The Chinese delegation to the EU opposed the expansion of NATO.

According to Beijing, "NATO expansion will not help ensure security and stability in the world", on the contrary, such attempts by the alliance "only contribute to the formation of political blocs and the emergence of confrontation in the military sphere."

Further, as usual, “we call on NATO to abandon the thinking and ideology of the Cold War, to show respect for the sovereignty, security and interests of other countries, for the differences in their civilizations, history and cultures”, while the alliance “must make more efforts to strengthen interstate trust, truly protect regional peace and stability.”

Such an exhortation, despite its exemplary meekness, hardly anyone in Brussels liked.

Both in the international department of the regional committee (responsible - comrade Borrell), and in the military (responsible - comrade Stoltenberg).

However, Stoltenberg is now being transferred to another front of work, he will have to deal with the Norwegian krone, and as NATO Secretary General he only sits out until autumn.

His activity has fallen sharply - and who is particularly interested in Stoltenberg now?

He can only repeat that the doors of NATO are open to all countries of good will, so Comrade.

Borrell has to work for himself and for that guy.

Even before the meek statement of the Chinese comrades about NATO, Borrell (as if staring into the water), assessing the Olympic gatherings in Beijing of Xi Jinping and V.V.

Putin, noted that “a joint statement by China and Russia, which the West did not particularly notice in the situation in Ukraine, could become the basis for a powerful alliance of two authoritarian regimes,” adding that now Moscow and Beijing “oppose democracy as authoritarian, not communist regimes, as it was before, during the Cold War.

The joint opposition to democracy within the framework of the common communist ideology actually ended more than 60 years ago - in the early 60s of the 20th century.

Since then, for many decades, Moscow and Beijing, if opposed to democracy, were very, very apart.

But the point is not even on what ideological platform they oppose, but what is the mutual coordination of the "powerful alliance" and whether it exists at all.

An alliance (fr. alliance) is an alliance that implies well-known formalized obligations of the participants.

Whereas the Chinese comrades, most likely, would begin to roll out claims to Brussels, regardless of alliances and misalliances, but simply because NATO began to strongly violate the red lines not only in Europe and not only in the North Atlantic, which were initially declared the sphere of action of this military block.

China has also tolerated NATO intervention in Iraq.

Then he was much weaker in military and other respects, and in general Iraq is far away.

But when the North Atlantic Alliance began to operate (so far at the level of maneuvers, but the trouble has begun) also in the Asia-Pacific region - ships of NATO countries, and not only American ones, are actively involved in naval activity in Southeast Asia - China finds that this is already too much and it is time to express their concern (simply speaking, dissatisfaction) with the fact that NATO is climbing into places extremely remote from the North Atlantic.

Such concerns do not require being an authoritarian state (although China is) and in agreement with Russia, which is concerned about the same (although there is some agreement).

And perhaps the most important emphasis in the Chinese statement is that, in the opinion of the PRC, "the North Atlantic Alliance should truly protect regional peace and stability."

And the region in which they should be protected (Europe) is very far from those places where NATO attempts are also observed.

That is, translated from diplomatic language into everyday language - "do not go where you are not asked and where you have absolutely nothing to do."

It is doubtful that the North Atlantic allies will immediately be ashamed and crawl out - they were not attacked.

But the Chinese comrades have a good memory.

If they show something to other countries or a group of countries, they, as a rule, do not forget it.

The point of view of the author may not coincide with the position of the editors.