伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：中國和俄羅斯都必須面對“兩個西方”

Club提要：3月1日，俄羅斯國際事務委員會（RIAC）總幹事伊萬·季莫菲耶夫在三亞接受北京對話專訪，就白宮爭吵、美歐矛盾、烏克蘭危機、中俄合作等問題進行深入分析。

季莫菲耶夫認為，美歐撕裂對烏克蘭局勢的影響仍需進一步觀察。俄羅斯要求烏克蘭保持“非結盟”地位、去軍事化、消除極端民族主義等。俄烏長期和解須建立在更廣泛的安全框架之上。他表示，即便美國撤銷制裁、恢復與俄正常關係往來，俄羅斯也需要繼續與中國保持戰略伙伴關係，發展多元化外交戰略，以備與美衝突“捲土重來”。

**韓樺：**你如何看待澤連斯基在白宮與特朗普總統和JD·萬斯之間的那場爭吵？

**伊萬·季莫費耶夫：**我們現在所看到的情況與我們習以為常的完全不同。考慮到過去三年美國及其盟友對烏克蘭的全面支持，目前的情況極為反常。

特朗普的立場截然不同，他認為和平是當務之急，絕不容忍自己的“小夥伴”提出條件。關鍵在於，既然是“小夥伴”，就應該服從“大夥伴”的路線。如果“大夥伴”改變主意，“小夥伴”也必須隨之調整。

在白宮的這次會面中，“應該（should）”這個詞變成了“必須（must）”。這對烏克蘭總統澤連斯基來説是一次相當嚴重的外交失敗，可能會大大削弱他在國內的政治地位。這件事對烏克蘭和平進程將會帶來怎樣的影響？衝突何時能夠結束仍然是一個非常複雜的問題。美俄雙方的談判雖處於初期階段，有關細節尚不清晰，但目前來看，這對烏克蘭領導人來説無疑是一個壞消息。

2月28日，烏克蘭總統澤連斯基與美國總統特朗普、副總統萬斯在白宮橢圓形辦公室會面（圖源：路透社）

**韓樺：**2022年2月的“特別軍事行動”前後，您曾發聲反對。三年過去了，您的認識是怎樣發展的？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**從一開始，我對軍事衝突的發展感到非常擔憂，原因有很多。其中之一是俄羅斯與西方衝突有進一步升級的風險，這個局部衝突可能演變成更大規模的衝突。在某個時點，西方向烏克蘭提供中程巡航導彈，這導致局勢變得極為危險。

烏克蘭士兵參加訓練演習（圖源：美聯社）

另一個原因是經濟惡化的巨大風險。不過，我很高興看到，關於俄羅斯經濟狀況的悲觀預測並未發生。一方面，俄羅斯在經濟壓力下展現了極大的韌性；另一方面，我們也成功避免了全球能源危機、糧食安全危機等問題。

現在，最理智的做法是利用當前俄美關係緩和的機會，推動軍事衝突結束。但與此同時，這一解決方案必須考慮到導致衝突的根本原因，考慮俄羅斯的訴求。否則，我們很難避免未來爆發新的衝突。

**韓樺：**在您看來，俄羅斯的核心訴求是什麼？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**一個核心訴求是烏克蘭的中立“非結盟”地位。換句話説，烏克蘭需要去軍事化，不能成為西方用來對抗俄羅斯的工具，也不能對俄羅斯構成威脅。

另一項關鍵訴求是對烏克蘭境內各族人民的尊重，包括對語言多樣性的保護，並對極端民族主義採取零容忍態度。當前烏克蘭社會存在歌頌二戰期間納粹合作者的聲音，這種歷史篡改行為必須被杜絕，包括對二戰歷史的任何歪曲。

總的來説，俄羅斯的訴求包括烏克蘭的“非結盟”地位、中立性、去軍事化、杜絕極端民族主義，以及尊重烏克蘭人口的多樣性。當然，俄羅斯官方外交可能會提出更詳細的清單，但這是我作為專家的基本看法。

**韓樺：**我相信俄羅斯會提出一些訴求。俄美之間的議題不僅限於烏克蘭危機，還有許多其他問題需要通過外交渠道討論。俄美談判會如何推進？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**談判進程可能會相當複雜，因為這場衝突本質上是一個更廣泛的安全架構問題，需要消除現存體系的缺陷，而不僅僅關乎烏克蘭。值得注意的是，從衝突一開始，中國就指出歐洲安全架構的缺陷，而正是這些缺陷導致了西方忽視俄羅斯的安全利益，並削弱了“安全不可分割原則”。要實現長期和解，需要在更廣泛的安全框架上取得進展。

目前，媒體報道已經提到了一些潛在的解決方案，其中包括烏克蘭大選，這可能是推動烏克蘭政治進程發展和衝突解決的重要前提。同時，關於領土劃分的討論也必須基於戰場上的既成事實，同時兼顧俄羅斯的訴求和當前的軍事態勢。

還有關鍵的政治層面的問題，就是烏克蘭的“非結盟”地位以及其與北約的關係。眾所周知，俄羅斯的一項核心訴求是烏克蘭不得加入北約。與此同時，烏克蘭及其歐洲盟友可能會推動在烏克蘭境內部署外國軍隊，以此作為安全保障。但對俄羅斯而言，這是完全不可接受的，因為無論出於何種理由，這都意味着烏克蘭被外國軍隊佔領。

任何所謂的“維和行動”都必須獲得聯合國安理會的同意，並得到更廣泛的國際社會支持。雖然西方勢力龐大且具有影響力，但它並不能代表整個國際社會，也無法為維和行動提供最廣泛的授權。唯一合法的維和行動必須由聯合國主導，並考慮到俄羅斯和中國的立場。因此，任何西方國家試圖單方面部署軍隊，都將面臨巨大的阻力。

3月2日，十餘個歐洲和歐盟國家，以及烏克蘭和加拿大的領導人在英國倫敦舉行峯會，就烏克蘭危機和歐洲防務問題進行討論

（圖源：英國首相府 新華社發）

特朗普在這個問題上態度鮮明，他明確表示，如果歐洲軍隊在烏克蘭與俄軍發生衝突，美國不會提供軍事支持。如果外國軍隊進入烏克蘭，這可能導致衝突升級，甚至引發俄羅斯與北約的直接對抗，而這絕不是一個理性的選擇。

正因如此，我最初談到了對這場軍事衝突的風險評估。正如我所提到的，最大的風險在於局部衝突升級為俄羅斯與北約之間的大規模戰爭，甚至是第三次世界大戰。如果西方軍隊進入烏克蘭，這一風險將始終存在。

**韓樺：**您剛才提到了糧食危機和能源危機，這是衝突爆發前的主要擔憂之一。那麼，在長期解決這一危機的過程中，某些經濟問題或人道主義援助是否會成為關鍵因素？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**這是一個重要的問題。其中之一是恢復因制裁和限制措施而受破壞的全球供應鏈。當然，我不認為這在當前起着決定性作用。俄羅斯及其夥伴已經找到繞過這些制裁的方法。需要指出的是，西方本身也在制裁中提供了人道主義豁免。因此，在很大程度上，世界避免了這場衝突對糧食安全和能源安全造成的嚴重人道主義影響。

但還有另一個嚴重的人道主義問題，那就是如何解決戰爭對烏克蘭以及受衝突影響的俄羅斯地區所造成的創傷。這包括排雷、基礎設施的重建，以及對戰爭中失去親人的烏克蘭人和俄羅斯人的幫助。這將是俄烏經濟上的一項沉重負擔。

**韓樺：**這也涉及到您的經濟領域研究。總體而言，俄羅斯如何在西方制裁下維持經濟運轉並保持韌性？與此同時，俄羅斯面臨了哪些挑戰，例如通貨膨脹等？此外，您如何看待在利雅得會議上關於恢復美國對俄投資的討論，以及這對中國在俄投資的影響？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**俄羅斯經濟的韌性甚至讓俄羅斯人自己感到驚訝。在很大程度上，這歸功於俄羅斯央行和政府多年來的前期準備工作。在發起特別軍事行動之前，我們建立了自己的金融信息傳輸系統（報文系統）和支付系統，減少了對西方體系的依賴。這使得我們在面對西方制裁風暴時能夠保持金融穩定。

俄羅斯聖彼得堡大賣場內的自動提款機（圖源：彭博社）

與此同時，我們迅速重建了本土工業體系，特別是在軍工和軍民兩用產品生產方面。與中國及其他友好國家的貿易往來，幫助我們減輕了貿易和進口方面的衝擊，包括消費品進口。中國始終保持公正和客觀的立場，不參與任何軍事聯盟，也沒有在軍事意義上選邊站隊。在西方對俄製裁的背景下，中俄兩國保持正常經貿關係。中國不僅成為俄羅斯商品的重要市場，還接收了那些被歐洲和美國市場拒之門外的產品。此外，印度也在購買俄羅斯石油和其他大宗商品方面發揮了重要作用。

總體而言，俄羅斯經濟能夠保持韌性，主要依靠以下幾個因素：政府充分的前期準備和有效的危機管理；俄羅斯經濟的市場化促使企業自主應對挑戰，而非依賴政府救助；良好的外交關係——尤其是與中國的緊密合作。

至於美國投資重返俄羅斯的前景，我們必須保持謹慎。首先，從法律角度來看，這些投資仍然是被禁止的。根據美國法律，目前無法向俄羅斯進行新的投資，因此，相關討論目前僅停留在初步探討和觀察階段。

如果烏克蘭衝突在所有各方均能接受的條件下達成和平協議，俄羅斯的利益得到滿足，那麼可以預期某些制裁可能會被取消。但需要警惕的是，這些解除制裁的措施可能只是臨時性的，可能更像是“豁免”而非永久性的法律廢除。因此，俄羅斯可能在相當長的時間內仍需面對制裁框架的影響。這意味着，一旦針對投資的制裁豁免出現，西方投資可能會逐漸迴歸，但制裁仍將是一個長期風險。

遭受經濟制裁後的俄羅斯商場繁榮依舊（圖源：紐約時報）

無論如何，即便西方投資迴歸，也不會影響中國在俄羅斯市場的地位。中國已成為俄羅斯市場上的重要力量，很難被取代。

**韓樺：**我認為，中國和俄羅斯都必須面對“兩個西方”：一個是美國，它可能會在某種程度上放鬆制裁，而歐洲方面則可能會堅持制裁。在這種情況下，我們應該如何應對？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**您的分析是正確的。最近的制裁情況就説明了這一點：歐盟在特別軍事行動三週年之際推出了第16輪制裁，而美國卻沒有采取新的制裁措施。因此，我們可能會看到這樣一種局面：某些美國盟友仍然在實施制裁，而美國本身卻沒有跟進。

考慮到美國在國際金融體系的核心地位，美國的制裁對我們來説比歐洲的制裁更具威脅性。如果歐洲繼續維持制裁，對俄羅斯的影響遠小於相反的情況——即美國維持制裁，而歐洲解除制裁。

就中俄合作而言，美國的制裁同樣比歐盟的制裁影響大，因為中國的金融界更加擔憂美國的“二級制裁”，而對歐盟的制裁並沒有那麼敏感。如果美國至少在某種程度上減少金融制裁的風險，那麼中國的金融機構會更願意推動中俄合作，併為雙邊貿易提供更多金融服務。

**韓樺：**希望如此。接下來可以討論金磚國家貨幣或金融結算體系？畢竟，特朗普可能會恢復與俄羅斯的部分對話和談判，但與此同時，他對金磚國家的金融合作、特別是金磚貨幣持極端敵視態度，而俄羅斯卻是金磚貨幣的堅定支持者。您對此怎麼看？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**是的，俄羅斯支持全球金融體系的多元化。但必須指出，這不僅僅是俄羅斯的立場，印度的立場也類似。印度與美國保持着良好關係，並深度參與全球化，但它仍然支持國際金融體系的多元化，因為它意識到壟斷並不是最佳選擇。

中國在保護自身金融體系和市場免受制裁和外部干涉方面做了大量工作。中國正在推動人民幣在國際交易中的使用。人民幣目前尚未對美元構成挑戰，其全球佔比仍然不高，中國人民銀行在推動人民幣國際化的過程中一直採取穩健態度，換句話説，中國在“摸着石頭過河”，一步一步推進，這是一種理性的戰略。

考慮到這些因素，我不認為金磚貨幣在短期甚至中期內會成為現實。這個構想仍然更多是一個概念，而非一個切實可行的解決方案。關鍵問題在於——誰來主導這套貨幣體系？它將如何運作？其價值基礎是什麼？這些問題都尚未得到解答。

從這個角度來看，我認為特朗普對金磚貨幣的過度警惕有些誇張。但另一方面，他確實意識到新的經濟中心正在崛起，這對美國構成了挑戰。因此，他的態度可能會相當強硬。在他第一任期的前幾個月，他對中國的表態還算剋制，但隨後他的政策變得極具攻擊性。眾所周知，他將中國視為美國的主要競爭對手甚至威脅。因此，我們還需要觀察他未來如何處理對華政策。

2月28日，中共中央政治局委員、中央外辦主任王毅在北京會見俄羅斯聯邦安全會議秘書紹伊古（圖源：外交部網站）

**韓樺：**對於中國和俄羅斯而言，我們不僅重視兩國政府間的合作，也高度重視學術界及其他各個層面的交流。在我看來，特朗普並不願意在烏克蘭危機上投入過多時間和精力，他在國內還有許多更重要的事務需要處理。

雖然預測未來變得越來越困難，但我還是想讓您做個預測。特朗普的主要目標是對付華爾街等國內問題，而不是過度關注烏克蘭危機，他只是想盡快結束這場衝突。那麼，您認為他將採取什麼樣的政策？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**特朗普的關注點始終在未來，而不是過去。不管我們喜歡他還是不喜歡他，有一點是明確的：冷戰已經成為歷史，而當前的烏克蘭危機則是冷戰遺留下來的問題。這一點毋庸置疑。從某種意義上説，我們仍然處於冷戰的“回聲”之中。

對於特朗普來説，烏克蘭危機是過去的問題，而不是未來的問題。他試圖擺脱與過去相關的沉重負擔，專注於未來。事實上，他已經意識到，烏克蘭危機無法在軍事上取勝。在當前形勢下，西方根本不可能戰勝俄羅斯，而繼續向烏克蘭提供武器，只會加劇風險——正如我們在對話開頭所談到的，這可能會導致局勢進一步升級，甚至引發美俄直接對抗。

特朗普出身商界，他明白烏克蘭危機意味着什麼：巨大的財政消耗。數千億美元的支出本可以用於美國的基礎設施建設，比如修路、機場現代化等——這些可不是小錢。他想節省這些資金，並將其用於更具價值的方向。那麼，問題來了：他的下一個方向是什麼？

2月27日，特朗普總統和英國首相基爾·斯塔默在白宮會晤（圖源：美聯社）

**韓樺：**從您的專業角度來看，您對特朗普關於美國國內經濟政策有何建議？

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**我不是美國人，儘管我長期研究美國。因此，要給他提出建議並不容易。美國是一個富裕國家，是全球主要經濟體之一。但同時，美國的貧富差距問題依然嚴重，比中國或俄羅斯更突出。然而，共和黨的立場並不支持公共服務、醫療和教育投資，而特朗普是共和黨人。因此，改善這些社會服務並不符合他的施政方向。

不過，作為一個俄羅斯人，作為一個來自重視社會福利體系的國家的公民，在理想情況下，我希望這些財政資源能夠用於改善人民的生活，比如教育、醫療，而不是用於軍事開支。當然，美國人民對自己的國家最有發言權，而我們則應該專注於如何管理好自己的國家。

回顧我與一些中國同行的交流，我認為在經歷了這場“制裁海嘯”之後，俄美貿易關係惡化的風險依然存在，我們很難相信一切會恢復正常。因此，我們必須做好準備，以防未來再次發生政治化衝突或新一輪制裁。

對莫斯科來説，最合理的做法仍然是對沖風險，保持在經濟交易上的自主權，並採用多元化的貿易方式，尤其是在與中國的合作。為什麼在雙邊貿易中我們要使用美元？我們完全可以使用本國貨幣——人民幣和盧布，這更為合理。

2024喀山峯會上，建立金磚國家支付系統毫無疑問是最重要的議題之一（圖源：俄羅斯衞星通訊社）

我們應該進一步探索由中俄雙方共同提供的新金融體系。中國的CIPS（人民幣跨境支付系統）是一個很好的例子，它不僅僅是一個支付系統，還是一個金融信息傳輸系統，而且其影響力正在不斷擴大。此外，俄羅斯的SPFS（金融信息傳輸系統）也為中國銀行提供了進入俄羅斯市場的機會。儘管一些中國銀行可能會擔憂美國的“次級制裁”，但仍然有一些願意承擔更高風險的銀行願意使用這一系統。

美元在國際金融體系中仍然佔據重要地位。對中國企業來説同樣如此，許多中國企業在國際貿易中廣泛使用美元，中國銀行也依賴美元進行交易。人民幣的國際化是中國的一個重要目標，中國的外交政策一直明確表示，中國並不打算破壞全球化。全球化對中國是有利的，中國為什麼要破壞它呢？中國提出了“一帶一路”倡議、全球安全倡議等政策，這些並不與全球化進程相矛盾。

2023年在北京召開的中國國際金融展上，跨境銀行間支付清算有限責任公司攜其最新產品服務亮相，對外傳遞人民幣跨境基礎設施建設新進展（圖源：南方都市報）

從這個角度來看，美方主導的全球金融體系政治化的風險依然存在，這不僅是對俄羅斯的挑戰，對中國也是如此。因此，理性的選擇是通過發展替代機制來規避這些風險；我們不只是為了對抗美國而對抗美國，如果有合作的空間，我們當然應該與西方國家合作。

然而，一旦涉及政治化、利益歧視，甚至干涉中國內政的問題，例如香港、新疆和西藏，包括美國借這些議題實施制裁。但這些是中國的內政，與美國無關。這關乎中國的國家政策，為什麼要讓其他國家來指手畫腳？

我們還記得，美國曾威脅對與香港問題相關的中國銀行實施金融制裁。從政治上講，這完全是不可接受的。最終，美國並沒有付諸行動，因為中國太強大了，他們害怕中國的反制。但即便如此，國際金融體系被政治化的風險依然存在，我們必須為這種情況做好準備。過去三年的經驗對中國和俄羅斯來説，都是一次深刻的教訓。

2024年11月5日，第七屆中國國際進口博覽會在上海開幕（圖源：新華社）

目前，中國在工業領域越來越不依賴外國供應商。中國正在逐步實現工業品和技術的自主化。當中國決定與某個外國夥伴合作時，不需要去華盛頓申請許可，也不需要獲得授權來向俄羅斯供應某些產品。中國有自己的技術，且自主技術的產品清單正在不斷擴大。

**韓樺：**沒錯，但中國一直都非常謙遜。三年前，我們唯一的短板可能是高科技產業，比如芯片。而現在，我們已經在這方面取得了許多突破。我能想到的最後一個領域可能就是大飛機，比如商用大型客機，但我們在這個方向上也在迅速推進。

伊萬·季莫菲耶夫在2025中俄三亞對話上發言（圖源：北京對話）

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**中國人的謙遜和低調是值得高度尊敬的，這也是中華民族的文化特質之一。我曾與許多中國朋友討論過技術和金融話題，他們總是説：“是的，我們取得了一些成功，但我們仍然需要向美國學習。美國在某些領域仍然很強大，我們應該去看看他們在做什麼，並借鑑他們的成功經驗。”

這種戰略非常理智——你在取得成功的同時，依然保持開放的心態，不會自滿，也不會關上學習的大門。你始終保持謙遜，繼續學習。這種文化傳統在當今這個充滿不確定性的世界中，是非常寶貴的競爭力。

**韓樺：**謝謝您的評價！所以，您也應該繼續學習中文哦！

**伊萬·季莫菲耶夫：**是的，我“應該學習漢語（這部分為中文原話）”。

以下為採訪原文：

Helen:What do you make of the most recent breakdown between Zelensky with President Trump and JD Vance?

Ivan Timofeev：Of course, what we see is completely different to what we got used to. It’s a very unusual situation, taking into account the recent 3 years of extensive support by the US and US allies towards Ukraine. Now, the new president has a completely different view that peace is demanded, he is not going to tolerate the situation where his junior partner raises his conditions. The point is that if you’re a junior partner, then you should follow the line of the senior partner. If the senior partner changes its mind, you should change your mind as well. In that meeting in the White House, the word should was changed into the word must.

That was quite a significant diplomatic defeat for Volodymir Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, which would probably undermine significantly his positions in Ukraine at home.

So we will see what would be the further consequences for the peace settlement in Ukraine. How fast would it happen for the conflict is still quite complicated. The negotiation positions of the US and Russia are still not clear, taking the into account that the negotiations are on the very start. But what we see is quite bad news for the leader of Ukraine.

Helen：Given you have been against the Ukraine war before and after February 2022, how have you opinions and comments evolved during the past 3 years?

Ivan Timofeev：You see, I was very concerned by the military development due to very different reasons. One of them was the risks of further escalation in relations between Russia and the West. This local conflict could turn into something bigger. At some points, we were close to this escalation when the West supplied mid-range cruise missiles to Ukraine. Russia used intermediate range missile against Ukraine. So quite a dangerous situation.

One other reason was that there was a huge risk of economic deterioration. There, I was happy that the negative forecasts on the economic situation, both in Russia and globally, it did not come true. On the one hand, Russia showed significant resilience to the economic pressure. On the other hand, we managed to avoid global energy crisis, food security crisis, et cetera.

Now, what is advisable? What is reasonable is to use this opportunity in Russia US relations to stop the military conflict. But at the same time, this resolution must take into account their conditions which provoke this conflict. It should take into account the demands of Russia. Otherwise, we will hardly avoid the new conflict in the future.

Helen：What are the demands from Russia, in your opinion?

Ivan Timofeev：One of the major demands is the non-aligned status of Ukraine. It’s demilitarization in a sense that it shouldn’t be a weapon in the hands of the Western partners of Kiev and should not pose a threat to Russia in its closest neighborhood.

One other thing is about people, respect to the diversity of the population, with respect to the linguistic diversity, with zero tolerance to radical nationalism. There is praise of those who cooperated with Nazi Germany during the second world war; there should be zero tolerance to the falsification of history, including the history of the second world war.

In sum this is the non-aligned, the neutrality, the demilitarization, the issue of radical nationalism and the respect to diversity of the population of Ukraine, I see it in this way, probably we will see another least list by Russian official diplomacy. This is just my expert opinion.

Helen：I believe some of the demands will be proposed. How do you envision the demands or the negotiation process down the road, first between Russia and the United States? There is more than Ukraine crisis between Russia and the United States, a lot of topics will be covered between your diplomatic channels.

Ivan Timofeev：The process may be quite complicated, because the conflict is complex, and this is not just about Ukraine. This is also about wider security architecture and the shortcomings of this architecture. There, by the way, it was from the very start of the conflict the point of the Chinese diplomacy, which stressed the shortcomings of European security architecture, which was one of the factors which actually neglected the security interests of Russia, which undermined the principle of indivisible security.

The long-term settlement demands progress in the realm of wider security framework.

We have already seen in the media that there may be several parameters of this settlement, including the elections in Ukraine, which may be an important internal policy prerequisite for further political development around this conflict. Their discussion on the territorial division line takes into account the status quo on the ground and take into account the demands on Russia on the one hand, the military situation in the field, and the discussion of political parameters like the nonaligned status of Ukraine, its relations with NATO. We know that the one of the demands of Russia is the non-membership of Ukraine in NATO.

European allies of Ukraine and Ukraine itself may try to promote the idea of the presence on the territory of Ukraine of foreign troops, which would guarantee the security. But this is and an unacceptable proposal for Russia, because that would mean that Ukraine will be occupied by foreign troops, regardless of the reason. Any so-called peacekeeping mission demands the agreement, the support of the UN security council and of the wider international community.

The west cannot substitute the international community. The west is big, it’s influential, but it’s not the international community. It cannot provide the widest mandate for peacekeeping operation. The only legitimate source of peacekeeping operations is the United Nations, taking into account the Russian position, Chinese position, would hardly adopt the emergence of any western contingent on the territory of Ukraine.

Trump is quite transparent and blunt on the issue, saying that he will not support militarily the European forces if they are in a clash with Russians within this mission. So Americans are not supportive. And this is rather good and bad, because this emergence of foreign troops in Ukraine may cause further escalation and direct clash between Russia and NATO, which is not a reasonable scenario.

That’s why we began about my perception of risks connected to this military conflict. And as I mentioned, the major risk was the escalation of the local conflict to a greater class between Russia and NATO to the third world war, actually. If the western forces emerge in Ukraine, this would make this risk remain on table.

Helen：You actually mentioned the food crisis, energy crisis, as top concerns of not having the Ukraine war in the first place. So would some economic concerns, some humanitarian assistance be one of the parameters of resolving this crisis in the longer term?

Ivan Timofeev：This is an important question. One of the issues is restoration of international supply chains, distorted by sanctions and distorted by restrictive measures. I wouldn’t say that they play a critical role now. Russia and its partners managed to bypass these sanctions. It must be stated that West itself provided humanitarian exemptions to sanctions. So to a large extent, the world managed to avoid the humanitarian impacts of this conflict on food security and energy security.

But on the other hand, there is another humanitarian issue. This is the issue of overcoming the consequences of war in Ukraine and in those Russian regions which suffered from the war and from this military conflict. I mean demining, I mean restoration of the infrastructure, help to those who lost their relatives on both sides. By the way, this would be a huge burden for both economies, for both Ukrainian and Russians.

Helen：Which leads deeper to your expertise in the economic field. How has Russia managed to keep its economy running and resilient under Western sanctions, in general? And at the same time, what has been some of the challenges, for example, with inflation and others down the road? And what do you think of some of the proposal during the Riyadh meeting about Western investment resumption, and its impact on Chinese investment in Russia?

Ivan Timofeev：The resilience of the Russian economy turned to be a surprise, even to Russians themselves; to a large extent, this was the result of preparatory work conducted by the bank of Russia, by the government of Russia.

Several years prior to the special military preparation in Ukraine, we created our own system of financial messaging, our own payment system. We became independent on the Western-led services in this area, which allowed us to maintain financial stability after emergence of this sanctions tsunami.

On the other hand, we managed to rebuild quickly our own industry in a number of areas, especially in the military, in the dual use product productions. Our trade ties with China and other friendly states, but considerably with China, also helped to diminish the shocks connected to trade and to imports, including of consumption goods. China kept an unbiased and objective position, China is not a part of military alliances, and it didn’t take any side in the military sense. But China has never distorted the market relations between our countries due to sanctions and even promoted the development of these relations under this sanctions war. And it was one of the critical factors. China turned out to be an important market for our commodities and for the goods which were kicked out from European and American markets; both China and India, by the way, India also played a major role in buying our oil and other commodities.

These were the major factors of resilience: good preparation, well crisis management by the government; by the way, the market structure of Russian economy, when entrepreneurs were responsible for themselves, they didn’t wait for the help from above. And good diplomacy, most of all our relations with China.

As for the prospects of Western investments to the Russian economy, we should be cautious about this. First of all, in legal sense, these investments are still prohibited. In terms of US law, no new investment is possible to Russia, so these are just preliminary discussions, observations, et cetera.

If there is peace in Ukraine, on conditions which is satisfactory to all sides, and for us, the Russian interests are a priority. If this meets Russian interests, then it’s reasonable to expect that some sanctions may be revoked, though we should be very cautious about this, because these revocations may be temporary, they may be rather in the logic of exemptions, but not long-term revocation of legal mechanisms, so we will leave this sanctions framework for quite a long time. This would mean that so some Western investments may emerge, may loom on the horizon if these exemptions on investment bans happen, but this sanctions framework will be a long-term risk.

Anyway, even if these investments occur, this is not a challenge for China at all. China emerged on the Russian market as a very strong player, and it will be very hard to anyone to outplay China on the Russian market.

Helen：I think both China and Russia mean have to face a two Wests. One is the United States, which probably will lift sanctions to some extent. But the European side will stick to those sanctions. So how should we deal with that?

Ivan Timofeev：You are absolutely right. If you look at recent sanctions, the European Union imposed its 16th package at the 3 years anniversary of the start of special military operation. But US abstained from sanctions. So we may see the situation where some allies are using sanctions, but the US is not.

I would say that, taking into account the centrality of the US in the international financial system, for us, US sanctions are more critical than European sanctions. If Europeans continue sanctions, this is less a problem than the reverse situation, where United States keep their sanctions and Europeans are revoking them.

And for Russia-China cooperation, US sanctions are much more critical than EU sanctions, because Chinese financial community is more concerned about US secondary sanctions than EU sanctions. If Americans are reducing, at least to some extent, this risk of financial sanctions, then Chinese financial community will be more favorable to promote cooperation and provide financial services to the trade between China and Russia.

Ivan Timofeev：We hope so. Yes. At some point, there might be talks regarding the BRICS currency or BRICS financial settlement, because Trump on one side may be resuming some of the discussions and negotiations with Russia, but he’s so hostile towards a BRICS system, a BRICS currency.

Helen：But Russia, on the other hand, is strongly supportive of a BRICS currency. So down the road, what’s your take on that?

Ivan Timofeev：Yes, Russia is a proponent of diversification of the international financial system. I must say that this is not just the Russian position, this is the position of India. By the way, India enjoys strong relations with the United States, and it enjoys globalization, but still, they are not against the diversification of international finance, understanding that monopoly is not the best way to do things.

China did a lot to preserve its own financial system and market from sanctions and from foreign interference. China is promoting yuan as a way for transactions. Yuan is still not a challenge to the US dollar, the share of yuan is not huge, and Chinese people’s bank is quite cautious, avoiding acceleration this promotion of the yuan, trying to bolster this process with real economy and real economic affairs. Trying to cross the river, keeping in mind the rocks, step by step. It’s a reasonable strategy.

Keeping this in mind, I do not think that the emergence of BRICS currency is a realistic scenario in the near future, not even in mid-term future, who would nominate this currency, how will it work, what would be the basis for this currency? It is still rather an idea than a practical solution.

In this sense, Trump is excessively alarmed, in my view. On the other hand, he understands that new centers of economy are emerging, that this is a challenge to the United States, and he will be quite assertive. In his first months of presidency, he avoided strong words in relations to China, but in his first term, he was quite aggressive. It’s not a secret that he regards China as the major challenge, the threat to the US. So we’ll see how he conducts his policy vis a vis Beijing.

Helen：For China and Russia, we attach great important to the bilateral relations, not only from the government level, but from academic, from other aspects of life. For Trump, my understanding is that he does not want to waste so much time, so much energy on Ukraine crisis. He has a lot more to do within the country.

So we know that prediction is really hard nowadays, but I still want you to predict, because his major objective is to deal with the Wall Street, not to put so much energy in the Ukraine crisis. He just wants to end it as soon as possible. So what’s his policy?

Ivan Timofeev：He is looking at the future, not to the past. We may like Trump, we may dislike him. But what is clear is that the Cold War is a matter of the past and current Ukrainian crisis is the legacy of the Cold War. This is crystal clear. In a sense, we are still in this echo of the cold war.

For Trump, this is a matter of the past, but not a matter of the future. He tries to get rid of the outlays which relate to this past, and concentrate on the future. Indeed, he understands that in the conflict in Ukraine, he has no prospect of military victory over Russia. It’s impossible to prevail over Russia at this current moment, and the further supplies of missiles to Ukraine would generate this dangerous situation, which I mentioned, at the beginning of our conversation, alarmed me pre-war to this military conflict.

He is looking at the future, he has a business background. He understands that this is a loss of money, hundreds of billions of dollars, which could be spent on the infrastructure in the US, on roads, airports, on modernization, whatever. These are not peanuts. These are big money. He just wants to save them and to redirect them. The question is, what would be the new direction.

Helen：From your expertise, if you can advise Trump regarding handling the domestic economic situation, what would be the advice you give to him?

Ivan Timofeev：I’m not an American, although I have been studying America for quite a long time. It’s hard to make an advice for him. You see that the US is a rich country, it’s a major economy. But still, inequality is still one of the problems, which is much more than in China, for instance, or in Russia. Though, this is not a Republican agenda to support the public services, to support the medical services for people, the education, et cetera, and Trump is Republican, this is not his agenda.

Still, as a Russian, as a citizen of the country where such services for people are important, I would probably, in my ideal world, these resources might be spent on people and their lives, education, health, et cetera, than on their military affairs. We’ll see, but American people know better what to do with their country. We know better what to do at our homes.

Helen：Going back to Trump, China and Russia relations. Do you think that Trump might request Russia to stop using the RMB in its trade? And how might Russia respond to such a potential request?

Ivan Timofeev：Even if he demands this, I wouldn’t say that this is doable. We already have quite a huge share of yuan in our trade. Getting back to some of the questions which I got from some of my Chinese counterparts, I would say that we will have this fear of deterioration of market relations for a long time; after this sanctions tsunami, it’s very hard to believe that everything will be okay, and we shouldn’t be prepared for another politicization, for another round of conflict.

This would mean that, for Moscow, it is reasonable to still hedge the risks, to still preserve its sovereignty over economic transactions and to have diversified means of trade, especially with China. Why should we use American currency in our bilateral relations? We should use our national currencies, Yuan and rubles. It’s more reasonable.

We should explore more opportunities in this new system provided by both by China and Russia: CIPS is a great thing. It’s not just a payment system; it’s also a messaging system. And it is increasingly popular. Russian SPFS system of messaging also provides opportunities for Chinese banks to get in. Though the Chinese banks may be afraid of secondary sanctions, but still they have this opportunity. There may be some banks with higher appetite to risk could use this system.

The dollar is inevitably important in international finance. It’s important for Chinese business, which uses dollar extensively, Chinese banks are using dollar extensively. This is the interest of China to use the Dollar, but by the way, Chinese diplomacy is very clear that China is not going to undermine globalization. Globalization is beneficial for China, so why should China ruin what is beneficial for everyone? Though, China has its own projects, like Belt and Road, like global security initiative, but it does not contradict the globalization process.

In this sense, the risks to politicization of US-led system will remain both for Russia and for China. It’s reasonable to mitigate these risks, to work on alternative for mechanism, not just to fight against America for the sake of the fight against America. That’s not the reason. When it’s reasonable, when we can cooperate with Western partners, we should cooperate.

But when it comes to politicization and to discrimination of our interests or the interference into our domestic affairs, like Hong Kong, like Xinjiang, like Tibet, we see sanctions of the US on these issues. This is not the issue of the US, this is an internal issue of China. This is your country and your people, it’s your policy. Why should someone else dictate to you what to do?

As we remember, Americans threatened the financial sanctions against banks who are connected to the situation in Hong Kong. Politically speaking, this is in intolerable. They didn’t take a risk to do this, because China is too strong. They were afraid of the retaliation, that you will push back.

But still, this very threat of politicization of international finance remains. And we should be ready to this scenario. Last 3 years is a big lesson, not just to Russia, but to China as well.

Helen：Yes, always be prepared and become more resilient.

Ivan Timofeev：Yes, just be resilient and be self-confident, respecting others, no problem, and cooperating with others, but having an opportunity to do it on your own.

Helen：Yeah, this is a part of the principles of Chinese diplomacy. But we just need to carry out in a more sophisticated way.

Ivan Timofeev：Yeah, and China can afford this. China is a universe. China is so separate; it’s a world in the world. By the way, that’s why this national currency trade makes sense for China and Russia, due to the simple fact that Russia can buy everything in China, because China produces everything. If you have for yuan, you can buy whatever you want.

This is not the case in the trade with other friendly countries, which have less diversified economy, which are less developed in terms of industry, so we are much more limited in terms of the use of national currencies, we will inevitably have disbalances in trade.

One other thing is that China is increasingly independent of foreign suppliers in terms of industry. China increasingly has its own industrial goods, technologies, et cetera. When deciding on cooperation with foreign partners, China should not go to Washington and apply for a license and permission to supply something to Russia, China has its own. And the list of the products which it has on its own is increasing.

Helen：Yes. But China is being so humble. 3 years ago, the only missing puzzle might be in the high tech industry, like the chips. Nowadays, we have so many breakthroughs. They only thing I can think is the aircrafts, the big commercial jetliners, but we are moving so fast towards this direction as well.

Ivan Timofeev：Chinese people are humble and modest, which is a part of the national character which deserves high respect. I talked many times with my Chinese friends on technology and finance, they say that, yes, we got some success, but still we need to learn from Americans in this and that, they are still strong in this and that, and we should go there and look at what they are doing. We should learn their competent practices.

This is a reasonable strategy where you achieve success, but you are not closing doors. You are not proud of yourself. You still keep this pen in the pocket, writing and learning from others. This is an essential part legacy of your culture, of your civilization, which is a huge competence in such turbulent times.

Helen：Thank you for saying so, so just keep learning Chinese.

Ivan Timofeev：I should，應該學習漢語.

俄羅斯國際事務委員會（RIAC，全稱Russian International Affairs Council）成立於2010年，是俄羅斯最具影響力的外交與國際關係智庫之一。RIAC致力於推動國際政策研究、促進全球對話，匯聚政府官員、學者及外交專家，就地緣政治、安全、經濟合作等議題提供政策建議。該委員會與全球知名智庫廣泛合作，旨在提升俄羅斯在國際事務中的影響力，並促進國際社會對俄羅斯外交政策的理解與互動。