THE CONTEMPORARY SIGNIFICANCE OF THE 70-YEAR CHINA-RUSSIA RELATIONS
FENG SHAOLEI
Director at the Center for Co-development with Neighboring Countries, Dean at the School of Advanced International and Area Studies, Director of the Center for Russian Studies and Tenured Professor at the East China Normal University
Since the establishment of diplomatic relationship between China and Russia (Soviet Union) 70 years ago, the relations between the two countries have become a model of highly mature major country relations with strong "internal motive force" on the international stage, and are likely to become a key role in promoting the stable development of the international situation in the future. As the picture shows, on June 5, 2019, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin attended the commemorating event of the 70th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relationship between China and Russia at the Moscow Grand Theater. (Source of picture: Xinhua News Agency)
China and Russia (Soviet Union), for 70 years since establishing diplomatic relations, have developed highly mature major-power relations with strong “endogenous power” and are poised to play a critical role in pushing forward steady development of the international landscape. As China-Russia relations are gaining more weight and unprecedented attention, it is imperative to further interpret and analyze this pair of bilateral relations. Only with such understanding can we steer the China-Russia relations to serve as a stabilizer and reformer in the contemporary world of diverse public opinions.
The positioning of China-Russia bilateral relations as partnership featuring “harmony in diversity” ,concrete bilateral, regional and global cooperation driven by the endogenous power, and mutual trust built up through close high-level interactions all carry important implications for contemporary international politics.
THE 70-YEAR CHINA-RUSSIA RELATIONS ARE A SHINING EXAMPLE OF CONTEMPORARY INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
There are multiple implications by defining China-Russia relations as a shining example of international relations. The positioning of China-Russia bilateral relations as partnership featuring “harmony in diversity”, concrete bilateral, regional and global cooperation driven by the endogenous power, and mutual trust built up through close high-level interactions all carry important implications for contemporary international politics.
First, China and Russia (Soviet Union) have gone through shared or similar history. A profound foundation has been built for bilateral cooperation and exchanges between the peoples when China learnt from the “Soviet Union” during the revolution and construction periods and when the two countries fought side-by-side during the anti-fascist war. Both being ancient civilizations with time-honored history and unique landscapes, China and Russia have made critical choices based on their respective national conditions as they strived for the same aspiration in the past century. As major countries, China and Russia share common principled stand in complex international affairs, yet they take different approaches. The two countries have come to the full realization through the growing bilateral relations that: in a highly diversified international community, respect for diversity is the basic principle for the international community to live in harmony. The state-to-state relationship based on the respect for diversity is conspicuously more prevailing and typical than that based simply on the “common but exclusive” concept and superiority in social systems.
Second, China-Russia relations have scored progress not only bilaterally, but also in international and regional affairs. As suggested in the Joint Statement on Developing the Comprehensive Strategic Partnership of Coordination for a New Era between the People's Republic of China and the Russian Federation signed in June 2019, the China-Russia relations enjoy strong endogenous power and are facing broad prospect for greater development. The two sides agreed to regard political, security, practical, people-to-people exchanges and international coordination cooperation as priorities of the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination. In the meantime, China and Russia have jointly launched the Shanghai Cooperation Organization at the regional level, pushed forward BRICS cooperation at the global level and through such mechanisms firmly committed to upholding the multilateral international order with the United Nations at its core. While the US pursues the “America First” agenda and the EU is tangled in the “Brexit” farce and rising populism, China and Russia follow the major trend, take forward-looking, fair and rational approaches that accommodate the interests of all stakeholders and facilitate the steady evolution of international landscape and efforts to reach consensus. This will, without any doubt, become a new paradigm for the future international development.
专家的报告固然精彩，但是，焊接装备企业的演讲也丝毫不逊色。深圳市麦格米特焊接技术有限公司销售总监何志军、宾采尔（广州）焊接技术有限公司销售总监魏武、上海发那科机器人有限公司研发中心副主任孔萌分别做了“智能焊接技术的发展”、“高效智能焊接技术分享与应用”、“发那科智能制造解决方案”的报告，更是展示了企业最新的智能制造解决案例和能力，满足了大家对智能制造知识的需求。
Third, political leaders engage in all-round, close, candid and effective exchanges, providing critical guidance and foundation for developing the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era. The exchanges of high-level visits not only cement bilateral relations, but provide an example of how to promote the joint building of a community with a shared future for humanity. In 2014, when the US and EU were boycotting the Sochi Winter Olympics, Chinese President Xi Jinping took a whirlwind trip to extend his congratulations, showing his deep respect for Russia's aspiration of national rejuvenation. And Russian President Vladimir Putin attended the two sessions of the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation in Beijing, showing his intense interest in aligning the national development strategies. With the high-level efforts, the bilateral institutionalized communication and exchanges have been so effective and fruitful that China and Russia successfully sought common ground while reserving differences and achieved winwin cooperation.
在对教育收益率的经验研究中，估计明瑟收入方程的普通最小二乘法(OLS)难以克服与受教育水平相关的其他解释变量(如个人能力)对收入的影响，进而造成严重的内生性问题，导致教育收益率的估计偏差。大多数文献采用工具变量法解决内生性问题。随着对高校扩招政策影响的研究成果不断增加，学者们在解决选择性偏差和异质性问题方面也进行着不断的尝试。吴要武、赵泉(2010)采用双重差分模型(DID)，估计扩招政策使大学毕业生小时工资下降了10.5%～11.4%。[10]马汴京等(2016)采用双重差分和工具变量估计方法，研究发现高校扩招政策对毕业生收入影响不显著。[11]
CHINA-RUSSIA RELATIONS AS AN INSPIRATION FOR DEEPENING UNDERSTANDING THE UNITY AND DIVERSITY OF WORLD HISTORY
The two world wars and the Russo-Japanese war between 1904 and 1905 reveal that Asia failed to escape the tragic wars imposed by the West in the 20th century. Even when the Western countries put up sword to build up strength after the World War II, a number of full-scale wars rampaged Asia. Some scholars raised the sharp points that the peace prevailed among western powers only when bloody wars erupted in the Eastern battlefield.
If we analyze the China-Russia relations from the perspective of diversity and unity of the world history, we need to complement universality with diversity, instead of denying diversity by citing universality； vise versa, regional uniqueness should not be employed to falsify the unity in the course of world history. This is the ideological basis for the China-Russia relations and the survival and development of both countries.
Second, how should we approach the international patterns that exist in different regions of the East and the West? The nation-state system established in the Western Europe during the 16th and 17th century undoubtedly kicked off a process of world history with universal significance. However, scholars argued in recent years that the establishment of nation-state system did represent a historical progress, but as a number of great powers emerged in such a system, the wars among European nations dragged on and sowed the seeds of trouble and even failed to prevent the world from the two catastrophic wars in the 20th century. If merely examining war and peace, the nation-state finally emerged in Asia nearly four centuries later, yet few large-scale all-out wars broke out until the late 19th century and the state-to-state relations were relatively stable. Therefore, we cannot simply take an exclusive, discriminatory and selective approach towards different international patterns that existed in different regions of the East and the West.
Third, how should we approach the non-Western European state governance model? China and Russia were yet to be developed into the Western European-style nation states four to five hundred years ago, but the Treaty of Nebuchadnezzar signed by the two empires in 1689 midst the chaotic wars across Europe brought nearly twocentury hard-won peace to a vast land of Eurasian at the border of China and Russia, lasting until the late 19th century. This is solid proof that before the Western European model dominated the core area of Eurasia and East Asia, non-Western European governance models have served as critical stabilizer in Eurasia for a long period of time. In view of this history, what China and Russia achieved with the 70-years diplomatic ties is by no accident, but built on a profound historical foundation.
First, whether the course of modern world history is a Western Europecentric one or a Eurasian one, with the long-time coexistence of the history of Western Europe, East Asia and interactions between the two? The Eurasia has at least seen three historical systems: the European historical pattern based on civil society and guided by democracy and legal institutions； the Mongol Yuan Empire and the succeeding Russian Empire pattern existing between Western Europe and East Asia； and the East Asian pattern dominated by China. As the studies on the history of East Asia, the Mongol Yuan Dynasty and Eurasia are unfolding in the past two to three decades, different observations have emerged and the most salient is the grievance over the West-monopolized linear discourse on world history. The author believes that while fully acknowledging the European dominance in the world history till today, it is necessary for the Western European discourse to accommodate other historical patterns, such as those of East Asia and the Russian Empire at the junction of Eurasian civilizations. Such inclusiveness can truly reflect the plentiful and complicated dialectical relationship between unity and diversity that objectively exist in the course of world history. It goes without saying that the debate on the course of world history will profoundly affect discourse and comprehension of current and future international process.
CONTEMPORARY EVOLUTION OF CHINA-RUSSIA RELATIONS MIRRORS THE CENTURY-LONG PARADIGM CHANGE IN EAST-WEST RELATIONS
Ever since, the political and economic transformation championed by the neoliberalism has swept across the world. The process in some Asian countries was quite different from the West-influenced “Shock Therapy” that characterizing the reform of Soviet Union model and led to distinctive outcomes. The former is relatively moderate, highlighting the inherence from tradition, while the latter is relatively radical, leading to disruptive revolution. The distinct processes and outcomes of the reforms have triggered deep reflection on the West-advocated transformation models. Such reflection has been translated into a strong and sustained impetus for Asian countries to strive for social and economic development in the precondition of political stability since the 21st century.
The path China and Russia went down during the past 70 years and the status quo of China-Russia relations are highly relevant to the heatedly-discussed unity vs. diversity and universality vs. particularity in the development of the world history. The discussion centers on three questions.
It becomes visible that the West and the East have embarked on separate tracks of development since the 2008 financial crisis: the West is at the edge of grave turmoil. The fundamental structural factors that had been the driver of development and progress in the West for centuries retrogressed: populism has undermined democracy； influx of refugees has challenged opening up； the “post-truth” and “post-facts” has ironically disrupted the positivism that the West always cherishes. In the meantime, it is indisputable that Asia has sustained relatively fast growth and achieved gradual reform of basic social systems. Neither did the continent suffer such cross-regional social turmoil as the “Brexit” and refugee influx, nor did it see any major geopolitical conflicts such as the Ukraine war. Such momentum is expected to sustain for quite a long time.
Some of the ongoing discussions on China-Russia relations still focus on the outdated argumentation of “keeping a low profile” and “making a difference” of the 1980s and 1990s, failing to recognize that the century-long dramatic change in the East-West relations is essentially an all-round and profound transformation involving economy, politics, security and culture.
However, the historical track was reversed when the Cold War was near its end: confrontation was still intense across Europe when China-US relations were thawing and so were Chinese relations with Japan and many western countries. The rapprochement brought the Cold War to a much earlier end in Asia. If, in the 1950s and 1960s, the peace among great powers were brought about by the bitter fights, the order in the western world relied on the rapprochement in Asia at this stage of history.
[2]Myers-Scotton,C.Code Switching as Indexical of Social Negotiations.In Heller,M.(ed.).Code-switching.Berlin:Mouton de Gruyter,1988：151-186.
埋藏深度1597.50～2463.90 m，厚度866.4 m。该地层据测井解释成果反映，共有77层砂岩，砂岩总厚度为118.3 m，砂厚比为13.65%。砂岩孔隙度12.75%～27.57%，渗透率1.51～99.29 md；热储层顶板井温为66.35℃，底板温度为79.98℃。
Third, China will not repeat the geopolitical model of rivalry among great powers. Objectively as a political power stuck in maritime and continental geopolitics, China needs to take countermeasures to prevent the disastrous consequences incurred by the rivalry of the two forms of geopolitics. To this end, China leverages on the geographic advantage of being at the juncture of continental and maritime geopolitics and adopt inclusive and pragmatic approaches that accommodate differences in ideologies to connect the East and the West, seek cooperation opportunities and delay and resolve conflicts and confrontation. The Belt and Road Initiative is a manifestation of such logic. Therefore, following such an objective geopolitical logic, China and Russia are to embrace broad space for cooperation and offers the possibility of seeking broader major-country cooperation on the basis of China-Russia cooperation.
一是优化空调系统外部空气进入汽车内部入风口的位置，有助于让外界新鲜空气进入车内，尽可能避免发动机舱内污浊气体进入车内。很多轿车空调入风口都在前挡风玻璃下侧，这个位置容易使发动机舱内的气体被吸入车内，显然这是需要改进设计的地方。二是调整车内空调蒸发器的位置，因为夏季长时间使用空调，蒸发器表面会凝结出水，空气穿过蒸发器就会附着大量空气中的灰尘污垢，容易产生胺、烟碱等有害物质。因此需要预留蒸发器检查清洗孔，便于后期对蒸发器的清洗保养。
THE OVERWHELMING NECESSITY FOR LONG-TERM CHINA-RUSSIA COOPERATION IN VIEW OF THE LAND-SEA GEOPOLITICAL CONFRONTATION AND CONNECTION
Geopolitics mainly refers to the effects of geography on state-to-state relationship and its operation, from which the state-to-state politics and strategies originates. Since the late 20th century, the “Annales School”, with its emphasis on such long-term factors as geography and civilization, has become the most prominent school in international historiography.
First, as a result of Russia's reflection on its relationship with the West and stable China-Russia relations, the West and the East are now experiencing different geopolitical landscapes, setting the basic course for the future development of China and Russia. The eastward expansion of the NATO and the EU has jeopardized Russia's intention to lean towards the West and placed the country under such intolerable pressure that grave geopolitical conflicts and confrontations arose in Europe. Asia also drew on the European integration process to boost regional cooperation, but it didn't adopt the EU model to seek integration beyond the boundaries of the sovereignty of nation-states. Therefore, Asia has seen intricate conflicts and disputes, but never suffered major geopolitical changes in such a large scale as the eastward expansion of the NATO and Russia's counter-blow. It is upon this crucial geopolitical and politi-cal background, together with the anchoring force of China-Russia friendly cooperation and the resilient regional civilization and tradition, that Asia has seized the opportunities for development.
China and Russia have always been committed to expanding cultural and people-topeople exchanges and cooperation. By holding “National Year”, “Year of Languages”, “Year of Tourism”, “Year of Youth Friendship and Exchange”, “Year of Media Exchange” and other state-level “theme year” activities, China and Russia have enhanced friendship and consolidate social and public support for China-Russia relations. Pictured is the concert celebrating the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China and the establishment of China - Russia diplomatic relations in St. Petersburg, Russia, on 11 June 2019.
Second, when the Cold War in Europe came to a complete end, East Germany and West Germany, landmarks of the Cold War, were reunited. But in Asia, two countries divided by the Cold War in the Taiwan Strait and on the Korean Peninsula are yet to achieve unity. The situation indicates that faceoff between the continental geopolitics and maritime geopolitics is almost an eternal topic for argument. The spatial discontinuity characterizing maritime geopolitics prevents the countries from the mutual disruption imposed on political stakeholders in the continents, and also helps the countries use the disadvantage to break down the cooperation facilitated by spatial continuity among continental countries. By doing so, they remove the potential threat that the political cooperation among continental countries posed to their maritime hegemony. The effort also targets at undermining the unity and cooperation among the continental countries.
It is evident that the East-West relations have undergone dramatic changes in terms of economy, politics, security and culture, marked by the rise of China, the reflection of Russia and the setback suffered by the West. The China-Russia relationship and its evolution amid shifting tide of history serve as a benchmark. Its development follows inexorable logic and is not subject to the will (including doubts) of anyone.
“师傅型”教师的职业素养主要分为三个层面，即教师岗位应具有的职业素养、培养学徒过程中应具有的职业素养和从事专业领域岗位的职业素养。只有具备良好职业素养的师傅，才可以通过言传身教和潜移默化促使学徒自我内化职业道德、职业意识和职业行为习惯。
THE DISPUTE OVER “MODERNITY” IS YET TO BE RESOLVED IN CHINA-RUSSIA RELATIONS
The seven-decade development of China-Russia relations is a topic of universal significance to be examined in the fields of both international politics and modernity. Ever since the 1960s and 1970s, modernity has become a proposition at the center of discussion and controversy in the academic community and imposed most extensive and direct impacts on the development of domestic and international ideological development. Europe and the US were then basically taken as the benchmark of “modernity” and thus the modernization drive of the countries and regions that didn't reach the European and American standards were deemed in the transition to the modernity represented by Europe and the US. All non-western countries have to go through what German philosopher Max Weber called the “disenchantment” to embrace “modernity”. To tell the truth, this theory did play a critical role in driving the modernization of non-western countries, but it is far from the end of cognition.
前文已指出天地的运作直接产生了万物，说明天地和万物是有区别的。“天地”在大多数情况下是特指，不能和“万物”混淆。所谓“天地不仁，以万物为刍狗”，这里也能看出两者的不同。不过，由于它们都属于天然现象之“物”，处于直接生成与被生成的关系中，两者的联系也就更加紧密。在一定的语境中，说“天地”如何存在，某种程度上便预设着“万物”如何或应如何存在；一些章节直接讨论“道”与“万物”之间的关系而未提及“天地”，在一定意义下我们应将“天地”补充进来。
When the Cold War ended, the Western ideology led larger-scale “disenchantment” sweeping across Russia and other former socialist countries as well as a large number of developing and transitional countries. However, the attempt to advocate neo-liberal transformation model by means of “shock therapy” was unexpectedly foiled by the countries and regions that didn't share the realities and traditions of European and American civilization and history. The attempt was also completely thwarted in such traditional powers as Russia. The linear progressive model where “modernity” displaces “premodernity” immediately gave its place to the paradigm of “multi-modernity”. The theories of “diversity”, “pluralism” and even “multi-polarity” in the course of world history have captured unprecedented attention since the 1990s till the early 21st century. Such trend has also served as a considerable momentum for reform. However, it doesn't represent the end of the debate on “modernity”, either.
In fact, the thinking on “modernity” has entered a new stage: “security”, which has largely been neglected in the Western studies on “modernity”, comes into focus. When the survival of humanity is severely threatened, “security” undoubtedly becomes one of the gravest concerns of today's world and a profound and factual background for China-Russia cooperation. Elevating “modernity and Pre-modernity” and “multi-modernity” to the “secure, diversified, and sustainable modernity” has become a critical ideological and theoretical precondition for further developing the China-Russia relations.
The balance of power between the East and the West is shifting, but it will be stuck in a long-term stalemate and the traditional West is still strongly competitive and innovative. As the debate weighing the importance of universality or particularity in the course of world history has yet to draw a final conclusion, the studies on the development path of China-Russia relations have to closely combine theory and practice. While it is imperative to review the significance of developing China-Russia relations from the perspective of “modernity”, explore its endogenous ideological momentum and resolutely promote and deepen China-Russia relations； it is also necessary to implement strategies and policies in such an appropriate and subtle manner that the relations serve as a solid cornerstone supporting China's development and the steady growth of the international community.
In short, the development of China-Russia relations calls for the firm support of the ideological and theoretical community, who can also find inspiration and enlightenment by engaging in the studies of China-Russia relations. As China and Russian have made remarkable achievements in developing the bilateral relations, an in-depth analysis of the ideological implications of the development of the relations meets the compelling needs to interpret the international affairs.
DOI: 10.19422/j.cnki.cn10-1398/d.2019.04.005
标签：The论文; Contemporary论文; significance论文; of论文; 70-YEAR论文; China-Russia论文; relations论文; China论文; the Center for Co-development with Neighboring Countries论文; the East China Normal University论文; the School of Advanced International and Area Studies论文; the Center for Russian Studies论文;