Taskaeva Svetlana

At the end of January, an 85-page report by the Atlantic Council (an American think tank at NATO) entitled "The Longer Telegram: Towards a New American China Strategy" was published, dedicated to US policy in the Chinese direction. The title of the document is a direct reference to the 1946 "long telegram" of the adviser to the US Embassy in Moscow George Kennan, which became the concept of the Cold War.
This emphases its conceptual significance for the American strategy in relations with China. Several points are noteworthy. The report was released just a week after the inauguration of Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr. and is entirely tailored to the programmatic directions of his foreign policy, in which hard aggressive diplomacy gives way to "soft power." No less interesting is the reorientation of the attention of the Atlantic Council, known for whipping up Russophobic sentiments on the basis of the "Russian threat" and "Moscow's subversive activities," from Russia to China. In addition, the author of the publication wished to remain anonymous.

Containment policy
The document proposes strategic goals and major policy priorities for the United States to counter the growing power of China. Among them are diplomatic, informational and military-political measures. Among other things, an important role is assigned to the revision of relations with Russia in order to prevent it from "finally falling into the arms of China." This tone of publication largely reflects the mentality of a number of both foreign and domestic political scientists who assign Russia the role of China's "little brother".
Recently, insinuations about the inevitability of a turn of Russia to the East and the forced following of Moscow in the wake of Beijing as a new world leader have been increasingly actively circulated. In the context of the discussion on the role of the Russian state in the international world, let us analyse the civilisational aspect of today's geopolitical realities.
China is the only uninterrupted ancient civilization that still found the Sumerians, ancient Egyptians and Hittites. Her contemporaries, the first civilisational formations on the territory of modern Europe, have long since disappeared into the darkness of centuries.
The paradox of the survival of Chinese ancient civilisation is that the history of the Chinese armed forces is a continuous history of defeat, from the Mongol conquest to the colonisation of north-eastern China by Japan. Neither the invention of firearms, nor the high level of development of military art helped to reverse this trend (Sun Tzu's treatise "The Art of War" of the 6th century BC still occupies a prominent place on the bookshelves of many military leaders of our time). The civilisational continuity of the Celestial Empire was due to (and perhaps due to) the systematic enslavement by foreign invaders who assimilated among the defeated Chinese.
Russia civilisation is relatively young. But its continuity was ensured precisely by military power. The campaign of Prince Oleg to Constantinople, the defeat of the Khazar Kaganate, the Pechenegs and the Polovtsians, the victory over the Livonian Order vividly demonstrated the military power of ancient Russia. Victories over the Ottoman Empire and Napoleon's army became the hallmark of the Russian Empire. And finally, the defeat of Hitler's Germany and Nazi Japan showed the superiority of Soviet military thought and the military-industrial complex over the advanced military powers of both Europe and Asia.
I would especially like to emphasise the defeat of the large, well-trained and relatively well-equipped Kwantung grouping, which had previously captured China almost without fighting in less than a month. Regardless of the political course of Beijing, most Chinese people still remember who exactly liberated their country from the Japanese militarists, and feel sincere gratitude towards Russia.
The crisis of political power in America is an example of the catastrophic nature of geopolitical gluttony. By projecting power over the entire globe, it is already problematic for Washington to keep track of what is happening at home. And the intransigence of political opponents in the Democratic and Republican parties legitimised the unscrupulous methods of internal political struggle, which turned into riots and pogroms.
Today it is becoming more and more clear that the hegemony of one state in the world is impossible. You can't bite off more than you can stomach. And from this point of view, the American strategy of greed alienates even the initially liberal part of Russian society from the Western world.

What to expect and what to do?
Based on examples of history and modernity, in the foreseeable future, China will continue its expansion in the economic sphere, but no military solutions to Beijing's geopolitical problems are foreseen. With a high degree of probability, the Chinese leadership has studied the report of the Atlantic Council and has already made the necessary conclusions. It is unlikely that the attempts of the United States and its allies to drive a wedge between Russia and China will lead to tangible results.

Pragmatic contacts
At the same time, I would like to cool the mindset of supporters of the militarisation of international relations. The Russian-Chinese military-political bloc, as opposed to NATO, is not quite what Moscow and Beijing need. Friendship against someone is generally not the best way to develop a relationship. Pragmatic contacts that strengthen the mutually beneficial development of the economy, culture and the well-being of peoples along with a harmonious balance of forces are the main components of Russia's successful existence in the international world of the 21st century.

(Graduated from the Khabarovsk Frontier Institute of the FSB of Russia, Svetlana specialises in the field of military law, military-political analysts)
-- Pravda.ru