Search results

Cooperation in agriculture and agricultural products trade is a new driving force for Sino-Russian cooperation in economy and trade in recent years. Driven by the interests and needs of both countries, a Free Trade Zone (FTZ) on the Chinese territory facing Russia, the Heilongjiang FTZ, has been established, and agricultural cooperation has attracted much attention within the FTZ framework. This chapter aims to analyze and explain the prospects of Sino-Russian agricultural cooperation under the framework of the Heilongjiang FTZ based on the current situations of cooperation. The author concludes that the Heihe and Suifenhe Areas in Heilongjiang FTZ are developed with a focus on Sino-Russian agricultural cooperation. This chapter is innovative because it combined the traditional research perspective on Sino-Russian agricultural cooperation with that under the FTZ framework. The author thinks that to facilitate the cooperation between the two countries in agriculture under the FTZ, the two governments must cooperate more extensively. Besides, they need to discuss the establishment of infrastructures like a joint agricultural product R&D centre and a digital development centre for agriculture. Meanwhile, the schemes of dispute settlement and risk-sharing should be addressed as well.

Geographic periphery regions are the focus of sustainable regional development research, with ongoing discussions on core–periphery relationships to address economic disadvantage and remoteness. However, periphery regions face challenges due to the high efficiency of core regions. Tourism provides an alternative economic landscape, revitalizing stagnant sectors and driving strategic exploration. The Sino-Russian border, spanning 4,209 km, represents a periphery where tourism plays a vital role. This chapter views Sino-Russian cross-border tourism through the lens of the core–periphery model, suggests two conceptual models of developing experiential cores in the cross-border areas of geographic peripheries, and argues for peripheries' potential to become sustainable experiential cores post COVID-19.

On November 26, 1996, China and India signed the Agreement on Confidence-Building Measures in the Military Field along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas. It was a follow-up to the Agreement between India and China on the Maintenance of Peace and Tranquillity along the Line of Actual Control in the India-China Border Areas, signed on September 7, 1993. Signatories to the 1996 document agreed that neither side would use military capability against the other. No armed forces would be deployed by either side in the border areas along the line of actual control. Further, no military strength would be used by one side to attack the other or to engage in military activities that would threaten the other side or undermine the peace, tranquillity and stability in the India-China border areas. As part of the agreement, each side reconfirmed its determination to seek a fair, reasonable and mutually acceptable settlement of the border dispute. Each country also reaffirmed its commitment to respect strictly the line of actual control. Finally, each country reaffirmed that, in mutually agreed to geographical zones, it would reduce or limit military forces to levels compatible with friendly and good neighborly relations, consistent with the principle of mutual and equal security.