Emperor Xi Jinping paid a royal visit to Pu Tin, regional governor of the northern Chinese province of Ruxia.
That's what it looked like, because that is what is happening. Xi was beaming and Putin looked the servant that he is. This was the greatest humiliation Russia has ever seen.
This isn't an alliance, it's boss and lackey. Xi isn't talking about fighting NATO or the US. He'll take Russia first. Putin is trying to buy extra hours in power by selling Russia to China.
Putin's insane war on Ukraine is worsening the Russian demographic crisis, depopulating the country. China isn't doing well and needs space, resources, and victories. Putin's nationalist supporters see what's happening.
China has issued maps that list swaths of Russian border territory with Chinese names and configurations. Putin would give that up to do what, take Bakhmut temporarily? Why not? He doesn't care about Russia or Russians at all.
This will be the choice Russia faces when defeated and ejected from Ukraine. To crawl back to Europe with concessions, accountability, and reparations or to become a gas station province of the Chinese dictatorship.
The US should not make the same mistakes with Xi that it made with Putin. Xi and his gang are self-interested and couldn't care less about Putin or this supposed friendship. They respect strength and will advance if faced by weakness in Ukraine and elsewhere.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
For over a century, US power, including hard power, was a force for good in the world. Yes, I said it. My latest Autocracy In America guest @AmbJohnBolton also says it, with plenty to back it up. From Iran to Russia to Hamas, what Trump's isolationism gets wrong. Link 👇
Listen or read my latest podcast episode of Autocracy In America with Ambassador John Bolton, who still believes America can, and should, be a force for democracy in the world. theatlantic.com/podcasts/archi…
Growing up in the USSR, but with the rare privilege of traveling abroad thanks to chess, I had no doubt who the good guys were, and it wasn’t us. Not to say the US and its myriad interventions were all pure of intent or outcome! But democracies standing up to dictators is good.
Some good material as usual, but do not give so much credit to the Western leaders Putin evaluated correctly. They were ready to concede Ukraine. Putin's big mistake of underestimating Ukraine and Ukrainians is one Biden and others made as well, and it all comes back to that.
Also, Putin is a KGB man, not a military leader, and his war on the free world started long before 2014, in 2005. His methods changed as his sense of impunity grew in the face of Western weakness. He was building political & economic leverage before using force.
E.g. Orban to undermine the EU & NATO, supporting Brexit, Le Pen, and Trump to do the same. Nord Stream 2 was under construction even after Russia invaded Ukraine. Although Putin's record wasn't 100%, it was only Ukraine's surprising resistance that forced allies to step up.
Echoing what I and so many other dissidents in repressive regimes ask of the mighty leaders of the free world: If you don't want to help us, fine, but stop helping our oppressors. Stop giving dictators money, trade, political normalization.
It was easy to critique the failings of our fractious democratic opposition in Russia. But meanwhile, Putin had summits and posed for photos with G7 leaders as he destroyed civil society. They made trade deals as he took over the largest corporations & spread corruption west.
No authoritarian regime is legitimate. As Masih says, don't ask why Iranians or Russians, et al, don't rise up against their well-funded and well-armed oppressors when those oppressors are usually funded, armed, and legitimized by the democratic leaders you freely voted for.
I remember. I don’t know who he’s talking about, but it doesn’t matter. From using tariffs to attack Brazil to defend a personal ally to threatening American citizens, Trump is confirming what we warned, that he will do whatever he is allowed to do. The GOP will downplay, again.
As I wrote about Putin 20 yrs ago, and Trump last month, an autocrat's illegal threats are tests. How hard is the pushback and from whom? What happens when the things people say Trump can't do or would never really do actually happen? Autocracy isn’t built in a day.
For years, I updated a list of things that "Putin would never" do according to Russian opposition and foreign politicians and experts—all things that he eventually did as soon as he was able without risking his power. Jailing Khodorkovsky, shuttering free media, etc.
Absolutely. But before the Marshall Plan, there was the Patton plan and the Eisenhower plan of kicking the invader’s ass. You can’t rebuild while Russia is still bombing the hell out of Ukrainian civilians every day, and they won’t stop until they are stopped.
Here’s a "Marshall plan" Kellogg should know: "We must proceed in the most businesslike manner possible to make this war so terrible to the enemy, so overwhelming in character, that never again can a small group of dictators find a sufficient following to destroy the peaceful security of a civilized world."—Gen GC Marshall, Speech to the American Legion, Sept. 21, 1943
Or this, relevant to Russia's attacks on Ukraine: "I hope with every fiber of my being that the horrible effect on civilian communities of recent air attacks will shock the civilized world into taking joint measures guaranteeing the immunity of such communities against bombing attacks in the future."—GC Marshall, speech to the West Virginia State American Legion, Sept 4, 1938
July 4 is about 1776, and I’m fond of posting quotes from and about the Founding Fathers, who hindsight confirms as the greatest collection of talent, knowledge, and courage ever assembled. But this year I’m starting with 1788, and Federalist Paper 69. guides.loc.gov/federalist-pap…
In it, and the subsequent Papers, Alexander Hamilton enumerates the differences between the US presidency and the monarchy. That is, why the American president is not a king, and how his power is constrained by law in many ways a king's or despot's is not.
Hamilton places great emphasis on how the presidency's great powers are constrained by the "advice and consent of the Senate" and by the threat of impeachment should he overstep. I leave it to you to read it and decide if such constraints are in effect today.