• ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    18 hours ago

    I mean anything can happen in theory, but I would put chances of that happening outside the realm of realistic expectations. The reality is that the US is not a politically stable country. Anything one administration promises can be completely reversed by the next, as Europeans are now finding out to their utter horror. So, any deal, no matter how sincere, has a horizon of 4 years tops. Whatever you may think of people in charge of Russia, they are not stupid or shortsighted. They plan for the long term and that means they need partners who can offer long term stability in turn.

    Furthermore, the US has precious little to offer Russia in practical terms. Russian economy has already adjusted to sanctions, and it’s actually growing faster now than it has before the war. If maximum pressure from the west amounts to so little, its maximum friendship isn’t worth much more.

    The best the US can hope to achieve here is to get on good terms with Russia, cut its commitments to Europe, and benefit from renwerd trade with Russia going forward. Whether Trump admin understands this is of course a different question. I do think they expect to peel Russia away from China by offering to lift sanctions, allow Russia to use SWIFT, and so on. What’s going to be interesting to see is how the US reacts when they realize that Russia and China aren’t going to be peeled apart.

    • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      17 hours ago

      I’m aware of how short-sighted and unstable the U.S. is, but bipartisan goals in this country can survive years and years of “leadership changes” is my concern.

      The U.S. instability and division can actually somewhat frustratingly work it it’s favor, by keeping the masses distracted and angry and divided and fearful, further cementing the rule of the capitalists and imperial hegemony, and cause people to become even further supporters of Amerikkkan imperialism.

      My concern is that Russia turning on China, while being an unlikely possibility, is way above a remote possibility. If I had to guess, maybe it’s a 1.5-10 or 20 percent. Even 1.5 percent is too high for my tastes.

      I think that fortunately, Russia has very little reason to turn towards the west, and that even the lifting of sanctions or being allowed back into SWIFT isn’t nearly enough to persuade Russia back. It would take multiple acts of god for Russia to even slightly turn back to the west, let alone distance itself from, let alone betray China.

      Alot of times in politics and probability and thought, it’s not the very likely and very unlikely things that concern me. It’s the unlikely things. Even a 1 or two percent chance can end up feeling more like 30 percent.

      • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmygrad.mlOPM
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        17 hours ago

        Exactly, it’s not so much that Russia is loyal to China but rather that the west has precious little to offer. I do think that this sort of political variability is more prevalent in the west however. Russian and Chinese politics are much more stable in nature, and hence there tends to be a lot less surprise upsets of the sort we see in the west.

        • cayde6ml@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I would argue that Russia does have a sense of loyalty to China, but it’s not as rock solid as it should be IMO.