10 ms·

Beijing is re-writing the Ukraine narrative

62 points by samizdis 5y ago

hirako2000 5y ago
Not sure which side makes most use of propaganda. Since we've witnessed how nato won't go help it's de facto ally, it wouldn't be intellectually honest to say China is a propagandist for saying it won't protect Taiwan either. All they will do putting is economical sanctions. The irony of propagandists calling each other awful propagandists.
- throwuxiytayq 5y ago
  Speaking of intellectual honesty, I seriously cannot fathom how people can even compare the propaganda (and the enforcement methods) employed by both sides of the conflict.
  - hirako2000 5y ago
    i would agree the methods seem different, but the western forms of propaganda are likely more effective. to me far more dangerous, since they work brilliantly.
  - yucky 5y ago
    We had this discussion today, by simply asking a room of people to explain Russia's reasoning for invading Ukraine (justified or not). Almost nobody knew, which means our propaganda in the West is QUITE effective.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  - erichocean 5y ago
    Libya and Kosovo and Iraq all say "hi!" (All three were subject to, ahem, "special military operations" by explicitly NATO troops in the last 30 years.) But you're right of course: NATO is supposed to be purely defensive. In practice, though, not so much. In fact, as I write this, NATO members are providing weapons to Ukraine despite no NATO member being attacked, or threatened with attack. Yet another "special military operation" for NATO in the last 30 days. At least it's for a good cause…
    - NicoJuicy 5y ago
      Hi, A multi-state NATO-led intervention is not NATO. Iraq was wrong and for Libya and Kosovo there were plausible indications for actual peacekeeping missions. Since both had severe issues at the time, which weren't solved in case of Libya. One of the things is that US ( after 9/11) had their own reasons for overdoing "war on terrorism". Which I do in fact don't agree with as with many others then - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War ( it triggered the largest protest in the world . I joined the protest 2 times as 16 year old fyi ) But again, that is not NATO and they don't trigger any article. Note: Kosovo indeed wants to say hi, concerning NATO membership - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kosovo-parliament-urges-government-start-nato-membership-bid-2022-03-03/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kosovo-parliament-urges...
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
  - allisdust 5y ago
    On paper, NATO nations should all be protecting each other. Whether that actually happens in practice against an adversary having nukes is yet to be seen. Its a valid open question.
    - NicoJuicy 5y ago
      I don't think there would be any doubt about this. NATO is the best option many countries have and that's exactly the reason why Finland and Sweden now want to join.
    - indymike 5y ago
      > Its a valid open question I think this is a dangerous thing to question. The last thing the world needs is an armageddon pop quiz.
- incompatible 5y ago
  NATO isn't ready to start WW3 for a "de facto ally". In theory, they'll do it for a full paid-up member.
  - plussed_reader 5y ago
    One of the times it doesn't pay to be a 'non-member of a union house'.
- VictorPath 5y ago
  - hirako2000 5y ago
    daring to mention anomalies in the western establishment speech will only lead to down votes, without anyone really addressing your point of course.
- zthrowaway 5y ago
  In my opinion the West has to rely on propaganda far more than an authoritarian government, where they can just force people into doing what they want. In the west you have to convince and brainwash them into doing what you want.
birdyrooster 5y ago
China Uncensored recently did a piece on how "China Can't Save Russia from an Economic Crisis" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1437ZfUGmU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1437ZfUGmU
- Aperocky 5y ago
  Of course they did, it's best to binge watch all of it and compare it with the news and eventual outcome of things, especially the old episodes. And then wait a few years and see how this one comes out.
- bakuninsbart 5y ago
  China Uncensored is part of the Falun Gong media empire, which is known for fake news and far-right conspiracy theories [0] Falun Gong is a religious organization, or cult, depending on who you ask, with strong anti-communist tendencies, as they were persecuted heavily by the CCP. Be that as it may, their 'news' on China is completely removed from reality, and they've been predicting the imminent collapse of the Chinese economy for well over a decade. [0] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ntd-tv-new-tang-dynasty/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ntd-tv-new-tang-dynasty/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/ [1] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/stepping-into-the-uncanny-unsettling-world-of-shen-yun https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/stepping-into... https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-abc-is-right-that-falun-gong-teachings-are-dangerous/12538058 https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-abc-is-right-that-falun-...
  - throwaway5848 5y ago
    - halfnormalform 5y ago
      - throwaway5848 5y ago
pasabagi 5y ago
Kinda nonsense article. Of course China isn't a fan of NATO: they literally fought a hot war against NATO[0] (Korean war) within living memory. It's unsurprising that they don't want pro-NATO talking points gaining popular currency. It's unsurprising that they're using authoritarian measures to achieve this - they are, after all, an authoritarian state. [0]: I was wrong, it was the UN.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Bouncingsoul1 5y ago
  You do know the difference between United Nations and NATO?
  - pasabagi 5y ago
    Oh, that's embarrassing. I'll edit my post to include your correction.
  - julienfr112 5y ago
    at the time, URSS choose not to take part of the security concil. And all permanent members of the said security concil where nato members.
anm89 5y ago
I'm not really much of a Beijing supporter in general but: Why is it that the western narrative is primary and Beijing rewrites it? It's all narratives. They're all primary in their own sphere. The idea that the US has a history of objectively writing the narrative is laughable, so so what if Beijing is full of it too.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- Jyaif 5y ago
  Putin is a great guy and Ukraine is controlled by Nazis. The fact that I can write this without fearing for my life or my "social score" is the difference.
  - motleysource 5y ago
    You forgot to provide the source for Ukraine's argument: https://youtu.be/rUja0J6mMds https://youtu.be/rUja0J6mMds
  - __s 5y ago
    But fear for your karma!
- ordu 5y ago
  No, the article is about Beijing had rewritten one of its narratives and replaced it with another. There is nothing about western narrative.
- Ourgon 5y ago
  Because you're reading and writing this on a western site? Of course we have our narrative, and of course it contains embellishments and skips over the cracks, it is meant to show us in the best light. Take away all embellishments and show all the cracks from all narratives and take your pick, which one will it be? - the west, with a nominally "democratic" system which has the tendency to be gamed by an in-crowd, leading to essentially the same people taking turns in controlling the countries. They use this control both for personal gain as well as to drive their (party) ideologies which are not always true to what they wrote on their election posters. The populace is generally free to do what they like as long as they pay taxes. The justice departments tend to err on the side of justice, not on that of the will of the ruling parties. - China, with an autocratic system described as "communism" but in reality closer to an oligarchy where "the leader" has an outsized amount of power to get through his will and as such gets to decide which course the country follows. Under Mao this was bloodshed and oppression, under Deng - who was wedged between the Soviet and Western blocks - it was aimed at loosening the reins a little bit in an attempt to overcome the damage caused by Mao, now under Xi is it again more towards Mao's ideology but this time backed by 21st century technology. The populace has undoubtedly become richer in the process but they are not free to display their displeasure, those who stick their heads up above the field tend to disappear. The justice system is on the side of the party which wrote the law books. - Russia, with a kleptocratic system described as "democratic" but in reality mostly a show meant to fool the outside world. From Czar through Commissar to would-be Czar, all leaders have convinced the Russian people that they are both destined for greatness as well as that they are under constant attack from all sides which explains the empty shelves in the stores - the motherland is surrounded by enemies. Also from Czar through Commissar to Putin, they enrich themselves and their chosen (but disposable) lackeys in the process, funnelling off funds which were meant to "defend the motherland" or "build those bridges" or "improve those roads". The populace has been brewed in this system for so long that especially the older generations don't know any better than that this is the way it works - Russia has always been at war with Eurasia after all. The justice system is on the side of the one with the largest bribes. I choose the west, warts and all. You?
sebastianconcpt 5y ago
Time to keep an eye on the hypothesis that the Chinese Communist Party is playing Putin in a similar way Stalin played Hitler [1] [1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/article/abs/icebreaker-controversy-did-stalin-plan-to-attack-hitler/17094114B28710068DC05CC2C59F2DBB https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/articl...
- oneoff786 5y ago
  I don’t recall Stalin playing hitler?
  - hef19898 5y ago
    I'd go on a limb and say it was the other way round. Until Barbarossa, that is.
    - antifa 5y ago
      I would think of it as a more mutual hatred of each other, mutual acknowledgement that war was inevitable.
      - hef19898 5y ago
        That's the thing, so. There is no reliable historical source that Stalin planned, immediately or later, a war against Nazi-Germany. Doesn't necessary mean that this war was not inevitable, there is only one party needed to start one after all. The USSR was caught completely flat footed, Red Army Officers even participated at balls and other social events the night before the invasion, on the other side of the soon-to-be front line. And Stalin ignored all intel pointing at an imminent invasion.
        eveningcoffee 5y ago
        The huge amount of equipment prepared for the invasion close to the border and no defense line was main give away that Stalin prepared to roll over of Hitler after he has destroyed all other European armies and finalize the commy dream they cooked up with Lenin to concur all of Europe that fortunately for all of us was stopped by Poles after WWI.
stunt 5y ago
Everyone is re-writing the Ukraine narrative.
- kennyadam 5y ago
  Who else? Other than Russia, of course.
  - pydry 5y ago
    Indeed, documents show a pattern of promises US negotiators made to their Russian counterparts as well as internal policy discussions opposing NATO expansion to Eastern Europe. "In the current environment, it is not in the best interest of NATO or the US that [Eastern European] states be granted full NATO membership and its security guarantees," according to a State Department memorandum in 1990, while those states were still emerging from Soviet control as the Warsaw Pact disintegrated. "[We] do not, in any case, wish to organize an anti-Soviet coalition whose frontier is the Soviet border. Such a coalition would be perceived very negatively by the Soviets." https://m.dw.com/en/nato-why-russia-has-a-problem-with-its-eastward-expansion/a-60891681 https://m.dw.com/en/nato-why-russia-has-a-problem-with-its-e... A large contingent of the western media is pretending that the documents referred to above by deutsche welle simply do not exist partly because A) Gorbachev apparently doesnt remember the assurances and B) because the repeated diplomatic assurances were never codified into a treaty. Also the phrase "purely defensive military alliance" is a lie. A lie viscerally disproven by bayonet thrust up Khafaffi's backside in 2011 by NATO allies after he was "welcomed back" into the international community. Neither of these facts are popular, but they are nonetheless still facts.
    - GekkePrutser 5y ago
      The Soviets don't exist anymore. Russia was never meant to be our arch enemy like they were. In fact you can tell from the current lack of even minimal military spending below agreed NATO standards that Europe did not view Russia as the enemy. We simply didn't even consider it likely enough to have enough resources for an effective land defense, let alone an attack. Of course this invasion put Russia back on the villain map with increasing spending accordingly. Of course NATO will now reinforce the borders, probably Sweden and Finland will join... As it was Ukraine was not going to join NATO anyway. This whole thing had the opposite effect.
dsq 5y ago
China may be playing the long game in more ways than one. Russia butts heads with West and undergoes economic and moral deterioration which may lead to rapid regime destabilization, after which China can annex Siberia, which is a truly world class prize, sparsely populated and full of resources. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to-be-redrawn/why-china-will-reclaim-siberia https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-bo... https://www.asianews.it/news-en/Beijing-'eating-up'-Siberia-53500.html https://www.asianews.it/news-en/Beijing-'eating-up'-Siberia-...
- axiosgunnar 5y ago
  > annex Siberia and get nuked?
  - dsq 5y ago
    It of course would only happen if the current regime were to fall. Perhaps 'annex' is too hard a word. Maybe 'cover all oustanding debts and throw in some lucrative personal deals for the current Kremlin warlord'? Napoleon sold a large chunk of North America for "$11.25 million, plus the forgiveness of $3.75 million in French debt". https://www.history.com/news/8-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-louisiana-purchase https://www.history.com/news/8-things-you-may-not-know-about...
    - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
      This whole mess started because Russia can't abide Sevastopol being in a NATO country. They won't accept losing Vladivostok either.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    In theory, Ukraine has a agreement with China that China would protect Ukraine from nuclear threats ( supposedly through the one road one belt agreement). http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/7/china-s-unusual-nuclearpactwithukrainesyanukovich.html http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/7/china-s-unusu... They also are turning against Ukraine, although they mentioned something different in the past: > The Chinese Government has constantly opposed the practice of exerting political, economic or other pressure in international relations. It maintains that disputes and differences should be settled peacefully through consultations on an equal footing. Abiding by the spirit of the Sino-Ukrainian joint communiqué of January 4, 1992 on the establishment of diplomatic relations, the Sino-Ukrainian joint communiqué of October 31, 1992 and the Sino-Ukrainian joint statement of September 6, 1994, China recognizes and respects the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, and stands ready to further develop friendly and cooperative Sino-Ukraine relations on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#France_and_China's_commitments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#Fr...
sorokod 5y ago
Not surprising at all given China's interest in Taiwan.
- simonh 5y ago
  The Chinese position on this and the implications for Taiwan are not as simple as a lot of the press seem to think. China's claim on Taiwan is based on the principle that it is legally still Chinese territory. Crimea is still legally Ukrainian territory, so Russia's annexation is a real problem for China. They can't support it because that would undermine the basis of their claim on Taiwan. Similarly with the invasion of Ukraine, any principle China could use to support Russian's military intervention in Ukraine could also be used to justify US military intervention in Taiwan. On the other hand big countries muscling in on little countries to take their stuff is a hobby China would love to take up if they get the chance. However their domestic promotion of Russian propaganda is more about the fact that they hate the west than it is about them actually supporting Russia at all.
  - sorokod 5y ago
    The context here is the price that Russia will end up paying and by analogy the price China may need to pay for a similar adventure. The legal details are of lesser importance I think.
    - simonh 5y ago
      That's certainly true. China would claim Taiwan regardless of the legal technicalities, but it's still interesting to see them get their claims, arguments and legalistic posturing tied up in knots over it all.
  - KptMarchewa 5y ago
    Also, China very much dislikes the puppet republics spawned to create claims on Ukraine land.
    - simonh 5y ago
dirtyid 5y ago
Beijing has consistently attributed fault to US-NATO, there's no rewriting except cracking down on extremely insensitive pro-war comments on PRC social media. Re-writing implies alternative reality where PRC would endorse take US-NATO side, which would never happen after Belgrade embassy bombing.
indy 5y ago
sebow 5y ago
Key thing to remember: While China & Russia are "buddies", China has long-term interests in Europe in their fight 'against' US: they don't want to be seen as Russia-backers necessarily because Europe is a gold mine for them: They still want their Silk Road train route from China to Europe, which moves from Kazakhstan & other Asian countries.This is also besides the obvious chinese play for Taiwan, which people should stay focused on.
Koiwai 5y ago
> "They tried to depict the U.S., the West and NATO as not trustworthy, and people in Taiwan as delusional to think the U.S. will protect Taiwan at all," Doublethink Lab CEO Min Hsuan Wu told Axios. Let me kindly remind you that secretary Hillary considered selling Taiwan to China, it's a real thing, you should google it up.
- yladiz 5y ago
  Citation needed.
- mymllnthaccount 5y ago
  I googled it. Clinton replied "it's clever" in response to reading a satirical op ed in the ny times on the topic. Please stop spreading misinformation.
  - Koiwai 5y ago
    My memory might not be exact but how does your finding make that "misinformation"?
- thechao 5y ago
  So, in 2011 Clinton wanted to discuss an OpEd piece in the NYT? Wasn't, like, her job to become informed of all possible strategic opprtunities available to the US on the geopolitical stage?
  - Koiwai 5y ago
    Let me make that clear, the only "correct" response had to be "that's nonsense!", she did not say that.
- Koiwai 5y ago
  For the record, my stance is U.S. will not "help" Taiwan at all, except selling them some outdated fighter jets.
Koiwai 5y ago
BTW, Ukraine "re-wrote" their story of the Snake Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Snake_Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Snake_Island
tpoacher 5y ago
> The Chinese government is scrubbing the country’s internet of sympathetic or accurate coverage of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and systematically amplifying pro-Putin talking points. This sentence makes zero sense. Unrelatedly, I would love to see an unbiased comparison to e.g. US media doing effectively the same thing. Not going to happen, of course (understandbly, for both countries, given their respective foreign policies and handle on their mainstream media, albeit in different ways). I'm very surprised, e.g., that throughout this, nobody has yet to make a comparison to the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban Missile Crisis. To me it looks like the mirror image of what's happening in Ukraine right now (minus the international outrage/sanctions/boycotting element -- different times before the internet, I suppose)
Overtonwindow 5y ago
I'm surprised China has not yet offered to command a no-fly zone..

62 points by samizdis 5y ago

hirako2000 5y ago

Not sure which side makes most use of propaganda. Since we've witnessed how nato won't go help it's de facto ally, it wouldn't be intellectually honest to say China is a propagandist for saying it won't protect Taiwan either. All they will do putting is economical sanctions. The irony of propagandists calling each other awful propagandists.

throwuxiytayq 5y ago
Speaking of intellectual honesty, I seriously cannot fathom how people can even compare the propaganda (and the enforcement methods) employed by both sides of the conflict.
- hirako2000 5y ago
  i would agree the methods seem different, but the western forms of propaganda are likely more effective. to me far more dangerous, since they work brilliantly.
- yucky 5y ago
  We had this discussion today, by simply asking a room of people to explain Russia's reasoning for invading Ukraine (justified or not). Almost nobody knew, which means our propaganda in the West is QUITE effective.
NicoJuicy 5y ago
- erichocean 5y ago
  Libya and Kosovo and Iraq all say "hi!" (All three were subject to, ahem, "special military operations" by explicitly NATO troops in the last 30 years.) But you're right of course: NATO is supposed to be purely defensive. In practice, though, not so much. In fact, as I write this, NATO members are providing weapons to Ukraine despite no NATO member being attacked, or threatened with attack. Yet another "special military operation" for NATO in the last 30 days. At least it's for a good cause…
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    Hi, A multi-state NATO-led intervention is not NATO. Iraq was wrong and for Libya and Kosovo there were plausible indications for actual peacekeeping missions. Since both had severe issues at the time, which weren't solved in case of Libya. One of the things is that US ( after 9/11) had their own reasons for overdoing "war on terrorism". Which I do in fact don't agree with as with many others then - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War ( it triggered the largest protest in the world . I joined the protest 2 times as 16 year old fyi ) But again, that is not NATO and they don't trigger any article. Note: Kosovo indeed wants to say hi, concerning NATO membership - https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kosovo-parliament-urges-government-start-nato-membership-bid-2022-03-03/ https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/kosovo-parliament-urges...
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- allisdust 5y ago
  On paper, NATO nations should all be protecting each other. Whether that actually happens in practice against an adversary having nukes is yet to be seen. Its a valid open question.
  - NicoJuicy 5y ago
    I don't think there would be any doubt about this. NATO is the best option many countries have and that's exactly the reason why Finland and Sweden now want to join.
  - indymike 5y ago
    > Its a valid open question I think this is a dangerous thing to question. The last thing the world needs is an armageddon pop quiz.
incompatible 5y ago
NATO isn't ready to start WW3 for a "de facto ally". In theory, they'll do it for a full paid-up member.
- plussed_reader 5y ago
  One of the times it doesn't pay to be a 'non-member of a union house'.
VictorPath 5y ago
- hirako2000 5y ago
  daring to mention anomalies in the western establishment speech will only lead to down votes, without anyone really addressing your point of course.
zthrowaway 5y ago
In my opinion the West has to rely on propaganda far more than an authoritarian government, where they can just force people into doing what they want. In the west you have to convince and brainwash them into doing what you want.

birdyrooster 5y ago

China Uncensored recently did a piece on how "China Can't Save Russia from an Economic Crisis" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1437ZfUGmU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1437ZfUGmU

Aperocky 5y ago
Of course they did, it's best to binge watch all of it and compare it with the news and eventual outcome of things, especially the old episodes. And then wait a few years and see how this one comes out.
bakuninsbart 5y ago
China Uncensored is part of the Falun Gong media empire, which is known for fake news and far-right conspiracy theories [0] Falun Gong is a religious organization, or cult, depending on who you ask, with strong anti-communist tendencies, as they were persecuted heavily by the CCP. Be that as it may, their 'news' on China is completely removed from reality, and they've been predicting the imminent collapse of the Chinese economy for well over a decade. [0] https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ntd-tv-new-tang-dynasty/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/ntd-tv-new-tang-dynasty/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/ https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-epoch-times/ [1] https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/stepping-into-the-uncanny-unsettling-world-of-shen-yun https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/stepping-into... https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-abc-is-right-that-falun-gong-teachings-are-dangerous/12538058 https://www.abc.net.au/religion/the-abc-is-right-that-falun-...
- throwaway5848 5y ago
  - halfnormalform 5y ago
    - throwaway5848 5y ago

pasabagi 5y ago

Kinda nonsense article. Of course China isn't a fan of NATO: they literally fought a hot war against NATO[0] (Korean war) within living memory. It's unsurprising that they don't want pro-NATO talking points gaining popular currency. It's unsurprising that they're using authoritarian measures to achieve this - they are, after all, an authoritarian state. [0]: I was wrong, it was the UN.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Bouncingsoul1 5y ago
You do know the difference between United Nations and NATO?
- pasabagi 5y ago
  Oh, that's embarrassing. I'll edit my post to include your correction.
- julienfr112 5y ago
  at the time, URSS choose not to take part of the security concil. And all permanent members of the said security concil where nato members.

anm89 5y ago

I'm not really much of a Beijing supporter in general but: Why is it that the western narrative is primary and Beijing rewrites it? It's all narratives. They're all primary in their own sphere. The idea that the US has a history of objectively writing the narrative is laughable, so so what if Beijing is full of it too.

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
Jyaif 5y ago
Putin is a great guy and Ukraine is controlled by Nazis. The fact that I can write this without fearing for my life or my "social score" is the difference.
- motleysource 5y ago
  You forgot to provide the source for Ukraine's argument: https://youtu.be/rUja0J6mMds https://youtu.be/rUja0J6mMds
- __s 5y ago
  But fear for your karma!
ordu 5y ago
No, the article is about Beijing had rewritten one of its narratives and replaced it with another. There is nothing about western narrative.
Ourgon 5y ago
Because you're reading and writing this on a western site? Of course we have our narrative, and of course it contains embellishments and skips over the cracks, it is meant to show us in the best light. Take away all embellishments and show all the cracks from all narratives and take your pick, which one will it be? - the west, with a nominally "democratic" system which has the tendency to be gamed by an in-crowd, leading to essentially the same people taking turns in controlling the countries. They use this control both for personal gain as well as to drive their (party) ideologies which are not always true to what they wrote on their election posters. The populace is generally free to do what they like as long as they pay taxes. The justice departments tend to err on the side of justice, not on that of the will of the ruling parties. - China, with an autocratic system described as "communism" but in reality closer to an oligarchy where "the leader" has an outsized amount of power to get through his will and as such gets to decide which course the country follows. Under Mao this was bloodshed and oppression, under Deng - who was wedged between the Soviet and Western blocks - it was aimed at loosening the reins a little bit in an attempt to overcome the damage caused by Mao, now under Xi is it again more towards Mao's ideology but this time backed by 21st century technology. The populace has undoubtedly become richer in the process but they are not free to display their displeasure, those who stick their heads up above the field tend to disappear. The justice system is on the side of the party which wrote the law books. - Russia, with a kleptocratic system described as "democratic" but in reality mostly a show meant to fool the outside world. From Czar through Commissar to would-be Czar, all leaders have convinced the Russian people that they are both destined for greatness as well as that they are under constant attack from all sides which explains the empty shelves in the stores - the motherland is surrounded by enemies. Also from Czar through Commissar to Putin, they enrich themselves and their chosen (but disposable) lackeys in the process, funnelling off funds which were meant to "defend the motherland" or "build those bridges" or "improve those roads". The populace has been brewed in this system for so long that especially the older generations don't know any better than that this is the way it works - Russia has always been at war with Eurasia after all. The justice system is on the side of the one with the largest bribes. I choose the west, warts and all. You?

sebastianconcpt 5y ago

Time to keep an eye on the hypothesis that the Chinese Communist Party is playing Putin in a similar way Stalin played Hitler [1] [1] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/article/abs/icebreaker-controversy-did-stalin-plan-to-attack-hitler/17094114B28710068DC05CC2C59F2DBB https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/articl...

oneoff786 5y ago
I don’t recall Stalin playing hitler?
- hef19898 5y ago
  I'd go on a limb and say it was the other way round. Until Barbarossa, that is.
  - antifa 5y ago
    I would think of it as a more mutual hatred of each other, mutual acknowledgement that war was inevitable.
    - hef19898 5y ago
      That's the thing, so. There is no reliable historical source that Stalin planned, immediately or later, a war against Nazi-Germany. Doesn't necessary mean that this war was not inevitable, there is only one party needed to start one after all. The USSR was caught completely flat footed, Red Army Officers even participated at balls and other social events the night before the invasion, on the other side of the soon-to-be front line. And Stalin ignored all intel pointing at an imminent invasion.
      - eveningcoffee 5y ago
        The huge amount of equipment prepared for the invasion close to the border and no defense line was main give away that Stalin prepared to roll over of Hitler after he has destroyed all other European armies and finalize the commy dream they cooked up with Lenin to concur all of Europe that fortunately for all of us was stopped by Poles after WWI.

stunt 5y ago

Everyone is re-writing the Ukraine narrative.

kennyadam 5y ago
Who else? Other than Russia, of course.
- pydry 5y ago
  Indeed, documents show a pattern of promises US negotiators made to their Russian counterparts as well as internal policy discussions opposing NATO expansion to Eastern Europe. "In the current environment, it is not in the best interest of NATO or the US that [Eastern European] states be granted full NATO membership and its security guarantees," according to a State Department memorandum in 1990, while those states were still emerging from Soviet control as the Warsaw Pact disintegrated. "[We] do not, in any case, wish to organize an anti-Soviet coalition whose frontier is the Soviet border. Such a coalition would be perceived very negatively by the Soviets." https://m.dw.com/en/nato-why-russia-has-a-problem-with-its-eastward-expansion/a-60891681 https://m.dw.com/en/nato-why-russia-has-a-problem-with-its-e... A large contingent of the western media is pretending that the documents referred to above by deutsche welle simply do not exist partly because A) Gorbachev apparently doesnt remember the assurances and B) because the repeated diplomatic assurances were never codified into a treaty. Also the phrase "purely defensive military alliance" is a lie. A lie viscerally disproven by bayonet thrust up Khafaffi's backside in 2011 by NATO allies after he was "welcomed back" into the international community. Neither of these facts are popular, but they are nonetheless still facts.
  - GekkePrutser 5y ago
    The Soviets don't exist anymore. Russia was never meant to be our arch enemy like they were. In fact you can tell from the current lack of even minimal military spending below agreed NATO standards that Europe did not view Russia as the enemy. We simply didn't even consider it likely enough to have enough resources for an effective land defense, let alone an attack. Of course this invasion put Russia back on the villain map with increasing spending accordingly. Of course NATO will now reinforce the borders, probably Sweden and Finland will join... As it was Ukraine was not going to join NATO anyway. This whole thing had the opposite effect.

dsq 5y ago

China may be playing the long game in more ways than one. Russia butts heads with West and undergoes economic and moral deterioration which may lead to rapid regime destabilization, after which China can annex Siberia, which is a truly world class prize, sparsely populated and full of resources. https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-borders-need-to-be-redrawn/why-china-will-reclaim-siberia https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2014/07/03/where-do-bo... https://www.asianews.it/news-en/Beijing-'eating-up'-Siberia-53500.html https://www.asianews.it/news-en/Beijing-'eating-up'-Siberia-...

axiosgunnar 5y ago
> annex Siberia and get nuked?
- dsq 5y ago
  It of course would only happen if the current regime were to fall. Perhaps 'annex' is too hard a word. Maybe 'cover all oustanding debts and throw in some lucrative personal deals for the current Kremlin warlord'? Napoleon sold a large chunk of North America for "$11.25 million, plus the forgiveness of $3.75 million in French debt". https://www.history.com/news/8-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-louisiana-purchase https://www.history.com/news/8-things-you-may-not-know-about...
  - kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
    This whole mess started because Russia can't abide Sevastopol being in a NATO country. They won't accept losing Vladivostok either.
- NicoJuicy 5y ago
  In theory, Ukraine has a agreement with China that China would protect Ukraine from nuclear threats ( supposedly through the one road one belt agreement). http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/7/china-s-unusual-nuclearpactwithukrainesyanukovich.html http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/3/7/china-s-unusu... They also are turning against Ukraine, although they mentioned something different in the past: > The Chinese Government has constantly opposed the practice of exerting political, economic or other pressure in international relations. It maintains that disputes and differences should be settled peacefully through consultations on an equal footing. Abiding by the spirit of the Sino-Ukrainian joint communiqué of January 4, 1992 on the establishment of diplomatic relations, the Sino-Ukrainian joint communiqué of October 31, 1992 and the Sino-Ukrainian joint statement of September 6, 1994, China recognizes and respects the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, and stands ready to further develop friendly and cooperative Sino-Ukraine relations on the basis of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#France_and_China's_commitments https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Ukraine#Fr...

sorokod 5y ago

Not surprising at all given China's interest in Taiwan.

simonh 5y ago
The Chinese position on this and the implications for Taiwan are not as simple as a lot of the press seem to think. China's claim on Taiwan is based on the principle that it is legally still Chinese territory. Crimea is still legally Ukrainian territory, so Russia's annexation is a real problem for China. They can't support it because that would undermine the basis of their claim on Taiwan. Similarly with the invasion of Ukraine, any principle China could use to support Russian's military intervention in Ukraine could also be used to justify US military intervention in Taiwan. On the other hand big countries muscling in on little countries to take their stuff is a hobby China would love to take up if they get the chance. However their domestic promotion of Russian propaganda is more about the fact that they hate the west than it is about them actually supporting Russia at all.
- sorokod 5y ago
  The context here is the price that Russia will end up paying and by analogy the price China may need to pay for a similar adventure. The legal details are of lesser importance I think.
  - simonh 5y ago
    That's certainly true. China would claim Taiwan regardless of the legal technicalities, but it's still interesting to see them get their claims, arguments and legalistic posturing tied up in knots over it all.
- KptMarchewa 5y ago
  Also, China very much dislikes the puppet republics spawned to create claims on Ukraine land.
  - simonh 5y ago

dirtyid 5y ago

Beijing has consistently attributed fault to US-NATO, there's no rewriting except cracking down on extremely insensitive pro-war comments on PRC social media. Re-writing implies alternative reality where PRC would endorse take US-NATO side, which would never happen after Belgrade embassy bombing.

indy 5y ago

sebow 5y ago

Key thing to remember: While China & Russia are "buddies", China has long-term interests in Europe in their fight 'against' US: they don't want to be seen as Russia-backers necessarily because Europe is a gold mine for them: They still want their Silk Road train route from China to Europe, which moves from Kazakhstan & other Asian countries.This is also besides the obvious chinese play for Taiwan, which people should stay focused on.

Koiwai 5y ago

> "They tried to depict the U.S., the West and NATO as not trustworthy, and people in Taiwan as delusional to think the U.S. will protect Taiwan at all," Doublethink Lab CEO Min Hsuan Wu told Axios. Let me kindly remind you that secretary Hillary considered selling Taiwan to China, it's a real thing, you should google it up.

yladiz 5y ago
Citation needed.
mymllnthaccount 5y ago
I googled it. Clinton replied "it's clever" in response to reading a satirical op ed in the ny times on the topic. Please stop spreading misinformation.
- Koiwai 5y ago
  My memory might not be exact but how does your finding make that "misinformation"?
thechao 5y ago
So, in 2011 Clinton wanted to discuss an OpEd piece in the NYT? Wasn't, like, her job to become informed of all possible strategic opprtunities available to the US on the geopolitical stage?
- Koiwai 5y ago
  Let me make that clear, the only "correct" response had to be "that's nonsense!", she did not say that.
Koiwai 5y ago
For the record, my stance is U.S. will not "help" Taiwan at all, except selling them some outdated fighter jets.

Koiwai 5y ago

BTW, Ukraine "re-wrote" their story of the Snake Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Snake_Island https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Snake_Island

tpoacher 5y ago

> The Chinese government is scrubbing the country’s internet of sympathetic or accurate coverage of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and systematically amplifying pro-Putin talking points. This sentence makes zero sense. Unrelatedly, I would love to see an unbiased comparison to e.g. US media doing effectively the same thing. Not going to happen, of course (understandbly, for both countries, given their respective foreign policies and handle on their mainstream media, albeit in different ways). I'm very surprised, e.g., that throughout this, nobody has yet to make a comparison to the Bay of Pigs invasion and the Cuban Missile Crisis. To me it looks like the mirror image of what's happening in Ukraine right now (minus the international outrage/sanctions/boycotting element -- different times before the internet, I suppose)

Overtonwindow 5y ago

I'm surprised China has not yet offered to command a no-fly zone..