High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / prediction

Published · transcript-backed

Sarah Paine: prediction

31 Oct 2025 Dwarkesh Podcast Sarah Paine — How Russia sabotaged China's rise

“In particular they want water because they’ve blown through their water table in North China.”

— Sarah Paine

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
Sarah Paine
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
prediction
Recorded
31 Oct 2025
Publisher
Dwarkesh Podcast

Transcript context

…all these little places lined up. You want to color it in. That’s where Ukraine comes in, in 2022. Putin wants to reverse all these territorial losses. He wants the green things and the purple things. I don’t know if he wants to do the Napoleonic Wars and go all the way to Paris. Who knows? Here’s how he looks at NATO or doesn’t look at it. You look at when people join. There are two great big periods of accession to NATO. One is in the early Cold War with all the smaller countries of Europe, which is everybody. We’re all smaller than Russia. The Europeans join to protect themselves from Soviet imperialism. Then at the end of the Cold War, when these Soviet satellites can finally slip the leash, I’ve given you all the reasons why, they stampede into NATO. It is not NATO tricking them to join. They’re stampeding in for excellent reasons. They’ve been proven right. Putin, when he works his magic the second time around in Ukraine in 2022, this is when the Finns and the Swedes decide neutrality’s not going to cut it and they’ve got to join NATO. But when Putin looks at this, he goes, “Oh, they’re coming at us in arcs.” Well, this is ludicrous. Russia has posed an existential threat to these places forever. No one today wants to invade Russia. Who’d want it? It’s full of Russians. We want them to stay home. There’s no one there who wants Russia. The Russians like to gaslight everybody else, like, “You’re the problem.” It’s been very effective. Lots of Americans will talk about NATO expansion and say, “Oh, this is why Putin went to Ukraine. You did NATO expansion.” He’s gaslighting everybody. Russians are the problem. Also it is their totally dysfunctional domestic system that offers everybody else nothing but problems. Instead of focusing on that and fixing it so they can be a productive member of the rest of the world, they’re not doing that. They’re just invading other people. Back to the real problem, what are the prospects of a bromance with these two? Barring World War III, which would be the great powers going at it… If the great powers go at it, you might well superglue these two. If that happens, whatever side is losing might well use a nuclear weapon, and then we’re going to have toxic plumes everywhere. So we had better get our diplomacy right because there are really serious consequences for getting it wrong in this particular era. We’re at the beginning of a second Cold War with a leadership that has not been chastened by surviving World War I, the Great Depression, and World War II. Which were the grownups who did a very effective job dealing with the early first Cold War. We haven’t got those people anymore. So if you look at primary adversaries, primary theaters, you don’t want them to align for your enemies, because if they do, they’ll coordinate. Currently, Vlad the Bad has a Ukraine fixation. Xi Jinping has got a Taiwan fixation, opposite ends of Eurasia. Xi Jinping is also causing India problems and doing South China Sea island building. But they’re on opposite ends of their two empires. So far, nothing aligns with these two. opposite ends of Eurasia. Xi Jinping is also causing India problems and doing South China Sea island building. But they’re on opposite ends of their two empires. So far, nothing aligns with these two. Even in a world war, their primary theaters probably would not align in the same way that the Axis primary theaters did not align. They might well disperse their resources in different directions. But the problem is we have a lot of people with nuclear weapons now. You really don’t want to do the hot war. If the West and others manage things correctly, I’ve given you a huge historical legacy of fraught relations. Play your cards appropriately and these two will take care of each other. The rest of us can, if we do it right, not launch trade wars on each other, but rather try to maximize our prosperity so that we get stronger and stronger while they’re busy in these wealth-destroying wars. Putin is just blowing through all of his assets in Ukraine to no purpose. That’s how we fought and won the last Cold War. Putin, he’s trying to do empire in the age of nationalism. It’s a non-starter. He’s dumping all of his ordnance on Ukraine, leaving Siberia wide open. Xi Jinping has moved right in even before the Ukraine war. The Belt and Road Initiative is peeling away the former Russian sphere of influence in Central Asia. Putin is doing this hot war gambit when Russia’s weak and China is strong, making it particularly damaging. Why would it matter? Siberia has precisely the resources that China now needs and covets and wants to have them contiguous so other people can’t mess with them. In particular they want water because they’ve blown through their water table in North China. Lake Baikal has over 20% of the world’s surface fresh water. So if you want a quick fix, it’s the best one. China is known for big water projects. They’ve been damming the Mekong and the Yangtze. They’ve done massive water projects. So that may be in Russia’s future. Who knows? Xi Jinping now holds all of the cards. China has nine times the population, nine times the GNP of Russia, and their per capita GNPs are converging. Not good news for Putin. The question isn’t whether this bromance is going to last forever, but rather when it’s going to end. When is Xi Jinping going to decide he’s got the right amount of leverage to get whatever it is he wants? What’s going on now illustrates the perils of getting your primary adversary wrong. Nicholas II fought a recreational war against Japan, the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905. He is pouring resources into really an irrelevant theater in those days, instead of taking those resources and putting it into a railway system that European Russia desperately needed to face off Germany, which it does within the decade and loses. He is overthrown in part because of bread riots in St. Petersburg, because no foreign aid can get in, because he has inadequate railway system. They’ll be built later and it’ll be good for Lend-Lease. So he and his family wind up shot in a Siberian basement. It takes a decade to play out. I don’t know how it’s going to go for Vladimir Putin on all of this. If we play our cards right, maybe he’ll go down as lonesome. ly wind up shot in a Siberian basement. It takes a decade to play out. I don’t know how it’s going to go for Vladimir Putin on all of this. If we play our cards right, maybe he’ll go down as lonesome. We may have to wait a long time. On the other hand, if we get into a hot war, nuclear war, and in the meantime, if the United States kills off its alliance system which is one of its greatest strengths, by doing a gratuitous trade war on our allies, then we have a dust-up with China… Well, let’s think about this. Japan tried this go-it-alone, my-way-or-the-highway strategy with China back in World War II, when China was a failed state, and it wrecked Japan. China now has a population that’s a multiple of ours, an industrial base that’s a multiple of ours. Why on earth would you ever want to take them on alone? So I’m going to quote Pericles, who was the leader of Athens at its height when it was building all these ancient ruins that weren’t ruins when they were being built. They’re gone. This warning came on the eve of the succession of Athenian blunders and ancient Athens never recovered: “I am more afraid of our own blunders than of the enemy’s devices.” Our leaders truly need to ponder this before they wreck all of us, themselves included. So thank you for your attention. That’s what I have to say about Sino-Soviet things.…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.

Search evidence