China’s increasingly evident role in the
Ukraine
conflict makes it impossible to ignore that this year-old war is truly global and that Beijing has consistently supported Moscow. Fulsome “expert” commentary, however, assured us that
China
wanted to distance itself from Russia. The invasion disturbed China, they said; China was pressuring the Kremlin behind the scenes, they said; China sought a peaceful solution, they said.
This was all nonsense.
Secretary of State
Antony Blinken’s
recent warning that Chinese President Xi Jinping might imminently ship weapons to Russia therefore surprised and alarmed those gulled into complacency as an apparent shift in Chinese policy. What was actually surprising was how long it took the Biden administration to admit the evidence of overt and covert support already supplied by Beijing. Public data alone show China has significantly increased purchases of Russian oil and natural gas, almost certainly even more if clandestine shipments are included, thus providing critical cash to mitigate Western sanctions. Moreover, Moscow’s sanctioned financial institutions have almost certainly been laundering funds through China’s opaque banking system into global channels. China could easily be helping facilitate the delivery of arms shipments from the likes of North Korea and Iran. There is probably more, all of which gives the lie to any notion China was standoffish toward its junior entente partner.
Chairman of the Central Foreign Affairs Commission Wang Yi’s recent offer in Munich to draft a peace plan for Ukraine must therefore be seen merely as China’s most visible manifestation of information warfare supporting its beleaguered partner. The West should have been alarmed when Russian President Vladimir Putin and Xi agreed on Feb. 4, 2022, that their countries enjoyed “friendship without limits.” This bilateral entente, if not yet a full-fledged “pact of steel,” is progressing well beyond mere diplomatic rhetoric. Today, China is the dominant partner, unlike the reverse during the Cold War. The Kremlin’s line to the West has been that there is no danger in increasing collaboration with China, which shows either Moscow’s extraordinary shortsightedness, or falling for its own propaganda.
PUTIN SAYS HE EXPECTS XI TO VISIT MOSCOW AS HE MEETS WITH CHINA’S TOP DIPLOMAT
Every element of China’s coming peace proposal should be read through China’s own prism, especially regarding Taiwan. Thus, Wang’s reference in Munich to respecting territorial integrity and “the sovereignty of all nations” is of no significance. Indeed, it differs little from his comments to Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba last September. Territorial integrity and sovereignty are in the eye of the beholder: Ask Wang what he thinks of Taiwan’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and he will insist it is a Chinese province. Putin could readily repeat Wang’s comments, replacing the relevant country names, and say exactly the same thing.
China will undoubtedly present its forthcoming position paper as “balanced,” but it will fully suit the Kremlin. For example, it may call for a “ceasefire in place,” which sounds superficially evenhanded. In fact, any internationally recognized pause in combat will benefit Russia more than Ukraine because it is Russia that most needs the breathing space. China’s ploy may also “coincidentally” follow a supposedly imminent Russian offensive, allowing Putin to claim graciously that he halted his forces even though they were advancing.
Beijing could propose immediate, face-to-face, bilateral negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow. Today, neither side wants to ask first for talks for fear of signaling weakness, especially Putin. Nor does Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky want negotiations, at least until his forces have made significantly greater territorial gains. Being “cornered” into talking primarily benefits Russia, as Kremlin propagandists spin “jaw jawing” rather than combat more to their advantage, at least among nervous NATO members.
China might also suggest that, for “humanitarian” reasons, all sanctions, embargoes, or other trade constraints against both sides be suspended for at least 90 days or while “good faith” negotiations continue. Here again, Russia would be the big winner, notwithstanding the proposal’s evenhanded appearance. A related gambit might be asking that weapons shipments to both belligerents be paused for the same period, which would clearly harm Ukraine more.
We should assume that Wang’s forthcoming handiwork was drafted with Russia or that Moscow at least cleared it in advance. By playing the game of “moral equivalence,” which much of the world would swallow, China would dramatically bolster the Kremlin. If Putin accepted China’s terms immediately while decrying their burdens on Russia’s suffering civilians, Zelensky might face European and U.S. pressure to accede as well, placing him in a politically difficult position at home and abroad. Notwithstanding this squeeze play, if Beijing’s proposal looks anything like these predictions, Ukraine should reject it flatly and explain why.
Sadly, the Ukraine war may well be far from over. No one should misunderstand China’s first major role in a European war, since China’s malign presence is what makes this a world war. Whether the war expands to include targets in Asia depends on defeating the Russian and Chinese collusion in Ukraine.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM RESTORING AMERICA
John Bolton was the national security adviser to former President Donald Trump between 2018 and 2019. Between 2005 and 2006, he was the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.
