Press reports are emerging that the United States and the rest of NATO would entertain the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) brokering a peace deal in Ukraine. While the United States has provided Ukraine with $75 billion of the $113 billion approved by Congress to assist the Kyiv government in driving Russian invaders out of Ukraine, China has been a staunch supporter of Russia in the conflict. But it appears the geopolitical winds have shifted. Think about that for just a moment. Does the phrase “breathtakingly naïve” come to mind?
China Helping Broker Peace in Ukraine?
The notion that the People’s Republic of China, in the wake of its newly minted fast friendship with Russia, could act as an “honest” broker has moved from the ridiculous to the absurd. Yet, as The Wall Street Journal makes clear:
“The willingness to encourage negotiations and seek out a role for China in talks represents a shift in Western thinking, particularly in the US, which has been highly skeptical of any involvement for Beijing given China’s longstanding support for Moscow. Secretary of State Antony Blinken publicly expressed cautious optimism recently that Beijing could help defuse the conflict.”
Skeptical or not, Blinken demonstrates the “cautious optimism” typical of the Biden administration’s flawed belief in a world the way they wish it were rather than embracing the realistic view of a geopolitical morass filled with threats to US national security. Nonetheless, those pushing a negotiated peace with the PRC as a player tie the talks to a successful Ukrainian spring offensive. If Kyiv’s forces can take back substantial portions of territory captured by Russia, perhaps President Vladimir Putin would be in a more conciliatory frame of mind.
Russia Has a Vote in the Ukraine Fighting
Furthermore, the Institute for the Study of War in its daily dispatches has claimed: “Russian forces continued limited offensive operations northeast of Kupyansk and in the Kreminna area. [Also] Russian occupation officials continue to plan for mass forced evacuations in Zaporizhia Oblast.” The indication is that Russian troops show no signs of giving up the eastern portions of Ukraine they’ve captured and are occupying.
So, what if three or four months from now there has been no substantial movement in the current battle lines? Kyiv government officials are more cautious with predictions of a winning spring offensive outcome. “Ukraine, meanwhile, has warned against unrealistic expectations from its counter-offensive. ‘The expectation from our counter-offensive campaign is overestimated in the world,’ Oleksii Reznikov, the defense minister, said … ‘Most people are … waiting for something huge,’ which may lead to ’emotional disappointment,'” The Times of London’s Catherine Philp explained, reporting from inside Ukraine.
Euro-Centric View of Ukraine Conflict Counters US Interests
Europeans want to see an end to the Ukraine conflict sooner rather than later. A ceasefire and reasonably long-lasting peace between the Kyiv government and the Kremlin, by any means, would be a welcome option. “By any means” could easily include China as a referee. But even with his globalist inclinations, Biden and his national security team must recognize the folly in such an initiative. But, of course, that is a Euro-centric point of view. “The interest in negotiations brings Washington in closer alignment with some European countries, which are eager to see the conflict end, or at the very least moderate in intensity, and have been the most intent on discussing some resolution this year,” the WSJ continued.
Xi Jinping and and Vladimir Putin (Photo by Xie Huanchi/Xinhua via Getty Images)
The United States has more fish to fry than the conflict in Ukraine, and giving the PRC a significant role on the world stage would conflict with American interests, for example, in maintaining gravitas as a coalition leader in the Indo-Pacific. What is obvious to most but apparently opaque to the White House is that the United States is in a global struggle with the CCP. To capitulate in any respect just fortifies the PRC’s goal of dominating global behavior militarily and economically. Moreover, giving in to those seeing China as a potentially positive force in ending the war in Ukraine would diminish the stature of the United States in the minds of non-aligned nations – a positive outcome for China’s propaganda to elevate the CCP image. And, of course, at the end of the day’s accounting, didn’t China’s President Xi Jinping and Putin sign a “‘no limits’ partnership agreement last year just weeks before Russia invaded Ukraine,” as Reuters reported?
China has no credibility as a consigliere in the affairs of the United States and Europe. Xi could not make any progress with Russia in ironing out a Kyiv-Moscow ceasefire and peace agreement during a recent state visit. So why would he be successful now? By no means should Biden and the NATO allies allow Xi that stature.
