By Prof. Swaran Singh
China’s claim to fame as the world’s new peacemaker is seeing serious contenders
Last month saw China staging a diplomatic coup by brokering a peace deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia — two arch rivals in the tension-ridden Middle East, where the United States has been an uncontested arbiter of all regional dynamics. This historic breakthrough by China was followed by its former foreign minister and now State Counsellor, Wang Yi, at the Munich Security Conference last month, presenting a 12-point peace proposal for ending the Ukraine crisis.
While the United States reluctantly recognised China facilitating the Saudi-Iran peace deal, it credited its regional allies Iraq and Oman for hosting several rounds of talks for two years before Beijing could host this finale on March 10. In comparison, Wang Yi’s peace proposal was dismissed by most of Ukraine’s western allies citing China’s suspect credentials as the most powerful backer of President Putin.
However, on obtaining his unprecedented third term in office, President Xi has now staked his personal prestige on this initiative. Earlier this week, not only did Xi make this a top priority of his Moscow visit, his actions saw President Putin accepting and endorsing it. So much so that even though Xi’s Moscow visit was followed by Russia relaunching another barrage of attacks, Xi's peace proposal has since engendered multiple counterintuitive responses, triggering debates on China emerging as the new peacemaker and and what it means for the future of American global leadership.
As Xi’s interlocutors began to work on his follow-up dialogue with President Zelenksy — who has welcomed Xi’s intervention asking that his words must be followed by sincere deeds — this Thursday witnessed an interesting Spanish twist. And, as time passes, this Spanish twist appears to be in line with what was widely suspected, given China’s deep and expanding outreach with European countries.
Though Ukraine has been critical of soft Russia policies of NATO members like Hungary and Germany, the end of Xi’s visit saw Spanish Prime Minister, Pedro Sánchez, surprising his European and American friends by announcing his China visit next week. He has offered to discuss Xi’s peace framework, transmit the message to Ukraine and help establish the conditions for their talks.
Spain is Ukraine’s strongest supporter, supplying Kyiv with military equipment and planning to send main battle tanks in its fight against President Putin. But Spain now wants to work with Xi in resolving the Ukrainian crisis. Most importantly, Spain is due, in July, to take over the European Union’s presidency, thus obtaining Pedro Sanchez a bigger platform to pursue this peace perspective.
Should this be seen as a wake-up call for the West to begin exploring serious counter-strategies instead of pooh-poohing China’s credentials and denouncing its refrain for a ceasefire as nothing more than seeking “effectively the ratification of Russian conquest” calling it “a classic part of China’s playbook”? Does it make sense to continue dismissing Xi’s peace initiative as nothing but a smokescreen for China’s ever-increasing support for President Putin?
So far, American agencies have continued to publicise their assessments that China is still considering supplying weapons to Russia and their confirmation that Chinese munitions are being used by Russian forces. In light of such Western rhetoric, can the Saudi-Iran peace deal provide any clues about Ukraine’s likely trajectories?
Saudi-Iran deal
To put things in perspective, China’s Saudi-Iran peace deal has rather limited lessons for the Ukraine crisis. It can neither be a stepping stone nor a model template for easy replication though China has sought to project it as setting the stage and adding an aura to Xi’s Ukraine initiative.
The Saudi-Iran deal could be brokered by Beijing as it is easier for it to maintain some sort of equidistance from these two countries. This is not possible when it comes to China’s ties with Moscow and Kyiv. Especially in China’s long-drawn contest with the United States, Putin remains Xi’s most important ally.
Second, given the volatile history of the Middle East, it will be easy to blame any future failure on the contracting parties, not Beijing. Like most such agreements, this peace deal too remains vague and vulnerable to contradictory interpretations from both sides. It makes no mention of resolving their bloody proxy war in Yemen.
Also, the failure of this peace deal will have limited implications for Beijing’s power and prestige. Its damage will be restricted to the Middle East. The Ukraine crisis has already resulted in shortages and price hikes in food, fuel, fertilisers and even finance capital worldwide. These have seen Russia brandishing nuclear weapons and commentators calling it 'World War III in the making'.
Ukrainian exceptionalism
What holds promise for Xi is that Ukraine’s approach to his peace proposal has been far too subtle and pragmatic; even at strong variance from its western allies. This makes Zelensky's direct talk with Xi a strong possibility.
For Zelenksky, if nothing else, his engagement with Xi will ensure China will stay closer to its professed neutrality and feel restrained from supplying weapons or any other material support to President Putin.
Moreover, before this war began, China was Ukraine’s largest trading partner and a major destination for its barley and corn. Ukraine had often abstained from a UN vote condemning China’s prosecution of its Uyghur Muslims.
So, in spite of Ukrainian discomfort about China’s increased oil imports from Russia funding President Putin’s war machine and China's peace proposal making no mention of the withdrawal of Russian forces, its specific points like the stress on reducing nuclear risks are finding unanimous approval from the Ukrainian political elite.
President Zelensky — who last March, told his western benefactors to send him weapons to fight and not a ride for an exile — has shown the grit and grace needed for his office. He knows how Western tough-talking and sanctions have had limited impact on Moscow and are even less likely to work with Beijing, were it to supply weapons to President Putin.
Zelensky must be watching parts of the Biden administration showing signs of course correction or fatigue that he must reckon with in choosing his options. Perhaps indirectly endorsing China's peace proposal, the US National Security Advisor, Jake Sullivan, for example, urged Xi to directly engage Zelensky rather than relying exclusively on Russian narratives.
Future trajectories
For China, this peace proposal marks another stepping stone in its global aspirations. But it may also end up revealing Xi’s inability to persuade Russia to meet Ukraine even halfway, leave alone accepting Ukraine’s precondition of withdrawing its forces. This will further accentuate China’s core challenge of managing perceptions of its credentials as a peacemaker.
Second, China is not the only one staking claim to mediating in the Ukraine war. President Erdogan of Turkey has been the only one so far to achieve concrete success, though it was short-lived. India presents the other major example with several nations now publicly expressing hope for its G20 presidency to deliver a breakthrough in the Ukraine war.
Prime Minister Modi’s ‘this era is not era of war’ comment has become the mantra amongst world leaders. The G20 Foreign Ministers meeting earlier this month was able to usher in a breakthrough by facilitating a bilateral between Blinken and Lavrov — their first meeting since the beginning of the Ukraine war. India now hopes to bring President Putin and the rest of the world leaders together at its G20 Summit coming September.
China’s claim to fame as the world’s new peacemaker is seeing serious contenders. It is also important to ask if India will continue to fight shy and just stand by the side as China presses ahead, projecting itself as the new peacemaker. Xi’s pursuit of peace in Ukraine has to be understood in the context of its brinkmanship with the US, which makes it pregnant with systemic implications for world order.
Closer to home as well, it has serious implications. China’s neighbours remain on the receiving end of its increasingly assertive behaviour. No doubt, apart from major power contestations, China’s muscle-flexing in its immediate periphery has been a drain on its credibility. Here, India — being both the largest among China’s neighbours and also a major power — must take cognisance of these developments and take some bold initiatives of its own in order to avoid being pushed into taking sides and playing second fiddle.
Originally published: Deccan Herald, March 25, 2023.
Posted in SIS Blog with the authorization of the author.
Swaran Singh is visiting professor at the University of British Columbia, fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute in Calgary, Alberta, and professor of diplomacy and disarmament at the School of International Studies, Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India
l