Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
February 4, 2022
The Great Russian Chinese Fireworks Of Beijing

While the fireworks of the Winter Olympics Opening Ceremony light up the sky over Beijing another firework comes in the form of a

Joint Statement of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China on the International Relations Entering a New Era and the Global Sustainable Development

by President Vladimir Putin of Russia and the President of the People's Republic of China Xi Jinping.

It is a long political statement touching many issues and can be seen as a common program Russia and China want to pursue.

The joint statement's introduction is followed by four parts covering democratic principals, global development cooperation between Russia and China, concerns about global governance issues and a reaffirmation of support for multipolar organizations.

It is altogether a well aimed shot against the United States which makes multiple appearances in the text without being named. The quotes below focus on those parts.

The intro:

The Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China, hereinafter referred to as the sides, state as follows.

Today, the world is going through momentous changes, and humanity is entering a new era of rapid development and profound transformation. It sees the development of such processes and phenomena as multipolarity, economic globalization, the advent of information society, cultural diversity, transformation of the global governance architecture and world order; there is increasing interrelation and interdependence between the States; a trend has emerged towards redistribution of power in the world; and the international community is showing a growing demand for the leadership aiming at peaceful and gradual development. At the same time, as the pandemic of the new coronavirus infection continues, the international and regional security situation is complicating and the number of global challenges and threats is growing from day to day. Some actors representing but the minority on the international scale continue to advocate unilateral approaches to addressing international issues and resort to force; they interfere in the internal affairs of other states, infringing their legitimate rights and interests, and incite contradictions, differences and confrontation, thus hampering the development and progress of mankind, against the opposition from the international community.

The sides call on all States to pursue well-being for all and, with these ends, to build dialogue and mutual trust, strengthen mutual understanding, champion such universal human values as peace, development, equality, justice, democracy and freedom, respect the rights of peoples to independently determine the development paths of their countries and the sovereignty and the security and development interests of States, to protect the United Nations-driven international architecture and the international law-based world order, seek genuine multipolarity with the United Nations and its Security Council playing a central and coordinating role, promote more democratic international relations, and ensure peace, stability and sustainable development across the world.

Part 1 declares that democracy is a universal human value but notes necessary differences in its implementation:

There is no one-size-fits-all template to guide countries in establishing democracy. A nation can choose such forms and methods of implementing democracy that would best suit its particular state, based on its social and political system, its historical background, traditions and unique cultural characteristics. It is only up to the people of the country to decide whether their State is a democratic one.

This followed by another appearance of the United States:

Certain States' attempts to impose their own ”democratic standards“ on other countries, to monopolize the right to assess the level of compliance with democratic criteria, to draw dividing lines based on the grounds of ideology, including by establishing exclusive blocs and alliances of convenience, prove to be nothing but flouting of democracy and go against the spirit and true values of democracy. Such attempts at hegemony pose serious threats to global and regional peace and stability and undermine the stability of the world order.

Part 2 is about common support for global development as well as bilateral measures supporting it.

In part 3 both sides express a common world view of the current geopolitical climate. Russia is supporting China's viewpoint on Taiwan and AUKUS while China is supporting the current Russian demands towards the U.S. and NATO. They see each other as allies in the confrontation with the U.S.:

The sides are gravely concerned about serious international security challenges and believe that the fates of all nations are interconnected. No State can or should ensure its own security separately from the security of the rest of the world and at the expense of the security of other States. The international community should actively engage in global governance to ensure universal, comprehensive, indivisible and lasting security.

The sides reaffirm their strong mutual support for the protection of their core interests, state sovereignty and territorial integrity, and oppose interference by external forces in their internal affairs.

Both oppose the cold war block strategy the U.S. is pursuing against them:

The sides believe that certain States, military and political alliances and coalitions seek to obtain, directly or indirectly, unilateral military advantages to the detriment of the security of others, including by employing unfair competition practices, intensify geopolitical rivalry, fuel antagonism and confrontation, and seriously undermine the international security order and global strategic stability. The sides oppose further enlargement of NATO and call on the North Atlantic Alliance to abandon its ideologized cold war approaches, to respect the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries, the diversity of their civilizational, cultural and historical backgrounds, and to exercise a fair and objective attitude towards the peaceful development of other States. The sides stand against the formation of closed bloc structures and opposing camps in the Asia-Pacific region and remain highly vigilant about the negative impact of the United States' Indo-Pacific strategy on peace and stability in the region. Russia and China have made consistent efforts to build an equitable, open and inclusive security system in the Asia-Pacific Region (APR) that is not directed against third countries and that promotes peace, stability and prosperity.

Both sides express support for the various global arms reduction treaties and security conventions.

This is followed in part 4 by support for support for international organizations both have interests in like the United Nations, WTO, G20, BRICS, SCO, APEC and Asean.

The sides underline that Russia and China, as world powers and permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, intend to firmly adhere to moral principles and accept their responsibility, strongly advocate the international system with the central coordinating role of the United Nations in international affairs, defend the world order based on international law, including the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, advance multipolarity and promote the democratization of international relations, together create an even more prospering, stable, and just world, jointly build international relations of a new type.

A reaffirmation of their strong alliance:

The sides call for the establishment of a new kind of relationships between world powers on the basis of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and mutually beneficial cooperation. They reaffirm that the new inter-State relations between Russia and China are superior to political and military alliances of the Cold War era. Friendship between the two States has no limits, there are no ”forbidden“ areas of cooperation, strengthening of bilateral strategic cooperation is neither aimed against third countries nor affected by the changing international environment and circumstantial changes in third countries.

This is followed by another shot against the United States, its phantom 'rules based order' and damaging sanction policies:

The sides reiterate the need for consolidation, not division of the international community, the need for cooperation, not confrontation. The sides oppose the return of international relations to the state of confrontation between major powers, when the weak fall prey to the strong. The sides intend to resist attempts to substitute universally recognized formats and mechanisms that are consistent with international law for rules elaborated in private by certain nations or blocs of nations, and are against addressing international problems indirectly and without consensus, oppose power politics, bullying, unilateral sanctions, and extraterritorial application of jurisdiction, as well as the abuse of export control policies, and support trade facilitation in line with the rules of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The U.S. will say that the above is just some grand declaration with no meaning. But it is much more. It is a political program that China and Russia as well as their allies will be working on for the next decades.

Asian as well as European countries should consider if they want to support or oppose it. They should recognize that siding with the U.S. against China and Russia guarantees that they will find themselves on the losing side.

Comments

Posted by: Robert Macaire | Feb 5 2022 8:09 utc | 163
I apologize – my statement at 198 is incorrect. I was conflating an earlier statement by the two leaders with the actual text – your link is complete as far as I can tell, just leaving off the brief explanation of ‘sides’. Sorry for the flub.

Posted by: juliania | Feb 5 2022 19:16 utc | 201

Malchik Ralf | Feb 5 2022 14:53 utc | 188
“The “Certain States” of America”.
May I suggest the “UNcertain States of America”?
****
Ma Laoshi | Feb 5 2022 17:43 utc | 195
I see that Zelensky is suggesting that the Gas goes through Ukraine (again) and that it becomes Europes’ “storage”. He is even willing to cut transit fees in half. I wonder who put him up to suggest that? Not the Americans, UK or Canadians.
***
Of note; Discussions between States about mutually beneficial commercial ties. I wonder who the “winners” will be?
“The Beijing Olympics provide an opportunity for China to strike new deals in the Middle East.
*
Meetings with Egypt and the United Arab Emirates immediately followed the opening ceremony
*
Pakistan and Uzbekistan held talks on Afghanistan at the sidelines of the Beijing Olympics
The Trans-Afghan railway project was an especially notable topic of discussion”

Posted by: Stonebird | Feb 5 2022 19:52 utc | 202

@Oriental Voice #200
I have to agree with m.
I’d also focus more clearly than “western societies”.
The US, UK and EU are inter-related but are not the same by any stretch of the imagination.
The US empire could be described as in the process of collapsing, but even if the empire magically disappeared overnight – the US as a nation would still be #2 economically, #3 population, etc etc. The US as a nation would still be “big”.
The UK is considerably more bleak. The North Sea oil strikes pulled them out of the doldrums in Thatcher’s era, but the avenues through which the UK can achieve future growth are extremely limited – particularly given the EU.
The EU, in turn, is clearly principally guided by Germany’s focus on mercantilism. France has retained some North African colonial relations and has picked and chosen national champions to represent French interests in the global economy, but it really isn’t clear what their goals are.
However, overall the EU has made many strides in protecting itself: its own currency, strong efforts to minimize dependencies (although undermined recently by apparent over-reliance on non-nuclear alternative energy), etc.
To paraphrase Dalio – only if/when we see open fighting in the US between factions, can collapse really be said to have occurred. Dalio thinks it might break out as early as the 2022 or 2024 elections, but it is less clear to me since this isn’t a left/right thing so much as a top/middle/bottom thing. From my view, the primary issue is brazilianization: the ongoing devolution of the majority of American’s interests in favor of the few. No need to go into the long list, but what really matters is what happens when enough Americans realize what is going on, and what they will then do.
This number of “economically woke” is clearly still not enough but the elections of both Trump and Obama contained clear signs of this discontent.

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 6 2022 0:46 utc | 203

The first comment naysaying b’s outstanding commentary and parsing of this very important document is the sort of crap we’ve come to expect from supporters of the Outlaw US Empire and its massive number of crimes. I completely agree with b’s conclusion that this manifesto will be the 21st Century’s map.

Posted by: karlof1 | Feb 6 2022 1:30 utc | 204

Posted by: c1ue | Feb 6 2022 0:46 utc | 203:
This number of “economically woke” is clearly still not enough but the elections of both Trump and Obama contained clear signs of this discontent.
Your point well taken, and I agree Obama and Trump’s election showed signs of discontent. In a way, so is Biden’s election, showing disappointment with Trump. But being discontent doesn’t equate to being aware of WHAT IS wrong. With decades of dumbing down through the MSM, the overall political intelligence in the USA is really quite pitiful. That’s the underlying factor of the collapse. My disagreement with m is that he/she thinks collapse has not to occur. I’d rather think it has, just not yet widely recognized.

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Feb 6 2022 1:48 utc | 205

@c1ue:
I recall you mocked the (ridiculously expensive) healthcare system of the United State. Actually much of the public service sector of the USA is just as broken and inefficient as the healthcare system. Take utility (phone, electric, water), government agencies, infrastructure contractors, all the basic and essential service providers are third world standard. I don’t know how much time you have wasted trying to get things done on phone, but these days most things are carried out on phones and it’s frustratingly ineffective. I myself am seeing things collapsing around me.
I do agree with you though that even a collapsed USA would stay a #2 or #3 in the world for a long time to come. It’s inertia; it’s psychological notions. But life here certainly has changed for the worse.

Posted by: Oriental Voice | Feb 6 2022 2:03 utc | 206

@ circumspect | Feb 5 2022 18:24 utc | 197
One of the great rewritings of history is the Korean War.
It is presented as having begun on the 25th July 1950 with a massive attack by the North against the South after a series of what are coyly referred to a “Border Clashes”
In fact, Newspaper reporters at the time, reported the South as launching big attacks across the border from August 1949 onwards.
By July 1950 the North Koreans had had enough and decided that the next time South Korea attacked they’d settle it once and for all.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 6 2022 2:27 utc | 207

correction,
25th of June, not July. Sorry.

Posted by: DaveGood | Feb 6 2022 2:40 utc | 208

Robert Macaire | Feb 5 2022 8:09 utc | 163
Robert Scheer is a decent yank..
Ever heard of the Lee Wen Ho case ?
Justice murikkan style/.
Presumed guilty until proven innocent
https://www.sfgate.com/opinion/article/WEN-HO-LEE-You-Call-This-Justice-Presumed-2883532.php

Posted by: denk | Feb 6 2022 5:17 utc | 209

@ Davegood 138
That’s ex@ctly what Trumps point was.
It’s one of the smartest, most distilled and pragmatic points Trump ever made.
Why? Why is NATO so important when TRADE is the biggest factor between EU and Russia?

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Feb 7 2022 1:18 utc | 210

CC @ 210; Ah, so you are a Trumper, cool. That’s about the only statement DJT made, that I agreed with;
“Disolve NATO”….
He said much, and only did massive, permanent tax cuts for the elites he was there to work for.

Posted by: vetinLA | Feb 7 2022 1:37 utc | 211

P.S. Not much to show for the American working classes, and spending * Trillion;
https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/31/trump-national-debt-increase/

Posted by: vetinLA | Feb 7 2022 1:42 utc | 212

P.S. Not much to show for the American working classes, and spending * Trillion;
https://dailycaller.com/2020/12/31/trump-national-debt-increase/

Posted by: vetinLA | Feb 7 2022 1:42 utc | 213

AnalyticMinded | Feb 4 2022 16:42 utc | 15:
“””Still, I do hope something more concrete vis-a-vis a military alliance is forthcoming. Otherwise the West will not relent.”””
I am sure they did not include all they talked about and agreed on privately into this statement. This statement is a good blueprint, and will gradually be worked out, as b already said.

Posted by: pepa65 | Feb 7 2022 3:05 utc | 214

m | Feb 4 2022 16:58 utc | 22:
“””So they fly to Moscow and try to work out something that allows Russia to backpedal without to much loss of face.”””
I am sure the RF does not intend to backpedal in any way here. If so, they would be doing the flying & visiting. It is very significant that so many of the highest leaders of European countries are visiting Moscow, and this will affect the course of the individual countries involved, and hopefully that of Europe and NATO as a whole. The US would rather not see these visits taking place.

Posted by: pepa65 | Feb 7 2022 3:13 utc | 215

@ 211
Yeah, dissolve NATO
Trump was right.
And if he had a modicum of political gravitas he could have moved that forward.
But…….shit happened, and he had zero backing for that, or really any important points.
Securing the southern border?
Nope.
Reducing troops and bases.
Nope.
Lock her up!
Nope.
He said some great things, had some good ideas that a TON of Americans wanted to hear,
and I admit it was all bullshit after all.
If he had just 25% more real support from Congress, senate, pentagon, C.O.C.
We might have seen something happen in those areas.
But he was castrated, repeatedly.
I agree, all he really got done was tax breaks, but it wasn’t just for the rich.
My family had its best 4 years financially ever, under Trump.
I think Trump was under rated and over penalized.
Cheers

Posted by: Cadence Calls | Feb 7 2022 4:04 utc | 216

Tom_Q_Collins | Feb 4 2022 22:18 utc | 91
They say that RT just struggles with licence rights, and it was fined £200,000 by UK regulator Ofcom for failing to “preserve due impartiality”. But the truth is that they can’t stand to hear it, and they definitely don’t want broad audiences to hear it. In the days of the Pravda, it was not an issue, it was risible but boring to western audiences. RT is in no way perfect, but the amount of truth that gets through compared to the regular MSM is something that cannot be tolerated..!

Posted by: pepa65 | Feb 7 2022 7:13 utc | 217