ROBERT A. MANNING
A year after Russia’s barbarous invasion and bombing of Ukraine, China — Moscow’s strategic partner — has taken a rare initiative into European problem-solving by offering a 12-point position paper to end the conflict in Ukraine.
Why? Beijing’s motives are complex.
The gambit comes amid a Chinese charm offensive aimed at driving a wedge between the U.S. and Europe, both of which have reacted with skepticism. Moreover, by playing peacemaker, Beijing seeks to burnish its image with the Global South, which, as last week’s United Nations vote showed, has largely been neutral on Russia’s war. Mixed motives aside, it doesn’t preclude China from seeing that an end to the war is in its own interests. So, what to make of its proposal?
First, there is a credibility problem. From Day 1 of the war, Beijing has tried to straddle an impossible position: claiming neutrality while refusing to condemn Moscow’s invasion, parroting Russian disinformation and increasing trade, much of it in price-discounted Russian oil and gas. At the same time, China has been cautious to avoid crossing the line on Western sanctions, and has halted several finance deals of Chinese banks and its Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) for Russian energy projects. It has been a pro-Russian neutrality.
For the past week, U.S. officials have alleged that China is considering supplying lethal military aid to Russia, although President Biden has contradicted his own top officials by saying that he doesn’t anticipate any such aid.
Yet Russia’s war in Ukraine already has had both reputational and economic costs for China. Moscow’s invasion shattered Beijing’s core foreign policy principles — if selectively applied — of respect for sovereignty and non-interference. And the impact of the war on the global economy has cost China; as China holds about one-third of developing nations’ debt, it has increased the risks of default, adding to China’s own debt problems. In addition, concerns of escalation and possible Russian use of tactical nuclear weapons both help to explain why China would like to see the war end and Russia’s Vladimir Putin to avoid total defeat.
Enter China’s “Position paper for a political settlement of the Ukraine Crisis.” It consists of 12 points, many of which are cost-free bromides, starting with “Respecting the sovereignty of all countries.” (A bit late in the day for that, isn’t it?) Inviting Alexander Lukashenko, the dictator of Belarus — a Putin ally and rear military base — to meet in Beijing this week doesn’t help China’s case either. The paper repeats China’s “Abandon Cold War mentality” mantra and calls for ending Western sanctions against Russia. Thus, President Biden, in an interview with ABC News, dismissed China’s plan as “mainly benefiting Russia.”
In what is more hope rather than a plan, Beijing calls for “ceasing hostilities” and “resuming peace talks,” arguing that “Dialogue and negotiation are the only viable solution.” Such pleas echo previous ones from China, as well as India and Turkey in recent months. But with no proposed plan of action or basis for talks, China stops short of investing any of its political capital on its junior partner, Putin.
And then there is the obvious: If Ukraine were to cease fighting, it would no longer exist, whereas if Moscow were to withdraw, the war would be over.
To Beijing’s credit, the paper puts China on record against the threat or use of nuclear weapons and for the protection of nuclear plants in Ukraine. Significantly, Beijing also called for “promoting post-conflict reconstruction” and says China “stands ready” to contribute.
While U.S. and European officials have been skeptical of Beijing’s initiative, the most intriguing response came from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who saw it as “an important signal that China looks like it’s going to participate in a peace formula.” Accentuating the positive, Zelensky appeared to call China’s bluff, saying he wants to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping. The U.S. would be wise to follow Zelensky’s lead.
While it is tempting to dismiss China’s move as a hollow proclamation, it is not insignificant that Beijing has put these principles on record. For all its ambition to be a leading world power, it is unusual for China to take diplomatic initiatives in an international crisis. The only other such effort was hosting the Six-Party Talks (consisting of the U.S., China, Japan, Russia and North and South Korea) in 2003. I was involved in those talks and China played a largely constructive role, though the effort ultimately broke down due to North Korean intransigence.Say no to child predators and other criminals going off the radarHow to get serious about climate change
There is little downside for the Biden administration to test China’s intentions. What is Beijing prepared to do to create conditions where negotiations are possible? And not least, China is the world’s largest creditor and had robust economic and military ties to Ukraine before the war. Reconstruction of Ukraine will be a huge challenge, and any U.S./European Union-led effort to mobilize institutions like the World Bank could be undermined if China does not coordinate any aid or investment in a global effort.
The Chinese characters for crisis are often translated as both danger and opportunity. In Ukraine, the dangers are legion. It is worth exploring whether Beijing is serious about opportunities.
No comments:
Post a Comment