The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in a nutshell
Founded in 2001, when Putin didn’t seem such an ogre, with two official languages—Chinese and Russian—the SCO included as members, alongside China and Russia, mostly the former soviet republics from Central Asia whose names end in -stan. These countries had (and still have) important oil resources, and both China and Russia wanted to prevent any interference from the United States in the region.
Honestly, should we ignore Russia’s innate malevolence, the approach had its legitimacy. NATO continued its expansion eastward, while its counterpart, the Warsaw Pact, ceased to exist. Furthermore, US troops remained in Western Europe, whereas Russian troops had left Eastern Europe. The might—true or imaginary—of the former Soviet Union ceased to exist. The world suddenly became unipolar, with a unique leader: the United States. Let’s not fool ourselves: Europe is in tow of the United States. It’s obvious now that Europe has relegated most of its defense to the US, and most of its industrial production to Southeast Asia. Also, please explain how Europe could survive without Microsoft and Google, which are 100% American!
So the Shanghai Cooperation Organization was actually meant to be more a security alliance than an economic one. This explains the partial overlapping with BRICS, especially now that several other countries have joined or are partner and friends with both BRICS and the SCO. India, a founding BRICS member, joined the SCO in 2017. Iran, a full SCO member since 2021, joined BRICS in 2024. Pakistan joined the SCO in 2017, despite its strained relations with India, and never considered BRICS. Turkey is only an SCO dialogue partner since 2012. Geographically, the SCO is more Eurasian-focused, while BRICS spans multiple continents. Right now, at the 2025 SCO summit in Tianjin, there was an important stress on economic cooperation and development, but rest assured that the SCO is a strategic security alliance before overlapping with the economic and trade aims of BRICS, which also has multipolar ambitions.
While Russia is a key member in both the SCO and BRICS, each time you hear about a “multipolar” world, don’t think of “the United States, Russia and China, plus India and whatnot” but rather think of “China and its sphere of influence wants to overpower the United States and its sphere of influence.”
In the brown circle: “Upholding the Shanghai spirit: SCO on the move”
The Aug 31–Sep 1, 2025, Tianjin SCO summit
It was dubbed “the meeting of the dictators” because of the presence of the leaders of Russia, Belarus, Iran, even Turkey. And “free elections” by Western standards only took place in India and Turkey (which insists on being called Türkiye even in English). But, frankly, Turkey is anything but a true democracy.
It doesn’t really matter, because China and the other SCO members only talk of “promoting democracy in international relations,” not of internal Western-style political democracy, meaning a plurality of political parties with equal chances.
I’ve heard some “analysts” trying to minimize or underestimate the power of the participating states in the SCO. Military aside, one of them talked GDP this way:
China + India + Russia ≈ $25.5 trillion
EU + UK ≈ $24 trillion
EU + UK + Canada ≈ $26 trillion
In other words, even without the United States, Wir schaffen das.
Well, I’m not so sure. I don’t believe that the GDP has any relevance nowadays. Not even when PPP-adjusted. The PPP adjustment would make sense in connection with the average income or with the minimum salary. It would be a fair indicator of the standard of living offered by the wages typical to a place. The GDP, on the other hand, has lost its indicative value, IMNSHO.
My favorite pet peeve is that a certain product can leave China (or Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, etc.) at $1 apiece only to retail in the West for $10 or even more. Add or subtract what you want, even consider the costs of replacing under warranty; the fact is that the entire value has been created in the country that exported the item at $1.
Most of everything else is purely parasitic, yet it gets included in the GDP of those Western countries that proudly boast their GDPs! Even the VAT is included in the GDP of the destination country! (Strange enough, the customs tariffs are not.) And the exporting country perceives zero VAT!
There is a Romanian saying that translates literally to “Both fucked and with the money taken” (“Și futut, și cu banii luați”). The official figures are hogwash. Go purchase 100 different non-food items at random and count how many of them are not made in China!
Now, of course, this is self-screwing. It wasn’t China that forced the West to move its production to China and other Southeast Asian countries. It was the greed of Western CEOs that led to that situation!
Also, the only reason we can afford computers at such prices is the fact that they’re made, with practically most of their components, in Southeast Asia. Let me tell you what kind of prices we have in the West.
Access the publicly available documents for the public works contracted by your city council. Say, how much did it cost to add a new bench in the park or a new streetlamp? The item plus the labor. You shouldn’t be surprised if the bill per bench or per streetlamp was something like €5k‒€10k, or even more! That’s how absurd our Europe has become. The European public works procurement process, the compliance with regulations, the bureaucracy overhead, and the Mafia that qualifies to execute such public works—all come at a cost. And it’s not any better in the United States!
We couldn’t survive without, well, China. We’d probably pay 3–4 times more for a computer, for instance, if every single component of it were manufactured in the West. We’d live at the real value of our work, once we subtract the cost of bureaucracy and ineptitude.
And it’s not always because of higher wages, because there are means to limit them. For example, a significant portion of the workforce in agriculture and construction from Eastern European countries, such as Romania, has migrated to Western Europe for better pay, often taking jobs that locals in the West are unwilling to accept at such rates. Meanwhile, Romania imports construction workers from Vietnam and food delivery workers from Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, India, and Nepal. In each case, this reflects social dumping and the exploitation of workers willing to accept lower wages than the local workforce. We need a new Marx.
Another random case of stupidity. Bloomberg: Germany Urges Europe to Stop China Buying So Much Copper Scrap. According to Germany’s Economy Minister Katherina Reiche, “The Chinese are buying copper scrap from the market in huge quantities,” so that “large German copper smelters are no longer getting any raw materials.” Why is that so? Because the Chinese are offering a better price than the stingy European copper scrap smelters! But the Chinese, after buying the copper scrap, actually do something with it. And the finished Chinese products will be cheaper in the end than if they were manufactured in Europe! Isn’t Europe great? We need new leaders.
The righteous reports on “the meeting of the dictators”
Obviously, I’m always cringing when I see Xi being such a friend and ally of Putin, despite holding the belief that this is mostly conjunctural: China needs energy products from Russia (India has similar needs) and from Iran, and every opportunity is good to thumb their nose at the United States.
Also, the televisions have shown images from the banquet, suggesting that Putin had received a very warm welcome:
This might be deceiving
The full gang:
This “laughing session” (Putin, Modi, Xi) also looks disturbing:
What if there is another way to look at it?
NEXTA TV is a pro-European, pro-Ukrainian independent media outlet that originated in Belarus, but now is headquartered in Poland. In April 2022, it has been declared a terrorist organization by the Supreme Court of Belarus, so it cannot be suspected as being pro-Kremlin.
Well, as reported by NEXTA TV on X, with a video excerpt from an Azeri TV station (to which it added English subtitles in which Erdoğan has been spelled phonetically), this interpretation is possible:
🤭 How leaders are welcomed vs. how Putin is “welcomed”
The video compares the arrival ceremonies of Aliyev, Erdoğan, and Putin in China.
Aliyev and Erdoğan were greeted by senior officials, an honor guard, music, and flowers — Putin was received formally, without honors.
The visual contrast is so obvious that no commentary is needed.
From the subtitle:
Putin was received more as a burdensome guest who was best seen off as soon as possible.
Now, I’m not necessarily buying this interpretation, but it could serve as food for thought. Here’s the full video by Budrooo News, in Russian: ⚡️Китай показал разницу: Алиев — дорогой друг, Путин — лишний гость (⚡️China showed the difference: Aliyev—a dear friend, Putin—an unwanted guest). YouTube has added a secondary audio channel in English (which should be the default one for you, unless your browser is in Russian), but it’s AI-generated.
Nonetheless, if Xi started to become slightly ashamed of Putin, even if he doesn’t show it boldly, that’s a good sign. But this is a big “if”!
In other news, here’s The Kyiv Independent reporting:
China’s Heihe Rural Commercial Bank has stopped accepting payments from Russia after falling under European Union sanctions, Russian pro-government media outlet Vedomosti reported on Sept. 1.
Heihe, a small rural lender, was one of the last Chinese banks willing to process transactions for Russian non-sanctioned credit organizations after larger Chinese banks cut off such services.
Many Russian small and medium-sized businesses had shifted to Heihe following earlier restrictions.
People’s Daily was busy these days—and so was Xi
To get a grasp on the Chinese official media’s reports on the Tianjin SCO summit, here’s a list of SCO-related articles posted on the site and in the app of People’s Daily, which aggregates China Daily, Xinhua, Global News, CGTN, and People’s Daily itself:
Aug 30, 2025 – Quotes from Xi: On the SCO (1) (video) – “We need to bear in mind that we live in a community with a shared future, and always uphold the Shanghai spirit. We need to stay firmly on the development paths that suit our respective national conditions and regional realities, and jointly build a more promising home of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization so that our peoples can live a peaceful, successful and happy life.”
Aug 30, 2025 – Quotes from Xi: On the SCO (2) (video) – “The people’s wish for a happy life is our goal, and peace, development and win-win cooperation are the unstoppable trends of our times. We must rise to the call of the times, keep in mind our funding mission, and stay in unity and coordination to bring more certainty and positive energy to world peace and development.”
Aug 30, 2025 – Quotes from Xi: On the SCO (3) (video) – “True development is development for all and good development is sustainable. We need to be guided by the vision of innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development and open up more opportunities for practical cooperation to facilitate economic recovery and betterment of people’s lives.”
Aug 30, 2025 – Quotes from Xi: On the SCO (4) (video) – “We should hold high the banner of the Shanghai Spirit, keep to the right direction in the historical trends of promoting democracy in international relations, and pursue our own development as we pursue common development for humanity. We should build a closer Shanghai Cooperation Organization community with a shared future and contribute more to lasting global peace and common prosperity.”
Aug 30, 2025 – Quotes from Xi | A just cause finds great support, and a journey with many companions gets far (video) – “A just cause finds great support, and a journey with many companions gets far. The SCO’s development accords with the trend of our times and goes along with the direction of human progress. Through our joint efforts, it will definitely grow from strength to strength. I am looking forward to meeting with the leaders of all member states in Tianjin to discuss plans for the future development of the SCO.”
Sep 01, 2025 – Quotes from Xi | Fasten the first button of life correctly – President Xi Jinping attaches great importance to youth development. “Look, there are so many talented people here! … This is an era when heroes emerge. You are in the prime of your life. Walk the journey of your life well and fasten the first button of your life correctly. … Hello, school children. My hope is that you will all become well-rounded individuals, contribute to society, and ultimately grow into pillars of our country.”
I really don’t know how to take the 2025 SCO summit. I said before that Xi makes a huge mistake by nurturing Putin. And I also said that in the face of the heinous bullying of the Orange Retard also known as Donald Trump, China was the only bulwark.
On the other hand, I don’t care much that most of the member countries of the SCO (and of BRICS+, for that matter) are authoritarian regimes. Our Western “democracy” became more and more hypocritical and fake, if not useless.
The governments didn’t stop those CEOs from undermining the national economies through treason to the benefit of China and Russia, and neither did Brussels. In the case of Russia, let’s not mention Gerhard Schröder and Gazprom. But how about halving the natural gas production of Europe just to purchase it cheaper from Russia? (And now, from the United States, much more expensive.)
Find me a computer fully made in Europe, and I’ll agree that China and its allies don’t matter. Don’t get fooled by the likes of Tuxedo Computers: based in Augsburg (Bavaria), they try to be slightly cheaper by “manufacturing” in Leipzig (Saxony), but what they do is this: they take a base laptop without RAM and storage and a few other modules, they configure it, and they label it “Made in Germany.” But what they do is to assemble 6-7 modules, LEGO-style! And these modules and their components are all made in China, Taiwan, Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam, etc.
Meanwhile, the European Union wants to save its economy by imposing an arbitrary €5 tax on each small package coming from TEMU or Shein. This is how smart Ursula is! By the book, each package should be taxed with VAT and, beyond a certain value, with a customs tariff. Obviously, the legally estimated value should be taken into account, not the declared one. So the legal path is to establish that the content of a package is valued at, say, €50 instead of the selling price of €5, and to apply the VAT to €50. The illegal and illegitimate €5 tax should be contested at the World Trade Organization! I never bought anything from TEMU, and I’ll never do such a thing, but rules are rules. In Xi’s lingo, I am “promoting democracy in international relations.”
I cannot see how the Shanghai Cooperation Organization could be disregarded by “us, the Westerners.”
Oh, about Erdoğan having been to Tianjin? How about Hungary’s Orbán and Slovakia’s Fico, both being Russia’s fifth column in NATO and the EU?
We’re literally doomed, and licking Trump’s ass cannot help anymore.
Béranger -September 2nd, 2025 at 6:48 PMnone
Comment author #116027 on How is Putin really seen by Xi? Notes on the 2025 SCO summit by Homo Ludditus
The Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is in Beijing, as he’ll take part tomorrow, Sept. 3, in China’s Victory Day Parade. During a meeting with Vladimir Putin, he said that “Slovakia wants to normalize its relations with Moscow and is increasing imports of Russian gas through the TurkStream pipeline.” (Reuters)
Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic Robert Fico (retranslated): Thank you, Mr President.
First, I have a somewhat unpleasant question – how are you?
Vladimir Putin: If I am alive, that is already a good sign. A pleasant question, indeed.
Robert Fico: …
On Friday, I will meet with the President of Ukraine in the city of Uzhgorod, and I will raise this issue very seriously. This infrastructure is very important to us and cannot be attacked. You are probably aware of the European Commission’s decision regarding RePowerEU, that is, the suspension of gas and oil transport beginning in 2027. We will vote against this decision in the European Union. I am sure a lot can change before January 1, 2028, and RePowerEU may not be operational by that time, because we find it exceedingly harmful.
…
Vladimir Putin: Mr Prime Minister,
As we know, Slovakia is a member of both the EU and NATO, and hence you can afford to criticise their policies because it is your community, your family today.
I do not wish to put you in a difficult or ambiguous position by criticising NATO or the European Union. I do not want to compare them to reptiles or animals. They are not experts on fairy tales; they are experts on horror stories.
What we see now are never-ending attempts to fuel hysteria over Russia’s alleged intention to attack Europe. I believe that reasonable people dismiss this as an obvious provocation or total incompetence, because any reasonable person understands perfectly well that Russia has never had, does not have and will never have any desire to attack anyone.
…
What can I say? After all, Ukraine receives a sizable portion of energy through its neighbours in Eastern Europe.Cut off gas supplies that come via reverse flow, cut off electricity supplies, and they will instantly come to realise that there are certain limits to their behaviour in violating others’ interests.
Speaking of nuclear power plants, the choice, of course, always remains with the customer. We have extensive experience cooperating with our foreign partners, including European partners. In particular, this applies to our joint work in Hungary. We can consider the possibility of cooperating with Westinghouse the way you are suggesting as well. Also, by the way – I mention this in passing – we can cooperate with our US partners at the Zaporozhskaya Nuclear Power Plant as well. We have indirectly discussed these matters with them. …
Why is Slovakia still part of NATO, the EU, and the Schengen Area?
Béranger -September 2nd, 2025 at 7:46 PMnone
Comment author #116028 on How is Putin really seen by Xi? Notes on the 2025 SCO summit by Homo Ludditus
Victor Gao, vice president for the Centre for China and Globalization, told Sky News (jump to minute 4):
I think all of us on the eve of the celebration of the 80th anniversary of the victory against fascism, we all need to remind ourselves that the One China policy and Taiwan being considered as part of China have been carved in stone as a legacy of the victory over Nazi Germany and Japanese fascism.
Because if you read the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation, they all dictate that when Japan unconditionally surrenders, Japan needs to surrender Taiwan back to China. This is the legal status. Taiwan has been part of China ever since the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation were made known to the world. And no one should pretend that Taiwan is separate from China. Taiwan is very much part of China. And this is the legacy of the victory of the Second World War.
The military parade on September the 3rd will be, in my judgment, the most important military parade in human history. It will showcase the best military weapons, hardware, software, drones, robotics of all kinds. The underlying message is to promote peace, meaning no country in the world should ever dare to impose war of any kind on China.
And China will remain a very important force for peace, including force protecting peace across the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Meaning nobody, no country should be allowed to intervene in the cross-strait relations because it’s purely a domestic, internal Chinese affair. It is not a situation involving two sovereign and independent countries. And no foreign country should be allowed to interfere and intervene in the internal matters of One China.
A few key facts:
❶ Cairo Declaration (8 December 1943)
→ Issued by the United States, United Kingdom, and Republic of China (ROC).
→ “All the territories Japan has stolen from China… shall be restored to the Republic of China.”
→ China’s view: This declaration set the political intention that Taiwan, which had been a Japanese colony since 1895, should be returned to China after the war.
→ Legal status: It was a wartime statement, not a treaty, so its binding force depends on later agreements.
❷ Potsdam Declaration (26 July 1945)
→ Issued by the United States, United Kingdom, Soviet Union, and ROC.
→ “…the terms of the surrender shall include the removal of all Japanese authority from territories taken by force, including Manchuria, Korea, Taiwan, the Pescadores, and the Kurile Islands.”
→ China’s view: Reinforces the intention expressed at Cairo that Taiwan would be relinquished by Japan.
→ Legal status: Like Cairo, it was a policy declaration; the actual legal effect comes from the subsequent surrender instrument and post‑war treaties.
❸ Japanese Instrument of Surrender (2 September 1945)
→ Signed by representatives of the Japanese government and accepted by the Allied Powers.
→ “The Japanese Government accepts the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration… and undertakes to comply with the terms therein, including the relinquishment of all territories acquired by force.”
→ The text does not list individual territories; it merely references the broader Potsdam terms. Consequently, the instrument itself does not explicitly name Taiwan, but it obliges Japan to give up all territories it obtained by force, which, under the earlier declarations, includes Taiwan.
❹ Treaty of San Francisco (Treaty of Peace with Japan, 8 September 1951, effective 28 April 1952)
→ Signed by 48 Allied nations, but not by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or the Republic of China (ROC).
→ Article 2(b): Japan renounces “all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, the Spratly Islands, the Paracel Islands, and the islands of Taiwan (Formosa) and the Pescadores.”
→ Legally transferred sovereignty over Taiwan to no specific state; the treaty left the ultimate disposition of Taiwan ambiguous because the two Chinese governments were excluded.
● Problematic Points
→ China’s legal argument rests on the chain of wartime declarations (Cairo → Potsdam) that Japan accepted through its surrender, rather than on an explicit clause in the surrender instrument itself.
→ The absence of a direct treaty transferring Taiwan from Japan to a specific Chinese government.
→ The People’s Republic of China (established 1949) was not a signatory to either the Cairo or Potsdam declarations, nor to the San Francisco Treaty, leading the ROC (now governing Taiwan) to claim continuity of the original Chinese government’s rights.
→ International bodies (e.g., the United Nations) have treated Taiwan’s status as “undetermined” pending a peace settlement, reflecting the legal ambiguity.
→ The shift of the United Nations’ China seat from the Republic of China (ROC) to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1971 (Resolution 2758) was a political decision made by the UN General Assembly, not a judicial ruling that automatically resolves questions of sovereign legitimacy.
→ The UN vote was a pragmatic response to the reality that the PRC controlled the vast majority of Chinese territory and that most member states preferred to engage diplomatically with Beijing. It did not constitute a legal judgment on the status of Taiwan; the UN Charter provides no mechanism for resolving internal succession disputes, and the Security Council itself has never ruled on the sovereignty of Taiwan.
→ The ROC retains effective control over Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu, and a few surrounding islands. In international law, de‑facto control is a strong indicator of sovereignty, but it does not erase competing claims when the underlying dispute is unresolved.
→ The PRC’s “One‑China” policy insists that there is only one China and that the PRC is its sole legitimate government. The ROC still maintains that it is a sovereign state. Neither side has consented to a mutually‑agreed settlement.
Shares of Russian energy giant Gazprom slumped on Tuesday after it announced that it had signed a “legally binding” memorandum with China to advance construction of the long-delayed Power of Siberia 2 pipeline.
Gazprom’s stock closed down 3.1% on the Moscow Exchange at 130.7 rubles, erasing more than 100 billion rubles ($1.2 billion) in market value.
…
The proposed Power of Siberia 2 pipeline, with an annual capacity of 50 billion cubic meters, has been on the Kremlin’s wish list for nearly two decades. The project has taken on new urgency as Moscow seeks a way to offset the collapse of Gazprom’s once-lucrative sales to Europe.
But investors were quick to note that the deal signed in Beijing was only another memorandum of intent, not a binding supply contract.
Sergei Kaufman, an analyst at the investment firm Finam, warned that the project could weigh on Gazprom’s already strained finances if it does move forward.
The 2,600-kilometer Power of Siberia 2 pipeline is expected to cost the company about 2 trillion rubles ($25 billion, according to spot foreign exchange market data published by Reuters), and China has not committed to provide funding.
…
Earlier reporting suggested that Beijing sought to commit to only part of the pipeline’s capacity and at heavily discounted Russian domestic rates, which stand at around $120 to $130 per thousand cubic meters, according to energy expert Alexei Gromov.
An even funnier thing. Bloomberg, using an official CCTV (China Central Television) broadcasted segment:
The leaders who gathered in China may not agree on everything. Some of them may not even like each other very much. But they are seeing the opportunity of a lifetime to end Western dominance of the global stage. And Europe fears it could be in the firing line.
…
“Russia is trying to demonstrate that even though it has been isolated from the Western world, it still has partners and allies which are economically strong countries… And this isolation doesn’t mean that the Russian economy will crumble or that Russia will be unable to sustain its war effort,” Natia Seskuria, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told CNN.
…
The US has been retreating from the global stage under President Donald Trump and his “America First” agenda. Meanwhile, Europe is battling its own demons, including a surge in far-right nationalism and economic pressures.
Russia, China, India and other countries that did not like the idea of a US-dominated world suddenly saw an opening.
…
Despite all the recent hand holding and smiles, China’s and India’s approach to Russia’s war in Ukraine is dominated by pragmatism, analysts say.
The two consistently profess their neutrality on the war – while at the same time fueling it by providing financial lifelines to Russia.
China and India were more than happy to step in when Ukraine’s Western allies slapped sanctions on Russian oil, a key moneymaker for Moscow.
They get cheaper energy supplies as a result, but experts say the relationship is not just about the money.
While neither China nor India is willing to enter into a direct confrontation with the West, both are happy to see Russia pushing an anti-Western agenda.
“China is much closer to Russia when it comes to multipolarity and decreasing the Western influence in general. There is an ideological affinity and there is a pure economic interest as well,” Seskuria said.
Lough said Russia’s push against the US-dominated world order also plays well into the Indian narrative. “I think the Indians are not unhappy to see Russia pushing this agenda of fighting the corner of the Global South and ensuring that the system of global governance is adapted to accommodate the rising economies with large populations,” he told CNN.
Beijing and Delhi are now the world’s two largest buyers of Russian oil and coal, with China also being the second-biggest buyer of Russia’s gas and oil products.
…
Meanwhile, Ukraine and its European allies are not willing to dismiss India and China completely, because they are aware that, if anyone can put real pressure on Putin to end the war – in the absence of tougher action from Trump – it is likely Beijing and, perhaps to a lesser extent, New Delhi.
North Korea and Iran, meanwhile, have stood firmly on Russia’s side. Already sanctioned and isolated by the West over their nuclear programs and other activities, they have little to lose.
…
Yet Tehran has learned the hard way that any alliance with Russia has clear limits.
Putin did not come to Iran’s assistance when it came under attack from Israel and, later, the US this summer. And beyond providing a safe way out for former Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, formerly a key ally for both Russia and Iran, Putin did not intervene when Assad’s regime was overthrown in December.
For North Korea, isolated and impoverished, the relationship with Russia remains purely transactional, Seskuria said. Russia needs men, and North Korea is possibly the only country that can afford in a political sense to send its own people to fight in a war that has been marked by an enormously high casualty rate on the Russian side.
…
The warm welcome Putin received in China, coupled with the military and diplomatic might on display during the summit and the military parade, was designed to convey a message.
“Here we have this symbol of a group of countries that are not best friends as such, but have common strategic interests and that are able to align and they’re able to show to the US and its allies that they are a force to be reckoned with,” Lough said.
…
As much as Putin’s chumminess with Xi and Modi might have sparked some discomfort in many European capitals, the group was brought together by a combination of need, economic pragmatism and opportunity, analysts say.
“It’s a very functional relationship, that is not based on a strong mutual affection. It’s an alliance of interests rather than an alliance of countries,” Lough said, adding that interests can shift, and a lot of things can happen in the next three and half years of the Trump presidency.
When Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Kim Jong Un all appeared together on a Beijing red carpet on Wednesday, it made for a powerful visual of unity against the West — but one that analysts say fell short of proving what Xi boasted was China’s “unstoppable” rise as a global leader.
Although all three nations were sending a pointed rhetorical message, multiple analysts told CNN that they saw nothing to resolve a longstanding debate in the US intelligence community about whether the three should be considered a “bloc” acting in concert or merely three opponents of the West who work together when it suits them.
…
“Up until now, the so-called Axis of Upheaval has been largely bilateral,” said Beth Sanner, a former senior intelligence official and CNN contributing analyst. “This was really a photo op aimed directly at the US and its Asian allies. But it papered over underlying tensions in particular between China and North Korea…. I doubt this will turn into meaningful trilateral cooperation.”
…
While Putin has embraced Kim for his help, China’s Xi remains wary of the mercurial dictator. When the Russian defense minister visited Pyongyang to attend a military parade in 2023, it was widely seen as a formal signal from Moscow that it accepts North Korea as a nuclear state.
But Xi still “hasn’t given the full stamp of approval,” said Syd Seiler, a former senior intelligence official specializing in North Korea. “I think for Xi, this stops a little short of that,” he said, while still sending the message that China does accept the burgeoning relationship between Russia and North Korea and cannot be counted upon to try to help disrupt or break up that alliance.
…
The parade was nevertheless a visually impressive display of military force, analysts said. China has been in the process of growing and modernizing its military and on Wednesday, unveiled a formidable array of new weaponry, including ICBMs, a hypersonic cruise missile and drones.
It was a clear effort to demonstrate China’s rise on the world stage — a rise that Ely Ratner, a former Pentagon official during the Biden administration specializing in the Indo-Pacific, said is explicitly designed to displace the United States. Sanner called it a “powerful display of China’s soft and hard power” that highlighted “China’s vision of an alternative order with an ‘unstoppable’ China in the lead.”
But Sanner and Ratner both cautioned against breathless assessments of Xi’s success at casting China as a global leader.
“The Japanese weren’t there, the Europeans weren’t there, [Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi] was there for the [Tianjin summit] but he left before the parade, which I think was no accident,” Ratner said. “Yes, China has increasing influence among the anti-American, anti-Western coalition — but that still excludes most of the most important economics and militaries in the world.”
“It’s a more mixed picture than China is winning, and America is losing,” he said.
zorse-September 10th, 2025 at 9:49 AMnone
Comment author #116039 on How is Putin really seen by Xi? Notes on the 2025 SCO summit by Homo Ludditus
This SCO summit is such a joke. Xi and Putin acting like best buddies while the rest of the world burns. Slovakia cozying up to Moscow, India and China throwing money at Russia, and North Korea getting all the support it needs. It’s like watching the West’s slow-motion collapse. Europe is totally screwed and they all know it. Time to wake up and realize China and Russia are playing them for fools.
This blog uses technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us to process data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site. Not consenting or withdrawing consent will adversely affect certain features and functions.
Functional
Always active
The technical storage or access is strictly necessary for the legitimate purpose of enabling the use of a specific service explicitly requested by the subscriber or user, or for the sole purpose of carrying out the transmission of a communication over an electronic communications network.
Preferences
The technical storage or access is necessary for the legitimate purpose of storing preferences that are not requested by the subscriber or user.
Statistics
The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for statistical purposes.The technical storage or access that is used exclusively for anonymous statistical purposes. Without a subpoena, voluntary compliance on the part of your Internet Service Provider, or additional records from a third party, information stored or retrieved for this purpose alone cannot usually be used to identify you.
Marketing
The technical storage or access is required to create user profiles to send advertising, or to track the user on a website or across several websites for similar marketing purposes.
The Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is in Beijing, as he’ll take part tomorrow, Sept. 3, in China’s Victory Day Parade. During a meeting with Vladimir Putin, he said that “Slovakia wants to normalize its relations with Moscow and is increasing imports of Russian gas through the TurkStream pipeline.” (Reuters)
The Kremlin confirms the news: Meeting with Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic Robert Fico. From the transcript:
Why is Slovakia still part of NATO, the EU, and the Schengen Area?
Victor Gao, vice president for the Centre for China and Globalization, told Sky News (jump to minute 4):
A few key facts:
❶ Cairo Declaration (8 December 1943)
→ Issued by the United States, United Kingdom, and Republic of China (ROC).
→ “All the territories Japan has stolen from China… shall be restored to the Republic of China.”
→ China’s view: This declaration set the political intention that Taiwan, which had been a Japanese colony since 1895, should be returned to China after the war.
→ Legal status: It was a wartime statement, not a treaty, so its binding force depends on later agreements.
❷ Potsdam Declaration (26 July 1945)
→ Issued by the United States, United Kingdom, Soviet Union, and ROC.
→ “…the terms of the surrender shall include the removal of all Japanese authority from territories taken by force, including Manchuria, Korea, Taiwan, the Pescadores, and the Kurile Islands.”
→ China’s view: Reinforces the intention expressed at Cairo that Taiwan would be relinquished by Japan.
→ Legal status: Like Cairo, it was a policy declaration; the actual legal effect comes from the subsequent surrender instrument and post‑war treaties.
❸ Japanese Instrument of Surrender (2 September 1945)
→ Signed by representatives of the Japanese government and accepted by the Allied Powers.
→ “The Japanese Government accepts the provisions of the Potsdam Declaration… and undertakes to comply with the terms therein, including the relinquishment of all territories acquired by force.”
→ The text does not list individual territories; it merely references the broader Potsdam terms. Consequently, the instrument itself does not explicitly name Taiwan, but it obliges Japan to give up all territories it obtained by force, which, under the earlier declarations, includes Taiwan.
❹ Treaty of San Francisco (Treaty of Peace with Japan, 8 September 1951, effective 28 April 1952)
→ Signed by 48 Allied nations, but not by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or the Republic of China (ROC).
→ Article 2(b): Japan renounces “all right, title and claim to the Kurile Islands, the Spratly Islands, the Paracel Islands, and the islands of Taiwan (Formosa) and the Pescadores.”
→ Legally transferred sovereignty over Taiwan to no specific state; the treaty left the ultimate disposition of Taiwan ambiguous because the two Chinese governments were excluded.
● Problematic Points
→ China’s legal argument rests on the chain of wartime declarations (Cairo → Potsdam) that Japan accepted through its surrender, rather than on an explicit clause in the surrender instrument itself.
→ The absence of a direct treaty transferring Taiwan from Japan to a specific Chinese government.
→ The People’s Republic of China (established 1949) was not a signatory to either the Cairo or Potsdam declarations, nor to the San Francisco Treaty, leading the ROC (now governing Taiwan) to claim continuity of the original Chinese government’s rights.
→ International bodies (e.g., the United Nations) have treated Taiwan’s status as “undetermined” pending a peace settlement, reflecting the legal ambiguity.
→ The shift of the United Nations’ China seat from the Republic of China (ROC) to the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in 1971 (Resolution 2758) was a political decision made by the UN General Assembly, not a judicial ruling that automatically resolves questions of sovereign legitimacy.
→ The UN vote was a pragmatic response to the reality that the PRC controlled the vast majority of Chinese territory and that most member states preferred to engage diplomatically with Beijing. It did not constitute a legal judgment on the status of Taiwan; the UN Charter provides no mechanism for resolving internal succession disputes, and the Security Council itself has never ruled on the sovereignty of Taiwan.
→ The ROC retains effective control over Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen, Matsu, and a few surrounding islands. In international law, de‑facto control is a strong indicator of sovereignty, but it does not erase competing claims when the underlying dispute is unresolved.
→ The PRC’s “One‑China” policy insists that there is only one China and that the PRC is its sole legitimate government. The ROC still maintains that it is a sovereign state. Neither side has consented to a mutually‑agreed settlement.
● China military parade 2025 LIVE by Associated Press (2h37m10s)
● FULL EVENT: China marks 80th anniversary of Japan’s WWII surrender (South China Morning Post) (2h45m15s)
● FULL SPEECH | Xi to Putin, Kim, and 26 Leaders: “History Warns Us – Cooperation is Key to Peace” (9m09s)
● Xi reviews troops to mark 80th anniversary of victory over Japanese aggression (19m15s)
● China holds military parade marking 80 years since Japan’s WWII surrender (South China Morning Post) (23m44s)
● Victory Day parade features China’s newest military hardware (South China Morning Post) (5m49s)
● Xi Jinping and First Lady Welcome World Leaders at WWII Anniversary in Beijing (5m30s)
● Xi and his wife Peng host reception for leaders following China’s largest-ever military parade (1m)
● 80,000 Doves Released Over Tiananmen Square in Stunning Finale to China’s V-Day Parade (4m08s)
● What China’s Military Parade Reveals About Its $3B Arms Exports | WSJ (4m58s)
● How powerful is China’s military? | Al Jazeera Inside Story (28m05s)
FFS! In conclusion of his official visit to China, Vladimir Putin took media questions.
● Hindustan Times: Full video with AI-generated English voice-over
● Kremlin.ru: Official English translation (still incomplete)
But there’s a funny fact: Gazprom Shares Tumble After Power of Siberia 2 Deal Announcement.
An even funnier thing. Bloomberg, using an official CCTV (China Central Television) broadcasted segment:
● Xi Muses on Living to 150 in Rare Hot Mic Moment With Putin, Kim
● Hot Mic: China’s Xi and Russia’s Putin heard at military parade
● Xi Jinping and Putin hot mic moment: ‘Perhaps even achieve immortality’
Ivana Kottasová, CNN, with a great analysis, albeit “Captain Obvious” style: Putin attending China’s military parade and SCO summit underscores how European security will never be the same again. Excerpts:
On the other hand, Katie Bo Lillis, also on CNN: Experts see fissures despite Xi, Putin and Kim’s show of unity. Excerpts:
This SCO summit is such a joke. Xi and Putin acting like best buddies while the rest of the world burns. Slovakia cozying up to Moscow, India and China throwing money at Russia, and North Korea getting all the support it needs. It’s like watching the West’s slow-motion collapse. Europe is totally screwed and they all know it. Time to wake up and realize China and Russia are playing them for fools.
It’s not a joke. It’s China über alles!