they were on the wrong side of that because the sino-soviet split was a major bruh moment. basically if i recall they helped the pakistani ISI funnel weapons to the Afghan Mujahideen
Was there an ideological reason for that other than "We want to be friendly with the west so we'll do fucked up shit just to ingratiate ourselves"? It seems to go against observable evidence we have for their modern interactions with other countries
I think the Chinese perspective on the sino-soviet split (and I'm just going off some translated statements Deng Xiaoping made, so perhaps my perspective is limited) is that Khruschev was a shithead who tore up hundreds of the old Stalin-era agreements between the USSR and PRC, ruining their economic relationship, and isolating them diplomatically. So from the Chinese perspective, Khruschev "drew first blood" so to speak, in the Sino-Soviet split. But there's probably more to it than that. Also around the same time, China's relationship with the Non-Aligned-Movement in the global south soured because of the Sino-Indian war. This left China in a precarious and isolated position where they were either gonna get the treatment that Indonesia got (CIA coup leading to the purging of millions of Communists, trade unionists, etc.) or they were gonna warm up to the US economically and provide cheap labor, and keep their head low until they became stronger (which is what ended up happening).
Thanks that's a way better answer than what I was expecting.
Not that I approve of Operation Cyclone but it seems like China's strategy overall ended up paying off. Did Kruschev actually do that unprompted or was there more back and forth than they're letting on there?
they were on the wrong side of that because the sino-soviet split was a major bruh moment. basically if i recall they helped the pakistani ISI funnel weapons to the Afghan Mujahideen
Was there an ideological reason for that other than "We want to be friendly with the west so we'll do fucked up shit just to ingratiate ourselves"? It seems to go against observable evidence we have for their modern interactions with other countries
I think the Chinese perspective on the sino-soviet split (and I'm just going off some translated statements Deng Xiaoping made, so perhaps my perspective is limited) is that Khruschev was a shithead who tore up hundreds of the old Stalin-era agreements between the USSR and PRC, ruining their economic relationship, and isolating them diplomatically. So from the Chinese perspective, Khruschev "drew first blood" so to speak, in the Sino-Soviet split. But there's probably more to it than that. Also around the same time, China's relationship with the Non-Aligned-Movement in the global south soured because of the Sino-Indian war. This left China in a precarious and isolated position where they were either gonna get the treatment that Indonesia got (CIA coup leading to the purging of millions of Communists, trade unionists, etc.) or they were gonna warm up to the US economically and provide cheap labor, and keep their head low until they became stronger (which is what ended up happening).
Thanks that's a way better answer than what I was expecting.
Not that I approve of Operation Cyclone but it seems like China's strategy overall ended up paying off. Did Kruschev actually do that unprompted or was there more back and forth than they're letting on there?
deleted by creator
i don't know, i need to read more about it tbh
Same. I'd like to blame Kruschev too but I'm not confident enough in that era of history yet. I'd definitely believe it.
deleted by creator