His explicitly stated goal of strengthening Russia’s technological sovereignty implies the unstated one of reducing dependence on China in this respect, which sends a very strong signal to the US.
Recap: China needs Russia far more than Russia needs China. Xi needs Putin far more than Putin needs Xi.
Now, there are various signs that the peak power of Xi has passed, and signs of prep for the power transition are numerous and becoming more apparent. The issue is that besides Xi, most other leading political and financial power elites (usually the same group) in China really want to tilt towards the West, as most of their personal wealth (and the bulk of capital flight) resides in the West. Most of their children and mistresses reside in the West, and none in Moscow or St. Petersburg. If by now Mr. Putin still cannot recognize this point, I would be really disappointed in him and his advisors.
I've suspected from 2023 onwards that China has been using its officials, influencers, and sympathetic members of the Russian Establishment (what I've previously called the pro-BRI faction) to whisper sweet nothings in influential Russians' ears about China and its vision.
The purpose was to alleviate misgivings about disproportionate dependence on China and the scenario of China repairing its ties with the US-led West at Russia's expense just like it did during the Old Cold War. I consider it one of the most significant psy-ops of this century.
It's had some success, but it wasn't a full success since Russia keeps dragging its heels on the Power of Siberia II for instance and continues arming India to the teeth against China, not to mention approving BrahMos sales to the Philippines and reportedly soon Vietnam too.
The pro-BRI faction, in my assessment, nowadays dominates (but importantly not fully!) official rhetoric, publicly financed Russian international media narratives, and exerts immense influence over state-adjacent top "Non-Russian Pro-Russian" (NRPR) influencers.
Still, Putin remains reluctant to "sell out Russia" to China as critics might see it, and with good reason since he'd just be trading dependence on the West with dependence on China with all that could entail in the long term.
I also assessed that his trip to China last month was aimed at proposing an anti-Western/US partnership on equal terms but he was clearly rebuffed by Xi, ergo why he's now trying to revive the previously US-mediated peace process to look for options there.
Manturov said what Putin has been thinking for a while, and it's that Russia cannot remain technoloically dependent on China despite whatever the NRPRs fantasize is in its interests, yet the path to alleviating the dependence is difficult to traverse amidst sanctions.
Hopefully, the "reformist" school of thought in Russia, as you described before, has recognized the issues by 2022.
As a total outsider with no experience in political-economic development, I think Russia needs to revive manufacturing using robotics. China has made giant steps in 2025. Note that humanoid robots do not need to have complete human intelligence. Their strength is that a single flexible humanoid robotic design can be trained for different workplaces and become efficient for traditional manufacturing processes that require repetitive action. There are many related videos, but I lost track of one specific Chinese compilation for humanoid robots in typical Chinese manufacturing plants. At the same time, China's official under-employment number is 320 million, and popular commentaries believe the real number is higher. That means roughly half of adult working-age people in China no longer have traditional jobs. Hopefully, Russia will not repeat the old mistakes of Mao or Western Europe.
One way to build the sovereign tech ecosystem would be to lure independent researchers and entrepreneurs from countries strong on independent engineering talent like China and Iran with generous funding/subsidies using the Eurasian solidarity - United East vs West narrative as a psyop - independently from the Chinese or Iranian states. Both these Asian empires bordering Russia have historically been strong civilisational adversaries of Russia and they need to be managed carefully - these sentiments are not going to change. National sovereignty cannot be achieved without technology and digital sovereignty. China itself proves this fact as the only true sovereign state. It would be foolish of Russia to civilisationally swap Western platforms for Chinese platforms simply because it is the dream of Pepe Escobar and co. Mancihean westerners do not understand complexity and think geopolitics is like school yard fights against bullies. The discussions in Chinese in Chinese academia and social media forums tell a different story - although the poweful western allied comprador dollar invested elite exist there (the Shanghai Mafia) in a great power struggle with the localists and can cut loose any time the centre weakens, there is a strongly adversarial faction to the west that is determined to defeat the west civilisationally and culturally and if they venture into military adventure militarily also. The admission of talent and funding in Russia should be entirely based on merit, rare skills, and talent and not "cheapness"as the west did and Siberia has all the resources to build an independent Russian tech ecosystem except probably sufficient manpower at scale. At the same time, the mass import of the western favorite regular global indentured labor class of Indo-Pakistanis into the tech ecosystem would lead to massive fraud, tribal cabalisation and decaying standards and complete absence of any culture of excellence due to "smart work" methods. Not to mention the issue of mass antisocial behaviour and organised sexual misbehaviour which these folks are used to on their native soils and repeat outside wherever they get sufficient numbers.
Yes. preferably, such technology is better done domestically, even if it takes some more time and money. Initially, of course it does not hurt to buy a few from China. Hey, China did the same with Russian Su-27, Kilo sub, and Sovremenny Destroyer. Humannoid robotics is actually not that important as most of such assembly line robots don't have to move. Therefore, dexterity of the upper body and the hands are critical, but not so much for lower body dexterity or walking ability. For combat robots, I prefer threaded track-based mobility rather than bipod or quadpod. The key is one basic prototype but trained for a thousand different tasks. You don't need general-purpose AI or LLM AI for this.
I have yet to see a quad pod managing uneven terrain at even a fraction of the speed a biologic quadruped can. The required computing power would certainly bust their "head" space.
The actual strength of robotics is as you say in applying them to repetitive tasks in well defined surroundings.
China does show sovereignty, albeit China is poorly led and has almost always been a selfish sovereign since 1949. I am guessing that you really meant that China showed no principle but only concern for self-interest during this war. Is that so? Or did you mean that China does not have real self-sufficiency, hence cannot always stand up for its own sovereignty?
I was refering to the latter. Their energy dependence showed itself to be such that it really hinders their acting souvereignly. I had very much the impression they were restraining Iran for fear of energy problems.
I am ethnic Chinese born in Taiwan. My hero used the name Nakayama when he resided in Japan in the early 20th century.
Not sure that I am addressing the issue you have in mind. Your statement suggests you do know a few things about China. I see more of China's weakness because I don't give much credit to apparent material side achievement, and certainly not to the McMansion psychology. China is still fractured internally, with Western, especially the US, infiltration deep in the society through the "world factory" days. Chinese Communists have scored fairly well in terms of beefing up basic industries, MIC, and the armed forces. At least, China is the only nation able to train soldiers to behave like robots.
However, China's internal problems and strategic weakness are certainly not limited to the above, despite the fact that the CCP had pinned self-sufficiency as a prime directive since 1949. Part of the weakness is exacerbated by the role of "world factory". China has to import raw materials to produce products. Xi wants to reduce Western/US influence in China, but the withdrawal of Western money and employment generated severe adaptation problems not properly planned for. With multiple negative factors lined up for a perfect storm, China is probably at its weakest point since 1949 to withstand an external hybrid war shock. An American military provocation is probably the last straw for the CCP to maintain domestic stability. Economic war alone has the ability to strangle China due to its current weak leadership cadres. However, the stupid neocons will somehow try a military provocation or even a color revolution to have a regime change. CCP will either get a new lease of life, or China will fragment. I suppose the latter possibility is what the Western powers had always wanted since the late 19th century.
At its core is China's inability to engage in productive diplomatic relations. Historically, being the Central Kingdom, with all that it entails. So it never learned how to spell diplomacy.
There is an article here that explains the deadly trap the US and the West was caught in with the critical issue of tungsten production. I guess Russia is trying to learn the lesson in time.
Don't mean to be rude, but anyone who thinks China needs Russia more must be mad -
in terms of bilateral trade China is by far the largest destination at c35% of Russian imports and exports. It is c5% the other way round. So with whom can Russia reliably diversify, Europe? India? What exactly does the US need from Russia?
Rare earths? Hopefully we all know the minerals are not rare, but it is the processing - of which China has over 40 design institutes and laboratories plus 11 universities with advanced programmes. How many does the West have, never mind Russia? How is anybody going to catch up?
Ok, let's assume miraculously someone caught up, what about Chinese technological advances in chemistry, automation, IT, medicines, engineering, defence, farming etc. etc.?
Given unlike most the Middle Kingdom lacks the invade and pillage DNA, which brave soul is going to tell President Putin the reverse Kissinger strategy has legs?
China depends on Russia far more then Russia on China. Russia is blessed with the biggest amounts of resources of all kinds, Miinerals, Gas, Oil, Ferrtile "Black Soil" and area in Sq. miles
FYI
"India seeks rare earth samples from Rosneft-owned Siberian deposit, source says"
https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/india-seeks-rare-earth-samples-from-rosneft-owned-siberian-deposit-source-says/article71108151.ece
Recap: China needs Russia far more than Russia needs China. Xi needs Putin far more than Putin needs Xi.
Now, there are various signs that the peak power of Xi has passed, and signs of prep for the power transition are numerous and becoming more apparent. The issue is that besides Xi, most other leading political and financial power elites (usually the same group) in China really want to tilt towards the West, as most of their personal wealth (and the bulk of capital flight) resides in the West. Most of their children and mistresses reside in the West, and none in Moscow or St. Petersburg. If by now Mr. Putin still cannot recognize this point, I would be really disappointed in him and his advisors.
I've suspected from 2023 onwards that China has been using its officials, influencers, and sympathetic members of the Russian Establishment (what I've previously called the pro-BRI faction) to whisper sweet nothings in influential Russians' ears about China and its vision.
The purpose was to alleviate misgivings about disproportionate dependence on China and the scenario of China repairing its ties with the US-led West at Russia's expense just like it did during the Old Cold War. I consider it one of the most significant psy-ops of this century.
It's had some success, but it wasn't a full success since Russia keeps dragging its heels on the Power of Siberia II for instance and continues arming India to the teeth against China, not to mention approving BrahMos sales to the Philippines and reportedly soon Vietnam too.
The pro-BRI faction, in my assessment, nowadays dominates (but importantly not fully!) official rhetoric, publicly financed Russian international media narratives, and exerts immense influence over state-adjacent top "Non-Russian Pro-Russian" (NRPR) influencers.
Still, Putin remains reluctant to "sell out Russia" to China as critics might see it, and with good reason since he'd just be trading dependence on the West with dependence on China with all that could entail in the long term.
I also assessed that his trip to China last month was aimed at proposing an anti-Western/US partnership on equal terms but he was clearly rebuffed by Xi, ergo why he's now trying to revive the previously US-mediated peace process to look for options there.
Manturov said what Putin has been thinking for a while, and it's that Russia cannot remain technoloically dependent on China despite whatever the NRPRs fantasize is in its interests, yet the path to alleviating the dependence is difficult to traverse amidst sanctions.
Hopefully, the "reformist" school of thought in Russia, as you described before, has recognized the issues by 2022.
As a total outsider with no experience in political-economic development, I think Russia needs to revive manufacturing using robotics. China has made giant steps in 2025. Note that humanoid robots do not need to have complete human intelligence. Their strength is that a single flexible humanoid robotic design can be trained for different workplaces and become efficient for traditional manufacturing processes that require repetitive action. There are many related videos, but I lost track of one specific Chinese compilation for humanoid robots in typical Chinese manufacturing plants. At the same time, China's official under-employment number is 320 million, and popular commentaries believe the real number is higher. That means roughly half of adult working-age people in China no longer have traditional jobs. Hopefully, Russia will not repeat the old mistakes of Mao or Western Europe.
One way to build the sovereign tech ecosystem would be to lure independent researchers and entrepreneurs from countries strong on independent engineering talent like China and Iran with generous funding/subsidies using the Eurasian solidarity - United East vs West narrative as a psyop - independently from the Chinese or Iranian states. Both these Asian empires bordering Russia have historically been strong civilisational adversaries of Russia and they need to be managed carefully - these sentiments are not going to change. National sovereignty cannot be achieved without technology and digital sovereignty. China itself proves this fact as the only true sovereign state. It would be foolish of Russia to civilisationally swap Western platforms for Chinese platforms simply because it is the dream of Pepe Escobar and co. Mancihean westerners do not understand complexity and think geopolitics is like school yard fights against bullies. The discussions in Chinese in Chinese academia and social media forums tell a different story - although the poweful western allied comprador dollar invested elite exist there (the Shanghai Mafia) in a great power struggle with the localists and can cut loose any time the centre weakens, there is a strongly adversarial faction to the west that is determined to defeat the west civilisationally and culturally and if they venture into military adventure militarily also. The admission of talent and funding in Russia should be entirely based on merit, rare skills, and talent and not "cheapness"as the west did and Siberia has all the resources to build an independent Russian tech ecosystem except probably sufficient manpower at scale. At the same time, the mass import of the western favorite regular global indentured labor class of Indo-Pakistanis into the tech ecosystem would lead to massive fraud, tribal cabalisation and decaying standards and complete absence of any culture of excellence due to "smart work" methods. Not to mention the issue of mass antisocial behaviour and organised sexual misbehaviour which these folks are used to on their native soils and repeat outside wherever they get sufficient numbers.
Yes. preferably, such technology is better done domestically, even if it takes some more time and money. Initially, of course it does not hurt to buy a few from China. Hey, China did the same with Russian Su-27, Kilo sub, and Sovremenny Destroyer. Humannoid robotics is actually not that important as most of such assembly line robots don't have to move. Therefore, dexterity of the upper body and the hands are critical, but not so much for lower body dexterity or walking ability. For combat robots, I prefer threaded track-based mobility rather than bipod or quadpod. The key is one basic prototype but trained for a thousand different tasks. You don't need general-purpose AI or LLM AI for this.
I have yet to see a quad pod managing uneven terrain at even a fraction of the speed a biologic quadruped can. The required computing power would certainly bust their "head" space.
The actual strength of robotics is as you say in applying them to repetitive tasks in well defined surroundings.
China sovereign? The Iran war just showed where it lacks in this respect.
China does show sovereignty, albeit China is poorly led and has almost always been a selfish sovereign since 1949. I am guessing that you really meant that China showed no principle but only concern for self-interest during this war. Is that so? Or did you mean that China does not have real self-sufficiency, hence cannot always stand up for its own sovereignty?
I was refering to the latter. Their energy dependence showed itself to be such that it really hinders their acting souvereignly. I had very much the impression they were restraining Iran for fear of energy problems.
BINGO.
Frankly I have not examined China from the angle you are talking about - can you elaborate? Curious to know more. Meanwhile are you Japanese?
I am ethnic Chinese born in Taiwan. My hero used the name Nakayama when he resided in Japan in the early 20th century.
Not sure that I am addressing the issue you have in mind. Your statement suggests you do know a few things about China. I see more of China's weakness because I don't give much credit to apparent material side achievement, and certainly not to the McMansion psychology. China is still fractured internally, with Western, especially the US, infiltration deep in the society through the "world factory" days. Chinese Communists have scored fairly well in terms of beefing up basic industries, MIC, and the armed forces. At least, China is the only nation able to train soldiers to behave like robots.
However, China's internal problems and strategic weakness are certainly not limited to the above, despite the fact that the CCP had pinned self-sufficiency as a prime directive since 1949. Part of the weakness is exacerbated by the role of "world factory". China has to import raw materials to produce products. Xi wants to reduce Western/US influence in China, but the withdrawal of Western money and employment generated severe adaptation problems not properly planned for. With multiple negative factors lined up for a perfect storm, China is probably at its weakest point since 1949 to withstand an external hybrid war shock. An American military provocation is probably the last straw for the CCP to maintain domestic stability. Economic war alone has the ability to strangle China due to its current weak leadership cadres. However, the stupid neocons will somehow try a military provocation or even a color revolution to have a regime change. CCP will either get a new lease of life, or China will fragment. I suppose the latter possibility is what the Western powers had always wanted since the late 19th century.
BRICS's stampede. Began in Kazan. Accelerating. Everyone for himself, God for all.
At its core is China's inability to engage in productive diplomatic relations. Historically, being the Central Kingdom, with all that it entails. So it never learned how to spell diplomacy.
There is an article here that explains the deadly trap the US and the West was caught in with the critical issue of tungsten production. I guess Russia is trying to learn the lesson in time.
https://thedailybreakdown.com/p/tearing-apart-the-tungsten-apt-chokepoint
Don't mean to be rude, but anyone who thinks China needs Russia more must be mad -
in terms of bilateral trade China is by far the largest destination at c35% of Russian imports and exports. It is c5% the other way round. So with whom can Russia reliably diversify, Europe? India? What exactly does the US need from Russia?
Rare earths? Hopefully we all know the minerals are not rare, but it is the processing - of which China has over 40 design institutes and laboratories plus 11 universities with advanced programmes. How many does the West have, never mind Russia? How is anybody going to catch up?
Ok, let's assume miraculously someone caught up, what about Chinese technological advances in chemistry, automation, IT, medicines, engineering, defence, farming etc. etc.?
Given unlike most the Middle Kingdom lacks the invade and pillage DNA, which brave soul is going to tell President Putin the reverse Kissinger strategy has legs?
China depends on Russia far more then Russia on China. Russia is blessed with the biggest amounts of resources of all kinds, Miinerals, Gas, Oil, Ferrtile "Black Soil" and area in Sq. miles