A. V. LUKIN: A BEAR WATCHING A DRAGON. OBRAZ KITAY V ROSSII V XVII-XXI VEKAKH [IMAGE OF CHINA IN RUSSIA IN THE XVII-XXI CENTURIES]. MOSCOW: ACT; Vostok-Zapad, 2007. 598 p., ill.

Extensive academic issues covering the complex and multifaceted complex of inter-civilizational relations between Russia and China in the context of the formation of a new post-bipolar world order are particularly important, if not exceptional. International scholars of various orientations and biases, in fact, share the dominant idea that the nature of the relationship between these two Eurasian giants will largely determine the main direction of global development in the XXI century. Therefore, a truly scientific analysis of the objective content and subjective factors in Russia's far from ordinary relations with its great East Asian neighbor is one of the key tools for developing and improving our state's foreign policy strategy. And it is precisely this methodological premise that gives the research Director of the Center for East Asia and the SCO MGIMO (U) The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia A.V. Lukin has increased its scientific and theoretical relevance and applied political and diplomatic significance.

page 189
The scientist did an unusually large-scale encyclopedic work in the field of source studies and historiography, not at all formally and amateurishly, as is often the case in practice, but deeply, thoroughly and critically reworked mountains of domestic and foreign primary sources and publications on the research topic. At the same time, the author's judgments about the works of his colleagues are very respectful and accurate. Some regret is caused only by the fact that the author did not use the materials of the funds of the Russian national archives, as well as the documentation stored in the national archives of Great Britain.

A. V. Lukin's book is largely interdisciplinary in nature, representing a methodological synthesis of the political science of international relations and historical science. At the theoretical level, the author seeks to understand in a new way the correlation of such sociological categories as "images", "beliefs", "representations", "perceptions", "values", etc. At the same time, he uses the concept of "image" as a complex description of the representations of individuals or members of a particular subcultural social group. It is on this basis that A. V. Lukin seeks to identify the image of another country (in this case, China) in the public consciousness of various social groups and the overwhelming majority of the Russian population. The author was greatly assisted in solving this key task by the results of selective sociological surveys, which have become systematic in the Russian Federation since the early 1990s. The reliance on political sociology gives the work of A. V. Lukin an additional persuasiveness and academic character.

One of the main methodological requirements of any historical research is compliance with the principle of historicism and chronological sequence. The author did not have to re-develop the periodization of the main stages of his research. But the conditional division of the main stages of the formation and evolution of the image of China in pre-revolutionary Russia, then in the Soviet period and after the collapse of the USSR, when the Russian Federation becomes a completely independent subject of international relations, is quite reasonable and scientifically reasoned. Separate chapters of the study cover current perceptions of China in the Russian border regions and the evolution of Russian views on Taiwan. The final chapter examines the impact of the image of China on Russian foreign policy and Russian-Chinese relations. Chapter 4, "The Image of China in Russia after the Collapse of the USSR,"is particularly informative, profound, and academically balanced. The author practically rediscovers the contradictory positions of various subcultural trends in Russia, subtly sneers at numerous philistine prejudices regarding the new "yellow danger", and most importantly, scientifically substantiates the proximity, similarity, and objective coincidence of national and state interests of the civilizational massifs of Russia and China in the context of globalization and modernization in a number of key problems.

The paper shows that a significant part of Russian pragmatists are consistently attracted to the experience of Chinese market transformations as gradual, well-thought-out with a highly effective role of the state. In this regard, the author cites a very expressive publication in Moskovskiye Novosti in August 1999, when rumors began to spread about Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov as a possible candidate for president of Russia. The essay was entitled "Evgeny Maksimovich Deng Xiaoping" and contained a lengthy discussion on whether E. M. Primakov would be able to provide Russia with the phenomenal breakthrough that was achieved in the PRC (p. 335).

Russia's choice of a balanced but at the same time effective foreign policy strategy has led to an increased polarization of the main political trends on issues of interaction with China. The ruling Russian elite, led by President Vladimir Putin, was opposed, as shown in the book, by a rather active opposition on key issues of interaction with China. Moreover, the" anti-Chinese position "in the 1990s was taken by groups representing diametrically opposite edges of the political spectrum:" radical Westerners "on the one hand, and" extreme nationalists " on the other. The new business and political elite of the Russian Far East was seriously opposing Putin's center in the Chinese direction. As the author reasonably asserts, "in the 1990s, the authorities of the border regions (Russia - V. L.) often openly challenged Moscow's policy towards China and pursued their own course, which was determined by the internal conditions in a particular region" (p.475).

Accordingly, there is a serious imbalance and discrepancy between the Kremlin's current policy of forced "strategic partnership" with the PRC and the mass electorate. This, in particular, is evidenced by the VTsIOM survey conducted in July 2005 in 153 villages

page 190
46 regions of Russia. While 48% of respondents consider the PRC an ally and close partner, 47% called it a dangerous rival, opponent and enemy. Assessing the participation of Chinese capital and firms in the development of Siberia and the Far East, only 17% identified it as useful and constructive, while 66% - dangerous and harmful. According to A.V. Lukin, without overcoming these most dangerous misconceptions in the minds of the vast majority of Russians, it will be difficult for the Russian elite to move forward in the implementation of various projects of mutually beneficial strategic partnership.

Despite significant scientific achievements, A. V. Lukin's book contains some controversial subjects and shortcomings. So, in my opinion, one of the author's conclusions concerning the comparative assessment of the ratio of the integrated potential and global positions of the PRC and Russia is very doubtful and insufficiently reasoned. In the final section of his work, the author writes that at the end of the 20th century, after the deep stagnation and disintegration of the USSR, "For the first time in history, China surpassed Russia in economic power and, possibly, in overall influence in the world" (p. 487). Here and further, as it seems to us, A. V. Lukin unreasonably mixes quantitative and qualitative parameters. Indeed, China has clearly outpaced Russia in terms of such quantitative indicators as total GDP, demographic growth, and some other parameters. But if we take into account such qualitative criteria as the aggregate national economic potential, energy security, the level of fundamental science, the state of the military-industrial complex, space exploration, strategic weapons, and participation in the G8, it becomes obvious that China's comprehensive universal superiority over Russia is still far away. Here we should not exclude the fact that in the future of the XXI century. In principle, China and Russia can occupy relatively equal positions in a multipolar world.

Another issue of discussion concerns the author's assessment of the strategic prospects of Russian-Chinese relations in the context of domestic political battles in Russia. This assessment, with all the reservations, in my opinion, is too one-sided. A.V. Lukin claims that "forces that consider China as a threat-radical nationalists or radical Westerners-have almost no chance of coming to power" if an emergency does not happen in Russia. And further: "The power in the Kremlin is maintained by supporters of a balance between East and West" (p.485). Here the author departs from the methodology of multidimensional predictive analysis and is too categorical in his conclusions, leaning only towards one desired political science scenario.

Meanwhile, the struggle for supreme power in today's Russia is so complex and confusing, and the alarming anarchic mood in the Russian regions (especially to the east of the Urals) in connection with the rapid rise of China's power is so great that we should talk about not one, but at least three predictive scenarios of relations between Moscow and Beijing for the future. The first of them is a mutually beneficial strategic partnership (the most likely scenario). The second is the transition to a hostile confrontation (an unlikely scenario). And finally, another medium-probable scenario is the preservation of bilateral relations at the level of formal ties. A.V. Lukin's book contains other controversial issues, but they do not belittle, but, on the contrary, indicate the creative nature of the research.

In conclusion, I would like to note that a peer-reviewed scientific and encyclopedic historical work does honor not only to its author, but also to the scientific institution where the research was conducted. A. V. Lukin inherited and continued the best traditions of Russian socio-humanitarian science. And in his scientific, academic and civic positions, the fateful problems of Russia are mirrored, which is called either to go into historical oblivion, or to find its new place in the Eurasian and world civilization. The importance attached to this study not only in Russia, but also abroad is confirmed by the fact that it has already been published in the United States in English, and in 2007, which was celebrated as the "Year of China in Russia", it was translated into Chinese and published in China.

Permanent link to this publication: