A house built on sand? The Russian-Chinese partnership

In decades gone, analysts would believe it incomprehensible that China and Russia would not only collaborate with one on military and economic affairs, but collaborate to project joint influence in the region.

For decades following the Sino-Soviet split, the two nations were locked in a competition to exert competitive control over the developing world, gain hegemony over the world’s communist movements and be perceived as the global vanguard for anti-imperialism.

It wasn’t so long ago that the US even tacitly worked with China. Throughout the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, clandestine intelligence units in the US and China would implicitly trade intelligence with one another to the detriment of Soviet forces in the nation.

This implicit co-operation between the US and China to repel Soviet dominance in the developing world was even recognised by the body politic in the West. In the 1984 classic Red Dawn, the Wolverines (a group of high school students who fled into the woods to launch a guerrilla campaign against the invading Soviet forces) were briefed that China and the US fought on the same team against the Soviets.

Eckert: Well, who is on our side?

Colonel Tanner: 600 million Chinamen.

Darryl Bates: Well, last I heard, there were a billion Chinamen.

VIEW ALL

Colonel Tanner: There were.

While seemingly trivial, such dialogue is indeed important as it is demonstrative of the lens through which the US, Russia and China perceived their relationships toward one another before the turn of the millennium.

Dr Elizabeth Wishnick, professor of political science at Montclair State University, last week unpacked the growing co-operation between Russian and China in War on the Rocks, examining the political realities of their individual and joint efforts in Afghanistan.

“Beijing and Moscow — once bitter adversaries — now cooperate on military issues, cyber security, high technology, and in outer space, among other areas. While it falls short of an alliance, the deepening Sino-Russian partnership confounds U.S. strategists. Some have proposed driving a wedge between the two countries, but this seems unlikely for the foreseeable future,” Dr Wishnick said.

Thus far, Dr Wishnick notes that Russia and China have successfully collaborated to exploit the post-US chaos in Afghanistan, as well as exercising co-operation in neighbouring Pakistan and the broader Central Asian region through the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation.

Indeed, the pair have exercised disciplined joint political messaging on the Afghanistan issue. Recently, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov even asserted that China and Russia remain ready to “jointly manage changes” in the nation.

Such joint messaging has also been evidenced on a legal basis, in which Dr Wishnick argues that “Beijing and Moscow voted against the appointment of a UN rapporteur for human rights issues in Afghanistan. They have also taken some complementary initiatives in Central Asia to boost their individual security co-operation with Central Asian states.”.

Nevertheless, the grand strategy of both nations do not perfectly align – especially in their immediate region.

“China aims to integrate these regions economically into the Belt and Road Initiative, while keeping Indian influence at bay and addressing perceived security threats to the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region,” Dr Wishnick contends.

“By contrast, Russia’s objectives are to maintain its role as the primary security provider in what it sees as the greater Eurasian region and to balance its longstanding ties with India with a new approach to Pakistan.”

In addition to this, while co-operating with China in Afghanistan, Russia has demonstrated more willingness to reach an international and multilateral solution to the Afghanistan crisis than China.

“Despite some positive public signaling, Russia’s preference seems to be to engage with the broader international community on Afghanistan, not just China,” Dr Wishnick suggested.

“In a 25-minute speech at the Moscow State Institute of International Relations on Oct. 15, Zamir Kabulov, President Vladimir Putin’s envoy to Afghanistan, suggested a need for a broader negotiation process led by the United Nations. Notably, he did not discuss working with China.”

In addition to this, some Russian officials have even rebuked the Belt and Road Initiative in the region the reasons for which are seemingly obvious.

“[Sterrnik] cast doubt on the merit of economic integration plans for Central Asia developed by outside powers and highlighted the risks from foreign military bases, which presumably could include China’s unofficial base located just south of Shaymak, Tajikistan, near the Afghan border,” Dr Wishnick noted.

Perhaps one of the largest areas in which Chinese and Russian foreign policies diverge is regarding the status of India in the Asian region. Despite India’s growing relationship with the US, India is nevertheless a longstanding ally and trading partner of Russia.

“Moscow views New Delhi as a longtime partner and a key market for Russian defense equipment — even as India improves ties with the United States — and likely considers a greater Indian role in Afghanistan as a net positive. In April 2021, Russia and India began a 2+2 dialogue of their foreign and defense ministers, and in September they signed an intelligence-sharing agreement for cooperation against terrorism and drug trafficking,” Dr Wishnick outlines.

“A former Indian intelligence official suggested that Russia was now seeking closer defense and intelligence co-operation with India as a part of a broader strategy to boost Russian influence in the Indian Ocean and provide an alternative to other powers active in the region.”

While analysts do typically believe that the US and Indian relationship is becoming India’s preeminent geopolitical alliance, ongoing overtures from the Russian government to their long term ally and partner in India are demonstrative of the fact that Moscow is not willing to curtail their traditional alliances and partnerships to satisfy Beijing.

Considering the evidence of diverging opinions on India, the Belt and Road Initiative and Russia’s (even if in name only) multilateral approach to Afghanistan – it seems likely that the Russian and Chinese collaboration may indeed be a short-term partnership to stave off a common threat.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia's political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch with This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it., or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..