cross-posted from: https://mander.xyz/post/57283231

Here is the original (in Ukrainian).

George Friedman, the founder of the analysis firm Geopolitical Futures, says Beijing has formally adopted the view that parts of Russia’s Far East were taken from China in the nineteenth century. That stance creates a strategic dilemma for the People’s Liberation Army, which for decades has been structured mainly to counter the United States rather than to handle threats across a vast continental border. For English-speaking readers, this report adds context to ongoing debates about where China’s territorial ambitions may lead next.

…

In 2023, China’s Ministry of Natural Resources ordered state agencies to place Chinese names for eight Russian locations on official maps. Under this new cartographic standard, Vladivostok is labeled Haishenwai, Khabarovsk appears as Boli, and Sakhalin is marked as Kuedao. These choices reflect a noticeable evolution in how Beijing presents its relationship with Moscow. Journalists at The New York Times have also reviewed an internal FSB document that refers to China as an adversary and notes Beijing’s aspirations toward Vladivostok.

Friedman nevertheless argues that China is not preparing to fight Russia. He also recalls that Beijing abstained in the UN vote shortly after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The picture becomes more complicated because Xi Jinping has carried out the largest purge of PLA generals since Mao Zedong’s time, a move that could alter the army’s strategic outlook as the geopolitical landscape shifts.

‘Beijing has officially stated that part of the Russian Far East was taken from China in the nineteenth century, and it publishes maps showing that land as Chinese territory. A military that spent decades preparing for confrontation with the United States would have to recalculate the risks along the continental border,’ Friedman said.

These events point to growing friction in the region and the possibility of changing alliances. Beijing’s public statements about territory held by Russia could indicate a new direction in its foreign policy and military planning. With historical grievances and present-day cooperation both in play, such moves may produce fresh geopolitical tensions.

…

Web Archive link