While Russia cuts more and more timber for export to China. In return for the support in the war (drone components, etc) China asks for even more and more timber and fresh water from Baikal.
While Russia cuts more and more timber for export to China. In return for the support in the war (drone components, etc) China asks for even more and more timber and fresh water from Baikal.
The same article says Russia is on 2nd place in reforestation. They do export timber and can export more, while increasing the share of sustainably managed forests. But export of Baikal fresh water? That’s fake news. Didn’t happen and won’t happen, unless you mean just some bottled water.
>The same article says Russia is on 2nd place in reforestation.
Reforestation alone doesn't matter. What matters is total result of deforestation and reforestation. Russia reforests only about 1Mha/year :
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1059300/russia-reforeste...
while the total resulting loss is
https://www.globalforestwatch.org/dashboards/country/RUS/?ca...
"In 2020, Russia had 748 Mha of natural forest, extending over 44% of its land area. In 2024, it lost 5.59 Mha of natural forest, equivalent to 816 Mt of CO₂ emissions."
>But export of Baikal fresh water? That’s fake news. Didn’t happen and won’t happen
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/07/parched-chines...
in Russian, that another waterpipeline - from river Ob' was approved at some Russian Parliament "roundtable on strategic projects with China and Kazakhstan".
https://topwar.ru/159671-bajkal-xxi-veka-druzhba-druzhboj-a-...
and there were strong leaks, not officially dispelled, that Baikal water was raised during the most recent Putin/Xi meeting.
Regarding your Global Forest Watch source I recommend to look below the tagline. The numbers that you picked have very specific meaning and the same page says that most of the loss (ca.75%) was due to wildfires and it grew more forest than it was lost due to logging. When including the loss for wildfires, the total balance is negligibly negative.
Regarding you Guardian and Topwar links, you are citing the sources that speculate about rumors about some science fiction projects. Russia does not export water from Baikal or Ob River and won’t export it.
>Regarding you Guardian and Topwar links, you are citing the sources that speculate about rumors about some science fiction projects. Russia does not export water from Baikal or Ob River and won’t export it.
Official state news https://ria.ru/20160503/1425318933.html
"Moscow invited Bejing to discuss fresh water transfer project from Russia to China - stated the Russian Minister of Agriculture"
and the further description of the proposed project is exactly the second project described in the topwar link.
One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact. The fact is, nothing did happen, there’s no export of fresh water and there’s no such plans.
>One article in propaganda outlet from 2016 doesn’t count as fact.
It isn't article itself that counts here. The official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture is the fact here. Whereis you so far stated only your personal opinion.
>there’s no such plans
You contradict the above mentioned official statement of the Russian Minister of Agriculture.
Russian government officials said many bizarre things in the past which never materialized. This is one of them. This guy lost his government job in 2018 after drinking champagne on a private jet and making toast to agricultural lobby. If you still insist this thing is real, you should prove it with specific parameters of this project. Construction start, volume, length of pipe etc.
>Russian government officials said many bizarre things in the past which never materialized.
some materialized, some haven't.
>This is one of them.
how would we know that? For example, nuclear powered cruise missile is beyond bizarre, yet they did it. Water transfer project is much more practical thing (and they already do have oil transfer pipelines, so why would they not do a water pipeline - if anything, unlike the oil, the water is a renewable resource), and there has been official interest on both sides, and adding your bizarrity indicator - we can conclude it is much probable thing to happen than the missile.
>If you still insist this thing is real, you should prove it with specific parameters of this project. Construction start, volume, length of pipe etc.
Where that info would come from? I pointed officially available facts. You have so far provided only blind statement "it wouldn't happen" and no facts to counter my facts.
As it happens simple Google has even more facts, including info you've been asking for:
https://www.rbc.ru/business/16/05/2019/5cdbde629a7947f8534b0...
"The government will consider $88B water transfer project to China.
Russian MP Alexey Chepa asked to approve construction of the largest in the world water pipeline.
...
Government sent the project down to various government agencies for working out further details of the project.
...
first stage by 2026 - 1200-1500km, 600-700 millions m3/year. second stage by 2040 - 1.8-2.4B m3/year.
"
Kind reminder - this is not reddit.
>Are you from country 404 by any chance? Because that's how these posts read.
You may read it whatever way you like. If we look at the facts - statista and globalwatch is some Western sites/orgs, topwar is straight Russian and Guardian is Great Britain.
>Kind reminder - this is not reddit.
This is why you're using that offensive "404" notation (an expression of the Russian propaganda point that Ukraine isn't a sovereign independent state) when referring to Ukraine?
Well, they aren’t. Never have been and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc).
>Well, they aren’t. Never have been
Like Ukranians a number of nations - for example Hungarians, Chezh, Finnish, Latvians, Estonians, etc. - for centuries didn't have their own state and were parts of larger empires and got their own states only relatively recently.
Like any other, the Russian propaganda thrives on people's ignorance. In this case "Ukranian people and Ukraine don't exist and never have existed, it is just an inferior kind of Russians on historically Russian territory". That is why nor Russian textbooks nor wide Russian info space never mention the 1651 book by French engineer D'Beauplan "Description of Ukraine, a Province of the Kingdom of Poland situated between Moskovia and Transilvania" where he clearly describes in detail a separate Ukrainian ethnicity living on their own separate territory (which is pretty close to the territory of modern Ukraine. Also note that Russia din't even exist back then, it was just a "Moscovia" duchy).
>and never will be. Geopolitics is a ruthless game and those in the middle sometimes get crushed. Which is why you generally want natural borders (mountains, coast, etc).
The same applies to all the above mentioned nations, and this is why they joined NATO, and why Ukraine is trying to.
I don't think they're giving away the timber. It is a commercial exchange like any other.
Yes, it is a massive sale of natural resources with huge discounts in exchange for the war support.
What "war support"? China trades with Russia, as it does with Ukraine. It doesn't support a side in particular.
There are a lot of thing which are clearly "war support", yet it would be a long and frankly pointless discussion, so i'll just refer to China's own words:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/04/europe/china-ukraine-eu-war-i...
"Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told the European Union’s top diplomat that Beijing can’t accept Russia losing its war against Ukraine..."
Him or some other pointed out to some important EU person that if they (China, an industrial powerhouse) were actually supporting Russian war efforts, the war would already be over.
They've been selling forestry products for decades. North Korea is also a big customer. Unsurprisingly, nations with existing and exclusive economic ties, tend to "support" each other.
North America does this with South America readily.
Source for the discounts? (reddit and x are not a sources btw)
This would happen war or not. Btw, they sell the same off-the-shelf drone components to Ukraine and anyone else willing to pay for them.