中国更喜欢哪一种：与俄罗斯结盟反对美国，还是与美国结盟反对俄罗斯？ [美国媒体]

What does China prefer an alliance with Russia against the US or an alliance with the US against Russia?

中国更喜欢哪一种：与俄罗斯结盟反对美国，还是与美国结盟反对俄罗斯？

Abdul Rehman, Self Employed (2006-present)
Instead of assuming a war alliance between China and the USA or between China and Russia, we should know that all the three have thousands of sophisticated missiles with nuclear war-heads and ICBMs. Had there been a traditional war, among these three, it would turn to a nuclear war, had there been a nuclear war, it would turn almost half of the earth into rags. Who will cash the post-war remnants?, surely no one. Neither of the three will like the scenario. So, the probability of overt war is almost null.
As an alternate, all the three are entangled in proxies on the war stage, likely, set by the USA. Each one has the SWOT analysis of the other and each one knows what are the activities of the other side, therefore, there are apparent endless wars in Afghanistan and the Middle-East. They are just wrestling to retard each other through proxies, again unable to fight, overtly. For, once they fired directly and openly, there would be nuclear flames, all around. They can just test each other’s potential. Through proxies they are endeavoring to occupy their strategic posts, yet cannot go beyond their limits. However, each of the three remains conscious to avoid a suspected snare in case of any prolonged war.
In the name of the global peace initiatives, climate change cooperation and bi-lateral trade agreements, they are slow poisoning each other. Actually, it is the real race among the nations. Only that state will survive which will immune the best. In the light of it, the likelihood is that there would be neither an Sino-US nor a Sino-Russian alliance, in the coming future, for there would be no winner of the dreadful war.

我们不应该假设中国和美国或者中国和俄罗斯结成战争同盟，我们应该知道这三个国家都拥有成千上万的带着核弹头的先进导弹和洲际弹道导弹。一旦这三者之间发生传统战争，就会变成核战争，一旦发生核战争，半个地球将化为灰烬。谁会为战后的劫灰买单呢？肯定没人。这三个国家没有一个喜欢这个情景。所以发生公开战争的可能性几乎为零。

作为替代选项，这三个国家会卷入代理人级别的战争——很有可能是美国发起的。每个国家都对其他两方进行了事态分析，每个国家都对另一方的活动了如指掌，所以阿富汗和中东地区显然会发生无休止的战争。他们只能通过代理人纠缠的方式来拖延另一方，而不能公然开战。因为一旦他们直接公开的开火，核战的火焰将燃遍四方。他们只能测试另一方的潜力。他们努力通过代理人获取他们的战略利益，却不能超出其极限。然而这三者都有意识的避免被怀疑存在陷阱，以防战争扩大化。

他们正在以全球和平倡议、气候变化合作和双边贸易协定的名义，慢慢的毒害彼此。事实上，这是国家之间真正的竞赛。只有免疫力最强的国家才能活下来。鉴于此，在不就的将来，可能既不会出现中美同盟，也不会出现中俄同盟，因为这场可怕的战争不会有赢家。

Gwydion Madawc Williams, Read a lot about this
They’ve done both, and neither.
Mao suggested to the USA in the late 1940s that he would consider some sort of balance. The USA was dead stupid and tried to restore the Kuomintang until the late 1960s. Not giving China recognition and its rightful UN set until the early 1970s.
People’s China was allied from 1949 to the Soviet unx up until the Sino-Soviet split which began in 1958 and was complete in 1961.
Mao made peace on his own terms with the USA in the early 1970s. There was an informal alliance against the Soviet unx, expressed in the Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979, which contributed to Vietnam eventually giving up Cambodia. Abandoning plans for further expansion, if they had them.
…… From then on, the USA hoped for an overthrow of the Beijing government, which naturally viewed them as enemies. And in the same year, the Soviet unx lost its Warsaw Pace dependencies and ceased to be a threat. Gorbachev had already been making a reconciliation.
After the Soviet collapse, Russia was briefly very pro-USA and China was on its own for a while. But the West stupidly allowed Russia to be insulted and impoverished, with criminals taking over much of its wealth. China and Russia moved back to cooperation. This was formalised with the inclusion of the ex-Soviet republics of Central Asia as the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in 2001. And with other partners as BRICS in 2009.
Apart from 1949-58, none of these relationships were ever a full alliance and definitely did not imply that they would be allies in any possible war.
It is worth adding that many Westerners supposed that the Soviet unx was now running China between 1949 and the visible split. I’ve detailed this, among other matters, in an article entitled How Chinese Communism Fixed a Broken Society

他们两种都试过，都不喜欢。
毛在上世纪40年代末曾向美国暗示，他会考虑某种平衡。而美国蠢死了，直到60年代末还在试图让国民党复辟。它一直不承认中国及其在安理会的合法席位，直到70年代早期。
PRC从1949年起就与苏联结盟，直到中苏分手（始于1958年，1961年完成）。

毛在他自己的任期内与美国实现和平，也就是70年代早期。当时存在一个非正式的反苏联盟，具体表现是1979年的中苏战争，并促使越南最终放弃柬埔寨。越南放弃了进一步扩张的计划——如果这个计划存在的话。

……中美关系恶化。从那时起，美国就寄望于推翻中国，自然会视其为敌人。同一年，苏联失去了华沙条约的威慑，不再被视为威胁。戈尔巴乔夫已经在着手达成和解。
苏联解体后，俄罗斯十分短暂的支持过美国，而中国自娱自乐了一段时间。但是西方愚蠢的让俄罗斯遭受侮辱和贫困，利用罪犯抢走了它太多的财富。中国和俄罗斯回到合作的路上。2001年随着中亚的几个前苏联国家的加入，正式成立了上海合作组织。并且在2009年与其他成员成立了金砖国家组织。

除了1949-1958年期间，那些关系都不是全面的盟国关系，而且肯定也不会意味着他们在任何可能的战争中会成为盟友。
值得注意的是，很多西方人认为，苏联在1949年到后来出现明显的分歧这一期间，一直在支配中国。我在《中国的GCZY如何修复一个破碎的国家》一文中详细解释过包括这个问题在内的多个问题。

Robin Daverman, World traveler
What does China prefer: an alliance with Russia against the US or an alliance with the US against Russia?
China will never say anything, but she’s thinking this:
“Stop, brother! Rise above this base desire. Be more than a rodent!”
Ice Age: Continental Drift (2012)
What’s the point in all this? What’s the end result you desire? France and UK fought for over 1,000 years. Did UK become France, or did France become UK? Or do you desire nuclear holocaust that wipes out a billion people?
You can’t compel people to do what you want by force. You can occasionally entice people to do so by sweet and honey. In the vast majority of the times, people are going to think what they want to think, and do what they want to do. That’s the law of nature. So all these “yada yada is my friend” and “yada yada is my enemy” are all the kind of thinking in the rodent territory. The Americans love America and the Russians love Russia and that’s just the way things are. One should be able to cooperate in pursuit of common good, and set boundaries according to the Golden Rule, if one could just be a LITTLE BIT better than naked imperialism.
China views the world as “China” and “the international environment”. LOL.

中国什么都不会说，但是会这样想：
“住手吧，兄弟！你要超越这种基本的欲望，而不要像个啮齿动物！”



冰河时代：漂移大陆（2012）
你的这些选项都有什么意义？你想要什么样的最终结果呢？法国和英国打了1000多年。英国变成法国了吗？还是法国变成英国了？或者你希望发生一场核浩劫，消灭十亿人？

你不能用武力强迫别人做你想做的事情。但是可以偶尔用蜜糖来引诱别人做事。在绝大多数时间里，人们都会用他们希望的方式思考，做他们想做的事情。这是自然法则。所以所有那些“谁谁是我哥们”和“谁谁是我对头”的想法都是啮齿动物领域的思维。美国人热爱美国，俄罗斯人热爱俄罗斯，事情就是这样。一个人，哪怕比赤裸裸的帝国主义好一点点，他都能够通过与人合作来追求共同的利益，并且根据黄金法则来设定边界。
而中国对世界的看法是“中国”和“国际环境”。lol

Josh Bergeman
Why do we have to be “against” any country, why can't we just work together for our common good?

我们为什么必须要反对哪个国家，为什么我们不能为了我们的共同利益携手共进呢？

Robin Daverman
Exactly!

正是！

Pieter Steenkamp
Well billionaires can’t be become billionaires or keep their wealth if we were all succeeding at coopering in common global interest. Capitalism ( the concentration of wealth/power) comes at the cost of any or all of the noble human socialist sentiments and that is why they enlarge our divisions and exploit all our human weaknesses.

如果我们都成功的在全球共同利益下合作，那么亿万富翁就不会成为亿万富翁，或者保持他们的财富了。资本主义（财富/权力的集中）就是以部分或者所有人类高贵的社会主义情操为代价的，这也是为什么他们要扩大我们的分歧，并利用所有人类的弱点。

Peter Shum
Only problem Josh - what EXACTLY is “common” and “good”? By whose definition? What is good for USA may not be good for China, or Russia for that matter? USA may and likely think having its missiles based in Germany pointing at Russia is “good” but I am sure Russia thinks otherwise? A teenager may think hanging out with friends late into the night and getting drunk/stoned as “good” but his/her parents will almost certainly think that is “bad”. So what will the teenager and his parents agree/accept as “common good”? Many people use “mushy” words like “common good”, without clearly thinking and defining what those words really mean, never mind the next step of getting the ideas successfully applied/implemented.

只有一个问题，Josh究竟什么东西才是“普遍”和“好的”？由谁来定义？万一对美国好的东西，也许对中国不好呢，或者对俄罗斯不好呢？美国也许，而且很可能认为，在德国建造导弹基地瞄准俄罗斯是一件“好事”，但我肯定俄罗斯不会这样想。少年人也许觉得跟朋友闲逛到深夜，并且喝得酩酊大醉是“好”的，但他/她的父母几乎肯定会认为这“不好”。那么什么东西才能被这个少年人和他的父母究竟能接受/同意为“共同的好”？很多人用含混不清的词，比如“共同利益”，却没有对那些词语的真正含义进行清晰的思考和定义，更不用说进一步把这种思想成功的应用/实施。

Josh Bergeman
Well Peter, I don’t know if you are serious or just trying to argue! There is nothing ambiguous about the “common good”and you comment is kind of nonsense! The common good has nothing to do with mushy ideas of good, but is about all those things that benefit society as a whole. Things like the rule of law, recognizing and respecting borders, ensuring that criminals can’t just cross into another country, free flow of trade goods and ideas with respects for copywrites, policing and protection of trade routes and things like that. None of those things are mushy ill defined words but concrete policies that working towards benefits everyone, hence the term “common good”! And yes, I know that there is alot of disagreement on the shape those policies should take, but what I hope no one argues is that working on those policies are better then war! War is bad policy with a very uncertine outcome and no guarantee of gain!
So to repeat, “the common good” are the things that benefit everyone as a whole! I hope this helps to clear up your confussion!

好吧Peter，我不知道你是认真的，还是只想抬杠！“共同利益”一点也不模棱两可，你的评论却有点胡扯！共同利益与“好”的模糊想法没有任何关系，而是与所有那些对社会整体有益的东西相关。比如法制，承认并尊重边界，确保罪犯不能进入另一个国家，商品贸易的自由流动，以及尊重版权的思想，管理和保护贸易路线，以及诸如此类。它们都不是模棱两可的，定义不充分的词语，而是具体的政策，致力于每个人的利益，所以才有了“共同利益”这个词！而且是的，我知道关于那些政策应该采取的形式，存在很多意见分歧，但是我希望没有人对“致力于那些政策比战争更好”这句话存在异议！战争是不好的政策，存在十分不确定的结局，而且不能确保收益！
所以我再重复一遍，“共同利益”是那些有益于人类整体的东西！我希望这有助于澄清你的困惑！

Qaiser Khan, Closely following the superpowers rivalry
In the present scenario, China does not eye on Russia as a threat or a power threatening its sphere of influence in any significant way; therefore an alliance with USA against Russia is unrealistic in the Chinese perspectives as it does not need it neither it will in the near future. Contrary to this, in times of former Soviet unx, China did feel threatened of the rising power of Soviet unx and eventually it paved the way for the opening of Sino-US engagement in 1971 culminating in the restoration of full diplomatic ties between the two countries in 1979. This was a traditional balance of power approach when the two countries (US and China) were convinced of the conventional military superiority of Soviet unx and initiated the rapprochement and engagement to balance the Soviet threat.
The end of the cold war in 1991 changed geostrategic imperatives, and resulted in a unipolar world with the US as the sole superpower challenged by none for a significant period of time, but the continued and consistent economic growth of China for the last three decades enabled China to gradually assert itself in the region and build up its military strength compatible with its economy thereby reviving its hopes of gaining its historic hegemonic and central role in East Asia that Great Britain snatched from it in 1842 with the treaty of Nanking.
Many political pundits predict that the big game of hegemony among major players in a multipolar world will be played on the turf of East Asia, an area of significant economic growth and immense strategic importance. The recent American pivot to Asia— partly inspired by the economic and strategic imperatives but mainly as a counterweight to the increased assertive Chinese overtures in the region— could be best understood in this context. How will China react to the American policies in the region could be derived from its perception of international affairs and historically central position in east Asia.
For centuries, China has been at the centre of East Asian politics both in terms of power and economy. Chinese perception of international affairs is an extension of its domestic affairs: a hierarchy defined by outward concentric circles in form of various spheres of influence but its centre of gravity in the direction of Beijing . China expects all its neighbors to accept its traditional historic central and hegemonic role in the region. It will not ask for alliance but expects that the neighbouring countries will come to it for such a favor in return for protection and Beijing-centred mutually beneficial economic relations. Such a phenomenon is already in the making with several countries of the Sinic civilization (Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore) lubricating each other economies through increased business interactions.
If China were to choose an alliance with either Russia or USA, it would definitely tilt in favor of Russia for several reasons. First, China being a rising power and USA being an established one are currently vying for hegemony in the most important geopolitical and economic entity of the globe, East Asia. Second, China feels threatened from USA, not Russia. Third, the most important factor is the diagonally opposing civilizational and cultural values. America representing the Western civilizational strongly believes in democracy, equality and liberty while China being the core state of Sinic civilization strongly believe in Hierarchy, authority, subordination of individual interest to the interest of society. Both the countries has a natural imperative to spread its values but the West, after the defeat of communism, is obsessed with the notion that its values are universal and expects the rest of the people to commit and adhere to it. But what is universalism to the West is imperialism to the rest and the following quote from Samuel P. Huntington summarizes the situation in a beautiful way:
The dangerous clashes of the future are likely to arise from the interaction of Western arrogance, Islamic intolerance, and Sinic assertiveness
The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order: Samuel P. Huntington: 9781451628975: Amazon.com: Books
https://www.amazon.com/Contest-S...
World Order: Henry Kissinger: 9780143127710: Amazon.com: Books

在当前的形势下，中国并没有把俄罗斯视为威胁，或者一个以任何重大的方式威胁其势力范围的大国。所以从中国的角度来看，与美国结成联盟对抗俄罗斯是不现实的，在可以预见的未来它也不需要如此。与之相反的是，在前苏联时代，中国确实感受到苏联这一崛起大国威胁，这种感受最终为1971年中美合作铺平了道路，并且在1979年两国恢复全面外交关系达到顶端。这是两国(美国和中国)在认识到苏联的传统军事优势，为了平衡苏联的威胁，而开始和解与接触，而产生的一种传统的均势方式。

1991年冷战的结束不可避免的改变了地缘战略，并带来了一个单极世界，美国作为唯一的超级大国，在相当长一段时间内无人可以挑战，但中国过去三十年的持续和连贯的经济增长使它在该地区的重要性逐渐彰显，并建立与其经济相匹配的军事力量，从而使它获得其历史上的霸主地位和东亚的核心角色的希望得以复兴，英国在1842年利用《南京条约》将这一地位夺走。

许多政治学者预测，在多极世界中，大国之间的霸权博弈将在东亚的地盘上展开。该地区具有重大经济增长和巨大的战略重要性。最近美国转向亚洲的行动——部分受到经济和战略需要的启发，但主要是为了制衡中国在该地区日益强硬的姿态——在这种背景下，最容易理解。中国对美国在该地区的政策有何反应，可能从它对国际事务的看法和在东亚历史上的中心地位推断出来。

几个世纪以来，中国一直位于东亚政治的中心，在权力和经济方面都是如此。中国对国际事务的看法是其国内事务的延伸：一种由不同势力范围为形式的同心圆所定义的层级制度，但它的重心指向北京的方向。中国希望它所有的邻国接受它在本地区的传统历史中心和支配地位。他不会要求结盟，但是期待邻国前来要求这种恩惠，最为回报它会提供保护，以及以北京为中心的互利互惠的经济关系。这种现象已经在几个中华文明国家（香港、南韩、台湾、新加坡）通过增加经济交往施惠彼此的经济中出现。

如果中国选择与俄罗斯或者美国结盟，它肯定会倾向于支持俄罗斯，原因有几个：第一，中国作为崛起中的大国，而美国作为既有的大国，目前二者在全球最重要的地缘政治和经济实体中争夺霸权，也就是东亚。第二，中国感受到来自美国而非俄罗斯的威胁。第三，最重要的因素截然相反的文明和文化价值观。代表西方文明的美国坚信民主、平等和自由，而作为中华文明核心国家的中国则坚信等级、权威、个人利益服从社会利益。这两个国家都有传播其价值观的天然义务，但在GC主义失败后，西方沉迷于其价值观是普世的观念，并期望其他国家的人民承担并遵守它。但西方的普世主义是帝国主义，下面引用塞缪尔·p·亨廷顿的话，很好地总结了当时的情况:
文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建：塞缪尔·p·亨廷顿
世界秩序：亨利·基辛格。

Triou Ye, lives in China
There is a geopolitical triangle among China, Russia and America.
Like this:(I take the liberty to use a Mercedes Benz brand as an illustration)
If you cut the top of Earth along N 50th parallel, you will find that China Russia and America will be roughly located at the tips of this three-pointed star. Whoever two parties united together will form a double side pressure of the third, making it hesitate to focus on attacking one.
Since the Cold War, the system works in this way: the weaker two ally together to face the pressure form the strongest one.
In 1950s, America was the strongest, so China and Soviet unx allied together, marked as Korean War and Vietnam War; in 1970s-1980s Soviet unx was quite aggressive and due to 73′ oil crisis, America was comparatively weaker than before, so China and America were allied. COD players may have a clear memory of this period, especially China-USA joint operations in Afghanistan. When Soviet unx collapsed, China and Russia allied( in some degree, but much less than they did in 1950s) together again.
And there is an ancient Chinese idiom: 兔死狗烹, which means the hunter killed his hound as food after the rabbits were hunted over. So, in this geopolitical triangle, the relationship is dynamic, always the weaker two together. At present, China joints hands with Russia, but Trump released the signal to ally with Russia to press China(America is still the strongest, but China showed a somewhat potential to threaten America’s hegemony all around the world, not China is the strongest)

中国、俄罗斯和美国之间存在一个地缘政治的三角。
就像这样：（我冒昧的用奔驰的车标打个比方）



如果把地球的顶端沿着北纬50度线切掉，你会发现中国、俄罗斯和美国差不多位于这个三角星的顶端。无论哪两方联合在一起，都会形成针对第三方的左右夹击，让第三方不能集中攻击任何一方。
从冷战以来，这个体系就是这样运行的：较弱的两方联合起来，对抗来自最强大一方的压力。
上世纪50年代，美国是最强大的，所以中国和苏联联合在一起，标志是朝鲜战争和越南战争；在70-80年代，苏联的进攻性相当强，而且由于73年的石油危机，美国比以前相对较弱，所以中国和美国结盟了。命令与征服的玩家对这一时期也许有着清晰的记忆，尤其是中国和美国在阿富汗的联合行动。当苏联崩溃，中国和俄罗斯再次联合在一起（在某种程度上，但是比50年代的程度少得多）。

而且中国古代还有一句成语：兔死狗烹，意思是当兔子被猎光了，猎人就会把他的猎犬杀了吃掉。所以，在这个地缘政治大三角中，各方关系是动态的，总是较弱的两方联合起来。目前，中国和俄罗斯携手一致，但特朗普释为了给中国施加压力（美国依然是最强的，但中国某种程度上展示出威胁美国在全世界霸权的潜力，并不是说中国是最强大的），放出与俄罗斯结盟的信号，

Gu Shaoyan, B.A. Chemistry, University of Sheffield (2020)
As a Chinese, I can tell you the situation is a little complex. It can be divided into five steps.
After establishing New China in 1949, President Mao incline to the USSR absolutely because of the common belief and great help that the USSR gave China. And Chinese army fought with USA in Korea. At that time, almost all Chinese considered the USSR as the best friend and hated America so much.
Then in the 1960s Khrushchev became unfriendly to China and cancelled series of contracts. Attitude towards Russia suddenly declined to a trough. At the same time, America still held hostility to China and dispatched U2 reconnaissance plane to detect intelligence relating to nuclear weapons of China. During that period(1960~1978), Chinese preferred neither the USSR nor the USA.
In 1978, Deng Xiaoping implemented the opening and reform policy, starting to learn advanced western technology to improve the strength of China and develope economy. America, together with other western countries(the UK, France, Canada) significantly changed their attitudes towards China. Coco cola, Walmart and Hollywood entered China. Meanwhile, Vietnam launched a war to China because it was supported by the USSR. In 1978 ~, Chinese prefer the USA rather than Russia.
…… which seriously affected the international image of China. Relationship between the USA and China broke up. US navy ships often navigate near coast of China while China navy was too weak to resist. Two years later, the USSR was separated into several countries, and Russia needed money to get over. China needed fighter and destroyer from Russia, so China had to reunited with Russia again. From then on, America is always the supposed enemy of China while Russia is considered as a tentative alliance.
Nowdays, authority prefer Russia rather than the USA because the USA is supposed enemy, while merchants prefer the USA rather than Russia because the USA is much richer.

作为中国人，我想说情形有点复杂，可以划分为5个阶段。
在1949年新中国成立后，毛主席完全倒向苏联，是因为共同的信仰和苏联给中国的巨大帮助。而且中国军队在朝鲜与美国作战。在当时，几乎所有中国人都把苏联视为最好的朋友，而且十分讨厌美国。
然后到了60年代，赫鲁晓夫变得对中国不友好，取消了一系列的合约。中国对俄罗斯的态度突然陷入低谷。与此同时，美国依然对中国持有敌意，派遣了U2侦察机来侦测与中国核武器相关的情报。在那个时期（1960-1978），中国既不喜欢美国也不喜欢苏联。

在1978年，邓实施了改革开放政策，开始学习先进的西方技术来增强中国的实力并发展经济。美国还有其他西方国家（英国、法国、加拿大）显着改变了他们对中国的态度。可口可乐、沃尔玛和好莱坞都进入中国。与此同时，越南因为受到苏联的支持，而对中国发动了一场战争。在1978-之间，中国人更喜欢美国，而不喜欢俄罗斯。

后来美国严重影响了中国的国际形象。美国和中国的关系破裂了。美国的海军军舰经常靠近中国的海岸航行，而中国海军过于弱小无法反抗。两年后，苏联分裂为好几个国家，而俄罗斯需要资金恢复经济。中国需要俄罗斯的战斗机和驱逐舰，所以中国不得不再次与俄罗斯走在一起。从那时起，美国一直在支持中国的敌人，而俄罗斯则被视为暂时的盟友。
现在，当局更喜欢俄罗斯，而不喜欢美国，因为美国是假想的敌人，而商人们更喜欢美国，而不喜欢俄罗斯，因为美国更有钱。

Ilja Schmelzer, Diplom from Moscow State University (1983)
Actually they prefer an alliance with Russia against the US. And it is quite obvious why. Without Russia, they will be the next victim of the US - the “exceptional nation” will do everything to reach wold power, and with Russia finished they would have the power to do this. Together with Russia, China is strong enough to withstand US.
China alone would be vulnerable, at least yet, to a nuclear first strike blackmail by the US. Together with Russia, this is not possible. Russia alone would be vulnerable to economic warfare, given that its economy is too small to produce everything. China, in fact, would be vulnerable too because it depends on importing a lot of commodities, and the US can control the sea, thus, without Russia it would be possible to block China. Together, they have all they need, Russia has all commodities, China is large enough to produce essentially everything, and Russia has the weapons necessary to defend them.
Both have a long tradition of not fighting against each other. An irrelevant border conflict, which has led to some fighting in Soviet times, is now finally settled. So, nobody sees the other as a danger.
If this unx will be transformed into a formal alliance or not will not matter.

实际上他们更喜欢跟俄罗斯结盟，来反对美国。原因很明显。没有俄罗斯，中国将会是美国的下一个受害者，这个“例外主义国家”为了获得全球霸权会无所不为，而如果俄罗斯完蛋了，他们就有了做这件事的力量。中国与俄罗斯一起，就足以抵挡美国。

面对美国首先发起核打击的讹诈，中国如果孤立无援，就会很脆弱，至少现在是这样。中国如果与俄罗斯在一起，这就是不可能的。面对经济战，俄罗斯如果孤立无援也会很脆弱，因为它的经济太小，不能生产任何东西。中国实际上也会很脆弱，因为它对很多大宗进口商品存在依赖性，而美国可以控制海洋，所以，如果没有俄罗斯，封锁中国将成为可能。如果在一起，他们都可以获得想要的，俄罗斯拥有所有大宗商品，中国足够庞大，基本上可以生产所有东西，而且俄罗斯拥有需要的武器来保护他们。

两国有长期的互不攻击的传统。在苏联时代发生了一场无关紧要的边境冲突，导致了一些战斗，现在终于解决了。所以，二者都不把对方视为威胁。
这个联盟会不会变成正式的联盟，则不是什么大问题。

Tom Jong
Funny enough, do you hear of a sentence “the enemy's enemies are friends”? China and Russia have a same competitor US. China or Russia naturally look each other as alliance.
Russia is going on a agent war in east Ukraine. Us is Tring to strike the price of oil and weakening Russia. A strong and tough Russia could help China share the pressure from US. So the Chinese government imports more oil and natural gas from Russia, and the prices are higher than international prices.

真有趣，你有没有听说过一句话：“敌人的敌人是朋友”？中国和俄罗斯有共同的竞争者也就是美国。中国或者俄罗斯天然把对方视为盟友。
俄罗斯在东乌克兰进行一场代理人战争。美国正在努力的打击石油价格，削弱俄罗斯。一个强大坚韧的俄罗斯可以帮助中国分担来自美国的压力。所以中国政府从俄罗斯进口了更多的石油和天然气，价格比国际价格还要高。

Matthew Rist, college student in new york
The United states easily.
Economic is the only reason. We do trade a hell of a lot better than Russia does with China, and we will continue doing trade a hell of a lot better than Russia does with china until the end of time. Without China, the US’s economy would melt, and without the US, China’s Economy would do as well.
Military wise, it’s not even a contest. Yes, nukes are cool, be the united states has been developing more gadgets and weaponry in secret that can impact a nation just as much as a nuke can, without destroying anything IE An EMP

很容易选啊，美国。
经济是唯一的原因。我们跟中国的贸易要比俄罗斯跟中国的贸易多得多，而且我们会继续这样下去到世界末日。没有中国，美国的经济会完蛋，而没有美国，中国经济也会如此。
军事方面，甚至不值得争论。是的，核弹很酷，而美国一直在秘密的开发越来越多的小玩意和武器，那些东西可以对一个国家产生与核弹一样多的影响，而不用毁灭任何东西，比如EMP。

Ming Jie, studied at Malaysia
Suppose by ‘alliance’ you mean a mutual defense treaty like NATO, then the obvious question is, what for?
NATO, was enacted and continues to be maintained to counteract potential Russian aggression(although this is not their stated aim but in practicality it is). Because Europe is made up of several states of varying sizes and influence, it is imperative that a united entity like NATO exist in order to have a meaningful resistance against Russia.
China, by contrast is massive and can well defend herself against Russia. Therefore, if Russia-China relationship deteriorate to the point of conflict, it does not need to form an alliance with the U.S.
However, if China and the U.S are hostile towards each other, China will most probably need to form an alliance with Russia to counteract. In fact, it probably needs to form an alliance with every anti-US country on the planet.
Based on current circumstances, there is no need to form an alliance with either.

假设你说的“联盟”指的是类似北约那样的共同防卫条约，那么有一个问题显而易见，结盟是为了什么？
当年缔结北约的原因是为了对抗俄罗斯可能的侵略，现在依然如此（虽然他们宣布的目的不是这个，但实际上就是）。因为欧洲是由若干个体量和影响力各不相同的国家组成，所以北约这样的统一实体的存在是有必要的，是为了对俄罗斯进行有意义的抵抗。
然而相比之下中国的面积则很大，可以很好的抵御俄罗斯。所以，如果俄罗斯和中国的关系恶化到冲突的地步，它不需要与美国结成盟友。
然而，如果中国和美国互相持有敌对的态度，中国很有可能需要与俄罗斯结成联盟来对抗美国。实际上，它可能需要与全世界每个反对美国的国家结成联盟。
而根据当前的环境，中国还不需要与二者的任何一个结成联盟。

Eugene Laka, Enagic Worldwide Distributor at Enagic Distributor (2015-present)
Neither - China prefers to exploit the very best terms it can extract from both the US and Russia and to use such benefits to become the dominant military and economic power in the world. Why on earth would they have any reason to prefer one over the other, as opposed to fostering their own self-interests?

二者都不。中国更喜欢利用它可以从美国和俄罗斯取得的最佳条款，并利用这些优势来变成占据世界主导地位的军事和经济大国。他们到底有什么原因喜欢一个而不喜欢另一个，而不是培养自身利益呢？

Stanislav Terentyev
It is very essential for Chinese to use metaphors, some of which are called stratagems, so here is one I think very applicable to the situation: watch the battle of a dragon with a tiger. Meaning is, the one who stays away from the major battle and gets engaged into it the last, when one of the major counterparts is defeated and another is exhausted, wins the whole war without even having to be either dragon or tiger.

中国人使用隐喻是很必要的，其中一些被称作计谋，我觉得有一个十分切合当前的情形：坐观龙虎斗。意思是，要作一个远离大型争斗的人，直到最后，当一个争斗者被击败，而另一个精疲力尽的时候，加入进去，甚至既不需要当龙也不需要当虎，就可以获取全部的胜利果实。

Eugene Laka
Excellent! Sun Tzu’s many sayings also are relevant, for example: “In the midst of chaos, there is also opportunity.” and “The greatest victory is that which requires no battle.” Even if neither the Americans or the Russians have studied “The Art of War” I doubt if there’s any senior military or civilian leader in China who doesn’t know Sun Tzu by heart. That alone gives China a major strategic advantage in addition to their population, which the Communist regime has decided to enlarge rather than to restrict. I’m insisting that, at the appropriate age, my daughter arranges for my grandson to be tutored in Chinese, most likely Mandarin. I would hate to have him grow up an uncultured “Round Eyed” American-Ukrainian.

精彩！孙子的很多语录也中肯，比如：“在混乱之中也存在机会”和“最大的胜利是不需要战斗的”。虽然美国人和俄国人都没有研究过“孙子兵法”，我很怀疑中国的是否存在不了解孙子的军事或民事领导人。仅仅是这就让中国拥有了很大的战略优势，再加上他们的人口，这个GCZY政权已经决定对其加以扩大而不是限制。我坚持让我的女儿在合适的年龄安排我的孙子接受中文的辅导，很有可能是普通话。我很讨厌他长大成为一个“目瞪口呆”的美国乌克兰人。

Alex Jouravlev, From 0 to 30 in Russia. A long time ago.
Every country in the World prefers to be in alliance with US, US is still the top dog. Not every country gets to ally with US on the conditions that keep the ruling regime in power.
Those who are denied US friendship however, instead of eating shit and dying, are building alternative alliances in order to 1) stay in power and 2) convince US that they are better as friends than as enemies.
China enjoyed an alliance with US against USSR/Russia for four decades, and prospered on that. However US elected Trump, and Trump started to tighten course on China. China would comply, however US at the same time went all out against Russia, doubled-up in Afghanistan and messed up their role in Syria, plus demonstrated total dysfunction with opposition and bureaucracy openly sabotage the executive power while the executive power - well, you know.
China treated all that as an opportunity. They however would go back to alliance with US of offered. Their terms would be much more steep than four decades ago though.

全世界每个国家都更喜欢与美国结盟，美国依然是领头羊。然而并不是每个国家在与我们结盟的时候都能获得执政政权可以继续掌权的条件。
然而那些拒绝美国友谊的国家，并没有接受命运等死，而是在建立替代性的盟友关系，目的是1）继续掌权；2）说服美国与他们做朋友，会好过做敌人。
在过去40年，中国曾享受与美国结盟并反对苏联/俄罗斯的关系，并且因此而繁荣起来。然而美国选出了特朗普，而特朗普开始收紧对中国的政策。虽然中国终究会顺从，然而与此同时，美国鼓足干劲去对付俄罗斯，在阿富汗加倍努力，还搞砸了他们在叙利亚的角色，再加反对派带来的显而易见的功能障碍，以及官僚主义公然的破坏行政权力，同时行政权力——好吧，你知道的。
中国把所有这些情况都当作机会。然而他们终将回到美国赐予的盟友关系中。不过他们获得的条件将比40年前苛刻得多。

Jack Zumruls, studied at Finance
I would say neither, or both, depending on whichever is more beneficial.
Using the syria war as example. China could have easily joined in to show their solidarity with either Russia or USA or both, but it didnt. It stayed away because of the ramifications.
While most of the Trump supporters cheered Russia for joining, the rest of world do not. With all the destructions and civilian casualties being shown on TV Russia is getting a lot of heat on that front.

要我说二者都不是，或者二者都是，这取决于哪一种更加有利。
拿叙利亚打个比方。中国可以轻易的加入这场战争，展示他们与美国、或者俄罗斯、或者这两国的团结一致，但它并没有这样做。考虑到这样做的进一步后果，它没有涉足其中。
当特朗普的大部分支持者在为俄罗斯加入战争而欢呼的时候，全世界其他国家则没有这样做。随着电视上展示的所有破坏和平民伤亡，俄罗斯在这方面承受了很多压力。

Ran Chang, lives in Beijing, China
China prefers to keep both close. Russia wasn't great with holding promises and being a good ally. The United States is trying to strategically isloate China. Only by keeping both close would China gain the most benefits.

中国更喜欢与两国都保持亲密的关系。然而俄罗斯在信守诺言和作为好盟友方面不太在行。美国在战略上正努力的孤立中国。只有与两国都保持亲密的关系，中国才能获得最多的利益。

Sam Lu
Preferably, China only wants to be left alone and develop its economy at least for now, but president trump doesn’t really give China a choice in this matter.

迄今为止，中国宁可一个人待着，发展自己的经济。但特朗普总统在这个问题上却不会给中国机会。

Aaron Cai, lived in Beijing, China
I’d say neither.
Ally with no one against no one.

要我说二者都不是。
既不与谁结盟，也不反对谁。

Volgaski Wang, Some average guy in China. Got some ideas about languages.
Dinamic balance of the 3 countries.

三国之间会形成动态的平衡。

Eric Chen, Director at Alibaba (2014-present)
as a chinese, i prefer the latter. i bet so does the government. however, american treat china as the top challenger now. hence hardly it could happen.

作为一个中国人，我更喜欢后者。我打赌政府也是这么想的。然而，美国现在把中国当作最大的对手。所以这种情况很难出现。

Michel McGill, Born, lived and worked in China.
China has non-alliance principle and prefer to be friends with US and Russia.

中国的原则是不结盟，更希望与美国和俄罗斯都做朋友。

Bill Carson, Business Owner (1978-present)
I would think any country would prefer a close alliance with the United States of America.
For all the naysayers in this country and abroad let me say in no uncertain terms with absolute confidence in the accuracy of my statement , in nearly every way a country can be judged economically, militarily, personal freedom, diversity, influence etc. AND despite our many problems, (we can always improve)
THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA is TODAY ….
THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE HISTORY OF THE PLANET!
If the United States was in a footrace with all other countries that ever existed, we would have lapped the field 10 times and are still on pace to widen the gap.
THAT my friends is what Donald Trump has been gifted with.
America WHAT a country

我认为任何国家都更喜欢跟美利坚合众国结成亲密的联盟。
我对美国国内和国外的那些否定者说，我对我的陈述拥有绝对的信心，没有任何不确定的措辞，这个国家的几乎每个方面都可以如此评判，在经济上、军事上、个人自由、多样性、影响力等方面。而且尽管我们存在很多问题，（我们总是能改进）
今天的美利坚合众国
是地球有史以来最伟大的国家！
如果美国与任何存在过的国家比赛跑步，我们将已经跑完10圈，而且依然在扩大差距。
我的朋友们，这就是唐纳德特朗普一直的天赋所在。
美利坚，多么美好的国家！

Zhaoqi Yang, Huaxiaren, Gongyangism scholar
We prefer neither and wants to trade with both plus Europe.
However when push come to shove we are not afraid of Uncle Sam and his lackeys.
We are not a people that bends to threats, so if you are planning to phrase it as “pick a side or else” - you can count on that we will not be by your side.

我们更喜欢不跟任何一个结盟，而是与二者，还有欧洲，进行贸易。
然而如果山姆大叔和他的爪牙们想要逼迫我们，我们也不怕。
我们不是那种向威胁弯腰的人，所以如果你们想把威胁美化为“选择一边或者另一边”，那么不用问，我们肯定不会站在你们那一边。
​