Two Years On, What is China's Role in the Russia-Ukraine War?

Putin and Xi. 

(Photo: The Quint)

Chinese President Xi Jinping has been invited to a peace summit to be hosted by Ukraine. In a recent interview with Reuters, the diplomatic adviser to President Zelenskyy, Ihor Zhovka, remarked, “We are definitely inviting China to participate in the summit, at the highest level. at the level of the President of the People's Republic of China’'. In the context of the “no limits” partnership with Russia, China’s manoeuvring around the conflict makes it an important negotiating element.

Last year, China elaborated its stance on the war with the presentation of a twelve-point document that reiterated Beijing’s allegiance to the UN charter and its condemnation of any attack on a state’s territorial sovereignty. While China had been active as a diplomatic broker in the conflict, the proposed peace plan reflected its complex regional interests. 

Many in the elite circles of Chinese diplomats do not view this invasion from a moral point of view. Chinese intellectuals are mostly united in demonising the United States as the biggest instigator of instability in the region. Many believe that America has been capitalising on the war in Ukraine to contain not only Russia but also China.

In addition, China being termed as a prominent security challenge in NATO’s Summit of 2022 in Madrid, further concretises the suspicion that similar motivations and threat perceptions can be applicable in the case of Europe in the context of China’s presence in the Indo-Pacific region. Therefore, its strategic relations with Russia are of great significance in navigating its intensifying competition with the United States. 

Washington has already accused Beijing of potentially delivering weapons to Russia. Apart from buying oil and gas from Russia, China’s supply of armed drones and other weapons to the Russian military will not allow it to become a trusted diplomat any time soon.

While it condemns the attack on Ukrainian sovereignty and breaches of international law, China has argued that NATO’s expansion in Eastern Europe has been the immediate trigger of the war. It condemned “the Cold War mentality” and argued that the responsibility lies with the US and NATO for deteriorating the security environment. Beijing refuses to call it a war or an invasion, instead using the word “crisis”.

Two things are important in understanding the intention behind China's interest in the war’s end. The first one is in congruence with the global economic outlook of the war, where the war has significantly deteriorated Sino-European relations and Xi’s flagship project, the Belt Road Initiative (BRI) project remains stagnated in Europe. In addition, the rumours of regime change in Russia and the future of Putin’s government in the prospect of Russian defeat would be a diplomatic catastrophe for Beijing.

The second is that the diversion of international gaze to the Gaza War has made Beijing drop to a wait-and-see approach with respect to Ukraine. In one of her interactions with CNN, Yun Sun, Director of the China Program in Stimson Centre argued that “China previously might have wanted to mediate because it didn't want Russia to lose too badly. But now there is less worry on that front.” 

Given that the United States is distracted due to the situation in the Middle East, China remains less motivated to advance a peace deal on its own. Zelenskyy understands the diplomatic position countries like China hold as a mediating force with the United States seemingly disoriented by Gaza. While China tries to be a diplomatic alternative to the US in conflict resolution, its credibility, while navigating its pro-Russian neutrality., will be tested.

(Upamanyu Basu is an Assistant Professor of Political Science in Manav Rachna International Institute of Research and Studies, India. He is currently pursuing his doctorate from National University of Juridical Sciences. He also serves as a non-resident fellow in International Development and Security Cooperation, the Philippines. He writes on Indian foreign policy and South Asian politics. This is an opinion piece and the views expressed are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for them.)