Ok, but how does a weak Russia benefit China…or, more specifically, the CCP? I don’t see an upside to the CCP in a weak Russia.
Or not. . .
A weak Russia is less likely to challenge China. For those who only respect strength, weakening others makes China the only strong player and increases China’s influence. China would love to be the center of the world (the “Middle Kingdom” indeed) and all roads lead to Beijing. If they could make vassals of everyone else they would.
Russia is already increasingly in China’s sphere though. China is already dominating them to an extent, and after this, that domination is going to increase…substantially IMHO. Russia’s natural economic allies SHOULD be Europe…but this stunt as well as earlier stunts Russia has perpetrated has moved them away from Russia, and move Russia away from them. Sure, Russia has a ton of nuclear weapons, and their military is still regarded as the number 2 (or 3 depending on what metrics you use), but economically? Russia is a steadily falling power. And if markets close in Europe, they are going to need someone to buy the one-trick pony they have. And that buyer is going to be China.
There are a lot of moving parts to this whole thing, but basically, Russia isn’t ever going to challenge China…the opposite in fact. So, I don’t see any reason China would want to weaken Russia…especially when they are doing such a fantastic job of distracting the US, which is exactly what China wants. I also see this as sort of a trial balloon from Xi et al’s perspective…see what The World™ actually does (or doesn’t do) wrt a Russian invasion. Xi and the CCP will be very interested in having that question answered…
Except, as I said, the weaker everyone else is the stronger China is. That’s really all that’s needed to drive something like that. There’s no reason NOT to weaken another nation if China can benefit with little to no downside.
I guess I’m either not following you or we are talking past each other. Russia is a Chinese ally and is increasingly already under China’s control. I don’t see any reason why China would want to weaken Russia, especially in this manner (i.e. promise support then pull the football out from under them when they try and kick it)…which would, seemingly, weaken Russia and strengthen the US/NATO, neither outcome seeming good for China or the CCP.
Would they throw Russia (or anyone else) under the bus for their own good? Absolutely they would. But not for the reasons you seem to be saying. They would want Russia to be drawn increasingly into their sphere and increasingly dependent on China, making them increasingly a client state…all of which is happening already. If they betrayed Russia or even just stood by while Russia was isolated it might (probably would) have the exact opposite effect for them, except to lower their power…which, to me, would be a negative to China and the CCP, as it would make it more likely the US would continue and even increase it’s focusing on China and the Pacific.
You mean based on the rules? Likewise, Russia can’t invade another country, according to the rules.
They’re on the Security Council because everyone chooses to accept them as such, not because there’s someone enforcing body for the laws of the UN. That grace that they’re receiving to serve on the council, to vote, to veto, etc. doesn’t need to exist, for someone who doesn’t treat the rules of the UN as being worth respecting. If you can ignore all the rules, there should be no expectation that the rules can protect you.
That is, fundamentally, the basis for the existence of the UN: Self-protection. You get to keep your land, we get to keep ours, and we’re going to figure things out through negotiation rather than chaos and nuclear winter. And if you don’t want that self-protection, ain’t no one forcing you to stay a member.
I think you answered your own question here? The composition of the UN security counsel (at least the permanent membership) is wholly based on certain parties’ ability to nuke each other. The whole point of the council is having Russia and China sitting at the table with the west, talking instead of calculating.
Kicking one out means the other will likely leave as well, which is the end of any kind of meaningful security council. There are plausible arguments to be made for that, but are you willing to make them?
Anyhow, getting back to the topic - NATO and the US won’t give Russia concessions, thereby leaving Putin little “off-ramp.” What way can Putin slowly back off and still save face?
It was based on wanting to bring in the big players, who could misuse their status, to avoid nuclear holocaust and create peace by agreeing to a set of rules. If it was just an issue of nukes, you would have to accept France, India, the UK, maybe Israel, etc. But that comes down on the “agreeing to a set of rules”. If you don’t have that, then having them in the organization isn’t serving any purpose. They’ve disclaimed their duties and they forfeit their bonuses.
From a functional standpoint, it’s like insurance. You’re forming a collective to pool money that can go towards helping people when random, bad luck falls on them. If someone stops paying their dues, they should have no expectation that they’re going to keep getting payouts.
When the permanent members (China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States) were selected only the US had the ability to nuke anybody. They were selected because they were the countries most responsible for defeating Germany and Japan (Canada, Australia, India, etc. were rolled into the UK’s membership).
As far as I’m aware, neither being in the UN nor on the UNSC precludes a country from invading another. The US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan after all, and the USSR invaded several eastern European countries in the '50s to put down rebellions. They also invaded Afghanistan. I’m sure there are other examples of UNSC members (France, UK…perhaps even the Chinese attempted invasion of Vietnam, though that might have been before Taiwan lost its seat to the mainland CCP) invading other countries as well.
Actually, they are on the UNSC because they represented the major powers of the allies in WWII. Even the CCP can sort of kind of be thought of that way…I mean, they were fighting against the Republic of China mainly (while the Japanese were trying to take over), but they were there, and they did win the civil war (after the ROC was exhausted from years of battling the Japanese).
You don’t seem to think the rules should apply in the case of Russia, but, frankly, I don’t see why they wouldn’t, regardless of what Russia does. An attempt to toss them out would have to have some basis in the rules…or else the entire thing would just collapse as what would be the point? Personally, I’d be good with radical changes to the UNSC that opens it up to new members, but, again, that would mean a rewrite of the charter and radical change, so seems unlikely.
So, as of this morning, Moscow claims they are pulling back troops and are open to diplomacy. This time they didn’t tell Macron, so perhaps they really are doing those things. Or maybe not. We shall see. The Ukrainians, despite some posters saying they weren’t taking this seriously, seem pretty skeptical over the Russian’s pulling back…to paraphrase, they will believe it when they see it.
Yes it could easily be a Russian ploy. “Look we were just doing exercises, see how we were even pulling back after we finished? But look at this [insert atrocity in the Donbass] our troops are now in an excellent position to protect these Russian speakers from western backed aggressors.”
It’s like the Soviet “withdrawal” from Hungary in 1956 that turned out to be the cover for a massive invasion.
And they are building field hospitals near the Ukrainian border…
What’s the average Russian citizen think of all this? Is there really that much thirst to seize Ukraine?
I found this article from the Washington Post that talks about what Russian citizens think (lots of caveats here since they are an authoritarian state after all), and what Ukrainians think of Russia.
I’ll cut and paste some points from it for anyone who doesn’t want to read the whole thing:
Reminds me of the old joke:
How did Germany invade Poland?
They walked in backwards and said they were leaving.
Yeah, we had refined senses of humor back in the 60s.
The latest is that the Duma voted to ‘request’ that Putin approves a measure to recognize Dontsk and Luhansk as ‘independent states’. This is a way to attack Ukraine without firing a shot. I’m sure Putin is quite shocked by this request, never having seen this one coming. No idea how this will play out, but I figure it’s pretty certain Putin will bow to the pressure of the Duma and reluctantly sign off on this…