| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
158057
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Russia and China rapidly restore communication after the Cold War, but the Chinese immigration issue is also widely exaggerated and even described as “Yellow Peril again” in Russia. The so-called Yellow Peril is not only a Russian object perception but also a cross-generational conflict between Russia and China. Furthermore, it will be related to the subsequent development of the Russian Far East and Siberia. The Chinese immigration constitutes psychological and survival non-traditional security impacts on Russia and also forms some kind of social competition with Russians. It is vital for Russia to cooperate with its eastern neighbor to accelerate the development of the Russian Far East and Siberia, but national security and social stability are the prerequisites for cooperation. Nevertheless, it is more significant to rebuild self-confidence of the Russians in the Russian Far East and acknowledge that the East will not be a threat to Russia. As long as Russia realizes that it can enjoy unlimited possibilities in the East, the non-traditional security impacts caused by the Chinese immigration will automatically alleviate and even disappear. Today, most Russians are trapped in the dilemma of welcoming or refusing the Chinese immigrants; however, cultural exchange still has some effects and at least causes Russians to begin to positively treat the Chinese immigration and consider whether to accept China and cooperate with China.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
153453
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
The author analyzes the book by the Chinese historian Li Weili entitled I. Bichurin, the Guru of Russian Sinology and notes its timeliness and importance within the framework of the modern development trend of Russo-Chinese relations and the New Silk Road Economic Belt project. On the basis of newly found documents, the author gives more accurate biographical information about I. Bichurin (1777-1853), his birthplace, his father, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 3 |
ID:
126793
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2013.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
Bandwagoinng with China against the United States and simultaneously covertly trying to testation China have been the dominant motives of Russia's Asian in Northeast and Southeast Asia. Throughout the 2000s. due to this dual-smelt policy. Russia had resigned itself to its growing economic dependence on China and its role as an energy source China. Between 2009and20lz. Russia madeaconseiouselibtt to portray itself as an Asian played. However. Russia's failure to develop the Russian Fat East (RFE) has fumed it to "turn to China for help". and this has allowed China to begin building a new economic and security otdet in Asia at Russia's expense. The nature and din.-action of the Russo-Chinese "strategic partnership" under Chinese President Xi jinxing and Russian President Vladimir Putin is aping becoming a subject of intense debate. The mayor assumption of this atticle is that it is unliltely that Russia would simply acquiesce in subonlination to China without tufting to situations with negativity.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 4 |
ID:
159312
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article describes the Russia-China Friendship Association (RCFA), which continues the traditions of the country's first friendship society with peoples of foreign countries - the Sino-Soviet Friendship Society (SSFA) set up in Moscow on October 29, 1957, which has worked for sixty years uninterruptedly for the sake of strengthening mutual understanding and friendly ties with our neighbor China and the great Chinese people.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 5 |
ID:
142089
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article focuses on the current arguments and geopolitical visions regarding the organizational shifts in Europe and the Eurasian region and the means for realization of these policies. It shows the responses of the major powers in Europe and Eurasia with regard to the “Ukrainian Crisis.” In this article also, analysis and comparison of the Eurasian strategy of China and Russia, which bear critical importance to geopolitical and geoeconomic considerations regarding the Korean Peninsula, is treated with significance along with the aforementioned issues. The article attempts to provide a short analysis of the implications of these pan-Eurasian strategic shifts on the Eurasian initiative of the Korean government. The concepts of Russia’s “Pivot to the East,” China’s “One Belt, One Road (OBOR),” and Korea’s “Eurasia Initiative” share a potential to stimulate the transition of the Asia-Pacific region from “the ocean of conflict” to “the ocean of peace.” However, in realizing these concepts, the relationship between Korea and the four powers (U.S.A./China/Russia/Japan) have a “strategic trilemma.” If the Eurasia Initiative can facilitate construction of the “continent of peace” in Eurasia, it will provide a vision and strategic opportunity to change the region form an “ocean of conflict” into an “ocean of peace.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|