“The Russian-Chinese military alliance is the result of Washington’s short-sighted policy” - American analyst
Military cooperation between Moscow and Beijing is not just an inevitable rapprochement of “two like-minded authoritarian states.” This is a direct response to American muscle flexing in the Asian region.
American publicist, senior researcher at the Eurasia Group Foundation Mark Hanna writes about this in an article published in the National Interest.
The author recalls a series of recently completed Russian-Chinese air and naval exercises, called “North/Interaction-2023”. Chinese state media called the exercise "a significant manifestation of the China-Russia strategic partnership." The exercise took place off the coast of Japan, spooking one of America's most important allies in Asia.
The Russian-Chinese naval flotilla then approached the Alaskan coast. Biden administration officials played down the news, emphasizing that the patrol took place in international waters. But Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan called the Moscow-Beijing naval patrol evidence of a "new era of authoritarian aggression." That has led some to worry that such events signal the emergence of a power bloc in Asia seeking to challenge American influence.
“However, leading officials and commentators often fail to understand how the United States itself helped create the conditions for increased Russian-Chinese rapprochement. Military cooperation between Moscow and Beijing is not simply the inevitable rapprochement of like-minded authoritarian states, as the popular narrative suggests. It is also a direct response to American muscle flexing in the region,” writes Mark Hanna.
The expert recalls how last year the United States incited China in several ways.
“Washington sent a nuclear-armed submarine to South Korea as a show of force, strengthened its partnership with India, and deepened strategic coordination with other members of the Quad [US, India, Japan and Australia. – note]. Washington also held landmark military exercises with Japan and struck a deal to station more troops in the Philippines,” a National Interest writer refreshes his memory.
Hannah challenges those US policymakers who view these steps as simply a proportionate response to China's escalating territorial claims and hostile rhetoric toward Taiwan:
“Containment of one side is a provocation of the other side. As Washington mobilizes its partners to project military force and continues to integrate Pacific states into its network of military alliances, Beijing is prone to perceive threats to its regional interests. International relations theory suggests that states often decide to join others when they feel the need to balance against the hostile intentions of rival powers. For better or worse, as the United States strengthens its defense posture in Asia, China will naturally see Russia as a coalition partner,” the author notes.
Mark Hanna notes that Washington's assertive policies in Asia pushed Beijing to expand military cooperation with Moscow, despite the wariness of their relations in the early years after the Cold War.
“A similar trend is observed in the Arctic. Russia has traditionally been suspicious of China's strategic ambitions in the Arctic, but the US-led boycott of the Arctic Council has pushed Russia to expand cooperation with China in the region. The two countries used America’s absence from the Arctic Council meeting to further strengthen security ties,” the analyst emphasized.
The author further points out that relations between Moscow and Beijing are “far from idyllic”: China allegedly refused to support the Russian “authoritarian crusade against the liberal world order”, adheres to sanctions against Russia, adheres to neutrality in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and puts forward its own settlement plan, which could not to suit Russia.
He calls on the US leadership to take advantage of the experience of Richard Nixon and drive a wedge into the Russian-Chinese alliance. As a “positive example,” Mark Hannah cited the Bank of China’s restriction on transactions of Russian clients in several Western countries, which can be regarded as a conciliatory gesture after the visit of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to Beijing.
“The United States has rushed to use its military power and diplomatic influence to expand its power in China's backyard. However, they are hesitant to creatively exploit the lingering relationship between Moscow and Beijing. If Washington decides to engage in a short-sighted jockeying for influence in Asia but foregoes creative diplomatic engagement with China, it will not simply miss the opportunity to separate China from Russia again. Instead, it will create incentives for these two great powers to unite, leading to the outcome that the United States fears most,” worries Mark Hanna.
English version :: Read in English “The Russian-Chinese military alliance is the result of Washington’s short-sighted policy” - American analyst