Russia’s Best Friend

After the Russian invasion of Crimea, only one country did not support the United States’ and European Union’s sanctions on Russia and remained neutral: China. Just recently, Russia announced its cooperation with China in countering the United States’ missile defense system, which both countries see as a threat to their national security. The supportive relationship between President Putin and President Xi is surprising, given the divergent paths of their respective economies. The Russian government continues to expand its grasp over the country’s vast hydrocarbon resources, refusing to diversify and liberalize its economy. China, on the other hand, has given rise to financial centers and booming megacities. Large migrations from rural to urban areas have led to a modernized economy, lifting millions out of poverty. So why has this asymmetry only strengthened the ties between these too largely authoritarian regimes?The answer lies in Russia and China’s expectations on the international stage. They both believe that international institutions, like NATO and International Court of Justice, discriminate against them—though both have a permanent seat in the UN Security Council. President Vladimir Putin recently criticized the Olympic Committee’s decision to ban a few Russian athletes from Rio Olympics as a political maneuver intended to undermine Russia. Similarly, China rejected the Hague’s ruling on the South China Sea and only increased its military presence on the islands. It’s too naïve to classify this aversion to compromise as simply an “aggressive foreign policy.” After all, Putin and Xi have significant incentives to contradict other world leaders as a way of spurring nationalist pride and legitimizing their own leadership. To prevent revolution and guarantee public satisfaction, both leaders portray their dedication to service as a constant struggle and fight against other “antagonistic” countries. Russia and China want to challenge US-dominated institutions like the World Trade Organization and NATO, and by working together, they can construct their own coalition of states and secure their own sphere of influence.Surprisingly, Russia and China have similar political structures despite their divergent economic paths. Both governments believe that human rights and civil liberties are secondary to their political ambitions and material wealth. In the twentieth century, Stalin’s purges and Mao’s Cultural Revolution proved that the survival of the party and the elimination of the bourgeoisie was the leadership’s top priority. Not much has changed. Putin’s approach to politics has become more reactionary over time. By renationalizing the oil/petroleum industry and covertly obliterating all opposition parties or journalists, Putin tightens his muscular grip over Russia, isolating his government from the goals that Gorbachev spelled out in Glasnost and Perestroika. Perhaps China’s political environment is not as apocalyptic, but it continues to suffer from widespread corruption and co-optation. It may be that the two dictators’ empathy for one another allows both to make mutually convenient deals on the global stage.Russia is no longer the world power that it used to be during the Cold War. Increasingly dissatisfied with nuclear deals such as the New START Treaty and upset by NATO’s expansion into former Soviet republics, Putin attempts to augment Russia’s power by allying with China and thus counterbalancing the Western order. Both Russia and China have played a key role in setting and fulfilling ambitious agendas in BRIC, an organization of the four main newly industrialized nations: Brazil, Russia, India and China. In 2014, Putin and Xi collaborated on a Power of Siberia deal that would pave for the construction of a gas pipeline. In the Security Council, China supports the Russian stance on Iran’s nuclear program, while Russia supports the Chinese stance on North Korea’s nuclear program.One might ask the question: Does the Russia-China relation pose a threat to American security interests? In my opinion, the United States will face little repercussions as long as it realizes that Putin still plays by Cold War rules. Some politicians believe that making concessions to Russia will ease tensions and open room for cooperation. But these politicians forget that the very existence of Putin’s authoritarian regime relies on the portrayal of the United States as a weak power incapable of challenging Russia’s superiority. If we choke Russia’s global image but engage China into world institutions, we will accomplish two goals. One, we will create a rift in Russia-China relations by changing China’s priorities. Two, we will challenge Putin’s political legitimacy.