Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 4

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  Sino-Russian relations
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Polityka Chińskiej Republiki Ludowej wobec wojny rosyjsko-ukraińskiej. Uwarunkowania i perspektywy dalszej ewolucji

100%
Wiśniewski R.
Przegląd Zachodni
|
2023
|
issue 1-2 (386)
141-170
EN
In analyzing the worldwide consequences of the Russia-Ukraine war, it is necessary to consider the position of People’s Republic of China. This results from three major factors. First, the aggressor state, the Russian Federation, has China as a strategic partner. Second, the ongoing armed conflict (which is actually also a confrontation between Russia and US/NATO) coincides with a period of increased rivalry between United States and China. And third, even if China wasn’t Russia’s strategic partner and Sino-American weren’t so tense, it would have been impossible to ignore China’s stance on the war. That is due to the fact that PRC is at present the second superpower and a strong candidate for international leadership. The articles aims to achieve the following research goals: 1) Identifying and explaining PRC’s position on the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine. 2) Assessing the effects of the current war on China’s international position. 3) Identifying the key factors that will determine the future course of PRC’s policy towards the conflict.
2
Content available remote

Wspólnotowe kultury polityczne Rosji i Chin. Podobieństwa i różnice

88%
Lubina M.
Politeja : Pismo Wydziału Studiów Miedzynarodowych i Politycznych Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego
|
2013
|
issue 3(25)
659-672
EN
Russian‑Sino relationships are constantly improving which lead a significant amount of scholars to focus on their cultural similarities. This is true particularly to Russian academicians who try to point out civilizational and cultural closeness between Russia and China as a counterweight to the Western model. Indeed, there are some similarities, like predominance of collectivism over individualism and the need for a strong leadership. Nevertheless, if we take the risk of venturing into deeper space of cultural background and take into account not only political issues but also Russia’s and China’s identity and consciousness, then striking differences appear. On this level we can clearly see that similarities between Russia and China are superficial and they exist only on the surface. On the deeper, cultural level, however, those two “civilizations that became countries” have very little in common. They are – as we said – different civilizations incomparable to each other due to several historical, cultural and social reasons. This thesis leads to a conclusion that a successful cooperation and interaction between Russia and China is possible only on political, tactical issues, but there could be no real “melting pot” between them. This does not mean they are bound to conflict, but it clearly shows the artificiality of their “everlasting friendship”. Political conjunctures are bound to change whereas civilizational factors lasts longer and this explains why Russia and China will never become as close as the try to show. For similarities between them are of tactical, political importance, whereas differences are of strategic, ontological nature.
3
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

The Settlement of the Russian-Chinese Border Dispute

75%
Dmochowski T.
Polish Political Science Yearbook
|
2015
|
vol. 44
56-74
EN
The establishment of the PRC opened the new chapter in the Sino-Soviet/Russian relations. For many years the existence of the problem of the common border was not openly expressed. In 1957 the first announcements about the territorial disputes between USSR and PRC were issued in China. And in 1960 Zhou Enlai stated that there were insignificant disrepancies in the Russian and Chinese maps, very easy to solve. Over the next nearly 30 years the problem of determination of the border has become a victim of tense and hostile Soviet-Chinese relations and unproductive talks. Gorbachev’s rise to power in the Kremlin enabled to negotiate a solution to the Soviet-Chinese border problem. And consequently to sign “The agreement on the eastern section of the Sino-Soviet state border” on May 16, 1991. The agreement on the western section of the border was signed on September 3, 1994. The demarcation of the western section of the border was finished by Joint Russian-Chinese Demarcation Commission on September 10, 1998. After six years of negotiations on October 14, 2004 the Complementary Agreement on the Eastern Section of the China–Russia Boundary was signed in Beijing. On its basis the Russian side ceded the whole of Tarabarov island (ch. Yinlongdao), half of Bolshoy Ussuriyski (ch. Heixiazidao) and half of Bolshoy (ch. Abagaitu) island. Another halves of Bolshoy Ussuriyski and Bolshoy islands were kept by Russia. Both sides shared disputed territory almost equally. The ceremony of installation of the border landmarks between Russia and China on Bolshoy Ussuriyski island (on October 14, 2008) finished the long process of demarcation of the Russian-Chinese border.
4
Publication available in full text mode
Content available

Rosja Władimira Putina a Chiny Xi Jinpinga O wpływie przywódców politycznych na politykę w państwach autorytarnych: przypadki rosyjski i chiński

63%
Lubina M.
Nowa Polityka Wschodnia
|
2018
|
vol. 3(18)
41-62
EN
In political science an accent on individuals (political leaders) in researching politics is neither popular nor advocated one. In authoritarian countries like Russia or China, however, political leaders and their personalities are a crucial factor in trying to understand the political processes there. Both Vladimir Putin in Russia and Xi Jinping in China have dominated their respective political systems. This, combined with good state of Russia-China relations makes it an interesting case study of the influence of political leaders on authoritarian countries. Both Putin and Xi are new type of leaders: they both follow the main ideas of political realism (though with “national differences”) and they share a 19th century outlook on the global affairs (“concert of powers”) yet they use contemporary means to fulfil these interests. Their personal understanding provides a predictability and stability: both Putin and Xi function in accordance with balance of power and respect for zones of influence concepts. That is why differences in other spheres, like Russia’s and China’s approaches to the USA do not influence the general good mood of Sino-Russian relationship.
RU
В политических науках фокус на политических лидеров не является популярным. Однако, в авторитарных странах, таких как Россия и Китай, это лидеры имеют ключевое значение для понимания политических процессов. Владимир Путин и Си Цзиньпин доминировали российский и китайский политические системы, что, в связи с хорошими российско-китайскими отношениями, является интересным примером в исследовании влияния политических лидеров на политику. Путин и Си Цзиньпин – это лидеры нового типа. Они оба – политические реалисты, хотя с «национальными» отличиями, у них похожее видение мира с перспективы концепции системы концерта держав и одновременно современные средства осуществления государственных интересов. Взаимопонимание между Путиным и Си Цзиньпином, схожая политическая философия, диктовавшая уважение собственных зон интересов и сохранение баланса сил, положительно влияют на российско-китайские отношения. Хотя и существуют отличия между Россией и Китаем (например, в вопросе политики в отношении США), они не влияют на хорошее состояние российско-китайских отношений”.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.