even one square meter of that land.

So will Papua New Guinea, even though it might be poor in terms of resources. Isn't that obvious?

That's why India should never think of that.
 
So will Papua New Guinea, even though it might be poor in terms of resources. Isn't that obvious?

That's why India should never think of that.
I was talking in the context of this article about China. Where did I mention India?
 
To be frank ,Some of Chinese actually want to reclaim it , but i think the thinking is not realistic.

You are very frank. I think the same as you.

But China must not get it via war. If there is chances that Russia break apart, then China may carpe diem.
 
Siberia is not very critical. More valuable land is at southern China. Good weather and arable land. And Sea of Japan is useless since it will be surrounded by Japan too.
We'll be aware of it :sniper:
 
I was talking in the context of this article about China. Where did I mention India?

Just wanted to point out that of course no country would allow one meter of land to be taken by force bu others.

It is not particularly about China. It is about any country, including India.

China will not reclaim Siberia.
 
Just wanted to point out that of course no country would allow one meter of land to be taken by force bu others.

It is not particularly about China. It is about any country, including India.

China will not reclaim Siberia.
I was talking about some desperate measures by Russia if China does decides to attack it in later future :P.
Btw Soviet did sell Alaska to USA. Is there any possibility of them doing that with China now ?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom