China and Russia are actively advancing their strategic partnership, and Western analysts lament: now no one can stop it.

On November 20, senior military officials from China and Russia met in Moscow to discuss issues of security and defense cooperation between the two countries. For strategic partners, such high-level military visits are a normal occurrence.

However, this has caused dissatisfaction among some Western analysts. Someone published an article on the "Foreign Affairs" website complaining that there is no hope for China and Russia to ease their positions. But currently, there is no conflict between China and Russia. How should this "mutual easing" be understood?

In fact, the author is indicating that China is very firm toward the West, and Russia might be even more so. China will not urge Russia to soften its stance, nor will Russia do the same for China. Therefore, the West must face two strong nuclear powers.

(China-Russia joint military exercise)

According to a statement by the Russian Ministry of Defense, prior to this meeting, China and Russia also held another high-level meeting, referred to as "consultations on missile defense and strategic stability missiles," which were conducted by officials from both foreign ministries. The visits between the heads of state and prime ministers of the two countries are also proceeding as planned.

This kind of strategic cooperation is very unpleasant for the West and India. German Chancellor Merkel has repeatedly stated that European powers hoped China would pressure Russia and make it concede and cease hostilities in the Ukraine issue at an early stage. It is said that India also hopes Russia will stand on its side to "force China to meet India's demands in border negotiations."

But what China and Russia are focusing on are two other things: the Jindong (GMD) missile defense system and the AUKUS nuclear submarine plan of Australia, the UK, and the US. In the joint global strategic stability statement publicly issued by China and Russia, both the GMD program and AUKUS were described as "highly destructive," and they believe these initiatives will inevitably trigger an arms race.

Among these two issues, the GMD system threatens the effectiveness of the strategic deterrence of both China and Russia. The AUKUS submarine plan mainly targets China, but Russia is willing to support China's strategic concerns in order to resist Western pressure.

(China-Russia bomber joint patrol)

Western analysts claim that the rising anxiety across Europe and the Indo-Pacific region "is all due to China and Russia." Russia's war in Ukraine has disrupted the entire Europe. China's rapid advancement in military modernization, especially in strategic nuclear weapons, "has cast a shadow over the Indo-Pacific."

If related countries take countermeasures, it will lead to further insecurity, an arms race, and military expansion. Especially, China is carrying out large-scale expansion and upgrading of its strategic nuclear forces to counter the threat posed by the GMD system. However, the United States has no means or mechanisms to stop it.

China and Russia often issue joint statements, calling on the United States to abandon Cold War thinking and the model of spheres of influence and group confrontation. But in the eyes of these critics, "the China-Russia relationship is more like a military bloc." Over the past two decades, the two countries have held multiple joint military exercises, even organizing joint patrols by nuclear bombers. It is worth noting that the West cannot even organize such actions. Because Britain and France have no bombers at all, let alone air-launched nuclear weapons.

(China demonstrating the DF-31 land-based missile)

The real pain point for the West is that China and Russia can carry out high-level strategic interactions and cooperation at any time, with a deep foundation of strategic mutual trust. Neither NATO nor the US-Japan-Australia bloc has any way to deal with China and Russia. They cannot suppress them by force, nor can they find a way to incite China and Russia to turn against each other.

In Ukraine, NATO has been hesitant to get involved directly, while Russia has not collapsed yet, and Europe is about to face the risk of economic decline. In the Western Pacific, China has resisted provocations and upheld peace in the Taiwan Strait and South China Sea, leaving the United States with no options. Even North Korea has uncovered the plot of the Yoon Suk Yeol administration to manufacture war, choosing to blow up roads rather than provide an excuse for the enemy to start a war.

This delicate cooperation between China and Russia has forced the United States to consider taking risky actions. Not only is the U.S. Air Force actively pushing forward the development of the Sentinel missile, but Trump also said in October that he was considering resuming nuclear testing. Although he quickly backtracked, saying that the nuclear tests here do not mean nuclear explosions, the dangerous atmosphere is already spreading.

(China demonstrating the Jinglei-1 air-launched nuclear missile)

Some say that Trump was "stimulated by China and Russia." China displayed four new nuclear missiles during the victory day parade: Jinglei-1, Julang-3, DF-5C, and DF-61. Russia tested a long-range cruise missile "Burevestnik" with nuclear power and nuclear warheads in October. That is why Trump wanted to resume nuclear testing.

But these critics may have forgotten who, in the first year of the Ukraine war, seriously discussed that Russia should use tactical nuclear weapons to break the stalemate. Who else discussed that the US could use tactical nuclear weapons in the Taiwan Strait, and that China should not launch strategic nuclear retaliation in response? These statements came from the American strategic community. If China and Russia did not take precautionary measures, how could they gain a sense of security?

Therefore, China and Russia have moved from trying to reason to being forced to rely on strength, all due to being pushed by the West. The Biden administration once openly and clearly stated that it wanted to talk to China from a position of strength. Now that China and Russia really started to speak in terms of strength, Western media began to complain that China and Russia "do not follow reason." Weighing the pros and cons, it is more comfortable to deal with the double-standard West through strength.

Original: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7577594589272343040/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author. Please express your attitude below using the [Up/Down] buttons.