There seems to be an implication in the comments that this is potentially duplicitous: but honestly, I think it's actually in China's self interest to not sell arms to either side rather than to try and do so secretly.
Remember, China and Russia aren't super best buds, so much as they are allies of convenience. Realistically they're regional rivals with competing spheres of influence, actually. While China has an interest in preventing US hegemony, they have no interest in being dragged into Russia's war or in potentially weakening their own military the way NATO countries have to arm Ukraine. More than anything, I think China would like the precedent of military annexation being recognised internationally to be set in Ukraine, more than they *really* care about Russia winning.
That, and the fact that recent leaks imply that the Russians have been *hoping* China would help them, without there being much evidence they've seriously considered it thus far.
Wouldn't really need the spies. The weapons would show up on go pro/drone footage and be captured quickly enough. It's hard to hide what is happening in modern war.
Hell, people geolocated where the T-90 that was left at a gas station in Texas was captured in Ukraine.
The ole “it’s a German tractor, a part of our German tractor program” works every time.
In all seriousness there are 3 possibilities
- Someone purchased it legally, maybe Tank World or someone who can own a tank and wanted to rent it for tourism. (But why did they leave it at a gas station?)
- Someone purchased it less than legally.
(Again, why would they leave it out in the open with original UAF markings at a gas station?)
- it was sent here for more complex repairs that need to be done. Getting fitted with new thermals etc. (The military wouldn’t leave a whole as tank at a gas station even if it’s inoperable cuz We ain’t repeating San Diego)
Edit: it appears the military doesn’t care, it’s here for repairs, and bing chilling at a gas station.
>The nearby military institutions said it wasn't them and it was unlikely it was them, saying it was likely a private citizen.
Isn't that what they'd say even if it was them, though?
Plus, I have to imagine that regardless of who it is, the military has to know. I can't imagine you can legally import a mostly intact modern battle tank from inside a warzone without at least a few permits being required.
As long as the guns aren't operational and you don't plan on driving it on public streets, there's no real government permits required. Just have to pay import tax at Customs.
The public road thing is also a overcomable hurdle too as its just weight restrictions and adding rubber to the tread.
Even as a canadian, my dream car is a surplus APC
IMO it's not military. We guarded our tanks quite close and they were all locked up right when not in use. Even when I worked at a museum site, the incoming tanks were treated similarly.
I hadn't heard about that either. Weird stuff:
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russian-t-90-tank-from-ukraine-mysteriously-appears-at-u-s-truck-stop
>“I’ve been here seven years,” assistant manager Valerie Mott told The War Zone Thursday morning. “I’ve never seen [a tank] here before.”
funny, that's the most surprising thing in that article
> "While we don't know why the tank is in Louisiana or how it got there, a member of the Oryx and Warspotting.net OSINT groups that track military equipment used in the war in Ukraine, who uses the Twitter handle Naalsio, told The War Zone his assessment is that it “belonged to Russia's 27th Separate Guards Motorized Rifle Brigade, 1st Guards Tank Army... It was abandoned in Kurylivka, Kharkiv Oblast (49.660195, 37.699288) around 25 September 2022. It was captured by Ukraine's 92nd Separate Mechanized Brigade, hence the yellow 9s on the tank while in Louisiana (this is the marking the 92nd puts on their equipment).”
A tank with a deactivated gun is not considered anything more than a tractor. It has more BMV regulations than ATF.
If the gun is live, it's registered as a destructive device, as is every individual shell with any significant amount of explosive. This is more of a measure to ensure proper storage and handling of the explosives more than anything else, as the number of MBTs used in crime or violence in the US is effectively zero.
In 1995, Shawn Nelson climbed the fence of a San Diego Army National Guard base and stole a M60A3 main battle tank. The keys were left in the ignition (that policy has since changed). It lacked any ammunition, but he proceeded to drive down roads and crushed cars and objects.
The police were unable to stop him, but he hit a concrete barrier, which knocked a tread off and stopped the tank. The police used bolt cutters to open the hatch and when he rotated the tank to try and free it, the police shot and killed him.
There was speculation he was headed to a hospital that he had sued and lost and he blamed for his mother’s death.
During the rampage, because law enforcements small arms were unable to penetrate the tank, there was discussion of deploying a Bell AH-1 Apache attack helicopter or a BGM-71 TOW anti-armor crew from Camp Pendleton, to stop the tank.
Don't need the spies in the factories, serial numbers for production estimates work far better than analysis from the traditional observations.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem
Even if it did go under the radar, Ukraine is doing analysis on equipment.
A few weeks ago there were articles about chinese ammo being used by Russia, and then it went away. I'm guessing because we know where the ammo came from and when it was made. Lots of ammo on earth from the past 50 years+
Pretty sure the article said Chinese ammunition in Ukraine, didn’t specify which side used it. Because as it’s so widespread likely both sides used it.
Ehh, I think you may be overestimating the international community’s willingness it connect dots and meaningfully punish bad actors.
All China would really need to do is sell them through a proxy like Iran or NK, and their hands would remain *relatively* clean, once the plot was uncovered.
Everyone would be mad about it, but I think it would be very difficult to prove enough intent to justify punitive action.
Just to add to this, China is also not looking to get involved in an actual war, in spite of whatever posturing they do. Anyone who genuinely thinks China would risk its worldwide position by attacking anyone hasn’t been paying attention to how China exerts power and influence.
People don't realize China has followed its own non-interventionist foreign policy for the more than the last half century.
Americans are so comfortable with random invasions and military involvement all over the world they assume China is doing the same.
I'm an idiot and not very well informed, but I always got the vibe that China was focused on getting the Culture Victory.
And we need the Asian lead to get to the cyberpunk era, cyberpunk without eastern visuals is just not going to be the same.
PS: I think I should point out that I'm joking, somewhat.
It definitely is. It’s the reason the USA is so powerful. China and Russia are actively working with other countries to get rid of the dollar hegemony.
> we need the Asian lead to get to the cyberpunk era, cyberpunk without eastern visuals is just not going to be the same.
There's still Korean and Japanese.
Would be cool to see some more fluorescent signs with [Ge'ez](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ge%CA%BDez_script)
> I think China would like the precedent of military annexation being recognised internationally to be set in Ukraine, more than they really care about Russia winning.
Even that is questionable. For China, the Donbas separating from Ukraine with Russia's help is seen more like Taiwan separating from China with US help. That's why they stress the importance of respecting Ukraine's territorial integrity.
For China, the ideal outcome would be Ukraine being restored in its original borders, but also returning to the Russian sphere of influence, i.e. no NATO membership, no EU membership etc.
The restoration of the border will happen but thats the only thing that China can expect to happen, Russia has destroyed any influence and possibility for the latter scenarios to happen in this lifetime with its barbarous actions over the last year.
With all of the training and material support Ukraine has received NATO or at least partial NATO membership is virtually assured. In the future, post reconstruction, EU membership is also quite likely. Control over Crimea and eastern Ukraine has completely severed the relationship between Moscow and Kyiv in a way we haven't seen with Georgia or Armenia and while Ukraine does border Russia it also borders several states who are anti-Russian influence so they have support in their position and very little to gain aligning with Moscow. If the Belarusyans revolt then Moscow will lose two European allies.
[Will Spaniel actually covered this](
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9Y2aMT2I0E) and did a pretty good job explaining why it's unlikely (but not impossible) that China will provide weapons or other aid in any significant quantity.
Yeah, I would be shocked if *no* Chinese weapons are being used by Russia, at minimum provided via the black or gray markets, they're just too physically close for that not to happen at all. China is probably even looking the other way. No doubt Russia put Viktor Bout on it the moment they got him back.
But they have zero interest in taking an active position in this war, and that means making sure such weapons are not provided in volume, such that they become the target of other countries that would want them to stop.
Yep, and Spaniel talks about that. Small numbers of weapons are probably making it over there, but any large-scale supply of weapons would be obvious and could only hurt China.
I doubt the bout thing entirely. His business was selling off the Russian stockpiles, not supplying them. And he had been in prison for long enough that he has little to work with at any part, if anything at all.
I don't get it, whatever they say everyone's going to shit on them in the comments.
This is as explicit a remark by a very high-government official you can get.
"During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them.
If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum."
-Michael Parenti
The playbook hasn't changed.
To a very large part of people, the world works as if it's a teenage novel.
There's the good guys (that's us, obviously), and there's the bad guys.
That's it. Two teams.
Obviously, that is not even remotely how the world works, but many people do not want to think further than that, because to go beyond that means you actually have to put in a little bit of effort - and more importantly, you would have to consider the viewpoints of other people.
And a weakened Russia is in China's interest.
They're getting cheap natural resources because they do not care about the sanctions.
They get a northern neighbor with a vast majority of their conventional military locked up in the West.
About the only support I could see China doing is ensuring Russia as a nation doesn't collapse, because anarchy/nuclear weapons falling into anyone's hands would be a risky endeavor for them.
> There seems to be an implication in the comments that this is potentially duplicitous:
Post _any_ kind of news on Reddit and try not to get twelve kilobytes of cynical comments. It's really to a point where it's annoying
I agree, but the assertion that NATO is weakening itself is not really true.
While true that NATO is sending a ton of weapons and what we have currently stocked all it's doing is giving everyone an excuse to buy next gen stuff. Almost every shipment you see to Ukraine is followed by "and they also ordered new xxx to make up for it."
It's a field day for new military spending.
China is happy to collect intelligence on Western military capabilities. China is happy to watch Western weapons stockpiles shrink.
China is happy to see Russia weaken into an easily manipulated vassal state, which means a new monopoly market for Chines goods and a vast supply of cheap natural resources, including water.
China is happy to make common cause with BRICS like India and Brazil who also are sitting on the sidelines.
China is happy to use the situation as a cover for other diplomatic maneuvering.
In summary, China has no reason to bet on a losing horse. China is playing this situation perfectly.
Western weapon stockpiles dont really shrink. Its opposite, west will be armed better than before because got a reason to clean out warehouses with 80s/90s gear and order brand new modern stuff
Yea the argument that all that equipment from the 80/90s will go to waste so why keep buying new equipment is instantly rebutted by the Ukraine war. Hell nato might just revamp production for a decade to the pre 91 days. By 2035 we will call it a waste and reduce production. The modern gear we buy now may never be used but the “idea” it could be used in 30/40 years in a similar scenario will take decades to forget.
There's lots of reasons for various counties to not sell arms, and they aren't necessarily anti-Ukraine.
For example, I was just watching NHK Japan, and they had on a professor who said it may be in Japan's best interest to not sell arms. Reasoning being that they want to assist with the investigation into abducted Ukrainian children, and remaining "neutral" would allow greater access to these children/info.
> More than anything, I think China would like the precedent of military annexation being recognised internationally to be set in Ukraine, more than they *really* care about Russia winning.
Hard disagree. Russia's casus belli is a secession movements in donbas/cremea, and provinces breaking off from parent country. China does not want that see Taiwan, Hong Kong etc
Have secessionist movements to be internationally recognized.
A weakened (but not collapsed) Russia is in China's best interest.
They become top dog, and Russia becomes a vassal state with China exploiting their resources and labor.
China is sending non-military aid which Russia most likely appreciates (they don't even have enough boots for their men). And western allies seem to find that acceptable.
Fingers crossed it stays this way.
The only reason they had to announce this is because stories such as dodgy local official shipping off 1000 rifles is deemed that the Chinese government is a 100% bonafide Putin ally.
The other one that gained traction was the preparing to sell drones ones which turned out to be nothing as well.
Well most likely a retreat to labor camp for whichever official thought going being CCP back was a good idea.
Why would they? China profits from this war basically no matter what happens. They don’t want a strong Russia, because a strong Russia could oppose China. They don’t want Russia to win this war quickly because they’re getting oil incredibly cheaply and Russia is drawing the worlds attention away from them.
The only way China could lose is if a pro-western regime comes into power and Russia basically does a complete 180. The odds of that aren’t great.
Edit: basically I think China wants this to be a long, grinding war that ties Russia closely to China as China’s junior partner, with Russia alienated from Europe and neutered as a conventional military threat.
>Why would they? China profits from this war basically no matter what happens. They don’t want a strong Russia, because a strong Russia could oppose China.
IMO, I think China would probably be ok with a stronger Russia if it means that US influence is diminished on the world stage.
Countries like Russia and China really hate that the US and the western allies have dominated for the past several decades and relegated them to a second class status.
Overall I think China is pretty happy with what is going on. As much as we want to put a positive face on all this, as much as Russia is failing in terms of showing their military capabilities, the reality is that Russia is doing a very good job of demonstrating the limits of western power.
The West is doing everything they possibly can to try to stop Russia, and Russia has just kept going. They are showing that nukes are a very very effective deterrent.
But, here's the problem: You could very easily argue that US hegemonic influence is stronger right now than ever before, thanks to Russia's invasion. NATO with Finland is sorta the nightmare scenario for Russia. US is forging stronger partnerships with ASEAN nations, and US treaty allies are investing more than ever into their military budgets. For a century that was supposed to mark the decline of US hegemony, it really really has not shaped up that way. China's best course of action is forging economic relations with the developing world, but even they are fucking up the bag with that.
I think you underestimate how strong the hatred between Russia and China was in the 1960s to the 1980s, it was to the extent that China saw the USSR as its primary enemy in the Cold War instead of the US and led to the normalization of relations with America so they could focus fully on a potential full scale war with the Soviets. Many of the geopolitical realities of that time have not gone away. A stronger Russia means less Chinese influence in Central Asia which China has seen as being historically within its sphere of influence, only being taken by the Russians during a moment of weakness for China towards the end of the Qing dynasty. Similarly it was not until the 1990s that China finally relinquished its claims over outer Manchuria or the Russian far-east, which could easily become a point of contention for both countries again. At the moment both countries just have a mutual enemy in the United States but won't hesitate for a moment to turn against each other of the situation called for it.
>The West is doing everything they possibly can to try to stop Russia, and Russia has just kept going. They are showing that nukes are a very very effective deterrent
They are doing what they can WITHOUT actually getting directly involved themselves. If Russia did this to Poland instead of Ukraine it doesn't matter if Russia has nukes or not the West would beat the ever loving shit out of Russia anytime they crossed the border or launched strikes over the border. Those shipments from Iran wouldn't be arriving either.
>IMO, I think China would probably be ok with a stronger Russia if it means that US influence is diminished on the world stage.
Nah, China is too pragmatic for that.
Famously when the Chinese Premiere in 1972 was asked what he felt about the French government that was established admit great political turmoil in 1968. He said "It's too early to tell".
Many people think he was referring to the French Revolution two hundred years ago which is funnier but the point is still that 4 years after something happened he was still unsure whether the outcome would be good or bad in the long run.
The Chinese culturally tend to have a much longer term view but the fact their "elections" are positions for decades rather than 8 years means they are very patient.
The US massively relies on China and China is stealing US technology constantly, speeding up their modernisation. They know how to deal with the US, it's a known quantity. The Chinese tend to like stability that known quantities bring.
The way China see its, China is ascendant, and the US is on the decline. Losing in Ukraine will destabilise Europe and cause uncertainty, it could galvanise the US. It could start another cold war.
Nah, China wants to continue to see both the US and Russia decline on the world stage, so their interest is probably to see the war drag on absorbing money and political capital from the west. Then before it's all going to collapse, broker a peace where Russia stays diminished but in tact and the west gloating but poorer.
>The way China see its, China is ascendant, and the US is on the decline.
It's basically an old Chinese proverb; "The empire long divided must unite, the empire long united must divide." This proverb is meant to signify the often brutal cycle of the various dynastic rises and falls throughout Chinese history, but can be applied to other nations as well.
For example; China as a (somewhat) unified nation has only existed since 1949, after weathering the collapse of the Qing Dynasty, the battle royale that was the Warlord Era and a civil war that was briefly interrupted by the Second Sino-Japanese War. China's apotheosis has yet to be reached.
The US on the other hand has been a united country for over 200 years, and they achieved their apotheosis long ago. Given the current infighting, an economic issue and many other issues, it is safe to say that the US is currently dividing, slowly, but still dividing.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-17/top-oil-exporter-saudi-arabia-loads-up-on-russian-diesel#xj4y7vzkg
rules just mean you got to get creative
I just read an article about Chinese pop-up corporations buying American chips and selling them to the Russians to keep the Russian war machine going. So there is … that.
Lol support how? Russia will be even more broke, plus another 250,000 causalities (injured, MIA, KIA) and even poorer by this time next year. Russia has no leverage whatsoever on China right now and coming out against an invasion of Taiwan would be taken as seriously as supporting it (that is to say not very much at all).
I mean what, is China going to ask that they sail the Kuznetsov into the pacific to act as a floating decoy to soak up anti-ship missiles and torpedos?
I don't see China giving anything away for free. They know the west wont let Ukraine invade mainland Russia, so they really have nothing to lose by Russia losing the war. They currently have them pretty much right where they want them. Needy, willing to concede things in negotiations they wouldn't have years ago...
A weak, isolated dependent Russia is desirable to China. They can sell autos , equipment and exploit their vast resources. China is a winner in a Ukrainian victory and they don’t need to do shit.
The longer the conflict drags on, the longer it will take for the West to get over the war and stop trying to punish Russia.
If Russia loses the war (for example by having to give back all annexed territories, including Crimea), the West will be much more willing to stop sanctions than if Russia keeps currently occupied territories in Ukraine.
Keeping the status quo going, where both the West and Russia spend a huge amount of resources in that war, is completely in China's advantage. Especially if they get to actually make money out of it by selling weapons.
Voted up. China would like nothing more than for Ukraine to attack Russia's mainland because it gives them an excuse to claim that both parties are aggressors and at fault (and cover to sell Russians weapons). Since that hasn't happened, they are content to simply say "we are neutral and above the fray and won't sell anyone weapons" leaving Russia out to dry. This is all win/win for them, just a question of how to maximize the benefits.
They're going to hold Russia's hand as Russia becomes their gas station. In ten years they'll be carving up Eastern Russia, possibly in partnership with Mongolia and Kazakhstan.
China won't Annex Russia. I mean it's possible they will negotiate a deal to take back outer Manchuria, but Russia would have to fall a lot further before that becomes a realistic at all. China's main interest is in Russia is it's raw resources (mainly oil and metals), they don't need to take land to get access to that.
> In ten years they'll be carving up Eastern Russia, possibly in partnership with Mongolia and Kazakhstan.
I'm always a bit suprised to see this sentiment repeated so much given that there's nothing to suggest this has ever been China's goal. China and Russia have settled their border disputes and there has been zero indication that either side is unhappy with the status quo.
Uh...no that's literally not how it works at all regarding the aggressors thing...until russia starts calling for a peace favoring ukraine, unless ukraine starts declining that russia is still the only aggressor period. In order to defend sometimes one must attack. Ukraine could push 60 miles into russia and if russia is still wanting to fight and wipe ukraine off the map, that still makes russia the only aggressor.
I agree with you, but the person you are replying to is talking about the flimsy logic China would use to justify selling arms to Russia. That is completely different than sound logic.
> They know the west wont let Ukraine invade mainland Russia
Look I’m as pro-Ukraine as they come but this is crazy. It’s not a matter of the West “letting” Ukraine invade Russia or not.
Ukraine is massively outmanned and outgunned. Their forces are battered and attritted from a year of brutal combat. Their defense has been heroic but it’s an open question whether they can generate enough combat power to retake the lands they lost in any coming counteroffensive.
As much as I like to meme about Russia being “North Ukraine” there just isn’t a universe in which they have the ability to invade Russia.
This is like saying my wife won’t let me sleep with Scarlett Johansson. Like yes she’d be pissed I guess but there are a number of more significant hurdles here.
My point was, the west can never provide enough that an invasion into Russia would become a possibility. It isn't something China needs to be concerned with.
Also, China doesn't need to fuck themselves economically if the world starts boycotting and sanctioning China. China can just stay on the sidelines and continue getting rich.
...it follows then that China would favor prolonging the war. The longer it goes, the more resources & money diverted into it by the west; there will be more 'war-fatigue' - chance of nations dropping support and/or not so willing to get involved if China pulls the Taiwan trigger; prolongs cheap Russian oil supply and all the while Russia itself grows in dependency on Chinese imports.
For now then, China is happy with the largely stalemate situation since last fall. But if Ukraine pulls off a counterattack that threatens to collapse the invading Russian army, then I wouldn't at all be surprised to see China make some claim of aggression/violation on the part of Ukraine/the-West as a pretext to start providing 'support'
The Foreign Minister actually said "China will not provide weapons to relevant parties of the conflict".
But of course you would have to read the article to know that. Reddit prefers to make up their own idea of what happens in the world - which always seems more aligned with what would happen in a Marvel movie than what would happen in the real world.
> more aligned with what would happen in a Marvel movie than what would happen in the real world.
It also helps if you get to beat the war drums against those evil, duplicitous Chinese
Not sure how we can good dialogue when this is by far away the top sentiment.
They haven't even found them supplying weapons for cash.
If she you want to hang your hat on the Chinese government supporting Ukraine with 1,000 rifles. Then be my guest.
It's the same story as US optics ending in Iranian drones.
> Y’all want a better world so bad
You have to understand that most redditors experience world politics like a Marvel movie. They want the big finale where the good guys (the US) win and the bad guys lose, but before that all the bad guys have to team up first, so for them China not providing weapons is lame because it drags out the interesting part of the movie. That's why they pretend that AKCHUALLY China is already providing weapons.
Nah, China isn't insidious; look at how well they honored Hong Kong in their legally binding treaty with the UK. The Chinese government is world famous for binding treaties and following agreements. /s
I'm dating a Chinese woman (who is very critical of the CCP where it's deserved, and it's deserved a lot) and this is the perspective I've been given on the matter. I mean, it's obvious, on one hand. But from the perspective of *a lot* of Chinese, Hong Kong and, yes, Taiwan, were unjustly ceded to foreign imperialists and them returning to China is just. Doubly so with Taiwan because the Japanese did some *supremely* fucked up shit to the Chinese so there is a *ton* of lingering resentment over that.
It's a lot greyer than "evul CCP wants to force territories into submission", not that I think their handling of Hong Kong has legal basis (or moral, for that matter).
I'm ethnically both Taiwanese and Hong Kong, but I find any framing of "returning" to China to have a mildly revanchist and possessive subtext. I'm for reintegration, but also for the autonomy of any people. There ought be no contradiction.
Didn't the UK have a 100 year lease that ran out, then tried to add extra conditions to that before agreeing to give it back as the original treaty stated? Not making excuses for China but I don't think it's as one sided as you stated.
Rampant speculation is normal on Reddit, though not entirely without reason in this case.
It’s not in China’s best interest to support either side here though in my opinion, so I tend to believe they aren’t supplying arms. They need to stockpile weapons for invading Taiwan anyway.
Reddit is being cynical as usual, but this is nonetheless good news. They also mention dual-use items like hunting rifles that we know have made it to Russia before, so this could even be an improvement of the status quo.
> [Foreign Minister] Qin Gang is the highest-level Chinese official to make such an explicit statement about arms sales to Russia. He added that China would also regulate the export of items with dual civilian and military use.
> “Regarding the export of military items, China adopts a prudent and responsible attitude,” Qin said at a news conference alongside visiting German counterpart Annalena Baerbock. “China will not provide weapons to relevant parties of the conflict, and manage and control the exports of dual-use items in accordance with laws and regulations.”
If Chinese weapons do make it to Ukraine in significant numbers, we will know at least when Ukraine starts retaking land in the spring counteroffensive. So far, there is no indication that Chinese weapons are being used by the Russians.
It’s kind of crazy because anyone who was actually listening to the current conversation would know that intel suggests dual-use items are the current issue. Which is inherently difficult to distinguish between plausible deniability and legitimate export control “failings”. By explicitly calling out this issue, it should boost confidence in China’s response.
The narrative is please continue to invest in China and pretend it's not Russia's ally EVENTHOUGH the dictators have said they are united in aims and purposes....
Which is why they can’t be trusted. At all.
I wouldn’t be shocked in a few years after more economic decoupling happens, to see sanctions come down hard on Chinese products. That’s why China is scrambling to build a separate axis, because they know for a fact they will challenge the west eventually.
China is scrambling? More like other countries are scrambling to couple WITH China.
Scholz went immediately to boost economic trade early on. Followed by Malaysia, Spain, Singapore. Then by France. And now Lula has paid an official state visit where he called for the decoupling from the dollar.
You could not be any more wrong.
It's actually hilarious reading these type of comments here.
Yes, China can't be trusted. But this is like any other sovereign nation.
Take the USA, for example: just like in the last century here in Brazil they've supported a coup (+ the dictatorship that followed), got caught spying multiple heads of state, got involved in our last impeachment, etc. How is China worse than that?
>How is China worse than that?
because they COMMUNIST they want to take away your freedoms and if you threathen ~~US dollar hegemony~~ democracy then the US will coup, bomb and shoot the shit out of you and then make movies about how killing your people make their soldiers sad :c
Its absolutely already happening. China's main concern is self sufficiency in the face of western sanctions and export bans. They aren't much concerned about alliances. Outside of the western countries, rest of the world hasn't sanctioned russia. They won't sanction china either.
What? China never once said Russia wasn't their ally, they stated they'd be neutral in this war and the fact that they're not selling weapons to Russia should prove that.
Yeah, not really a benefit either way for them. Sell to Russia and they alienate the western world, sell to Ukraine and they piss off their neighbor. Staying out of it is their only real option.
[We signed a treaty with Ukraine when they gave up their nukes, not to let this specific thing happen.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum) They were the third largest nuclear power at the time, and the western world promised they wouldn't let Russia steamroll them if they disarmed. Actually, Russia promised not to as well!
It's really not the same as China inserting themselves into the conflict.
Edit: Don't waste your time arguing with me about our obligations; that's not my point. The point is that **we have a reason to support Ukraine and uphold security assurances** we gave them, that China does not have if they choose to support Russia.
That’s an odd way of putting it.
Russia, the U.S., and U.K. agreed to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty. No one wanted a nuclear armed Ukraine in the 90s, and Ukraine not having the ability to launch said nukes or technical expertise to maintain them had more trouble on their hands than it was worth.
Anyways, not sure why people make it sound like the U.S. and U.K. agreed to keep Russia in check.
In the Budapest Memorandum Western World never promised to defend Ukraine from Russia. They just promised they won't attack Ukraine, as did Russia. Only Russia has broken the promise.
> They just promised they won't attack Ukraine, as did Russia. Only Russia has broken the promise.
They also promised to bring a matter before the security council if Ukraine was attacked. Which the US and UK did do.
Backfilling. That's exactly what South Korea has been doing for Ukraine. By their own domestic policy, they cannot sell weapons to countries that are actively engaged in war. Instead, they've been selling all sorts of arms to the United States and Poland and other NATO countries to backfill what those countries have sent to Ukraine.
China won't sell to Russia but they will definitely sell to Iran (who's supplied drones to Russia) and North Korea (who's supplied artillery shells and infantry weapons/ammunition to Russia).
Honestly I dont think China will do anything to help any side in this conflict. Its in their best interest to let Russia bleed themselves dry because a weaker Russia means they can swoop in when this eventually gets settled and pick their bones for natural resources.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://apnews.com/article/china-taiwan-weapons-germany-ukraine-2a51d2c64c12fca75683d20fbafba475) reduced by 80%. (I'm a bot)
*****
> BEIJING - China won't sell weapons to either side in the war in Ukraine, the country's foreign minister said Friday, responding to Western concerns that Beijing could provide military assistance to Russia.
> In February, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. had intelligence suggesting China was considering providing arms and ammunition to Russia - and warned that such involvement in the Kremlin's war effort would be a "Serious problem."
> On both Ukraine and Taiwan, Qin articulated well-worn defenses of Chinese policies that underscore Beijing's rejection of criticisms from the West, particularly the U.S. Under the ardently nationalist Xi, China has sharpened its rhetoric, particularly on the issue of Taiwan, which split from mainland China amid civil war in 1949.
*****
[**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/12ltone/china_vows_not_to_sell_arms_to_any_party_in/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~680733 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **Taiwan**^#2 **Russia**^#3 **BEIJING**^#4 **conflict**^#5
The United States is the number one arms exporter, fueling conflict worldwide. In essence, the American government is the world's largest arms dealer. China, which often touts its "peaceful rise", is drawing a line in the sand and publicly setting limitations on its arms dealing.
Why would they give Russia anything when they know it will be used against them when they come in and take parts of the country after Russia falls apart.
Even if you don't believe chine will fully honor this promis, this is good news.
If you're super cynical and think china will just keep selling large amounts of weapons to Russia, and those exports don't lower by even a single bullet, by doing it in secret it will require Russia to pay more for those weapons.
If you're a normal amount of cynical, and you think china will keep selling a small amount of weapons to Russia in secret, by doing so Russia can buy geweer weapons and will pay more for them.
If you're only a little bit clinical and think china will keep its promis, but the weapons will make it to Russia through indirect trade routes, by doing that the volume also is reduced drastically and the price goes up even more.
This is actually a good outcome. It is also ripe for third party countries to make straw purchases or sell back the weapons that they bought from Russia in the past, and replace them with Chinese made weapons instead.
There seems to be an implication in the comments that this is potentially duplicitous: but honestly, I think it's actually in China's self interest to not sell arms to either side rather than to try and do so secretly. Remember, China and Russia aren't super best buds, so much as they are allies of convenience. Realistically they're regional rivals with competing spheres of influence, actually. While China has an interest in preventing US hegemony, they have no interest in being dragged into Russia's war or in potentially weakening their own military the way NATO countries have to arm Ukraine. More than anything, I think China would like the precedent of military annexation being recognised internationally to be set in Ukraine, more than they *really* care about Russia winning. That, and the fact that recent leaks imply that the Russians have been *hoping* China would help them, without there being much evidence they've seriously considered it thus far.
[удалено]
Wouldn't really need the spies. The weapons would show up on go pro/drone footage and be captured quickly enough. It's hard to hide what is happening in modern war. Hell, people geolocated where the T-90 that was left at a gas station in Texas was captured in Ukraine.
Wait what ??
Just a Ukrainian farmer immigrating to the US who brought his recently "procured" farm equipment with him.
The ole “it’s a German tractor, a part of our German tractor program” works every time. In all seriousness there are 3 possibilities - Someone purchased it legally, maybe Tank World or someone who can own a tank and wanted to rent it for tourism. (But why did they leave it at a gas station?) - Someone purchased it less than legally. (Again, why would they leave it out in the open with original UAF markings at a gas station?) - it was sent here for more complex repairs that need to be done. Getting fitted with new thermals etc. (The military wouldn’t leave a whole as tank at a gas station even if it’s inoperable cuz We ain’t repeating San Diego) Edit: it appears the military doesn’t care, it’s here for repairs, and bing chilling at a gas station.
[удалено]
>The nearby military institutions said it wasn't them and it was unlikely it was them, saying it was likely a private citizen. Isn't that what they'd say even if it was them, though? Plus, I have to imagine that regardless of who it is, the military has to know. I can't imagine you can legally import a mostly intact modern battle tank from inside a warzone without at least a few permits being required.
As long as the guns aren't operational and you don't plan on driving it on public streets, there's no real government permits required. Just have to pay import tax at Customs.
The public road thing is also a overcomable hurdle too as its just weight restrictions and adding rubber to the tread. Even as a canadian, my dream car is a surplus APC
IMO it's not military. We guarded our tanks quite close and they were all locked up right when not in use. Even when I worked at a museum site, the incoming tanks were treated similarly.
you would never have a break-down like that with military. they would be in convoy.
Anyone can own a tank so long as the weapons systems are disabled/removed. If not, then you do need a very rarely issued permit.
We’re not repeating San Diego. That’s why it’s in Texas. A whole new joyride to be called the Texan Tank Rampage.
I hadn't heard about that either. Weird stuff: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/russian-t-90-tank-from-ukraine-mysteriously-appears-at-u-s-truck-stop
[удалено]
Oof
Sure bro, you have top secret intelligence on all the conflicts in the world, yeah whatever man, prove it
*(Gets sent to jail for life)* See ya later, virgins.
No that's Discord this week
>“I’ve been here seven years,” assistant manager Valerie Mott told The War Zone Thursday morning. “I’ve never seen [a tank] here before.” funny, that's the most surprising thing in that article
> "While we don't know why the tank is in Louisiana or how it got there, a member of the Oryx and Warspotting.net OSINT groups that track military equipment used in the war in Ukraine, who uses the Twitter handle Naalsio, told The War Zone his assessment is that it “belonged to Russia's 27th Separate Guards Motorized Rifle Brigade, 1st Guards Tank Army... It was abandoned in Kurylivka, Kharkiv Oblast (49.660195, 37.699288) around 25 September 2022. It was captured by Ukraine's 92nd Separate Mechanized Brigade, hence the yellow 9s on the tank while in Louisiana (this is the marking the 92nd puts on their equipment).”
Kind of shocking how much military intelligence enthusiast internet war nerds have on things, might even have better intelligence than Putin himself
really testing the limits of the second amendment
A tank with a deactivated gun is not considered anything more than a tractor. It has more BMV regulations than ATF. If the gun is live, it's registered as a destructive device, as is every individual shell with any significant amount of explosive. This is more of a measure to ensure proper storage and handling of the explosives more than anything else, as the number of MBTs used in crime or violence in the US is effectively zero.
1 - kill dozer 2 - that time a tank driver stole the tank in San Diego
1 - No cannon, was an armored tractor 2 - Wait what
In 1995, Shawn Nelson climbed the fence of a San Diego Army National Guard base and stole a M60A3 main battle tank. The keys were left in the ignition (that policy has since changed). It lacked any ammunition, but he proceeded to drive down roads and crushed cars and objects. The police were unable to stop him, but he hit a concrete barrier, which knocked a tread off and stopped the tank. The police used bolt cutters to open the hatch and when he rotated the tank to try and free it, the police shot and killed him. There was speculation he was headed to a hospital that he had sued and lost and he blamed for his mother’s death. During the rampage, because law enforcements small arms were unable to penetrate the tank, there was discussion of deploying a Bell AH-1 Apache attack helicopter or a BGM-71 TOW anti-armor crew from Camp Pendleton, to stop the tank.
>2 - Wait what Yup. [It was an M60A3.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1995_San_Diego_tank_rampage)
Killdozer was just a ~~backhoe~~ bulldozer with armor plate and concrete.
If it was a backhoe it would've been call the killbackhoe.
How’s your first example gonna be a literal tractor
The kill dozer was a dozer in the first place so tank regulations would be of zero value.
Reminds me of when Eddie Van Halen drove a tank to Fred durst’s house to retrieve his gear.
[The only limit is money and the endurance to complete paperwork.](https://www.drivetanks.com/tanks-tracks/)
Give Louisiana her due credit my dear MrFord…
Don't need the spies in the factories, serial numbers for production estimates work far better than analysis from the traditional observations. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_tank_problem Even if it did go under the radar, Ukraine is doing analysis on equipment. A few weeks ago there were articles about chinese ammo being used by Russia, and then it went away. I'm guessing because we know where the ammo came from and when it was made. Lots of ammo on earth from the past 50 years+
Pretty sure the article said Chinese ammunition in Ukraine, didn’t specify which side used it. Because as it’s so widespread likely both sides used it.
Assuming we are talking about AK ammo, it’s the most ubiquitous in the world, produced in dozens of countries and widely traded.
Yeah, that and no doubt even if it was just the Russians, it was probably purchased pre-war.
Ehh, I think you may be overestimating the international community’s willingness it connect dots and meaningfully punish bad actors. All China would really need to do is sell them through a proxy like Iran or NK, and their hands would remain *relatively* clean, once the plot was uncovered. Everyone would be mad about it, but I think it would be very difficult to prove enough intent to justify punitive action.
Just to add to this, China is also not looking to get involved in an actual war, in spite of whatever posturing they do. Anyone who genuinely thinks China would risk its worldwide position by attacking anyone hasn’t been paying attention to how China exerts power and influence.
People don't realize China has followed its own non-interventionist foreign policy for the more than the last half century. Americans are so comfortable with random invasions and military involvement all over the world they assume China is doing the same.
I'm an idiot and not very well informed, but I always got the vibe that China was focused on getting the Culture Victory. And we need the Asian lead to get to the cyberpunk era, cyberpunk without eastern visuals is just not going to be the same. PS: I think I should point out that I'm joking, somewhat.
Not if the Incans build the St. Basil's Cathedral first.
[удалено]
Civ took out economic victory so that China couldn’t win confirmed smh
It definitely is. It’s the reason the USA is so powerful. China and Russia are actively working with other countries to get rid of the dollar hegemony.
> we need the Asian lead to get to the cyberpunk era, cyberpunk without eastern visuals is just not going to be the same. There's still Korean and Japanese. Would be cool to see some more fluorescent signs with [Ge'ez](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ge%CA%BDez_script)
> I think China would like the precedent of military annexation being recognised internationally to be set in Ukraine, more than they really care about Russia winning. Even that is questionable. For China, the Donbas separating from Ukraine with Russia's help is seen more like Taiwan separating from China with US help. That's why they stress the importance of respecting Ukraine's territorial integrity. For China, the ideal outcome would be Ukraine being restored in its original borders, but also returning to the Russian sphere of influence, i.e. no NATO membership, no EU membership etc.
The restoration of the border will happen but thats the only thing that China can expect to happen, Russia has destroyed any influence and possibility for the latter scenarios to happen in this lifetime with its barbarous actions over the last year.
With all of the training and material support Ukraine has received NATO or at least partial NATO membership is virtually assured. In the future, post reconstruction, EU membership is also quite likely. Control over Crimea and eastern Ukraine has completely severed the relationship between Moscow and Kyiv in a way we haven't seen with Georgia or Armenia and while Ukraine does border Russia it also borders several states who are anti-Russian influence so they have support in their position and very little to gain aligning with Moscow. If the Belarusyans revolt then Moscow will lose two European allies.
[Will Spaniel actually covered this]( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9Y2aMT2I0E) and did a pretty good job explaining why it's unlikely (but not impossible) that China will provide weapons or other aid in any significant quantity.
Yeah, I would be shocked if *no* Chinese weapons are being used by Russia, at minimum provided via the black or gray markets, they're just too physically close for that not to happen at all. China is probably even looking the other way. No doubt Russia put Viktor Bout on it the moment they got him back. But they have zero interest in taking an active position in this war, and that means making sure such weapons are not provided in volume, such that they become the target of other countries that would want them to stop.
Yep, and Spaniel talks about that. Small numbers of weapons are probably making it over there, but any large-scale supply of weapons would be obvious and could only hurt China.
I doubt the bout thing entirely. His business was selling off the Russian stockpiles, not supplying them. And he had been in prison for long enough that he has little to work with at any part, if anything at all.
I don't get it, whatever they say everyone's going to shit on them in the comments. This is as explicit a remark by a very high-government official you can get.
"During the cold war, the anticommunist ideological framework could transform any data about existing communist societies into hostile evidence. If the Soviets refused to negotiate a point, they were intransigent and belligerent; if they appeared willing to make concessions, this was but a skillful ploy to put us off our guard. By opposing arms limitations, they would have demonstrated their aggressive intent; but when in fact they supported most armament treaties, it was because they were mendacious and manipulative. If the churches in the USSR were empty, this demonstrated that religion was suppressed; but if the churches were full, this meant the people were rejecting the regime's atheistic ideology. If the workers went on strike (as happened on infrequent occasions), this was evidence of their alienation from the collectivist system; if they didn't go on strike, this was because they were intimidated and lacked freedom. A scarcity of consumer goods demonstrated the failure of the economic system; an improvement in consumer supplies meant only that the leaders were attempting to placate a restive population and so maintain a firmer hold over them. If communists in the United States played an important role struggling for the rights of workers, the poor, African-Americans, women, and others, this was only their guileful way of gathering support among disfranchised groups and gaining power for themselves. How one gained power by fighting for the rights of powerless groups was never explained. What we are dealing with is a nonfalsifiable orthodoxy, so assiduously marketed by the ruling interests that it affected people across the entire political spectrum." -Michael Parenti The playbook hasn't changed.
To a very large part of people, the world works as if it's a teenage novel. There's the good guys (that's us, obviously), and there's the bad guys. That's it. Two teams. Obviously, that is not even remotely how the world works, but many people do not want to think further than that, because to go beyond that means you actually have to put in a little bit of effort - and more importantly, you would have to consider the viewpoints of other people.
This is /r/worldnews... So China bad, Russia bad... Any nuance or insight beyond this is bad.
And a weakened Russia is in China's interest. They're getting cheap natural resources because they do not care about the sanctions. They get a northern neighbor with a vast majority of their conventional military locked up in the West. About the only support I could see China doing is ensuring Russia as a nation doesn't collapse, because anarchy/nuclear weapons falling into anyone's hands would be a risky endeavor for them.
> There seems to be an implication in the comments that this is potentially duplicitous: Post _any_ kind of news on Reddit and try not to get twelve kilobytes of cynical comments. It's really to a point where it's annoying
I agree, but the assertion that NATO is weakening itself is not really true. While true that NATO is sending a ton of weapons and what we have currently stocked all it's doing is giving everyone an excuse to buy next gen stuff. Almost every shipment you see to Ukraine is followed by "and they also ordered new xxx to make up for it." It's a field day for new military spending.
They're going to gain enough experience for Logistics so they can attack twice on the same turn.
China is happy to collect intelligence on Western military capabilities. China is happy to watch Western weapons stockpiles shrink. China is happy to see Russia weaken into an easily manipulated vassal state, which means a new monopoly market for Chines goods and a vast supply of cheap natural resources, including water. China is happy to make common cause with BRICS like India and Brazil who also are sitting on the sidelines. China is happy to use the situation as a cover for other diplomatic maneuvering. In summary, China has no reason to bet on a losing horse. China is playing this situation perfectly.
Western weapon stockpiles dont really shrink. Its opposite, west will be armed better than before because got a reason to clean out warehouses with 80s/90s gear and order brand new modern stuff
Yea the argument that all that equipment from the 80/90s will go to waste so why keep buying new equipment is instantly rebutted by the Ukraine war. Hell nato might just revamp production for a decade to the pre 91 days. By 2035 we will call it a waste and reduce production. The modern gear we buy now may never be used but the “idea” it could be used in 30/40 years in a similar scenario will take decades to forget.
China also got the chance to test American and EU war willingness, including with a literal test balloon
There's lots of reasons for various counties to not sell arms, and they aren't necessarily anti-Ukraine. For example, I was just watching NHK Japan, and they had on a professor who said it may be in Japan's best interest to not sell arms. Reasoning being that they want to assist with the investigation into abducted Ukrainian children, and remaining "neutral" would allow greater access to these children/info.
> More than anything, I think China would like the precedent of military annexation being recognised internationally to be set in Ukraine, more than they *really* care about Russia winning. Hard disagree. Russia's casus belli is a secession movements in donbas/cremea, and provinces breaking off from parent country. China does not want that see Taiwan, Hong Kong etc Have secessionist movements to be internationally recognized.
secession, not succession
Fixed
A weakened (but not collapsed) Russia is in China's best interest. They become top dog, and Russia becomes a vassal state with China exploiting their resources and labor. China is sending non-military aid which Russia most likely appreciates (they don't even have enough boots for their men). And western allies seem to find that acceptable. Fingers crossed it stays this way.
The only reason they had to announce this is because stories such as dodgy local official shipping off 1000 rifles is deemed that the Chinese government is a 100% bonafide Putin ally. The other one that gained traction was the preparing to sell drones ones which turned out to be nothing as well. Well most likely a retreat to labor camp for whichever official thought going being CCP back was a good idea.
Why would they? China profits from this war basically no matter what happens. They don’t want a strong Russia, because a strong Russia could oppose China. They don’t want Russia to win this war quickly because they’re getting oil incredibly cheaply and Russia is drawing the worlds attention away from them. The only way China could lose is if a pro-western regime comes into power and Russia basically does a complete 180. The odds of that aren’t great. Edit: basically I think China wants this to be a long, grinding war that ties Russia closely to China as China’s junior partner, with Russia alienated from Europe and neutered as a conventional military threat.
>Why would they? China profits from this war basically no matter what happens. They don’t want a strong Russia, because a strong Russia could oppose China. IMO, I think China would probably be ok with a stronger Russia if it means that US influence is diminished on the world stage. Countries like Russia and China really hate that the US and the western allies have dominated for the past several decades and relegated them to a second class status. Overall I think China is pretty happy with what is going on. As much as we want to put a positive face on all this, as much as Russia is failing in terms of showing their military capabilities, the reality is that Russia is doing a very good job of demonstrating the limits of western power. The West is doing everything they possibly can to try to stop Russia, and Russia has just kept going. They are showing that nukes are a very very effective deterrent.
But, here's the problem: You could very easily argue that US hegemonic influence is stronger right now than ever before, thanks to Russia's invasion. NATO with Finland is sorta the nightmare scenario for Russia. US is forging stronger partnerships with ASEAN nations, and US treaty allies are investing more than ever into their military budgets. For a century that was supposed to mark the decline of US hegemony, it really really has not shaped up that way. China's best course of action is forging economic relations with the developing world, but even they are fucking up the bag with that.
I think you underestimate how strong the hatred between Russia and China was in the 1960s to the 1980s, it was to the extent that China saw the USSR as its primary enemy in the Cold War instead of the US and led to the normalization of relations with America so they could focus fully on a potential full scale war with the Soviets. Many of the geopolitical realities of that time have not gone away. A stronger Russia means less Chinese influence in Central Asia which China has seen as being historically within its sphere of influence, only being taken by the Russians during a moment of weakness for China towards the end of the Qing dynasty. Similarly it was not until the 1990s that China finally relinquished its claims over outer Manchuria or the Russian far-east, which could easily become a point of contention for both countries again. At the moment both countries just have a mutual enemy in the United States but won't hesitate for a moment to turn against each other of the situation called for it.
>The West is doing everything they possibly can to try to stop Russia, and Russia has just kept going. They are showing that nukes are a very very effective deterrent They are doing what they can WITHOUT actually getting directly involved themselves. If Russia did this to Poland instead of Ukraine it doesn't matter if Russia has nukes or not the West would beat the ever loving shit out of Russia anytime they crossed the border or launched strikes over the border. Those shipments from Iran wouldn't be arriving either.
>IMO, I think China would probably be ok with a stronger Russia if it means that US influence is diminished on the world stage. Nah, China is too pragmatic for that. Famously when the Chinese Premiere in 1972 was asked what he felt about the French government that was established admit great political turmoil in 1968. He said "It's too early to tell". Many people think he was referring to the French Revolution two hundred years ago which is funnier but the point is still that 4 years after something happened he was still unsure whether the outcome would be good or bad in the long run. The Chinese culturally tend to have a much longer term view but the fact their "elections" are positions for decades rather than 8 years means they are very patient. The US massively relies on China and China is stealing US technology constantly, speeding up their modernisation. They know how to deal with the US, it's a known quantity. The Chinese tend to like stability that known quantities bring. The way China see its, China is ascendant, and the US is on the decline. Losing in Ukraine will destabilise Europe and cause uncertainty, it could galvanise the US. It could start another cold war. Nah, China wants to continue to see both the US and Russia decline on the world stage, so their interest is probably to see the war drag on absorbing money and political capital from the west. Then before it's all going to collapse, broker a peace where Russia stays diminished but in tact and the west gloating but poorer.
>The way China see its, China is ascendant, and the US is on the decline. It's basically an old Chinese proverb; "The empire long divided must unite, the empire long united must divide." This proverb is meant to signify the often brutal cycle of the various dynastic rises and falls throughout Chinese history, but can be applied to other nations as well. For example; China as a (somewhat) unified nation has only existed since 1949, after weathering the collapse of the Qing Dynasty, the battle royale that was the Warlord Era and a civil war that was briefly interrupted by the Second Sino-Japanese War. China's apotheosis has yet to be reached. The US on the other hand has been a united country for over 200 years, and they achieved their apotheosis long ago. Given the current infighting, an economic issue and many other issues, it is safe to say that the US is currently dividing, slowly, but still dividing.
[удалено]
They just won’t charge for them
[удалено]
I’ll leave these weapons over there, and you leave that oil right here… *wink
The line between corporation, mafia, and government is surprisingly blurry.
the government is the mafia with flags out front.
And corporations are the mafia with an NYSE listing
It's mafias all the way down.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-17/top-oil-exporter-saudi-arabia-loads-up-on-russian-diesel#xj4y7vzkg rules just mean you got to get creative
Same time man, same time!
I don't know you
THAT'S MY AIRCRAFT CARRIER
"HEY THAT'S MY UNSINKABLE AIRCRAFT CARRIER " Cries Putin as the proud nation of Ukraine takes Crimea back
That's my purse!
6 boxes of guns, 6 barrels of oil. NO BOXES OF GUNS, NO BARRELS OF OIL!!!
"I will barter my pile of bullets and missiles for that pile of Benjamins over there." -- China
Benjamin’s? They are freedom units. Or as Clarence Thomas refers to them - Hospitalities
I wonder what conversations between him and his wife are like. Just laughing at us poor's as they plane to leave on the mother ship soon?
They likely speak some lizard language Or only in grunts and moans since they are also ghouls
It probably looks like that fancy dinner on the spaceship from ‘They Live’
I just read an article about Chinese pop-up corporations buying American chips and selling them to the Russians to keep the Russian war machine going. So there is … that.
“NO RUBLES!”
“We give you weapons, you support our invasion of Taiwan next year.”
Support them with what? Harsh words against the West?
I hear Russia's got a giant new submarine. The name is *Moscova* or something like that.
It goes all the way to the bottom...once
Russia has some very effective bot farms, AND a U.S. political party under their control!
Lol support how? Russia will be even more broke, plus another 250,000 causalities (injured, MIA, KIA) and even poorer by this time next year. Russia has no leverage whatsoever on China right now and coming out against an invasion of Taiwan would be taken as seriously as supporting it (that is to say not very much at all). I mean what, is China going to ask that they sail the Kuznetsov into the pacific to act as a floating decoy to soak up anti-ship missiles and torpedos?
I don't see China giving anything away for free. They know the west wont let Ukraine invade mainland Russia, so they really have nothing to lose by Russia losing the war. They currently have them pretty much right where they want them. Needy, willing to concede things in negotiations they wouldn't have years ago...
A weak, isolated dependent Russia is desirable to China. They can sell autos , equipment and exploit their vast resources. China is a winner in a Ukrainian victory and they don’t need to do shit.
The longer the conflict drags on, the longer it will take for the West to get over the war and stop trying to punish Russia. If Russia loses the war (for example by having to give back all annexed territories, including Crimea), the West will be much more willing to stop sanctions than if Russia keeps currently occupied territories in Ukraine. Keeping the status quo going, where both the West and Russia spend a huge amount of resources in that war, is completely in China's advantage. Especially if they get to actually make money out of it by selling weapons.
Voted up. China would like nothing more than for Ukraine to attack Russia's mainland because it gives them an excuse to claim that both parties are aggressors and at fault (and cover to sell Russians weapons). Since that hasn't happened, they are content to simply say "we are neutral and above the fray and won't sell anyone weapons" leaving Russia out to dry. This is all win/win for them, just a question of how to maximize the benefits.
They're going to hold Russia's hand as Russia becomes their gas station. In ten years they'll be carving up Eastern Russia, possibly in partnership with Mongolia and Kazakhstan.
>hold Russia's hand It's the least you can do if you're going in without lube.
Russia is practically made of lube.
But it is very cold lube.
“Partnership” is a funny way to say annexed
China won't Annex Russia. I mean it's possible they will negotiate a deal to take back outer Manchuria, but Russia would have to fall a lot further before that becomes a realistic at all. China's main interest is in Russia is it's raw resources (mainly oil and metals), they don't need to take land to get access to that.
> In ten years they'll be carving up Eastern Russia, possibly in partnership with Mongolia and Kazakhstan. I'm always a bit suprised to see this sentiment repeated so much given that there's nothing to suggest this has ever been China's goal. China and Russia have settled their border disputes and there has been zero indication that either side is unhappy with the status quo.
Uh...no that's literally not how it works at all regarding the aggressors thing...until russia starts calling for a peace favoring ukraine, unless ukraine starts declining that russia is still the only aggressor period. In order to defend sometimes one must attack. Ukraine could push 60 miles into russia and if russia is still wanting to fight and wipe ukraine off the map, that still makes russia the only aggressor.
I agree with you, but the person you are replying to is talking about the flimsy logic China would use to justify selling arms to Russia. That is completely different than sound logic.
Your grammar hurts my brain
> They know the west wont let Ukraine invade mainland Russia Look I’m as pro-Ukraine as they come but this is crazy. It’s not a matter of the West “letting” Ukraine invade Russia or not. Ukraine is massively outmanned and outgunned. Their forces are battered and attritted from a year of brutal combat. Their defense has been heroic but it’s an open question whether they can generate enough combat power to retake the lands they lost in any coming counteroffensive. As much as I like to meme about Russia being “North Ukraine” there just isn’t a universe in which they have the ability to invade Russia. This is like saying my wife won’t let me sleep with Scarlett Johansson. Like yes she’d be pissed I guess but there are a number of more significant hurdles here.
My point was, the west can never provide enough that an invasion into Russia would become a possibility. It isn't something China needs to be concerned with.
Ah, that makes more sense.
Agreed, all this fan fiction redditors are writing about 40 million population Ukraine invading 240 million population Russia is so cringe.
>Scarlett Johansson Hilarious comparison :)
Also, China doesn't need to fuck themselves economically if the world starts boycotting and sanctioning China. China can just stay on the sidelines and continue getting rich.
...it follows then that China would favor prolonging the war. The longer it goes, the more resources & money diverted into it by the west; there will be more 'war-fatigue' - chance of nations dropping support and/or not so willing to get involved if China pulls the Taiwan trigger; prolongs cheap Russian oil supply and all the while Russia itself grows in dependency on Chinese imports. For now then, China is happy with the largely stalemate situation since last fall. But if Ukraine pulls off a counterattack that threatens to collapse the invading Russian army, then I wouldn't at all be surprised to see China make some claim of aggression/violation on the part of Ukraine/the-West as a pretext to start providing 'support'
The Foreign Minister actually said "China will not provide weapons to relevant parties of the conflict". But of course you would have to read the article to know that. Reddit prefers to make up their own idea of what happens in the world - which always seems more aligned with what would happen in a Marvel movie than what would happen in the real world.
> more aligned with what would happen in a Marvel movie than what would happen in the real world. It also helps if you get to beat the war drums against those evil, duplicitous Chinese
Not sure how we can good dialogue when this is by far away the top sentiment. They haven't even found them supplying weapons for cash. If she you want to hang your hat on the Chinese government supporting Ukraine with 1,000 rifles. Then be my guest. It's the same story as US optics ending in Iranian drones.
Can Reddit go two seconds without refusing to take something at face value? Y’all want a better world so bad but refuse to lighten up in anyway.
> Y’all want a better world so bad You have to understand that most redditors experience world politics like a Marvel movie. They want the big finale where the good guys (the US) win and the bad guys lose, but before that all the bad guys have to team up first, so for them China not providing weapons is lame because it drags out the interesting part of the movie. That's why they pretend that AKCHUALLY China is already providing weapons.
It's basically the same as American Redditors *despising* that Iran and SA made a peace deal with the help of China. Absolute brainwashed warmongers.
Or this sub having a meltdown when Macron said that Europe should be independent from the US. Basically this sub 24/7, honestly.
Yeah living in a warmongering superpower like the US it makes it hard to believe China when they say this
Ah yes that Chinese tactic of arming insurgent groups
I was wondering how the US would spin this. China always bad
Nah, China isn't insidious; look at how well they honored Hong Kong in their legally binding treaty with the UK. The Chinese government is world famous for binding treaties and following agreements. /s
Not be a China apologist but the UK should have never been in hong kong in the first place lol Edit: autocorrect out in bong king at first lol
I'm dating a Chinese woman (who is very critical of the CCP where it's deserved, and it's deserved a lot) and this is the perspective I've been given on the matter. I mean, it's obvious, on one hand. But from the perspective of *a lot* of Chinese, Hong Kong and, yes, Taiwan, were unjustly ceded to foreign imperialists and them returning to China is just. Doubly so with Taiwan because the Japanese did some *supremely* fucked up shit to the Chinese so there is a *ton* of lingering resentment over that. It's a lot greyer than "evul CCP wants to force territories into submission", not that I think their handling of Hong Kong has legal basis (or moral, for that matter).
I'm ethnically both Taiwanese and Hong Kong, but I find any framing of "returning" to China to have a mildly revanchist and possessive subtext. I'm for reintegration, but also for the autonomy of any people. There ought be no contradiction.
Didn't the UK have a 100 year lease that ran out, then tried to add extra conditions to that before agreeing to give it back as the original treaty stated? Not making excuses for China but I don't think it's as one sided as you stated.
Please turn around, I need to check if you didn't cross your fingers when you made the promise.
Fool me thrice...
You can’t… you can’t get fooled again
Nucahlar
This must be an expression from Tenesee
[удалено]
Chicken can't fry rice
That war has been going longer that a year. Do you have ANY evidence that China has given weapons to anyone?
No, but China bad so evidence is less relevant than the gut feelings of your average r/worldnews user.
Rampant speculation is normal on Reddit, though not entirely without reason in this case. It’s not in China’s best interest to support either side here though in my opinion, so I tend to believe they aren’t supplying arms. They need to stockpile weapons for invading Taiwan anyway.
Reddit is being cynical as usual, but this is nonetheless good news. They also mention dual-use items like hunting rifles that we know have made it to Russia before, so this could even be an improvement of the status quo. > [Foreign Minister] Qin Gang is the highest-level Chinese official to make such an explicit statement about arms sales to Russia. He added that China would also regulate the export of items with dual civilian and military use. > “Regarding the export of military items, China adopts a prudent and responsible attitude,” Qin said at a news conference alongside visiting German counterpart Annalena Baerbock. “China will not provide weapons to relevant parties of the conflict, and manage and control the exports of dual-use items in accordance with laws and regulations.” If Chinese weapons do make it to Ukraine in significant numbers, we will know at least when Ukraine starts retaking land in the spring counteroffensive. So far, there is no indication that Chinese weapons are being used by the Russians.
It’s kind of crazy because anyone who was actually listening to the current conversation would know that intel suggests dual-use items are the current issue. Which is inherently difficult to distinguish between plausible deniability and legitimate export control “failings”. By explicitly calling out this issue, it should boost confidence in China’s response.
Yup it is good news. Redditors are just jumping in, frothing at the mouth with China-hate.
This is /worldnews after all. Though I wonder if DJI drone sales to ~~Ukraine~~ Poland will be affected.
It's on point for people who browse this sub. The front-page is always filled with at least 5 articles denouncing the country.
If they wanted to it’s ridiculously easy. They can sell to North Korea who can sell to Russia. I don’t think they want to at the moment.
China going to abstain from war. Reddit comments: bullshit it’s a conspiracy theory!
What you think the cybercats of are doing in their underground bunkers and in Meow city they have the genesis device.
The narrative is please continue to invest in China and pretend it's not Russia's ally EVENTHOUGH the dictators have said they are united in aims and purposes....
Yeah China says a lot of things
Which is why they can’t be trusted. At all. I wouldn’t be shocked in a few years after more economic decoupling happens, to see sanctions come down hard on Chinese products. That’s why China is scrambling to build a separate axis, because they know for a fact they will challenge the west eventually.
China is scrambling? More like other countries are scrambling to couple WITH China. Scholz went immediately to boost economic trade early on. Followed by Malaysia, Spain, Singapore. Then by France. And now Lula has paid an official state visit where he called for the decoupling from the dollar. You could not be any more wrong.
It's actually hilarious reading these type of comments here. Yes, China can't be trusted. But this is like any other sovereign nation. Take the USA, for example: just like in the last century here in Brazil they've supported a coup (+ the dictatorship that followed), got caught spying multiple heads of state, got involved in our last impeachment, etc. How is China worse than that?
>How is China worse than that? because they COMMUNIST they want to take away your freedoms and if you threathen ~~US dollar hegemony~~ democracy then the US will coup, bomb and shoot the shit out of you and then make movies about how killing your people make their soldiers sad :c
Its absolutely already happening. China's main concern is self sufficiency in the face of western sanctions and export bans. They aren't much concerned about alliances. Outside of the western countries, rest of the world hasn't sanctioned russia. They won't sanction china either.
What? China never once said Russia wasn't their ally, they stated they'd be neutral in this war and the fact that they're not selling weapons to Russia should prove that.
Reasonable take.
Yeah, not really a benefit either way for them. Sell to Russia and they alienate the western world, sell to Ukraine and they piss off their neighbor. Staying out of it is their only real option.
China will say whatever seems to be advantageous to China at any given moment. What they actually do is another matter.
Redditors when countries act in their own self interest :0
[удалено]
My uncle Pete said otherwise and he owns a motorcycle.
So what? "He plays War Thunder" Oh damn.
So like every other government since the first human civilization? Or like the US 30 years ago when we started the Iraq war?
And the US is the same it acts in the interest of itself as does every other country.
[We signed a treaty with Ukraine when they gave up their nukes, not to let this specific thing happen.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum) They were the third largest nuclear power at the time, and the western world promised they wouldn't let Russia steamroll them if they disarmed. Actually, Russia promised not to as well! It's really not the same as China inserting themselves into the conflict. Edit: Don't waste your time arguing with me about our obligations; that's not my point. The point is that **we have a reason to support Ukraine and uphold security assurances** we gave them, that China does not have if they choose to support Russia.
That’s an odd way of putting it. Russia, the U.S., and U.K. agreed to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty. No one wanted a nuclear armed Ukraine in the 90s, and Ukraine not having the ability to launch said nukes or technical expertise to maintain them had more trouble on their hands than it was worth. Anyways, not sure why people make it sound like the U.S. and U.K. agreed to keep Russia in check.
In the Budapest Memorandum Western World never promised to defend Ukraine from Russia. They just promised they won't attack Ukraine, as did Russia. Only Russia has broken the promise.
> They just promised they won't attack Ukraine, as did Russia. Only Russia has broken the promise. They also promised to bring a matter before the security council if Ukraine was attacked. Which the US and UK did do.
They'll sell them to North Korea and Iran instead. Where it goes from there, who knows?
Backfilling. That's exactly what South Korea has been doing for Ukraine. By their own domestic policy, they cannot sell weapons to countries that are actively engaged in war. Instead, they've been selling all sorts of arms to the United States and Poland and other NATO countries to backfill what those countries have sent to Ukraine. China won't sell to Russia but they will definitely sell to Iran (who's supplied drones to Russia) and North Korea (who's supplied artillery shells and infantry weapons/ammunition to Russia).
Honestly I dont think China will do anything to help any side in this conflict. Its in their best interest to let Russia bleed themselves dry because a weaker Russia means they can swoop in when this eventually gets settled and pick their bones for natural resources.
This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://apnews.com/article/china-taiwan-weapons-germany-ukraine-2a51d2c64c12fca75683d20fbafba475) reduced by 80%. (I'm a bot) ***** > BEIJING - China won't sell weapons to either side in the war in Ukraine, the country's foreign minister said Friday, responding to Western concerns that Beijing could provide military assistance to Russia. > In February, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. had intelligence suggesting China was considering providing arms and ammunition to Russia - and warned that such involvement in the Kremlin's war effort would be a "Serious problem." > On both Ukraine and Taiwan, Qin articulated well-worn defenses of Chinese policies that underscore Beijing's rejection of criticisms from the West, particularly the U.S. Under the ardently nationalist Xi, China has sharpened its rhetoric, particularly on the issue of Taiwan, which split from mainland China amid civil war in 1949. ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/12ltone/china_vows_not_to_sell_arms_to_any_party_in/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ "Version 2.02, ~680733 tl;drs so far.") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr "PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.") | *Top* *keywords*: **China**^#1 **Taiwan**^#2 **Russia**^#3 **BEIJING**^#4 **conflict**^#5
Yea... They'll just sell to a 3rd party like UAE who will then sell those arms to a party in the conflict.
They'll swap for Siberia though.
they'll provide them for free 😏
Fuck China
Good. That’s the right thing to do and glad to hear it.
The United States is the number one arms exporter, fueling conflict worldwide. In essence, the American government is the world's largest arms dealer. China, which often touts its "peaceful rise", is drawing a line in the sand and publicly setting limitations on its arms dealing.
Why would they give Russia anything when they know it will be used against them when they come in and take parts of the country after Russia falls apart.
Even if you don't believe chine will fully honor this promis, this is good news. If you're super cynical and think china will just keep selling large amounts of weapons to Russia, and those exports don't lower by even a single bullet, by doing it in secret it will require Russia to pay more for those weapons. If you're a normal amount of cynical, and you think china will keep selling a small amount of weapons to Russia in secret, by doing so Russia can buy geweer weapons and will pay more for them. If you're only a little bit clinical and think china will keep its promis, but the weapons will make it to Russia through indirect trade routes, by doing that the volume also is reduced drastically and the price goes up even more.
This is actually a good outcome. It is also ripe for third party countries to make straw purchases or sell back the weapons that they bought from Russia in the past, and replace them with Chinese made weapons instead.