- Great and small American Chess players
As I have already commanded in another text, the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian War on February 24, 2022, I see as a manifestation of a "geopolitic crack" between the Atlantic planet and Eurazia, i.e. China and Russia, and thus at the end of globalization processes and ideology of globalism.
In front of us, the planet is just divided into 2 large spaces: Anglo-Saxon and Chinese-Russian, which will feature 2 non-cooperative economies, separate ideological and cultural systems, and will even function in their own – as they say colloquially – information bubbles, due to the fact that peculiar services will consciously cut off access to news channels from the another part of the world.[1]. Until recently, Chinese censorship of the net and the concept of Russian Runet were ridiculed as expressions of authoritarian states' policies that fear freedom of expression in the information world.[2]. present peculiar services in liberal-democratic Poland without any judicial decisions cut us off not only from Russian media but besides Polish websites, accused of promoting “Russian narrative”. For example, we are referring to the websites of 2 Polish weeklys – “Polish Thoughts” and “Highest Time!” to mention the 2 largest Polish media, which fell victim to liberal censorship on the anti-Russian profile. This is simply a evidence to the collapse of the ideology of globalism of belief in the intrinsic value of free circulation of information, so that the reader from Poland will have free access to news from all over the world. At the same time, economists, and peculiarly economical theorists, compose about the process of the global collapse of supply chains for the semi-autarical regional economy.[3].
The Russian attack on Ukraine is not the origin of this geopolitical crack in the Atlantic and Euro-Asian world, but alternatively its expression and catalyst. global relations analysts have long seen the inability of the global coexistence of the United States and China as superpowers and the necessity of a conflict between them. Not even due to the fact that 1 side will consciously prosecute specified a conflict. It was pointed out that this was due to human nature itself, where the situation of 2 large and strong powers led to war from fear of the latter, even if the second had not yet done anything that pointed to his aggressive intentions. The specified fact that it becomes equal to the strength of the erstwhile strongest is the origin of a sense of danger to the erstwhile hegemon, who does not trust the fresh large player. In turn, the fresh player does not believe that the erstwhile hegemon will decision and share the proceeds without a fight. Therefore, the conflict of equal powers – in this case China and the United States – which do not admit the authority of the another was indeed inevitable[4].
While this conflict has long been predicted, it has been amazing to see the arrangement of forces and alliances that arise or even arise before our eyes. The most prominent American analysts of global relations were convinced that the increase in economical power, and consequently military-political China would lead to the natural establishment of an anti-Chinese alliance, composed of all the susceptible neighbours of the mediate State. In 2014, John Mearsheimer was convinced that there would be an anti-Chinese alliance of Russia, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam and India against Beijing (the alleged balancing alliance), which would be assisted by the United States if the common strength of these allied states proved insufficient. In another words, Mearsheimer was convinced that Moscow's informal and informal alliance with Washington against Beijing would come close.[5]. This is besides the political line presented as its presidency by Donald Trump, who considered the main threat to the position of Washington China alternatively than Russia. Hence his delicate but firm refusal to build Fort Trump in Poland and good individual relations with Vladimir Putin. Trump disapproved of the American commitment to Majdan in 2013-2014, which is why he toned the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, and even stepped back from the escalation of the conflict in Syria to not irritate Moscow[6]. In the West, he was considered weak or even accused of agential relations with Russia, especially in circles that adhere to the global doctrine of neoconservativeism[7]. A reflection of this demagoguery was many primitive and crude articles in the Polish-language press, usually belonging to Western major media corporations, sympathizing with neoconservatives.
Joe Biden's winning presidential election in the United States meant that the alleged hawks, propagating the same policy as neoconservatives in the Republican Party, came to power in the White House. It is simply a confrontational policy motivated by a circumstantial American nationalism, turning into imperialism. It is founded on imperial pride, whose sources are: 1/ subjective Judeo-Puritian sense of the choice and missionary character of the United States, which have the right to organize the full planet in their image and to their interests; 2/ the belief of American military-political-economic dominance over the full world, even if Washington had to fight itself against everything[8]. As a consequence of the dominance of these circles in the White House, there has been a extremist reassessment of American abroad policy. Biden decided to proceed the confrontation with China to prevent their further growth. At the same time, he has most likely taken measures which we know small about at the moment, concerning the US and NATO's expanding engagement in Ukraine, that is, the anti-Russian direction. most likely from American inspiration Kiev began abruptly reporting not only the aspirations for integration into the European Union, but besides the entrance to NATO. At an global conference in Munich 5 days before the outbreak of the war, the president of Ukraine Volodymyr Żelenski publically and openly announced his accession to the Pact, hoping that, by referring to Article 5, Western states would assist Ukraine's armed forces, already as a associate State, in the recovery of Crimea and Donbas[9]. Since 5 days later, Russian troops attack Ukraine, it is very hard to miss the co-incidence of these dates. Let us add that the previously cited Mearsheimer in 1 of his books as early as 2018 stated that at the minute erstwhile Ukraine will enter NATO, Russia simply has to strike[10].
In this way – consciously or unconsciously (at the minute it is impossible to tell) “The United States has provoked Russia to start an open war, but this conflict has been lingered since 2014, erstwhile Moscow has not accepted political changes as a consequence of the Kiev Revolution on Maidan, funded by American and German interviews (about $5 billion). At the time of this war, Washington faced the following dilemma: should Putin Ukraine be sold in exchange for an alliance against China? Or should Kiev be supported to prolong the war and exhaust Moscow?
Contrary to information coming to Poland, there were influential political circles in the United States who wanted to make specified an agreement with Putin. And they weren't just Trumpists. He simply expressed this position of 98-year-old Henry Kissinger in his loud speech in Davos in 2022, proposing that the West recognise the annexation of Crimea and Donbass by Russia, as well as accepting Russian demands to recognise Ukraine as a neutral state, constituting a buffer that permanently separates Russia from NATO.[11]. However, this concept was not supported either in Washington or in Brussels, London or Berlin. We know that in March 2022, a period after the outbreak of the war, there was a peace agreement with Russia on the Gelenski table. Under his power, Crimea and Donbas were to fall to Russia, and Ukraine was to declare eternal neutrality. In return, Russian troops were to retreat from occupied areas. In another words, Putin demanded the legal designation of the actual status quo In exchange for peace. The information available shows that the president of Ukraine rejected the negotiated text of the agreement for the proposition of Western politicians who promised him a large supply of arms and funds[12].
Joe Biden and the leaders of the European Union decided to resolve the force against Russia, believing that economical sanctions would rapidly weaken her to sit down for peace talks. However, this did not happen, and political change in the planet went in an unforeseen direction by the West. In this situation, and Kissinger withdrew from his peace plan after six months [13], due to the fact that political events in the planet have taken on a fresh dimension. What happened? Was there anything Western analysts missed?
- Russian-Chinese ax
Even before the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, early February 2002, Vladimir Putin hosted China. The consequence of this visit was a paper signed on 4 February under the name Joint message by the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China on the fresh era of global relations and global sustainability. This paper should be regarded as a manifesto of the Moscow-Pekin axis and should so be further analysed.
The full text is simply a large Russian-Chinese manifesto against American hegemony and for building a multipolar world, which is seen as the essence of democracy at a global level. In Putin's joint declaration and Xi Jinping's words democracy and democratisation appear in full as many as 19 times. Therefore, from a doctrinal point of view, this paper should be read as an effort to take distant the American and European Union monopoly on defining what is and what is not democracy; which states are and which are not democratic. As a result, teaching what democracy is and what “standards” must be met. For this reason, the Russians and the Chinese declare very powerfully that in the ideological sphere they express obedience to Western standards in this area and definitions:
Democracy is not built on templates. Depending on the socio-political structure, history, traditions and cultural characteristics of the country, its inhabitants have the right to choose the forms and methods of implementing democracy that correspond to the particularities of that country. Only its citizens have the right to justice whether the state is democratic. The attempts by individual states to impose on another countries their ‘democratic standards’, to grant themselves a monopolistic right to measure the level of compliance with the criteria of democracy, to delineate the dividing lines on ideological grounds, including by creating narrow-format blocks and ad hoc alliances, are indeed an example of trampling democracy and of moving distant from its spirit and actual values. specified attempts to act as a hegemon pose a serious threat to global and regional peace and stableness and undermine the stableness of the planet order. The Parties are convinced that the protection of democracy and human rights should not be utilized as an instrument of force on another countries. The Parties argue the abuse of democratic values, interference in interior affairs of sovereign states under the pretext of defending democracy and human rights, as well as attempts to provoke divisions and confrontations in the world. The Parties call on the global community to respect the diversity of cultures and civilizations and the right of nations of different countries to self-determine[14].
In fact, as I have shown on another occasion, the essence of democracy in the proposed approach is its recognition with the right of the people/nation to self-determine. If the people had established democracy for themselves, they had the right to do so; if they had revolutionised themselves and set up a dictatorship, so had they. Any government established by the people/nation itself, without abroad interference, should be considered as ‘democratic’. In this sense democracy is not only Russia (considered in the West as a semi-dictation), but besides officially monopartisan China[15]. And nothing to do with Westerners!
This paper further acknowledges Russia's crucial issues for China: 1/ support for the construction of the fresh Silk Road; 2/ opposition to EU protectionism veiled as a carbon duty; 3/ opposition to the attribution of blame to China for the coronavirus pandemic; 4/ support for their rights to union with Taiwan; 5/ opposition to the expansion of American bases and alliances in the Pacific (AUKUS). In return, China has supported 2 crucial issues for Russia: 1/ opposition to NATO's expansion in Europe to the east (the Parties argue NATO's further expansion, calling on the North Atlantic Alliance to abandon the ideological approaches of the Cold War era, respect for sovereignty, safety and the interests of another countries); 2/ opposition to the rehabilitation of the Nazi ideology ("To prevent the tragedy of the planet war from repeating itself, The Parties will powerfully condemn actions aimed at eliminating work for the atrocities of fascist aggressors, militarist invaders and their associates, desecrating and defiling the honour of the victorious countries)[16].
If we combine Chinese support for Russia's opposition to NATO's expansion to the east with a proclamation against the rehabilitation of the "fascist aggressors", then already from this text a careful analyst should guess that both of these criteria meet only 1 state, namely Ukraine - especially in the context of the increasingly loud desire to join the Atlantic military pact from Kiev and the openly promoted ideology of flagism (in the western part) whether it is the racist ideology of Azov (in the east part) and another fresh paramilitary organizations not only operating openly in Ukraine, but transformed into authoritative elite military units. It is not surprising, then, that when, after the Russian-Chinese agreement is signed 20 days later, the Russian "special operation" begins, China is highly restrained towards it, refusing even to declare it a war, due to the fact that the conduct of wars is prohibited by the current global law and whoever carries on it is automatically guilty of it in the face of that law. Beijing is consistently talking about "crisis" and "conflict"[17].
In mid-March 2023, or after a year of war, Xi Jinping arrived in Moscow. planet media has devoted quite a few attention to this event. peculiar attention was paid to the farewell of the Chinese man at the airport and the last words of the Chinese leader to Putin: “There are now changes that have not been seen in a 100 years. We together drive these changes”[18]. What precisely did Xi Jinping and Putin talk about only themselves, and our grandchildren (maybe) will read declassified papers about it. However, it is worth noting – what was overlooked in Poland – that on the eve of arrival in Moscow the Chinese leader published text in the Russian press On the eve of the beginning of the fresh chapter of Chinese-Russian friendship, cooperation and joint development.
In his text Xi Jinping, after discussing various issues in the past of both states or the common fight against the wicket, makes at any point an crucial conclusion:
Both powers closely coordinated their actions internationally and carried out our powers. China and Russia are powerfully active in protecting the global strategy concentrated in the UN, an global order based on global law and basic standards of global relations based on the objectives and principles of the United Nations Charter. We have been in close communication and coordination with the UN, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, the BRICS, the G20 and another multilateral mechanisms, and have worked together for a multipolar planet and greater democracy in global relations. We actively practice real multilateralism, advance the common values of humanity and advocate building a fresh kind of global relations and a community about a common future for humanity[19].
These words clearly show that the Chinese-Russian alliance is inactive being maintained by Beijing, developing and having a common goal in the form of strengthening the multipolar world, in the Chinese-Russian diplomacy language called the word "democracy in global relations" already known to us (by default: against American "tyranny"). Against Washington's dominance over the world, 2 passages are directed against itself in the text of the Chinese statesman:
The prevailing trends of global multipolarism, economical globalisation and greater democracy in global relations are irreversible. On the another hand, our planet faces complex and interconnected conventional and non-traditional safety challenges, destructive acts of hegemony, dominance (...). The global community recognised that no country is better than others, no governance model is universal and no single country should dictate global order[20].
Xi Jinping then commented on China's position towards the war in Ukraine, consistently referred to as the crisis, writing:
Since last year we have been dealing with a widespread escalation of the Ukrainian crisis. All along China has maintained an nonsubjective and impartial stance based on the substance of this issue and actively promoted peace talks. I have put forward respective proposals, i.e. compliance with the objectives and principles of the United Nations Charter, respect for the legitimate safety concerns of all countries, support for all efforts to resolve the crisis peacefully (...). We have late published China's position on a political solution to the crisis in Ukraine, which takes into account the legitimate concerns of all parties and reflects the widest common knowing of the crisis by the global community. Constructively, we want to mitigate the side effects of the crisis and facilitate its political solution[21].
This passage draws attention to the deficiency of the definition of a Russian "special operation" as a war, and refers to a "crisis", which upholds the name of this armed conflict as "non-war", prohibited by global law. As we know, China's plan was so general that both Moscow and Kiev saw it as their support for themselves, as he spoke of global law (which liked Kiev) and the necessity to satisfy Russian pretensions, without calling anything war or aggression[22]. However, what is not remembered in Poland, the Russian position is besides justified by global law, specifically the right of nations to self-determination, which in Russian explanation has a primacy in relation to maintaining existing borders of states. It is so hard to consider China's position as not supporting Russia.
- Alliance of Complementary States
When Russian troops entered Ukraine on 24 February 2022, it was expected that after a week or 2 Kiev would capitulate. This did not happen, however, due to the fact that thanks to the fiction of the Minsk agreements, Ukraine received respective years to build its own army and rise its morale, most likely with the large aid of American specialists and weapons (which we inactive know small about), and what Angela Merkel late admitted, which was approached by Russian alleged pranksters in a telephone conversation. reasoning she was talking to Petro Poroshenko, erstwhile German Chancellor said that the Minsk Accords were not meant to bring peace but “to give Ukraine more time”[23].
When the Russians were detained by the Ukrainian army, The West was convinced that it gave Ukraine adequate time, this time will defy effectively, and now the step belongs to the West, which will bring Russia to its knees with successive tranches of economical sanctions. The percentages and tens of percent of GDP to fall in Russia as a consequence were shouted. However, this did not happen due to Russia's cooperation with the BRICS countries, mainly China and India. These countries began, at reduced prices to the planet markets, to buy from Russia the alleged hydrocarbons, whose suspension of imports by the European Union would lead to the collapse of the Russian economy, the failure of war, the triggering of revolutions and possibly even the exile of Putin.
Today, we do not know the scale of Russia's cooperation with BRICS, especially with China. Media reports that Beijing buys a evidence amount of Russian oil and gas, Chinese banks aid Russian to celebrate the effects of throwing them out of the SWIFT system, etc.[24]. There are speculations about Chinese support in electronics, and possibly in advanced weapons systems[25]. In fact, we only have rumors on this issue, many of which may be fake-news spread by the Russians (to show Chinese support for themselves) or Americans (to show China's side of the aggressor in a bad light). The most crucial aspects of this cooperation are most likely kept secret, and if, for example, the CIA has information about it, it will surely not brag about it in the media. Therefore, we do not give religion to any rumors, without being able to verify them in any way – but for the fact that specified developing cooperation is developing.
In fact, the economies of Russia and China are, as economists sometimes say, complementary. Russia has a sea of natural materials. Siberia contains most likely all, but possibly aluminum (boxite)[26]. Meanwhile, China has only coal and alleged uncommon metals. They were so permanently dependent on imports of natural materials from abroad: from the Gulf (oil and natural gas), from Africa, from around the world. Transport of these natural materials by sea has always been at risk. nevertheless late China has been expanding its war fleet[27]It is for good that no 1 knows what its combat value is, due to the fact that it has not yet participated in the actual war. Therefore, Beijing tries to circumvent its uncertain maritime trade through land trade routes, including the fresh Silk Road project. In fact, access to Siberian natural materials actually solves all the natural materials problems of the Chinese economy: isolated Russia must sale hydrocarbons comparatively cheaply due to the fact that it does not have alternate markets (outside India) and through convenient (safe) and short land routes. In Beijing's alliance with Moscow, the second turns into a giant "gas station" for China. On the another hand, the same Russia – technologically heavy delayed – becomes the perfect importer for Chinese technology and electronics. These products are comparatively cheap, from year to year higher quality and are surely able to fill the gap created by Western sanctions. In addition, Russia adds its atomic power (7.700 heads), gigantic compared to Chinese (280)[28]. In global relations, the position of both powers besides gives a common seat on the UN safety Council as permanent members, thus having veto rights.
China’s president Xi Jinping waves after introducing the members of the Chinese Communist Party’s fresh Politburo Standing Committee, the nation’s top decision-making body, in the large Hall of the People of the Beijing on October 23, 2022. (Photo by Noel Celis / AFP) (Photo by NOEL CELIS/AFP via Getty Images)The emergence of economically complementary Eurasia is frequently inactive not seen. In Poland there are inactive myths of Chinese exhaling Siberia. These fairy tales are not only told by tic-tokers and amateurs on the Internet, but even by serious MEPs[29]. However, the problem of this complementarity has been identified in Germany. Since the fresh Ostpolitik Willy Brandt Germany has become accustomed to their economy and Russia being complementary: Berlin supplied Russia with technologically advanced and device products for decades in exchange for hydrocarbons[30]. Most likely in Berlin, after brief hesitation, as the outbreak of the war clearly amazed the German elite, that the slow advancement of the Russian army would allow, through harsh sanctions, to push the Russian economy down and force Moscow into greater economical affluence, essential at least for the passage of the alleged Green Revolution (Fit for 55), that is, until 2035, erstwhile the EU economy would become independent of hydrocarbons, especially oil (the situation with gas is more difficult).
The sanctioning policy has yielded the other effect to Germany: Russia not only has sustained sanctions, but has permanently shifted its exports of hydrocarbons to China and India, completely independent of Berlin as an importer and supplier of method products. As a result, the German economy has lost its safe and proven natural material base for decades, a partner with a complementary economy. Even if Berlin wanted to return to co-operation after the war, not only is it not known whether Moscow would be curious in it yet, but the main transport channel in the form of Nord Stream (possibly) blown up by American peculiar forces was besides lost. German political elites shared in their views what should be done now. The opposition right of alternate für Deutschland for the cost of returning to complementarity with Russia has already announced its readiness to accept the division of Ukraine into the east (independent and related to the West) and the Russian-speaking east 1 to be incorporated into Russia[31]. Meanwhile, Olaf Scholz's government went in a different direction, taking up a number of noisy anti-Russian actions in Ukraine (the late accelerated arms supply), in Moldova[32] and in Georgia[33], and besides starting a violent anti-Chinese agitation[34]. This is logical, since China has taken Germany's place in Russian politics and economy.
- Summary of the fresh geopolitical strategy in the world
Russian aggression to Ukraine has completely changed the political and economical power strategy in the world, sparking many discussions on this subject, including the view expressed not so long ago by Magdalena Ziętek-Wielkomska that we have the end of conventional geopolitics for the "network" reasoning of the world[35]. However, the author of this text with specified a extremist stance disagrees, seeing the emergence of the Russian-Chinese bloc just a triumph of classical geopolitical categories[36]which is an expression of our wider view that the nature of planet politics has always been, is and will be the same. Only players and the arrangement of forces between them change.
Without having the chance to draw in specified a short text all aspects of the fresh planet agreement that we are facing, we would like to draw attention to the phenomenon of the reversal of respective alliances:
1/ The United States for a alternatively weak success of defending Ukraine against changing the government and cutting it off by east Russian-speaking territories – which, by the way, is simply a large question mark and seems improbable to us – decided to push Russia into China. Thus an inept American politician, filled with imperial pride, self-proclaimed the emergence of the united land power of Eurasia. Moreover, the emergence of this conflict with the West not only caused the collapse of globalisation as an economical phenomenon and globalism as an ideology, but the recently created power seems to defy Washington's economic-nuclear-political potential, becoming a geopolitical alternate to American hegemony for the full world.
2/ The closest traditionally European ally of the United States for many years, namely Germany, has lost all the benefits of complementarities of their economy and Russian economy. It is hard to tell how this will translate into long-term German GDP and the competitiveness of this economy, the second exporter in the world. However, all points to Berlin's permanent failure of access to inexpensive and certain Siberian natural materials, peculiarly alleged hydrocarbons. This is likely to slow Berlin's economical strength towards another powers. Germany is trying to compensate for these losses by the European Union's federalisation projects thrown over and over again to manage the greater demographic mass and economical potential.
3/ In Asia an alliance has been born so far considered "impossible", namely the Moscow-Pekin axis. Pressed simultaneously by Washington, 2 powers climbed above conventional dislikes and resentments, creating a giant economic-political block of complementary economies. In front of our eyes, this block present challenges the West, especially the Hegemony of the United States.
Adam Wielomski
First print: fresh geopolitical map of the planet 1 year after the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, “tax Advice”, 2023, no. 3, pp. 35-40.
[1] A. Wielomski, Geopolitical fracture 2022, in: Lost the war. Conflict in Ukraine, beneficiaries and bankrupts, Wrocław 2022, pp. 21-30.
[2] A. Bogał-Brzezinska, J.A. Wendt, The geopolitical context of Russian information sovereignty in cyberspace and its importance for global security, ‘De safe et Defensione’, 2020, No 6, pp. 97-113; D. Grabowska, Restrictions on net Communications in China, in: D. Siemieniecka, M. Szabłowska-Zaremba (ed.), The net as a space for social relations – opportunities, limitations, perspectives, Lublin 2021, pp. 170-178.
[3] The president The large Reset, PDF, pp. 45-46, 52-53, 63-65, 71-73, 83-84, repari.free.fr/schwab2020.pdf [20.01.2023].
[4] J.J. Mearsheimer, Political Powers Tragism, Kraków 2019 [2014], pp. 429-486; J. Nougueira Pinto, Hegemony. 7 duelos pelo poder global, Lisboa 2021, pp. 390-430.
[5] J.J. Mearsheimer, Political tragedy..., pp. 465-466.
[6] O. Hare, ‘Une nouvelle ère’? Défense et stratégie des États-Unis après la premère année de l’administration Trump, ‘Politique Américaine’, 2018, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 121-122; M. Quencez, Le ‘trumpisme’ en politique étrangère: imagination et pratique, ‘Politique Etrangère’ 2020, No 2, pp. 79-80, 83-84.
[7] The president Pourquoi les néoconservateurs se sont-ils opposés à Donald Trump? Les fondements idéologiques d’un rejeet affirmé, ‘Politique Américaine’, 2021, Vol. 36, No. 1, pp. 97-130.
[8] M.C. Rhoades, Neoconservatism. Believefs, the Bush Administration and the Future, Kansas City 2008, pp. 32-34, 96-98; D. Cooper, Neoconservatism and American abroad Policy. A Critical Analysis, fresh York 2011, pp. 100-152.
[9] W. Zelensky, Rede des ukrainischen Präsidenten Wolodymyr Selenskyj auf der 58. Münchener Sicherheitskonferenz, 19.02.2022, München, bpb.de/themen/europa/ukraine-analysen/No 262/346833/documentation-rede-des-ukrainischen-praesiden-wolodymyr-selenskyj-auf-der-58-muenchener-sicherheitskonferenz-19-02-2022-muenchen/ [28.03.2023].
[10] J.J. Mearsheimer, Big illusion. Liberal Dreams and global Reality, Kraków 2021 [2018], pp. 267-278.
[11]Henry Kissinger at Davos: Ukraine should quit territory to Russia to scope peace, pubaffairsbruxelles.eu/eu-in-the-media/henry-kissinger-at-davos-ukraine-shore-give-up-territory-to-russia-to-reach-peace/ [28.03.2023].
[12]Die Kriegsziele des Westens.Deutscher Diplomat fordert Einigung der NATO auf „westliche Kriegsziele“ in der Ukraine. Neue Quellen belegen: Der Westen verhinderte im Frühjahr 2022 ein rasches Kriegsende [2023], german-foreign-policy.com/news/detail/9164 [18.02.2023].
[13]Kissinger: The concept of neutral Ukraine no longer makes sense; the country should be in NATO, newspaper.pl/news/world/articles/8639231,kissinger-Ukraine-neutrality-rise-to-nato-davos-2023.html [28.03.2023].
[14]Joint message by the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China on the fresh era of global relations and global sustainability, modern think.pl/2023/02/19/community-association-federation-Russian-and-Chinese-popular republic/ [19.02.2023].
[15] A. Wielomski, Liberal democracy, non-liberal democracy and democratisation. Glos to a Russian-Chinese message dated February 4, 2022, modern think.pl/2023/03/18/democracy-liberal-democracy-non-liberal-and-democratisation/ [18.03.2023].
[16] Both quotes for: Joint Statement..., op.cit.
[17] J. Blanchette, B. Lin, China’s Ukraine Crisis. What Xi Gains – and Loses – From Backing Putin, foreignaffairs.com/articles/china/2022-02-21/chinas-ukraine-crisis [28.03.2023].
[18]Xi and Putin's last call. It's all recorded., basins.pl/observator-media/419173/visyta-xi-in-moskwie-nagrala-sie-last-talk-with-putin.html [28.03.2023].
[19] Xi Jinping, On the eve of the beginning of the fresh chapter of Chinese-Russian friendship, cooperation and joint development, conservatism.pl/xi-jinping-in-early-opening-new-chapter-Chinese-Russian-friendly-operation-and-common-development/ [23].2023.
[20] Ibid.
[21] Ibid.
[22]China has presented its peace plan for Ukraine, money.pl/economy/chiny-presented-its-plan-peaceful-for-Ukraine-6869885532949088a.html [24.02.2023].
[23]Angela Merkel “a victim” of Russian praksters. She talked about Poland, cyberdefence24.pl/cybersecurity/English-merkel-sacrifice-Russian-Prankster-movila-o-polsce [28.03.2023].
[24] The president New supply evidence for China. This is what happens to oil from Russia., energy.rp.pl/ropa/art37998971-new-record-delivery-to-chin-to-to-what-history-sie-z-ropa-z-rosion [28.03.2023]; I. Trusewicz, Russia chooses “Chinese SWIFT”, rp.pl/banki/art1413431-Russian-chosen-Chinese-swift [28.03.2023].
[25]China deliver Russian weapons? Western intelligence is considering disclosure, newspaper.pl/news/world/articles/8666590, chiny-bron-Russia-interview.html [28.03.2023].
[26] R. White-skinned, The Geostrategic Position of the Russian Federation. A Powermetric Study, Siedlce 2018, pp. 255-273.
[27] R. Kochnowski, Navy of the People's Liberation Army of China, conservatism.pl/Kochnowski-marine-war-Chinese-Army-people-library/ [28.03.2023].
[28] Data for 2018. See Nuclear weapons,pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pa%C5%84stwa_have%C4%85ce_bro%C5%84_j%C4%85dr%C4%85 [28.03.2023].
[29] R. Czarnecki, China wants to teardrop distant their old lands from Russia?, basins.pl/opinie/421474/black-chiny-china-chca-derwac-from-rusion-its-old-earth.html [28.03.2023].
[30] M. Kreile, Ostpolitik und ökonomische Interestisen, in: E. Jahn, V. Rittberger (ed.), Die Ostpolitik der BRD: Triebkräfte, Widerstände, Konsequenzen, Opelden 1974, pp. 71-94; W.D. Lippert, The economical Diplomacy of “Ostpolitik”: Origins of NATO’s Energy Dilemmas, b.m.w. 2011, pp. 173-183.
[31] See interview with Head of AfD: A. Weidel, Weidel sieht einen „Wirtschaftskrieg gegen Deutschland“ [2022], deutschlandfunk.de/alice-weidel-afd-ukraine-krieg-100.html [22.02.2023].
[32]Der Musterpartner driftet ab, german-foreign-policy.com/news/detail/7280 [28.03.2023].
[33]Der Druck der Straße. Außenministerin Baerbock reist nach Georgien, um das Land zur Annäherung an die EU zu drängen. Die Chancen gelten als gut: Kürzlich abgehaltene prowestliche Massenproteste sind noch nicht verhallt, german-foreign-policy.com/news/detail/9202 [28.03.2023].
[34]Ein ‘Fachbesuch’ auf Taiwan. Berlin setzt mit Taiwan-Reise der Forschungsministerin die Provokationen gegen Beijing fort. Deutsche Leitmedien folgen einheitlich einer Sprachregelung, die mit der Ein-China-Politik bricht., german-foreign-policy.com/news/detail/9199 [28.03.2023]; Entkoppeln und aufrüsten Berlin bereitet Verbot von Huawei-5G-Bauteilen vor, treibt die technologische Entkopplung von China voran. Westen rüstet zugleich massiv gegen die Volksrepublik auf. Beijing warnt vor Konsequenzen, german-foreign-policy.com/news/detail/9188 [28.03.2023].
[35] M. Ziemek-Wielkomska, Birth and dusk of geopolitics (German), modern thinker.pl/2023/03/03/birth-and-twilight-German politics/ [03.03.2023].
[36] A. Wielomski, New Silk Road, Karl Haushofer in Chinese, modernmysl.pl/2021/09/06/new-one-way-way-karl-haushofer-po-Chinese/ [06.09.2020].
