Between an axis of convenience and a return to the past

Michał Lubina’s Russia and China: A political marriage of convenience – stable and successful is a 300-page-long volume, dense with detail. Bobo Lo’s contribution A Wary Embrace: What the China-Russia relationship means for the world is three times shorter. When read together, both books offer distinct perspectives on one of the most important bilateral relations in today’s geopolitics.

Sceptics vs pessimists

The western debate on the quality of post-Cold War Russian-Chinese relations used to be divided between sceptics and pessimists. Representatives of both these groups challenged the official narrative of the “comprehensive strategic partnership”, eagerly promoted by officials from the Kremlin and Zhongnanhai. Sceptics emphasised all the flaws in the Sino-Russian relationship and pointed to the possibility of a clash of interests between Moscow and Beijing. Pessimists in turn warned against China and Russia establishing a revisionist alliance, keen on overturning the liberal international order.

Bobo Lo has becomeone of the most prominent representatives of the first group, having published The Axis of Convenience in 2008. His most recent contribution, published almost a decade later, argues that the Sino-Russian relationship has not transformed qualitatively. In 2008 Lo defined the relationship as based on tactical expediency and short-term interests rather than long-term strategies or shared worldviews; in other words, cynical and pragmatic rather than reflecting like-mindedness. While Lo admits that today’s ties between Moscow and Beijing have broadened, he argues that the nature of their relations has not changed. The contours and limitations of rapprochement have been defined already in the early-1990s. Lo remains sceptical. What has changed in his recent assessment is the lowering probability of a clash between the two states. As he puts it, the current shape of co-operation can be expected to stay. Still, we should not take appearances for reality, which is what – in Bobo Lo’s view – those analysts who see a post-2014 relationship as the “alliance in all but name” are doing.

Michał Lubina, meanwhile, attempts to navigate between these two dominant narratives and offers an original interpretation. He argues that mutual relations – though not an alliance – go far beyond the “marriage of convenience”. For Lubina, Sino-Russian relations have undergone a deep transformation as a result of which the contemporary relationship between Moscow and Beijing resembles one of the 17th and 18th centuries, with China having gained the upper hand but remaining able to demonstrate and implement self-restraint in its policy towards Russia. Lubina uses the metaphor of the Nerchinsk/Kyakhta treaty system which allowed Russia to gain profits in return for the acceptance of China’s superiority. At that time, Russia, though weaker than China, still stood out as a half-equal. This model lasted until the mid-19th century when Russia joined other European powers in dominating China. Nonetheless, just as three centuries ago, both states do not have much in common with each other today. This is where Lubina meets Lo.

In his book, Lubina seeks to employ and adapt the existing conceptual and theoretical vocabulary of the discipline of international relations. He dismisses out of hand liberalism and institutionalism, seeing interdependence, win-win co-operation and mutual benefits as a mere “smokescreen” put on by Russia and China. Instead, realism serves as the starting point. There is, however, some confusion when it comes to realism. Lubina uses “neorealism” and “realism” interchangeably, arguing that Russian and Chinese elites alike see the world in Realpolitik terms, regardless of ideological variations. Both states share a “philosophical understanding” of international politics. Yet, he tends to forget that neorealism emphasises structural pressures, such as the distribution of material capabilities in the international system, and does not pay attention to features of individual great powers. Using neorealism means that the main, and the only, incentive for the Sino-Russian co-operation is American predominance. Lubina points to the role of constructivism and takes another competing narrative on board – one of a peaceful power transition and Russia’s acceptance of China’s primacy. He strives to combine the pessimistic and a cautiously optimistic perspective and supplements them with the asymmetry theory and asymmetrical win-win.

Asymmetry

Lubina’s book is a very systematic compendium of the contemporary Russian-Chinese relationship. The introduction sets the stage, discussing theories, the role of domestic factors and broader international roles of two main protagonists. The first part scrutinises political relations in a chronological order, singling out key moments that have transformed Russia-China relations. Among these are Boris Yeltsin’s first visit to China, the proclamation of the “strategic partnership”, the Snowden affair and the crisis over Ukraine. The second part covers economic relations, in particular energy and arms trade, and – which may come as a surprise – military relations which may be a tad misleading for the reader. A separate section discusses the Russian Far East and its place in Sino-Russian relations. The last part of the book focuses on the regional dimension, Central Asia and Asia-Pacific respectively. In the conclusion, Lubina returns to the “asymmetric win-win” concept and discusses possible futures for the relationship. Lo’s much shorter essay is divided into four parts. The notion of asymmetry in Russian-Chinese relations dominates the first part. The second part puts the relationship into a broader perspective, linking it with Russia’s and China’s foreign policies. Towards the end of the book, Lo reviews the existing interpretations and also discusses prospects for the future.

Despite all the differences between the two authors, they reach a similar conclusion – current co-operation between Russia and China is here to stay. The two states benefit from good relations, even if in an asymmetrical way.

Marcin Kaczmarski is a senior research fellow with the Finnish Institute of International Affairs. His expertise is on Russia’s foreign policy, Russia-China relations, and great power regionalism.

Bobo Lo, Book review, Michal Lubina, Russia-China relations