My recent commentary, “Only China Can Stop Russia,” stirred up strong arguments on both sides of the increasingly contentious debate over the horrific war in Ukraine. While most in the West recognise the need for extraordinary actions in extraordinary times and agree that China has an important role to play in resolving the conflict, those sympathetic to Russia’s concerns over border security and NATO enlargement argue that China has no reason to weigh in. But both posed the obvious and important follow-up question: What exactly can China do to restore peace and stability to Ukraine?
China can take the initiative in three key areas. For starters, Chinese President Xi Jinping should call for an emergency summit of G20 leaders, focused on achieving an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in this conflict and developing an agenda for a negotiated peace. The G20 is now the recognised forum for global action in the midst of crisis, having galvanised support among the world’s leading economies in late 2008 for a coordinated response to the global financial crisis. Both China and Russia are members, so the G20 can play a similar role today. As a demonstration of his personal commitment to this effort, Xi should break his post-pandemic lockdown protocol (he has not left China in 24 months) and attend the meeting in person – as should Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Second, China can contribute substantially to humanitarian assistance. With children comprising at least half of the more than two million refugees from Ukraine (a number projected to rise quickly to at least four million), the need for humanitarian support directed at neighboring host countries is unquestionably acute. China should make a no-strings-attached donation of $50 billion to UNICEF – the United Nations Children’s Fund – the world’s largest relief agency for children in distress.
Third, China can support Ukrainian reconstruction. Russia’s brutal bombing campaign has been aimed at pulverising Ukrainian urban infrastructure. Ukraine’s government currently puts war-related infrastructure loss in the $10 billion range, a figure that could rise sharply in the days and weeks ahead. Rebuilding will be an urgent yet very burdensome task for a country that in 2020 ranked 120th in the world in terms of per capita GDP (on a purchasing power parity basis). China should use its peerless focus on modern infrastructure to provide dedicated post-conflict support to Ukraine totaling $3.5 billion – including but not limited to infrastructure-related activities of its Belt and Road Initiative (of which Ukraine has been a member since 2017) and the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. This is China’s Marshall Plan moment.
The plan I propose is far from perfect. But as Ukraine burns and its people, especially its children, suffer unfathomable hardship, it certainly beats the alternative of prolonging this tragic war. Yes, it may put China in an uncomfortable position. But leadership never comes easy. With Europe arguably on the brink of a war the likes of which it has not seen in 75 years, this is China’s moment to rise to the occasion. And make no mistake: this war is not just about Europe. Unlike World War II, this conflict has put two nuclear superpowers on a path of dangerous confrontation, with – as Putin himself put it – “consequences…such as you have never seen in your entire history.”
Only China can bring Putin to his senses. He has been unflinching in the face of brutal sanctions from the West. As a result, the Russian economy is on the brink of imploding. Without the support of Russia’s barely month-old “unlimited” partnership with China, that will happen sooner rather than later. China matters far more to Putin than any pain inflicted by Western sanctions.
Moreover, the potential collateral damage China faces from continuing to prioritise its partnership with Russia over its broader responsibilities for world peace are becoming increasingly apparent. As the West continues to up the ante on draconian sanctions against Russia, senior US officials are now openly discussing China’s guilt by association, just as I had warned. China needs to act quickly in order to forestall this possibility – before it finds itself in the crosshairs of rapidly spreading sanctions.
For a deeply principled nation, the choice is actually quite obvious. Since the days of Zhou Enlai in the mid-1950s, China has been steadfast in its commitment to the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, including respect for national sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, and non-interference in other countries’ domestic affairs. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is in clear violation of these sacrosanct principles. There is no room for China to finesse that conclusion while remaining true to its core values.
To be sure, as underscored in its recent partnership accord with Russia, China has expressed concerns over NATO expansion and Russia’s border security. Again, this is where China can take the lead in arguing these concerns in an emergency G20 forum. In assuming a leadership position, China will have ample opportunity to play the role of honest broker in weighing the risks and resolving this debate. But the war must end first.
Xi has been determined and methodical in charting a new path for China over the past ten years. At times his rhetoric has soared, steeped in aspirations of rejuvenation after a century of humiliation, great-power status for a “modern socialist nation” by 2049, and, more recently, “common prosperity” for the world’s largest population. Yet at some point, rhetoric starts to ring hollow. This crisis calls for more than slogans and promises: It is China’s opportunity to demonstrate that it is willing to step up and act on its long-sought goal of a responsible global leadership.
That may well raise tough questions for the rest of the world. But that’s our problem. After all, we in the West have not done a particularly good job in preventing this tragedy. The message bears repeating: Only China can stop Russia.
Stephen S. Roach is a faculty member at Yale University and the author of Unbalanced: The Codependency of America and China. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2022, published here with permission.
29 Comments
Didn't Putin meet with Xi before this whole conflict kicked off ? I'm not sure if China has any interest in stopping the war. This is no different from Syria really where it was Syrians killing Syrians and now its Russians killing Russians. The west needs to stay out of it. Poke the bear at your peril.
The meeting between Putin & Xi is a mere pittance, in perspective to the historical relationship between these two nations. In the 1960s there was a profound and bitter rift, The Sino-Soviet Split. That lifted & parted the bamboo curtain for the West, eventuating with the sidelining of the USSR and the fracture of the iron curtain. China doesn’t owe anybody anything. In terms of modern history they have been exploited if nothing else. The theft of tea made fortunes for western merchants. The opium wars , they lost Hong Kong to Britain, later Tsingtao to Germany and were then invaded from that conveniently gifted location, with brutal genocide by the Japanese in the 1930s. Russia in this adventure, has thrown itself under a bus. It can only come out of Ukraine considerably weaker than it entered, militarily but economically drastically so. China has nothing to lose by having the old overbearing and often irksome neighbour, reduced in power and increased in dependency. The spoils of war without having to go to war. What could be better than that. In which case, per doctrine Napoleon, why interfere with your enemies mistakes!
So modern Russia is making the same mistake that the USSR made - trying to compete with the West on weapons development - how did that work out. Currently it appears that the Russian's can't even maintain a proper maintenance schedule on their existing equipment.
Just saying.
I saw a video on YouTube where a Ukrainian soldier called the Russian invaders "orcs" - appropriate I think.
RT.com - you sure this isn't Russian propaganda (I have noticed you use links to Russian and Chinese websites that may lack impartiality). While China and Russia may have "tested" hypersonic craft doesn't necessarily mean they have a functional and operational system - there is a big difference - that may be years away.
Edit
I still argue that Russia is playing the same game - trying to compete with the USA.
Still doesn't explain why Russia can't maintain it's existing equipment.
EDIT 2
This article argues that "Russia’s military prioritizes perception of capability over actual capability"
https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/russias-focus-on-perception-is-costing-the…
"trying to compete with the West on weapons development"
For the Russo-Ukrainian war they don't have to. Ukrainian military I should imagine is similarly armed as Russia but probably with a generation older equipment.
"Currently it appears that the Russian's can't even maintain a proper maintenance schedule on their existing equipment. "
Maintenance is a dirty word to most companies. Costs too much money for no apparent benefit to boards and CEOs. I should imagine not too much different in peace time armies. I say armies as opposed military as probably the only area where maintenance is done regularly would be the air force. Maybe the Navy as well. So I wouldn't be surprised if the USA army is not much better. Hard to say. My perception is with the USA Army is if it breaks down go fetch a new one.
Propaganda. So many haven't read Sun Tzu quite obviously. If Russia was really doing so badly why are 'the west' being pushed so aggressively to get involved in the action? I think every one needs to think more clearly about what really is going on in the information war.
And fired from under the sea ,of course? Would have to be, having read your good posts as to how, with satellite co-ordinates any surface vessel is a sitting duck. Then again, what is the comparison USA & allies nuke subs vs the others, three to one? The old yanks were hardly asleep at the wheel when they downsized General Curtis Le May’s Strategic Air Command, and prioritised nuke subs instead.
I don't think they'll get involved either way nor try to mediate a peace. A militarily and financially weakened Russia benefits China in the long term as they can hold the reigns and pump oil. To that end the erratic President Putin is a liability but probably not for much longer as their alliance will out-last him.
However war has come at a difficult moment just as they try to rebalance their economy and deal with Coronavirus.
I've said it before and will repeat "Putin is nothing more than Xi's useful fool " this is working out beyond Xi's wildest dreams Putin has delivered Russia to him on a plate . China now will have all of Russians resources on demand for whatever he feels like paying in Yuan . This will impoverish ordinary Russians for years to come .
Exactly! Have to admit it, in terms of power play and strategy, Xi here has been masterful. In fact Putin looks pretty pathetic doesn’t he. “ You are most welcome here in Beijing, our city, the Olympics are for your complete enjoyment. What’s that, takeover Ukraine? Oh, I see, well then, just wait until the Olympics are over for our international profile, be a nice little chap.”
China should use its peerless focus on modern infrastructure to provide dedicated post-conflict support to Ukraine totaling $3.5 billion – including but not limited to infrastructure-related activities of its Belt and Road Initiative (of which Ukraine has been a member since 2017) and the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. This is China’s Marshall Plan moment.
Charity begins at home - Why is the White House stealing $7bn from Afghans?
That would be a long belt and long road. It would be natural for the Ukraine to sell wheat and other food and any oil to nearer neighbours. But the Marshall plan extended to both sides - both the UK and Germany, France and Italy. China should and probably will invest in Russia once this conflict is over. Access to Siberian resources makes sense for them.
"Only China can stop Russia."
An EU official called for China to mediate between Russia and Ukraine about six days ago.
Chinese President Xi Jinping on Tuesday called for peace and “maximum restraint to prevent a massive humanitarian crisis” in Ukraine.
"Second, China can contribute substantially to humanitarian assistance"
Two days ago, China announced that the Chinese Red Cross will provide a batch of humanitarian assistance worth 5 million yuan ($791,540) to Ukraine, consisting of daily necessities.
A better article would be How the US can end the war in Ukraine and its not militarily by Nato.
It suits the USA and the EU to supply a few weapons, some humanitarian aid while it sacrifices Ukrainians of all linguistic groups in order to emasculate Russia for at least ten years if not longer. Sanctions will do this in the the longer term. Zelensky and his cabinet have a lot answer for in the hope that trying to get a ceasefire and continuing some resistance until sanctions bite enough to get a better deal. The cabinet and Zelensky don't have to worry about the 2-3million refugees. They become the EUs problem. Aleppos cropping up all over now. No worries when the war is over the EU will fund the re-development and if they don't because it ends up as a neutral state at best or Russian client state at worst, the Ukrainians will still be worse off. No rebuild from Russia.
The war is a disaster for both Russia and Ukraine. Zelensky and his cabinet have still got their big boy pants on.
On one corner, US and the Free World.
On the other corner, Russia & China.
Sitting on the sidelines, be it judge or spectator, are India, Brazil, Japan, Nigeria, Indonesia, South Africa and the rest of the World.
Vlad P went to China and formed an alliance. Then he invaded Ukraine. Two weeks later, Xi calls for peace and maximum restraint- like a benevolent patriach.
Who will win this contest, don't know.
I do know that I would not like to live in an orwellian setting.
Born to be free.
I don't think that we should make the mistake of attributing anything benign or neutral to China's true intents as opposed to their insincere rhetoric. Their leanings are clear right from the top down to the masses, judging by Chinese public comment. They are different from each other and not necessarily friends, but both are streadfastly anti free world and bent on world domination. You only have to put aside apologist attitudes and use your eyes to see that.
I believe that within the bounds of minimizing damaging our own economies the free world should be quickly moving to cut our dependence on China.
China morphed into a superpower since then. And since the late 70s, have not fought a conventional war. Choosing economic coercion to achieve its aims, but retaining and improving its arm forces. China Navy has the most number of ships, Coastguard and militant fishing vessels patrol the South China Sea.
Vlad P might have counted on help from China. If he did, Xi has the upper hand.
The only winner out of the current situation is China:
1. Russia wins - China as one of the few friends of Russia benefits from a cheap super-supplier of (Russian and Ukrainian) oil, gas, coal, wheat and rare metals (essential for high-technology), while Russia uses China as a proxy to launder its resources for cash and trade.
2. Russia loses - China as one of the few friends has a lapdog in the form of the largest country in the world, again with a wealth of resources
3. World goes into recession - China reverts to its "world's factory of cheap goods" mode and burns as much coal and gas it wants and nothing the world can say about it. Meanwhile, China gets a few more countries into its pockets.
4. Follow on from 3., China can build its currency to become, if not THE dominant, then one of the dominant ones in the world.
5. Taiwan may end up becoming a vassal state of China not by force but economics. Nearby countries may follow - S Korea, Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, perhaps more. The only ones that may likely resist are Japan, Australia, Singapore (despite its predominantly Chinese population, it is super wealthy and can resist China's checkbook diplomacy), Indonesia, India.
I think countries like Australia which are largely self-reliant, may weather the recession well.
Lots of interesting comments here. If anyone is interested to find out more on international politics, I suggest search "John Mearsheimer" on YouTube and watch some of his videos. This guy spent most of his adult life studying political science and international relations. He has been described as the most influential realist of his generation. I found that to best appreciate his thoughts is to be completely unbiased. Here's his view (in 2015) on who is responsible for what is unfolding in Ukraine
We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.
Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.