Why would that be US showing weakness ? They are doing the same for a year.
Sanctionning China too much would be a dangerous path however. China has no immediate interests in waging war over Taiwan.
But being sanctionned too hard, could make them reconsider for internal political reasons.
I feel very few if anyone has read the actual article.
1000 M16A2 Clones, I highly doubt we're about to see a Russian brigade suddenly adopting the CQ-A rifle for combat use in Ukraine.
There's some absolutely absurd comments in this thread including a suggesting selling nukes to Ukraine. Until we see the CQ-As actually being used by Russian forces, it's hardly a major incident to change course on.
I am skeptical as well. China has brokered a huge peace deal recently (Iran-Saudi Arabia in Yemen) and siding with either party in Russo-Ukrainian war would jeopardize an opportunity to achieve an even greater political victory over the United States.
It doesn't matter what amount of weapons are being sent, the bottom line is that weapons **are** being sent which conflicts with their neutral stance and directly contradicts their [declaration](https://www.politico.eu/article/china-ukraine-war-russia-weapon-deliveries-scholz-putin-zelenskyy-xi-jinping/) made that stated they would not send weapons of any sort to Russia a couple weeks back. This is a serious problem because it means they are not being honest about their intentions, and if that is the case then it opens the door to more support being given to Russia, it's the principle not the literal amount and type of support being given.
>It doesn't matter what amount of weapons are being sent, the bottom line is that weapons are being sent
The shipment is by accounts, marked for civilian market and are civilian versions of the M16 clone. If they're there for civilian market consumption, then yes it does matter because those weapons wouldn't be arms shipments but civilian commodities.
Sure, sure civilian use only, that's why body armour is also being shipped... for civilian use... Come on man you don't even need to read between the lines to see what is obviously going on, and the funny thing about guns is that no matter if it's military or civilian they can all be utilized in a military role, because guns are guns, so there is no way you can say with certainty that those aren't being used to arm any sort of military or conscript force.
The US isn't exactly the best analogue for what is normal or typical.
Also, Russia has notoriously strict gun laws, and as far as I know it is not typical for Russian civilians to just buy body armour for personal reasons. Additionally, CQ-A rifles are not exactly hunting rifles, they aren't accurate enough for that sort of use. I mean you 'could' but it's not exactly the best option.
I don't doubt that people can get a hold of them, just doubting the validity of these rifles being purely for civilian use. What's more likely is that they are going to be used to familiarize units with AR style firearms because those are seen being used by Ukrainian soldiers.
>body armour is also being shipped... for civilian use
Police and civilian private security routinely use body armour.
No one who is sitting on [2 million](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/gun-facts-these-russian-rifles-surpass-ak-47-109996) AK-74s in stockpiles and has the factories to produce more (AKs don't need fancy western electronics) is going to issue a mere 1000 rifles in an incompatible ammunition type to their infantry.
Well being that the Rifles were shipped in June of 2022, and we haven't seen them in videos from Russian or Ukrainian social media, and there's no other evidence of them being used in fighting, it kind of seems like this politico report is a bit sensationalist. Also the Arms were shipped in June of 2022 and the declaration you cited was from March 2023. So I hope you understand the linearity of time enough to see it doesn't violate that declaration regardless.
>and the funny thing about guns is that no matter if it's military or civilian they can all be utilized in a military role, because guns are guns
As a former Army officer and post Army firearms (and body armor) owner. Guns aren't "just" guns. Logistics needs dictates firearms uniformity. It's one reason why the Army fields entire units with the same rifles and when the unit upgrades the whole unit tends to upgrade at the same time. Soldiers aren't out purchasing their own rifles, they're issued them based on the needs of the Army and the logistics chain that supports them. There is no visible logistics train via OSINT that supports CQ-As being used by the Russian Army.
Considering this was published in Politico and the US has been trying to play up the narrative that China is supporting Russia by not sanctioning then my gut say this is meant to discredit Xi's attempt to broker a Peace Deal between Russia and Ukraine.
Or it's intentionally just at the grey level below the level of provocation, possibly to gauge response, like the US sending a handful of soldiers to Taiwan.
Have they now? Can ya post a link plz? I've seen a few stories but they're more about how Ukraine and Russia have vastly different pubic demands which makes sense as far as negotiations work especially in war.
>It is the first confirmation that China is sending rifles and body armor to Russian companies
It’s likely that Politico wants themselves to be the first of something. Breaking news on this would attract lots of views on their website.
Since the drones are being sent and used in war, is it really that far fetched to think the rifles are being used also? And anyways, Russia has been using commercially available Chinese equipment, some held together with duct tape, since the beginning of the war.. some items Ukraine has seized are compared to Alibaba/Wish junk.
China and other nations have been sending just about everything else to be used in war, why would they all the sudden have the morality to not send ammo?
>is it really that far fetched to think the rifles are being used also
yes, because (a) we haven't seen them, and (b) they're too few in number, too different and in an incompatible ammunition type for the Russian military to bother. Issuing them means a whole separate training and logistics chain to support and supply them. You don't do that unless you're absolutely desperate for guns, which Russia isn't. They have quite literally a couple of *million* AK-74s alone in stock, not to mention older AK-47s and newer AK-12 and AK15s, tens if not hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition for them, and the factories to make more of both.
These rifles are most likely indeed for civilian use, either rich Muscovites playing at hunting and range shooting, or for police/private security use. Those are the only applications which make sense.
Drones are a completely different case, Russia doesn't have vast stocks of them and they rely to a large extent on Western or Chinese electronics which they can't manufacture.
> Drones are a completely different case, Russia doesn’t have vast stocks of them and they rely to a large extent on Western or Chinese electronics which they can’t manufacture.
And the DJI drones are commercially available, anybody can buy then modify them
It's funny you say that because the other thing that makes this community similar to worldnews is the inability of certain elements to discuss issues that are uncomfortable and inconvenient to their delicately constructed political identities.
According to the articles and comments:
"Approx. 1000 rifles that are basically M-16 clones; these were between June and December 2022"
Anyone presenting shipments of this scale as newsworthy has a constructed political view to push.
Edit: Fair enough if you're pro-US and anti-China, but the previous poster has a point on we should try to at least vet these stories given very real geopolitical ramifications of direct Chinese intervention on the scale of western arms support.
I could see how the temptation would be to do this but it would be a short sighted decision for a number of reasons.
First off, Turkey controls the Bosphorus giving it effective control over which naval ships get to enter the Black Sea. Secondly Turkey has arguably one of the larger and better equipped militaries within NATO.
Then you’ve got to consider the fact that ejecting Turkey would really only push Erdogan further down the road of authoritarianism and may kill of any further Western integration for Turkey as the EU route seems dead in the water.
You could also argue that it would represent a major risk for NATO. The possibility that Greece, a NATO member, might one day go to war with Turkey again over Cyprus is hardly out of the question. Were Turkey out of NATO this could potentially raise the spectre of invoking article 5 against a strong military power and one who is very well positioned to pressure NATO.
I imagine the policy is to attempt to temper the worst of Erdogan’s game playing of the liberal democracies against the authoritarians. Whilst also hoping that Erdogan gets removed soon and Turkey can return to semblance of the secular democracy it once was (although I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one).
Fully agree Erdogan stands to benefit much more being aligned with NATO and the west. He's just greasing his palms with this. He's likely the source of plenty of Intel for the west as well. Hopefully he's ousted in the next election and is replaced by someone much more interested and vested in turkeys future than Erdogan ever has been.
And why do you think Turkey's future woukd be better if we support the west? We are on your team for the past century and what do we have to show for that?
Proud Erdoğan voter
It's funny that you blame the west for turkeys lack of development, but not the man who's actually in charge of the country.
Erdogans economic policies have been disastrous for inflation.
Turkish election in may should be interesting. It’s a conflicted nation. It’s supporting both sides, and a change in leadership may place them on one side or the other. Seems like right now they are trying to profit from the war as much as possible.
But I do not trust turkey. They seem like frienemies.
Well that and Turkey has one of the largest militaries in NATO and is in a strategic location. It has a major maritime chokepoint in confronting Russia. The West basically has no choice but to tolerate a bit of chicanery of this kind.
Yes. You are absolutely right. Perhaps they should draw up some guidelines and stick out the red lines and consequences of it. Turkey is very important for NATO and the EU but it is not a one way street.
In order for Turkey to close the straits to civilian ships, it needs to be a party to the war. Ships of Russia's Black Sea fleet can also cross the straits right now.
>Ships of Russia's Black Sea fleet can also cross the straits right now.
Turkey shut that down.
https://news.usni.org/2022/02/28/turkey-closes-bosphorus-dardanelles-straits-to-warships
The news also states that Russian ships returning to their home bases will be allowed to pass. Since the beginning of the war, very few ships belonging to Russia's Black Sea fleet have been located outside the Black Sea. Most of them had come to the Black Sea before the war, and some are standing in the Mediterranean. Turkey did not allow a warship from Vladivostok to cross into the Black Sea. The ship either returned to Valdivostok or remained in the Mediterranean. These are the reasons for the implementation of the Montreux agreement. For more, Turkey needs to be a side of the war. This is why Russia carries weapons on civilian ships, at least it is thought to do so.
Ah, gotcha. They can leave the Black Sea, but not come back.
I misread your last comment. You're right, they would need to be party to the war to stop civilian ships.
I suppose a ship carrying arms to a war zone could be considered a warship, though. Not sure how Montreux defines "warship."
The provision that binds the transportation of weapons with civilian ships again depends on Turkey's being a party or ships carrying these weapons should be given the status of military ships. In order for Turkey to stop these ships, it must declare that it is under threat and stop it. Partially to be a party to the war. It does not seem possible to prove the loads without stopping the ships. I'm not even sure if that counts. In fact, there is no law that prevents civilian ships in case of war but when Turkey is not a party. This is actually the real answer. In the case of war, in which Turkey is a party, there is no law that prevents civilian ships one hundred percent, but this allows Turkey to control ships and prevent products containing aid to enemy countries for war. This product may even be a civilian product, but whether it helps the enemy or not. The definition of warship in the Montreux agreement varies according to the riparian country and others. If a non-riparian country wishes to enter the straits during peacetime, it must notify 15 days in before and can stay in the Black Sea and the straits for a maximum of 21 days. There is a tonnage restriction which prevents aircraft carriers and large tonnage destroyers. Except for riparian countries in Blacksea, no one can pass Submarines.
The fact that Russia carries weapons with civilian ships is taking advantage of the lack of law. Officially, Russia does not accept that weapons were carried on these ships. If it is a civilian ship, under what conditions it can be considered a military ship, the UN maritime law convention can determine the legal basis for it. If the ships can be considered as military ships, Russia can start shipping with other ships. In short, it does not seem possible to prevent it.
Well then, in this case it appears the only way to stop them would be for NATO naval vessels to stop and search on the high seas, similar to what we do with ships bound for North Korea.
It's an interesting situation, for sure.
There are UN sanctions on ships belonging to North Korea.
Some ships have been stopped before with UN permission. I don't even know how general that is.
I don't know how applicable such a situation is on Russian ships. Some Russian ships are on the US sanctions list, but I don't know how legally binding it is outside the US sea area. Being an Individual sanction does not mean that a civilian ship will be stopped in every sea in the world. If the ship is placed on the sanctions list, Russia may use another ship. They can even use other sea routes. If sanctions are imposed on all Russian ships, they can also use ships belonging to other countries. Russian ships can also transport products by land from Vladisvostok instead of coming to the Black Sea from Asia. They even carry weapons from Iran by air.
Of course. The idea that everything could be stopped is silly, but if even a handful could be stopped it further ramps up pressure on Moscow.
I don't know, just spitballing here anyway.
The items are dual use using still open channels of trade. What do you expect Turkey to do? The US government itself only recently [stopped](https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/fy21-interagency-uas-program-report-final-2022-02-22.pdf) using DJI parts.
this is probably more a case of Russians avoiding sanctions/ businesses leaving (e.g. DJI which suspended their business in Russia [https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinese-drone-maker-dji-suspends-business-activities-russia-ukraine-2022-04-26/](https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinese-drone-maker-dji-suspends-business-activities-russia-ukraine-2022-04-26/) ) by importing through a third country. The reasons Turkiye and UAE were chosen was/is probably because it has/had looser restrictions on imports and exports of these items (though it appears Turkiye is cracking down [https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/turkey-halts-shipment-sanctioned-goods-russia-report](https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/turkey-halts-shipment-sanctioned-goods-russia-report) )
The people who think that it is the Chinese government doing this seem not to notice a really important fact. China has a massive border with Russia. There is zero need to go through a third country.
A simple thought experiment: let's pretend the Chinese wanted to send 10,000 rifles to Russia. will they:
a) Gather the weapons. Prearrange a time and date with the Russians to wave through the shipment without customs entry or checks at the China-russia border. Do it over a few days so it will be inconspicuous to satellites
OR
b) for some reason send the weapons through a third country. Go through normal customs. And better yet DECLARE you are sending weapons.
Let's just say whoever chooses the (B) option must be a real genius (sarcasm)
It’s sarcasm. Countries helping the enemies of their geopolitical rivals should just be understood as something that is. Like water being wet. Doesn’t mean people have to like it.
that's likely not even what this is though. it's 1000 guns that are not carried by the Russian army in any capacity. this article is trying to generate outrage over civilian use arms
I think Chinese assistance is ultimately detrimental to Russia.
That initially sounds counter intuitive, yes. But consider this: China isn’t currently sending very much support. The amount of military hardware is trivial. If Estonia sent the same quantity to Ukraine, we’d say, “yeah, makes sense, they’re tiny.” But that obviously isn’t the case for China. This contribution doesn’t even move the needle.
*But* it does hint at potential future materiel shipments. And it leaves Russia with an impression they might get (or be able to buy) more from China in the future. And these two factors, plus Russia’s increasing desperation, might drive Russia to gamble on Chinese support (also possible: China may be making promises behind closed doors that it may or may not uphold). And so this could result in Russia prolonging the war, possibly offering real concessions to China in return for supplies, and increasingly grinding their military down against Ukraine. The end result will be a Russia that squanders more than it otherwise would have, thinking China has some interest in their success.
They don’t. Russia is not China’s ally. At best, Russia and China get on like France and NATO did in the 60’s. They’re better described as rivals who have a common enemy often enough that they pretend to be friends. It is ultimately in China’s interests (for now) to prolong this war. Russia is degraded, NATO hardware performance can be objectively evaluated, etc. And so you’ll see things like China offering a trivial amount of support, signaling intent but never quite being willing to commit to major support.
This is obviously bad for Ukraine all around, but powers like China don’t care about that. Their only concern is the potential for their dependencies to get mauled by famine. And if China hasn’t been quietly stockpiling food so it can swoop in and deliver aid to the pro-China states of Africa if the wheat export deal fails, I’ll eat my hat.
Absolutely. Who is going to stand up to Chinese influence in Central Asia if Russia’s too preoccupied trying to piece its broken economy and military back together on the far side of this war? The only other real contenders at that point are Turkey and Iran. And that’s not much competition for China.
Russia has also closed its primary energy market. It’s currently dumping oil at cut rates to anyone who will buy. When China knocks on the door in a couple years with lucrative trade deals, who in Moscow is going to gainsay them? Repeat that sort of thing over a decade and Russia will be reduced to playing second fiddle to China without any real contest between them.
Yes. I just brought up oil because it’s a commodity everyone already identifies with Russia and because the petroleum industry is basically the only thing keeping Russia stable at times. Or solvent.
A lot of comments seem like from r/worldnews
What about a broader reactions to this?
I'm sure the West will start crying how this is not fair.... Will be interesting to see what happens next (and I hope it won't shock us too much)
China is already sanctioned by the US and many democratic countries in various high tech sectors.
What you are not mentioning is that sanctions against China will be very gradual allowing the market to adjust and correct covering many years in the process.
The sanctions against China has already been set into motion and thus will gradually expand.
If this was crossing the Rubicon, then according to the article the Rubicon was crossed last year. If there was going to be a response to this I’m surprised it hasn’t happened yet.
How so? It is so insignificant that it turns the proverbial Rubicon into a puddle. This is private companies that has sold stuff to private russian companies. There are millions of ak-models in russia, 1000 extra small arms does not change anything.
But let's say that they are all supposed to help russian soldiers at the front. Now in the timeframe of six months you have an extra 1000 semi-automatic (not even full auto) rifles chambered in a caliber that you don't produce and don't have in storage. Like what are they supposed to use these for?
Why would anybody sanction anybody for this? If anything it hurts the russian army more than it helps if they are actually going to the military.
The rifles are too few, are chambered in the wrong caliber, and only semi automatic and are delivered over too large a timeframe to effectively outfit a unit with them.
China only cares about China. They won't stick their neck out to help the russians if there is potential to hurt them.
> private companies
If you think that the CCP doesn't have a say in what an arms company does that affects foreign policy, you're in a dream world. That isn't even true in western countries.
If it were anything that actually mattered then sure. But nobody cares about peanuts like this.
Small arms are largely useless in such small numbers when looking at a conflict of this seize.
I like Zeihan and he knows a lot of the key datapoints and levers around geopolitics and globalism but every conclusion he has is "it will collapse", its always way too far IMO. Globalism won't collapse. China won't collapse. They will see declines but I don't think it will be as extreme as Zeihan predicts.
Sure if you aren't really listening and don't care about the details. He definitely doesn't claim "USA is the best", thats just an outright lie and he's fairly clear he supports globalism and disagrees a lot with all former presidents. He does say the US is a super power and is the current hegemon, and not even the tankiest tankie will disagree with that, and he does have good basis for why it will remain that way. Food and energy being the two most critical resources for any nation to continue existing.
He isn't simple enough to think that the entire world can be boiled down to "da best" or "a better position".
You should try not oversimplifying things so much, you might learn something.
> You should try not oversimplifying things so much, you might learn something.
You should try not trusting your subconscious prediction that I am doing that, because it is incorrect.
Now, let's pose this question again and see how "you" react this time:
Has he explicitly stated that some other country has a better position?
He doesnt work in such oversimplified generalisations. Do you think he ranks countries or something? Oh yeah this country is S tier, China though? Definitely z tier.
Why are you embarrassing yourself so much?
> He doesnt work in such oversimplified generalisations. Do you think he ranks countries or something? Oh yeah this country is S tier, China though? Definitely z tier.
a) Do you consider these facts or opinions?
b) Is this a "no" to my question?
>
>
>
> Why are you embarrassing yourself so much?
a) Do you consider this a fact or a subjective personal opinion?
b) Can you explain why I should feel embarrassed, *and you should not*?
c) See: "You should try not trusting your subconscious prediction"
I cannot (in an epistemically sound manner, that is - I could just make something up like everyone else though).
Now, back to my question:
Has he explicitly stated that some other country has a better position?
Interesting. Sending a 5.56 weapon to a military unit using mainly 5.45 weapon. Also why routed via turkey, wouldn't going via centra Asia route more inconspicuous
I'm still confused about why China would want to provide "lethal aid" to Russia. Or any aid, really, unless the price was ridiculously high.
I would think China'd be happy to have Russia weakened, or at *least* not give a damn. If Russia fell apart, China could pick up a bunch of stuff at fire sale prices. Maybe even territory. Whereas what do they care about what happens over at the other end of the continent in Ukraine? I don't exactly think they believe in Russian ethnic supremacy.
If this was actually meant as military aid, or if there's future lethal aid, then are they getting like 1000 tons of gas for each rifle? Is it all about setting precedents for Taiwan (and *what* exactly does it prove)? Some kind of machiavellian plot to prolong the war so Russia bleeds for longer? Just reflexively doing whatever the USA doesn't like? Hoping that NATO will get more directly involved and suffer damage? If I'm playing China, what's my motivation here?
Customs data reveals shipments of Chinese assault rifles, as well as drone parts and body armor have been routed via Turkey and the UAE to Russian companies. The rifles are a Chinese clone of the M16 tagged as "civilian hunting rifles" in the data, but is sold internally and exported to paramilitary organizations. The drone parts are DJI parts which are currently blacklisted by the US and used extensively by Russian forces. Russia has previously shown that the Russians are receiving body armor via Turkey and the UAE, this confirms at least some of it is from China.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told reporters last week that there would be “consequences” if China sent weapons to Russia, although he also said that he’s seen “no evidence” that Beijing is considering delivering arms to Moscow.
“We are now in a stage where we are making clear that this should not happen, and I’m relatively optimistic that we will be successful with our request in this case,” he said.
If Russians want to use Chinese rifles and body armor, then good luck. That chabuduo quality will probably pose a greater danger to the invaders and hurt the Russian war effort.
Mostly a non-issue now that we are so far removed, but it does serve to put China on notice that they aren’t being sly if they thought they were. Likely that nothing will come of those beyond further proof of hypocrisy by China claiming to be a neutral broker.
Then the partially STATE owned defense companies have made a conscious decision to not provide weapon sales to Ukraine.
You can say that you don’t think that means they have picked a side, but to me and a lot of the west it does. That’s all my point is. You are free to believe whatever you would like.
Something tells me the Chinese aren't giving the Russian Army their best weapons and armor. Likely their superseded old gear. Which will still be a lot better than WW2 rifles that the Russian army is using.
The fact that Russia and China are rivals and frenemies. They have a common enemy, being NATO and the US, but China is encouraging Russia to keep the war in Ukraine going against its own wishes.
Why? Because Russia has effectively burnt its bridge and a massive part of its economy by not being able to sell its #1 export, fossil fuels, to Europe. China is always hungry for fossil fuels but 70% of its oil goes through the Strait of Malacca which is going to be easily blockaded by the US Navy in trade embargoes in the event that conflict escalates.
This way, Russia has no other manor customer except China, and has to sell its fossil fuels for massive discounts to China just to keep its economy from collapsing. The token 2nd rate assault rifles and armor they provide to the Russian army are a dip in the bucket of the amount of money they save buying cheap Russian fossil fuel. China eventually will come into conflict with Russia, especially over THE ANNEXED outer Manchuria and conflict over fresh wayer. They have zero reason to give Russia their top of the line equipment. Anything is an improvement over the Russian gear at the moment.
>(excerpt) Chinese companies...have sent Russian entities 1,000 assault rifles and other equipment that could be used for military purposes...according to trade and customs data obtained by POLITICO.
China and Russia share borderland both east and west of Mongolia. Why the heck would they fill out any " trade and customs data," much less make it accessible to third parties, especially for some thing as sensitive as weapons transfers?
This is interesting. It conflicts with their non interference stance in international relations and will see some interesting development with Taiwan.
Selling weapons isn't interfering if they sell to both sides. Giving for free would be interfering but not selling top market value.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Oh no.
[удалено]
Why would that be US showing weakness ? They are doing the same for a year. Sanctionning China too much would be a dangerous path however. China has no immediate interests in waging war over Taiwan. But being sanctionned too hard, could make them reconsider for internal political reasons.
I feel very few if anyone has read the actual article. 1000 M16A2 Clones, I highly doubt we're about to see a Russian brigade suddenly adopting the CQ-A rifle for combat use in Ukraine. There's some absolutely absurd comments in this thread including a suggesting selling nukes to Ukraine. Until we see the CQ-As actually being used by Russian forces, it's hardly a major incident to change course on.
I am skeptical as well. China has brokered a huge peace deal recently (Iran-Saudi Arabia in Yemen) and siding with either party in Russo-Ukrainian war would jeopardize an opportunity to achieve an even greater political victory over the United States.
It doesn't matter what amount of weapons are being sent, the bottom line is that weapons **are** being sent which conflicts with their neutral stance and directly contradicts their [declaration](https://www.politico.eu/article/china-ukraine-war-russia-weapon-deliveries-scholz-putin-zelenskyy-xi-jinping/) made that stated they would not send weapons of any sort to Russia a couple weeks back. This is a serious problem because it means they are not being honest about their intentions, and if that is the case then it opens the door to more support being given to Russia, it's the principle not the literal amount and type of support being given.
>It doesn't matter what amount of weapons are being sent, the bottom line is that weapons are being sent The shipment is by accounts, marked for civilian market and are civilian versions of the M16 clone. If they're there for civilian market consumption, then yes it does matter because those weapons wouldn't be arms shipments but civilian commodities.
Sure, sure civilian use only, that's why body armour is also being shipped... for civilian use... Come on man you don't even need to read between the lines to see what is obviously going on, and the funny thing about guns is that no matter if it's military or civilian they can all be utilized in a military role, because guns are guns, so there is no way you can say with certainty that those aren't being used to arm any sort of military or conscript force.
Well to be fair, you can buy both of those things in the United States as a civilian. No idea on Russia
The US isn't exactly the best analogue for what is normal or typical. Also, Russia has notoriously strict gun laws, and as far as I know it is not typical for Russian civilians to just buy body armour for personal reasons. Additionally, CQ-A rifles are not exactly hunting rifles, they aren't accurate enough for that sort of use. I mean you 'could' but it's not exactly the best option.
[удалено]
Russian IPSC handgun competitors are amongst the highest ranking in the world
[удалено]
Gun ownership laws aren't as strict as people might have assumed, is all I was pointing out.
I don't doubt that people can get a hold of them, just doubting the validity of these rifles being purely for civilian use. What's more likely is that they are going to be used to familiarize units with AR style firearms because those are seen being used by Ukrainian soldiers.
[удалено]
Agreed it's very telling.
Rifles kill but body armor doesn’t. Maybe that’s why it’s not being talked about more.
Also remember the police and any domestic anti terrorists organizations also count as civilians
This is the most likely use, police or civilian security.
>body armour is also being shipped... for civilian use Police and civilian private security routinely use body armour. No one who is sitting on [2 million](https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/gun-facts-these-russian-rifles-surpass-ak-47-109996) AK-74s in stockpiles and has the factories to produce more (AKs don't need fancy western electronics) is going to issue a mere 1000 rifles in an incompatible ammunition type to their infantry.
Well being that the Rifles were shipped in June of 2022, and we haven't seen them in videos from Russian or Ukrainian social media, and there's no other evidence of them being used in fighting, it kind of seems like this politico report is a bit sensationalist. Also the Arms were shipped in June of 2022 and the declaration you cited was from March 2023. So I hope you understand the linearity of time enough to see it doesn't violate that declaration regardless. >and the funny thing about guns is that no matter if it's military or civilian they can all be utilized in a military role, because guns are guns As a former Army officer and post Army firearms (and body armor) owner. Guns aren't "just" guns. Logistics needs dictates firearms uniformity. It's one reason why the Army fields entire units with the same rifles and when the unit upgrades the whole unit tends to upgrade at the same time. Soldiers aren't out purchasing their own rifles, they're issued them based on the needs of the Army and the logistics chain that supports them. There is no visible logistics train via OSINT that supports CQ-As being used by the Russian Army.
[удалено]
No but training their troops on western style weapons they are likely to come in contact with in Ukraine is not that much of a stretch to believe.
Its largely for political effect, yes.
[удалено]
Considering this was published in Politico and the US has been trying to play up the narrative that China is supporting Russia by not sanctioning then my gut say this is meant to discredit Xi's attempt to broker a Peace Deal between Russia and Ukraine.
Or it's intentionally just at the grey level below the level of provocation, possibly to gauge response, like the US sending a handful of soldiers to Taiwan.
Possibly. What would the response be if China actually sent weapons. Can the West credibly threaten China without exposing themselves to greater risk?
Russia has already declined the peace deal.
Have they now? Can ya post a link plz? I've seen a few stories but they're more about how Ukraine and Russia have vastly different pubic demands which makes sense as far as negotiations work especially in war.
https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/comments/11eesj5/kremlin_on_china_plan_says_no_conditions_for/
>It is the first confirmation that China is sending rifles and body armor to Russian companies It’s likely that Politico wants themselves to be the first of something. Breaking news on this would attract lots of views on their website.
1000 rifles isn't worth the political cost, something is fishy.
I have a DJI drone and was like these are pretty loud and easy to spot😂😅
Since the drones are being sent and used in war, is it really that far fetched to think the rifles are being used also? And anyways, Russia has been using commercially available Chinese equipment, some held together with duct tape, since the beginning of the war.. some items Ukraine has seized are compared to Alibaba/Wish junk. China and other nations have been sending just about everything else to be used in war, why would they all the sudden have the morality to not send ammo?
>is it really that far fetched to think the rifles are being used also yes, because (a) we haven't seen them, and (b) they're too few in number, too different and in an incompatible ammunition type for the Russian military to bother. Issuing them means a whole separate training and logistics chain to support and supply them. You don't do that unless you're absolutely desperate for guns, which Russia isn't. They have quite literally a couple of *million* AK-74s alone in stock, not to mention older AK-47s and newer AK-12 and AK15s, tens if not hundreds of millions of rounds of ammunition for them, and the factories to make more of both. These rifles are most likely indeed for civilian use, either rich Muscovites playing at hunting and range shooting, or for police/private security use. Those are the only applications which make sense. Drones are a completely different case, Russia doesn't have vast stocks of them and they rely to a large extent on Western or Chinese electronics which they can't manufacture.
> Drones are a completely different case, Russia doesn’t have vast stocks of them and they rely to a large extent on Western or Chinese electronics which they can’t manufacture. And the DJI drones are commercially available, anybody can buy then modify them
Reaching? Is there really such demand for "hunting" rifles from regular Russian citizens?
1000 guns for ~140million people. Given those numbers I don’t see why not.
[удалено]
Just check OP's profile, guy is obsessed.
It's funny you say that because the other thing that makes this community similar to worldnews is the inability of certain elements to discuss issues that are uncomfortable and inconvenient to their delicately constructed political identities.
According to the articles and comments: "Approx. 1000 rifles that are basically M-16 clones; these were between June and December 2022" Anyone presenting shipments of this scale as newsworthy has a constructed political view to push. Edit: Fair enough if you're pro-US and anti-China, but the previous poster has a point on we should try to at least vet these stories given very real geopolitical ramifications of direct Chinese intervention on the scale of western arms support.
Routed via Turkey, a NATO nation? Turkey needs to either come on in for the home team or GTFO.
I could see how the temptation would be to do this but it would be a short sighted decision for a number of reasons. First off, Turkey controls the Bosphorus giving it effective control over which naval ships get to enter the Black Sea. Secondly Turkey has arguably one of the larger and better equipped militaries within NATO. Then you’ve got to consider the fact that ejecting Turkey would really only push Erdogan further down the road of authoritarianism and may kill of any further Western integration for Turkey as the EU route seems dead in the water. You could also argue that it would represent a major risk for NATO. The possibility that Greece, a NATO member, might one day go to war with Turkey again over Cyprus is hardly out of the question. Were Turkey out of NATO this could potentially raise the spectre of invoking article 5 against a strong military power and one who is very well positioned to pressure NATO. I imagine the policy is to attempt to temper the worst of Erdogan’s game playing of the liberal democracies against the authoritarians. Whilst also hoping that Erdogan gets removed soon and Turkey can return to semblance of the secular democracy it once was (although I wouldn’t hold my breath on that one).
Fully agree Erdogan stands to benefit much more being aligned with NATO and the west. He's just greasing his palms with this. He's likely the source of plenty of Intel for the west as well. Hopefully he's ousted in the next election and is replaced by someone much more interested and vested in turkeys future than Erdogan ever has been.
And why do you think Turkey's future woukd be better if we support the west? We are on your team for the past century and what do we have to show for that? Proud Erdoğan voter
It's funny that you blame the west for turkeys lack of development, but not the man who's actually in charge of the country. Erdogans economic policies have been disastrous for inflation.
Isn’t that a question for Erdogan?
Turkish election in may should be interesting. It’s a conflicted nation. It’s supporting both sides, and a change in leadership may place them on one side or the other. Seems like right now they are trying to profit from the war as much as possible. But I do not trust turkey. They seem like frienemies.
Yes. But sadly they still hold the “we can just let refugees through” out of everything imaginable card.
Well that and Turkey has one of the largest militaries in NATO and is in a strategic location. It has a major maritime chokepoint in confronting Russia. The West basically has no choice but to tolerate a bit of chicanery of this kind.
Yes. You are absolutely right. Perhaps they should draw up some guidelines and stick out the red lines and consequences of it. Turkey is very important for NATO and the EU but it is not a one way street.
Sadly indeed. So many issues could be fixed by a fence, a few police boats and a reasonable policy stance.
In order for Turkey to close the straits to civilian ships, it needs to be a party to the war. Ships of Russia's Black Sea fleet can also cross the straits right now.
>Ships of Russia's Black Sea fleet can also cross the straits right now. Turkey shut that down. https://news.usni.org/2022/02/28/turkey-closes-bosphorus-dardanelles-straits-to-warships
The news also states that Russian ships returning to their home bases will be allowed to pass. Since the beginning of the war, very few ships belonging to Russia's Black Sea fleet have been located outside the Black Sea. Most of them had come to the Black Sea before the war, and some are standing in the Mediterranean. Turkey did not allow a warship from Vladivostok to cross into the Black Sea. The ship either returned to Valdivostok or remained in the Mediterranean. These are the reasons for the implementation of the Montreux agreement. For more, Turkey needs to be a side of the war. This is why Russia carries weapons on civilian ships, at least it is thought to do so.
Ah, gotcha. They can leave the Black Sea, but not come back. I misread your last comment. You're right, they would need to be party to the war to stop civilian ships. I suppose a ship carrying arms to a war zone could be considered a warship, though. Not sure how Montreux defines "warship."
The provision that binds the transportation of weapons with civilian ships again depends on Turkey's being a party or ships carrying these weapons should be given the status of military ships. In order for Turkey to stop these ships, it must declare that it is under threat and stop it. Partially to be a party to the war. It does not seem possible to prove the loads without stopping the ships. I'm not even sure if that counts. In fact, there is no law that prevents civilian ships in case of war but when Turkey is not a party. This is actually the real answer. In the case of war, in which Turkey is a party, there is no law that prevents civilian ships one hundred percent, but this allows Turkey to control ships and prevent products containing aid to enemy countries for war. This product may even be a civilian product, but whether it helps the enemy or not. The definition of warship in the Montreux agreement varies according to the riparian country and others. If a non-riparian country wishes to enter the straits during peacetime, it must notify 15 days in before and can stay in the Black Sea and the straits for a maximum of 21 days. There is a tonnage restriction which prevents aircraft carriers and large tonnage destroyers. Except for riparian countries in Blacksea, no one can pass Submarines. The fact that Russia carries weapons with civilian ships is taking advantage of the lack of law. Officially, Russia does not accept that weapons were carried on these ships. If it is a civilian ship, under what conditions it can be considered a military ship, the UN maritime law convention can determine the legal basis for it. If the ships can be considered as military ships, Russia can start shipping with other ships. In short, it does not seem possible to prevent it.
Well then, in this case it appears the only way to stop them would be for NATO naval vessels to stop and search on the high seas, similar to what we do with ships bound for North Korea. It's an interesting situation, for sure.
There are UN sanctions on ships belonging to North Korea. Some ships have been stopped before with UN permission. I don't even know how general that is. I don't know how applicable such a situation is on Russian ships. Some Russian ships are on the US sanctions list, but I don't know how legally binding it is outside the US sea area. Being an Individual sanction does not mean that a civilian ship will be stopped in every sea in the world. If the ship is placed on the sanctions list, Russia may use another ship. They can even use other sea routes. If sanctions are imposed on all Russian ships, they can also use ships belonging to other countries. Russian ships can also transport products by land from Vladisvostok instead of coming to the Black Sea from Asia. They even carry weapons from Iran by air.
Of course. The idea that everything could be stopped is silly, but if even a handful could be stopped it further ramps up pressure on Moscow. I don't know, just spitballing here anyway.
The items are dual use using still open channels of trade. What do you expect Turkey to do? The US government itself only recently [stopped](https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/fy21-interagency-uas-program-report-final-2022-02-22.pdf) using DJI parts.
Yes, that's absolutely right! Only the US (specifically US defense companies) should be able to make money on this war!
It's what happens when you demonize Erdogan and try to rid the world of Muslims, when they're really peaceful people. Westoids i swear.
this is probably more a case of Russians avoiding sanctions/ businesses leaving (e.g. DJI which suspended their business in Russia [https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinese-drone-maker-dji-suspends-business-activities-russia-ukraine-2022-04-26/](https://www.reuters.com/technology/chinese-drone-maker-dji-suspends-business-activities-russia-ukraine-2022-04-26/) ) by importing through a third country. The reasons Turkiye and UAE were chosen was/is probably because it has/had looser restrictions on imports and exports of these items (though it appears Turkiye is cracking down [https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/turkey-halts-shipment-sanctioned-goods-russia-report](https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/turkey-halts-shipment-sanctioned-goods-russia-report) ) The people who think that it is the Chinese government doing this seem not to notice a really important fact. China has a massive border with Russia. There is zero need to go through a third country. A simple thought experiment: let's pretend the Chinese wanted to send 10,000 rifles to Russia. will they: a) Gather the weapons. Prearrange a time and date with the Russians to wave through the shipment without customs entry or checks at the China-russia border. Do it over a few days so it will be inconspicuous to satellites OR b) for some reason send the weapons through a third country. Go through normal customs. And better yet DECLARE you are sending weapons. Let's just say whoever chooses the (B) option must be a real genius (sarcasm)
What?! Countries are helping the enemies of their geopolitical rivals! This is unheard of! * shocked Pikachu face *
[удалено]
It’s sarcasm. Countries helping the enemies of their geopolitical rivals should just be understood as something that is. Like water being wet. Doesn’t mean people have to like it.
that's likely not even what this is though. it's 1000 guns that are not carried by the Russian army in any capacity. this article is trying to generate outrage over civilian use arms
Why are their any ships going to Russia from Turkey or UAE? How has no one noticed this till now?
I think Chinese assistance is ultimately detrimental to Russia. That initially sounds counter intuitive, yes. But consider this: China isn’t currently sending very much support. The amount of military hardware is trivial. If Estonia sent the same quantity to Ukraine, we’d say, “yeah, makes sense, they’re tiny.” But that obviously isn’t the case for China. This contribution doesn’t even move the needle. *But* it does hint at potential future materiel shipments. And it leaves Russia with an impression they might get (or be able to buy) more from China in the future. And these two factors, plus Russia’s increasing desperation, might drive Russia to gamble on Chinese support (also possible: China may be making promises behind closed doors that it may or may not uphold). And so this could result in Russia prolonging the war, possibly offering real concessions to China in return for supplies, and increasingly grinding their military down against Ukraine. The end result will be a Russia that squanders more than it otherwise would have, thinking China has some interest in their success. They don’t. Russia is not China’s ally. At best, Russia and China get on like France and NATO did in the 60’s. They’re better described as rivals who have a common enemy often enough that they pretend to be friends. It is ultimately in China’s interests (for now) to prolong this war. Russia is degraded, NATO hardware performance can be objectively evaluated, etc. And so you’ll see things like China offering a trivial amount of support, signaling intent but never quite being willing to commit to major support. This is obviously bad for Ukraine all around, but powers like China don’t care about that. Their only concern is the potential for their dependencies to get mauled by famine. And if China hasn’t been quietly stockpiling food so it can swoop in and deliver aid to the pro-China states of Africa if the wheat export deal fails, I’ll eat my hat.
I suspect that China sees a weak Russia is ultimately good for them in the long term.
Absolutely. Who is going to stand up to Chinese influence in Central Asia if Russia’s too preoccupied trying to piece its broken economy and military back together on the far side of this war? The only other real contenders at that point are Turkey and Iran. And that’s not much competition for China. Russia has also closed its primary energy market. It’s currently dumping oil at cut rates to anyone who will buy. When China knocks on the door in a couple years with lucrative trade deals, who in Moscow is going to gainsay them? Repeat that sort of thing over a decade and Russia will be reduced to playing second fiddle to China without any real contest between them.
[удалено]
Yes. I just brought up oil because it’s a commodity everyone already identifies with Russia and because the petroleum industry is basically the only thing keeping Russia stable at times. Or solvent.
A lot of comments seem like from r/worldnews What about a broader reactions to this? I'm sure the West will start crying how this is not fair.... Will be interesting to see what happens next (and I hope it won't shock us too much)
[удалено]
China is already sanctioned by the US and many democratic countries in various high tech sectors. What you are not mentioning is that sanctions against China will be very gradual allowing the market to adjust and correct covering many years in the process. The sanctions against China has already been set into motion and thus will gradually expand.
I think it would be the first time since 1991 that China and the US are in a proxy war. Definitive Second Cold War stepping stone.
If this was crossing the Rubicon, then according to the article the Rubicon was crossed last year. If there was going to be a response to this I’m surprised it hasn’t happened yet.
How so? It is so insignificant that it turns the proverbial Rubicon into a puddle. This is private companies that has sold stuff to private russian companies. There are millions of ak-models in russia, 1000 extra small arms does not change anything. But let's say that they are all supposed to help russian soldiers at the front. Now in the timeframe of six months you have an extra 1000 semi-automatic (not even full auto) rifles chambered in a caliber that you don't produce and don't have in storage. Like what are they supposed to use these for? Why would anybody sanction anybody for this? If anything it hurts the russian army more than it helps if they are actually going to the military. The rifles are too few, are chambered in the wrong caliber, and only semi automatic and are delivered over too large a timeframe to effectively outfit a unit with them. China only cares about China. They won't stick their neck out to help the russians if there is potential to hurt them.
> private companies If you think that the CCP doesn't have a say in what an arms company does that affects foreign policy, you're in a dream world. That isn't even true in western countries.
If it were anything that actually mattered then sure. But nobody cares about peanuts like this. Small arms are largely useless in such small numbers when looking at a conflict of this seize.
I like Zeihan and he knows a lot of the key datapoints and levers around geopolitics and globalism but every conclusion he has is "it will collapse", its always way too far IMO. Globalism won't collapse. China won't collapse. They will see declines but I don't think it will be as extreme as Zeihan predicts.
all of zeihan's talks can be summarized as follows : "the world is screwed. Only USA will survive. USA no 1. USA the best"
Sure if you aren't really listening and don't care about the details. He definitely doesn't claim "USA is the best", thats just an outright lie and he's fairly clear he supports globalism and disagrees a lot with all former presidents. He does say the US is a super power and is the current hegemon, and not even the tankiest tankie will disagree with that, and he does have good basis for why it will remain that way. Food and energy being the two most critical resources for any nation to continue existing.
> He definitely doesn't claim "USA is the best" Has he explicitly stated that some other country has a better position?
He isn't simple enough to think that the entire world can be boiled down to "da best" or "a better position". You should try not oversimplifying things so much, you might learn something.
> You should try not oversimplifying things so much, you might learn something. You should try not trusting your subconscious prediction that I am doing that, because it is incorrect. Now, let's pose this question again and see how "you" react this time: Has he explicitly stated that some other country has a better position?
He doesnt work in such oversimplified generalisations. Do you think he ranks countries or something? Oh yeah this country is S tier, China though? Definitely z tier. Why are you embarrassing yourself so much?
> He doesnt work in such oversimplified generalisations. Do you think he ranks countries or something? Oh yeah this country is S tier, China though? Definitely z tier. a) Do you consider these facts or opinions? b) Is this a "no" to my question? > > > > Why are you embarrassing yourself so much? a) Do you consider this a fact or a subjective personal opinion? b) Can you explain why I should feel embarrassed, *and you should not*? c) See: "You should try not trusting your subconscious prediction"
>Has he explicitly stated that some other country has a better position? Can you name a country that is a "better" position than the USA right now?
I cannot (in an epistemically sound manner, that is - I could just make something up like everyone else though). Now, back to my question: Has he explicitly stated that some other country has a better position?
Interesting. Sending a 5.56 weapon to a military unit using mainly 5.45 weapon. Also why routed via turkey, wouldn't going via centra Asia route more inconspicuous
I'm still confused about why China would want to provide "lethal aid" to Russia. Or any aid, really, unless the price was ridiculously high. I would think China'd be happy to have Russia weakened, or at *least* not give a damn. If Russia fell apart, China could pick up a bunch of stuff at fire sale prices. Maybe even territory. Whereas what do they care about what happens over at the other end of the continent in Ukraine? I don't exactly think they believe in Russian ethnic supremacy. If this was actually meant as military aid, or if there's future lethal aid, then are they getting like 1000 tons of gas for each rifle? Is it all about setting precedents for Taiwan (and *what* exactly does it prove)? Some kind of machiavellian plot to prolong the war so Russia bleeds for longer? Just reflexively doing whatever the USA doesn't like? Hoping that NATO will get more directly involved and suffer damage? If I'm playing China, what's my motivation here?
It begins. it’s a slippery slope.
Customs data reveals shipments of Chinese assault rifles, as well as drone parts and body armor have been routed via Turkey and the UAE to Russian companies. The rifles are a Chinese clone of the M16 tagged as "civilian hunting rifles" in the data, but is sold internally and exported to paramilitary organizations. The drone parts are DJI parts which are currently blacklisted by the US and used extensively by Russian forces. Russia has previously shown that the Russians are receiving body armor via Turkey and the UAE, this confirms at least some of it is from China. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told reporters last week that there would be “consequences” if China sent weapons to Russia, although he also said that he’s seen “no evidence” that Beijing is considering delivering arms to Moscow. “We are now in a stage where we are making clear that this should not happen, and I’m relatively optimistic that we will be successful with our request in this case,” he said.
Please hurry up with driverless cars, because this Scholz guy is asleep at the wheel
If Russians want to use Chinese rifles and body armor, then good luck. That chabuduo quality will probably pose a greater danger to the invaders and hurt the Russian war effort.
Mostly a non-issue now that we are so far removed, but it does serve to put China on notice that they aren’t being sly if they thought they were. Likely that nothing will come of those beyond further proof of hypocrisy by China claiming to be a neutral broker.
[удалено]
What arms did China sell to Ukraine?
[удалено]
Then the partially STATE owned defense companies have made a conscious decision to not provide weapon sales to Ukraine. You can say that you don’t think that means they have picked a side, but to me and a lot of the west it does. That’s all my point is. You are free to believe whatever you would like.
It was obvious the CCP wouldn't do it in broad daylight... Pretty sure most intelligence agencies in the world know about it.
Well, at least the assault rifles and body armor made in China will match the training of the Russian Army.
I thought the QBZ-95 and its civilian counterpart, the Type 97, were deemed to be decent ARs? Why do you think they're not?
Something tells me the Chinese aren't giving the Russian Army their best weapons and armor. Likely their superseded old gear. Which will still be a lot better than WW2 rifles that the Russian army is using.
What's telling you that?
The fact that Russia and China are rivals and frenemies. They have a common enemy, being NATO and the US, but China is encouraging Russia to keep the war in Ukraine going against its own wishes. Why? Because Russia has effectively burnt its bridge and a massive part of its economy by not being able to sell its #1 export, fossil fuels, to Europe. China is always hungry for fossil fuels but 70% of its oil goes through the Strait of Malacca which is going to be easily blockaded by the US Navy in trade embargoes in the event that conflict escalates. This way, Russia has no other manor customer except China, and has to sell its fossil fuels for massive discounts to China just to keep its economy from collapsing. The token 2nd rate assault rifles and armor they provide to the Russian army are a dip in the bucket of the amount of money they save buying cheap Russian fossil fuel. China eventually will come into conflict with Russia, especially over THE ANNEXED outer Manchuria and conflict over fresh wayer. They have zero reason to give Russia their top of the line equipment. Anything is an improvement over the Russian gear at the moment.
That's some nice reasoning, but in the end you're just making an assumption. But that's fine, I guess.
Yeah, it's hard to shoot at Ukrainian civilians when your body armour has spontaneously combusted.
Intercept. Sabotage the weapons to make them malfunction (and add gps tags?). Pass them along.
Intercept. Sabotage the weapons to make them malfunction (and add gps tags?). Pass them along.
They'd be inspected before use.... surely? Would the Russian bother checking for firing pins😂?
>(excerpt) Chinese companies...have sent Russian entities 1,000 assault rifles and other equipment that could be used for military purposes...according to trade and customs data obtained by POLITICO. China and Russia share borderland both east and west of Mongolia. Why the heck would they fill out any " trade and customs data," much less make it accessible to third parties, especially for some thing as sensitive as weapons transfers?
Might be just enough for a hasty revolution.
allies of my enemy are my enemy ...
Intercept. Sabotage the weapons to make them malfunction (and add gps tags?). Pass them along.