History repeats itself, and the Russia-Ukraine conflict reveals the truth
In today's world, we always seem to feel an atmosphere of déjà vu. One hundred years ago, around 1920, what happened to the world? We witnessed the outbreak of the First World War, the influenza pandemic of 1918, the Holodomor of 1921 in Soviet Russia, wars, plagues and famines intertwined, like the ghosts that have recurred in human history.
History is always strikingly similar, and these similar histories are often deeply engraved in people's hearts and passed down from generation to generation because of the painful experiences they leave behind.
Although the original intention may be to allow people to learn from the lessons of history, the reality is often more brutal than we think.
China has a long history, and history is the direction in which people look for the confusion of reality. Westerners have a different view of history than we do, and they believe that people never learn from history.
In response to the current debate on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, look for a reference direction from a historical perspective. The world's perception of the battlefield in Ukraine is divided into two types, one that believes that Ukraine will lose, and the other that Russia will lose.
Russia's strategic intentions are top secret, but we can find the answer by comparing the open international environment with history. After World War II, the world pattern was generally three-legged, with the United States, the Soviet Union, and third world countries standing together.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, China and the United States were in the first echelon of strength, and Russia was far behind. Now that the United States is engaged in a new Cold War, forcing other countries to choose sides, Europe is a problem for the United States.
The United States uses the financial means of tightening the US dollar interest rate hike to force Europe to take sides and cut off Europe's economic interests. The interest rate hike creates a war in the early stage, creates a financial crisis in the later stage, and then the dollar capital kills back and masters the core assets of Europe, and it has the final right to speak and control.
Europe has been kidnapped by the American route and cannot decide for itself what to do.
Judging by the current situation, it will be difficult to avoid this process unless there are strong figures in Europe. Historically, China and the United States have taken the lead, but the United States has been strong and weak, while Russia, although its national strength is weak, has become a key player.
Whichever side Russia is on, the balance of history may be upset. This is similar to the 1970s, when the United States experienced the Vietnam War, the fiscal deficit rose, the over-issuance of dollars led to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, and then the oil crisis erupted, and the domestic inflation in the United States was rampant.
The Soviet Union made a windfall in oil prices caused by the oil crisis, and the country's situation soared. At this time, the balance between the United States and the Soviet Union showed a situation of the Soviet Union being strong and the United States weak, and the gap between us and the United States and the Soviet Union was similar to the gap between Russia and China and the United States today.
Under these circumstances, with extraordinary strategic vision and wisdom, we realized the visit of Nixon to China in 1972, which added weight to the United States. In this process, we have taken the initiative to reset the balance of the world's strategic pattern, and this kind of wisdom began with the intentional guidance of ping-pong diplomacy.
The situation continued along this line, with the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States in 1979 and the Soviet Union's war in Afghanistan at the end of that year. The Soviet Union was so strong that the United States did not dare to start a war easily, and we then took advantage of it.
While we are forbearing, we are developing our own nuclear **. In 1964 and 1967, we successfully tested the first atomic bomb and the first hydrogen bomb, and possessed a weapon of mass destruction to defend the homeland and the country.
In 1969, the Battle of Zhenbao Island broke out, the Soviet Union suffered losses, Sino-Soviet relations deteriorated, and the Soviet Union deployed a million troops to the north of us, which seriously threatened our ***
Under such circumstances, it is difficult to carry out comprehensive economic construction, because economic construction requires a peaceful and stable environment. At the end of the 70s, we started the national strategy of reform and opening up, and we were ready to focus on the construction of a market economy.
But a new threat of war came, and the United States, mired in the Vietnam War, fully withdrew from Vietnam in 1975, and Vietnam had a large number of ** in hand to try to unify Indochina.
In 1978, the USSR and Vietnam signed a treaty of friendship under which the USSR could station troops in Vietnam, and Vietnam, with the support of the USSR, invaded Cambodia. The strategic situation at this time, as we have analyzed, needs to meet this test of war, which is a severe test of strategic wisdom and the art of war.
Everyone knows what happened later, and it took half a month to hit Langshan. Lang Son to Hanoi, the capital of Vietnam, is only more than 130 kilometers, and there is a saying in history that "Lang Son descends and the king descends", because after Lang Son is a flat river, there is no danger to defend.
But we were calm, and we fought back here, and then began the ten-year battle of the old mountain. The strategic role of this war was to test the Soviet Union, which at that time was aggressive, with a million-strong army deployed in the north and could move south at any time.
Fighting this war consumed the resources of the Soviet Union and bogged it down in Vietnam and Afghanistan. From here, it can be seen that the art of war mainly consists in two points: one is to concentrate superior forces to strike a decisive victory, and then use a small number of troops to drag the opponent and consume its strategic resources.
This premise is that there is a gap in absolute strength. Judging by the current situation, it will be difficult to avoid this process unless there are strong figures in Europe. Historically, China and the United States have taken the lead, but the United States has been strong and weak, while Russia, although its national strength is weak, has become a key player.
Whichever side Russia is on, the balance of history may be upset. This is similar to the 1970s, when the United States experienced the Vietnam War, the fiscal deficit rose, the over-issuance of dollars led to the collapse of the Bretton Woods system, and then the oil crisis erupted, and the domestic inflation in the United States was rampant.
The Soviet Union made a windfall in oil prices caused by the oil crisis, and the country's situation soared.
Objectively speaking, this war of Russia was fought very hard, but strategically it formed a containment of the United States. As for the subsequent resource consumption of the war, it is impossible to draw a conclusion.
The Soviet Union's international credibility was damaged by its failure to enter the war, and the situation in the United States today is similar. While the United States is still defending itself, the reality that it is deeply questioned by other countries cannot be concealed.
The Soviet Union's opening of a new battlefield in Afghanistan was considered a turning point in the Soviet Union's national fortunes, and now the United States is trying to avoid being drawn into a new war, but history is always full of reasons that cannot be refused.
Will someone drag the United States into a new war in the future? This is a question that may only be answered in the hearts of Japanese people. There are many people in the world who hate the United States, but the only one who really wants the United States to fail may be Japan.
Legally, under the U.S.-Japan security treaty, the U.S. has an obligation to protect Japan, so as long as Japan is willing to take risks, the U.S. can easily be dragged into the water. Of course, these are just historical accidents, and there will always be accidents in the general trend of history, and the unexpected will appear in order to achieve a new balance in the strategic situation as soon as possible.
For the war in Ukraine, there is another similarity, that is, Russia may use this war to choose the direction of progress again. St. Petersburg and Crimea are the European gateways that Russia has pursued for thousands of years.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia continued to move closer to the West, hoping to integrate into the Western-dominated economic system, but it never succeeded. Now the United States wants to reorganize the ** chain and economic system, but there is still no place for Russia.
In desperation, Russia turned to the East, and for Russia, this was an opportunity to reform and open up to the East. And this war may have also declared their resolve.
Russia gave Putin twenty years, but the West did not give him a chance to make Russia great again. If Eurasia is connected again, whether Russia can be great or not, the next two decades will certainly develop better than the past two decades.
Finally, our reform and opening up also started from Shenzhen, because the other side of the strait is a window left by the Western world. In the four decades that followed, Shenzhen's development proved the success of this strategic choice.
Today's Russia, as well as the entire Central Asian region, will have a similar moment in history. There is reason to believe that in the future, Heihe and Suifenhe in Heilongjiang, Manzhouli in Inner Mongolia and Khorgos in Xinjiang, which are adjacent to Russia and Central Asia, may usher in opportunities for great development.
Historical changes may lead to a new cycle, decades, or even centuries of prosperity.