Category: Blog

Chinese Maneuvers on the International Stage

You don’t have to be a fan of Donald Trump to appreciate a certain aspect of his approach – the art of deal-making. In the Chinese context, you could call it the “art of making money without annoying your partner.” I must admit that the Chinese have been quite successful in their relations with Russia so far. They know the recipe for success: flattery, playing on Russian ambitions as a superpower, fueling anti-American sentiments, while maintaining restraint and self-control. But as Russia weakens, the temptation for the Chinese grows.

The most important trip since the invasion of Ukraine

Vladimir Putin’s visit to China was like “the most important trip since the invasion of Ukraine.” He fired up the diplomatic engine that seemed long dormant when he appeared as an honorary guest at the Belt and Road Forum. But the price he paid was a contemporary version of “kou tou” – that is, flattery.

The New Silk Road – or another edition of the same concept

The New Silk Road is the third summit in Poland referred to as the “New Silk Road,” announced ten years ago in Astana. This initiative aimed to build a global infrastructure network focused on the South, primarily benefiting China.

For many countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, this initiative is a boon. They prefer to develop at the cost of dependence on China rather than not develop at all. Importantly, unlike Western partners, the Chinese do not raise sensitive human rights issues.

The idea of Chinese “mini-globalization” is neatly packaged in the propaganda associated with the Belt and Road Initiative, suggesting Oriental wealth and expanding nearly every Chinese idea as part of the Belt and Road Initiative, regardless of whether it concerns Chile, the Arctic, cybernetics, space, or something earlier, like the Pakistani port of Gwadar.

Blurring the line between policy and the initiative

At some point, the line between Chinese foreign policy and the all-encompassing Belt and Road Initiative began to blur. The pace of “Silk Roadification” of Chinese policy increased in parallel with the strengthening of Xi Jinping’s power.

Excuse me, New Silk Road

Russia was initially very skeptical of the idea announced by Xi Jinping in Astana, right in the heart of its sphere of influence. It’s worth noting that initially, Russia tried to block Chinese influence, but then had to let it go because it couldn’t afford to have conflicts with both the West and China, especially after the aggression in Ukraine in 2014.

The convergence of Russia and China

Russia eventually had to choose between confrontation with the West and compromise with China. Russia made amends with the New Silk Road. As a result, Central Asia has become a sort of Russo-Chinese political and economic condominium.

Putin at the Belt and Road Summits

Putin appeared at the previous two Belt and Road Summits in 2017 and 2019 in Beijing. On each occasion, he played his tricks – arriving late for the official inauguration, playing the piano for journalists while waiting to meet Xi Jinping. In his speeches, he exaggerated Russia’s significance for the Belt and Road Initiative, presenting it as an indispensable participant on his own terms.

The Chinese tolerated this with almost imperial tolerance, knowing that it’s better to tolerate Russia’s capriciousness than to engage in open confrontation.

Fading into the background

Unfortunately for the Belt and Road Initiative, the current international political climate is becoming increasingly unfavorable. By the way, the enthusiasts of this initiative, who hung onto the idea of “reversing the effects of geographic discoveries” through the New Silk Road a decade ago, are now as interested in it as non-English (or non-Chinese) speakers.

The People’s Republic of China has also somewhat cooled the Belt and Road Initiative. It hasn’t abandoned it completely – it’s not the Chinese way. They’ve just shifted the focus to other actions, such as Xi Jinping’s “Global Security Initiative.” The Belt and Road Program has been downsized or rationalized, focusing on specific regions and presenting the initiative as environmentally friendly.

Russia as “the northern half”

Through its invasion of Ukraine, Russia fell into its global semi-isolation. Initially, China cheered on Russia’s invasion, seeing it as a potential weakening of the Western international order. But Putin faltered, getting stuck on the Ukrainian steppes while uniting the West against him, thus giving a breath of life to the global leadership of the United States.

For Xi Jinping and his team, the most significant challenge is competition with the United States. Russia offers the People’s Republic of China “the northern half” – peace in the north and stable supplies of cheap energy, away from the U.S. Navy. Moreover, Russia is a partner in attempts to change the current international order.

China couldn’t imagine a better Russia. Moscow finds itself in a situation where its previous ties with the West have been frozen. Now, there’s nothing on the horizon other than the East and the “global majority,” as Dmitri Trenin put it, who used to play the role of an independent analyst but now works entirely in the Kremlin’s interest.

Realistically, Russia not only wants but must rely on China. For Beijing, any change in this situation, like the overthrow or death of Putin, could pose potential difficulties. Therefore, it benefits China to maintain goodwill towards Russia.

Giving face

At the Belt and Road Summit, the Russian leader was welcomed with a red carpet, despite having controversies on his record with the International Criminal Court in The Hague. For China, this is a gesture of “giving face,” which doesn’t cost them much but brings gratitude from the Russian leader.

This gives Putin a significant dose of legitimacy. Thanks to the Chinese, he can present himself as a leader received with honors, rather than as someone isolated in a bunker. In return, Putin must publicly praise Xi and the Belt and Road Initiative, which he tried to hamper a decade ago.

No dotting the “i”

Although China officially presents itself concerning the Russia-Ukraine war as “for, and even against,” in reality, they support Russia by providing money for the war through massive purchases of raw materials and exporting dual-use parts.

But they do this without dotting the “i.” Openly supporting Moscow would limit China’s flexibility, so it’s better to leave some appearances. This allows Western countries to influence China’s assistance to Russia. While China is helping Russia, it doesn’t want to bear the costs of Russian mistakes or pay for them. De jure, China abides by sanctions, but de facto, they’ve found a loophole in the system or simply bypass them.

Asymmetry of mutual benefits

The Chinese have set their relationship with Russia based on “gong yin,” where both sides benefit. But that doesn’t mean these benefits are equal. How much you gain depends on your strength, position, and negotiation skills. Even before the Ukraine war, the proportions in the Chinese-Russian arrangement were more 30/70 than 50/50. And now, Russia is growing weaker.

The art of deal-making, the Chinese way

So, paraphrasing a great American intellectual, the “art of deal-making, the Chinese way” is about making money without annoying your partner. And for now, the Chinese have been successful in their relations with Russia, thanks to a mix of flattery, manipulation of Russian superpower ambitions, fueling anti-American sentiments, restraint, and self-control.

They could be more ruthless toward Russia, but for now, they stick to certain limits. But as Russia weakens, the temptation for the Chinese undoubtedly grows. However, what holds China back is that the West would be the main beneficiary of such actions. So, at least for now, it pays to be kind to Russia.

So, in addition to everything, Putin can now quote Xi Jinping: “Deal with it!”

Krzysztof Bielejewski PhD MBA

Senior Partner w KB Konsulting i Partnerzy Sp. z o.o.

In an era defined by shifting power dynamics, regional conflicts, and global challenges, the world’s geopolitical landscape is undergoing significant transformation. Two pivotal issues at the forefront of this transformation are the Ukrainian War and the Taiwan Crisis. In this article, we will delve into the current state of global geopolitics, with a focus on these critical flashpoints, while also exploring the concept of the emerging New World Order. These topics collectively shape the intricate web of international relations, alliances, and power structures that define the world today.

The Current Geopolitical Landscape

A world that has long been shaped by the forces of globalization and geo-economics is now navigating the treacherous waters of heightened geopolitical risk. Persistent shocks, such as the enduring COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict, have left an indelible mark on the global landscape in 2023.

1. Global Challenges
   The global economy is on uncertain ground, with signs of impending downturns in the US and Europe. Geopolitical tensions simmer amidst responsible competition. Energy and climate change remain divisive, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine sparks de-carbonization urgency. The Inflation Reduction Act in the US offers hope for renewable investment. The COVID-19 response divides nations, prompting reevaluation of interconnectedness. Escalating cyberattacks threaten digital infrastructure, and soaring sovereign debt levels raise default concerns. A looming sovereign debt crisis and declining exports in major economies amplify fears of global economic fragmentation.
2. Great Power Competition:Today’s global politics are marked by a resurgence of great power competition, primarily involving the United States, China, and Russia. While not a new concept, the current era’s intensity and complexity distinguish it. The U.S., a reigning superpower, aims to maintain global dominance through military, economic, and technological advantages. China, in a remarkable economic transformation, seeks regional and global leadership via initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Russia, led by President Putin, asserts influence through various means. Economic power, military capabilities, and ideological differences are driving forces. Global influence, regional conflicts, shifting alliances, technological advancements, and economic disruptions all stem from this competition, shaping the contemporary geopolitical landscape.
3. Multilateralism vs. Unilateralism: Multilateralism involves nations collaborating through international institutions like the UN and WTO to address global challenges and uphold norms. It promotes cooperation, inclusivity, and shared responsibility. Unilateralism, on the other hand, prioritizes a nation’s interests without seeking approval or cooperation from others. It emphasizes sovereignty and independent decision-making, even using force if necessary. The interplay between these approaches shapes global diplomacy and efforts to address challenges. Nations must carefully choose when to collaborate and when to act alone, navigating the evolving landscape of global governance.

The Ukrainian War: A Geopolitical Flashpoint

The Ukrainian War that started in 2014 is a complex and protracted conflict,which has had important regional and international implications. It’s essential to understand the background, key actors, and ongoing developments to grasp the full scope of this conflict.

Background:

The emergence of the Ukrainian War can be rooted back to Ukraine’s desire of having closer ties with the European Union (EU) and the subsequent annexation of Crimea by Russia. Ukraine’s pivot toward the West, particularly its aspiration to sign an EU Association Agreement, led to widespread protests and the eventual ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych in February 2014. This period, known as the Euromaidan, marked a pivotal moment in Ukraine’s modern history.

Annexation of Crimea:

Shortly after Yanukovych’s removal from power, Russia seized control of Crimea, which has been marked as a region with historical ties to Russia and a significant proportion of its population belonging to Russian-speaking natives. Russia’s actions were met with international condemnation, and the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution that affirmed Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

Conflict in Eastern Ukraine:

In eastern Ukraine, specifically in the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, several movements emerged including the infamous pro-Russian separatist movements. These led to a conflict emerging between Ukrainian government forces and the separatist groups. This conflict escalated into a full-scale war, characterized by sporadic fighting, ceasefires, and attempts at diplomacy.

Key Actors

1. Ukraine: The Ukrainian government, based in Kiev, has sought to regain control of the breakaway regions and assert its territorial integrity. Ukraine has received support from Western countries, both diplomatically and through military assistance.
2. Russia: Russia has been under the accusationsfor providing support to the separatist forces working in the eastern Ukraine.These include the military equipment and personnel. Moscow has denied its direct involvement in the conflict while acknowledging the presence of Russian-speaking volunteers.
3. Separatist Groups: Pro-Russian separatist groups in Donetsk and Luhansk have played a significant role in the conflict. They have declared independent republics but are not internationally recognized.
4. International Community: The conflict has garnered international attention and condemnation. Western countries, including the United States and the European Union, have taken actions to impose sanctions on Russia for its actions in Crimea and eastern Ukraine. Diplomatic efforts, such as the Minsk agreements, have been attempted to achieve a peaceful resolution.

Humanitarian Impact

The Ukrainian War has had a severe humanitarian impact. It has led to casualties on both sides, displacement of civilians, damage to infrastructure, and an ongoing humanitarian crisis. Millions of people have been affected by the conflict, and efforts to provide humanitarian aid and assistance continue.

Ongoing Developments:

The conflicts between Russia and Ukraine still persist. In early 2023, Russian President Vladimir Putin launched an offensive in Ukraine’s Donbas region but faced significant challenges. The attack primarily focused on the town of Bakhmut, which held limited strategic importance. Despite heavy casualties, including an estimated 20,000 Russian deaths, Russia struggled to make progress, and the conflict devolved into a months-long siege.
On June 6, 2023, a dam breach near Kherson resulted in severe flooding in southwest Ukraine, impacting over 80,000 people. Ukraine accused Russia of blowing up the dam, alleging it was an attempt to hinder a southeastern offensive. Russia, in turn, claimed Ukraine carried out the attack to disrupt Crimea’s water supply. The dam’s destruction also raised concerns about cooling water for the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant.
In June 2023, Ukraine initiated a counteroffensive aimed at breaking through Russian defenses in Donetsk and Zaporizhzhia provinces. While Ukraine aimed to liberate 18% of occupied territory, they faced stiff resistance, including minefields and Russian air superiority. Nonetheless, Ukraine made some gains on the ground and intensified attacks on infrastructure linked to Crimea and Moscow.
The United States played a substantial role in supporting Ukraine, providing nearly $40 billion in security and humanitarian aid since February 2022. This aid included advanced weaponry and increased troop presence in Europe. The U.S. commitment to supporting Ukraine remained unwavering, with additional military aid announced in June 2023.
By June 2023, the conflict had resulted in significant humanitarian costs, with thousands of civilian deaths and injuries, nearly six million internally displaced people, and nearly eight million refugees fleeing to neighboring countries.
On June 23, 2023, a significant internal challenge emerged for Putin when Yevgeniy Prigozhin, the leader of the Wagner Group, announced a “march of justice” against the Russian Ministry of Defense. Prigozhin’s actions followed months of tension with the Ministry and resulted in a mutiny by Wagner forces. They occupied key Russian cities and advanced towards Moscow. Ultimately, negotiations led to a resolution, but the incident weakened both the Wagner Group and Putin.

THE TAIWAN CRISIS

The Taiwan-China crisis is a long-standing and complex issue characterized by political, military, and economic tensions between the Republic of China (ROC) and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) on Taiwan. This crisis dates back to the Chinese Civil War when the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), which was led by Chiang Kai-shek, retreated to Taiwan after their defeat by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) on the mainland in 1949.

Key Points of the Taiwan-China Crisis:

1. One-China Policy: Claims for being the legitimate government of China has been made by both the ROC and the PRC. The PRC maintains that Taiwan is a part of its territory and seeks to re-unify with Taiwan under its “One-China Policy.” In contrast, Taiwan operates as an independent, separate, and self-governing entity with its own government, military, and constitution.
2. International Recognition: The PRC has sought to isolate Taiwan diplomatically, where efforts have been made to pressurize the countries and international organizations not to officially recognize Taiwan. Only a few countries maintain formal diplomatic relations with Taiwan, while the PRC has established diplomatic ties with a majority of the world’s nations.
3. Military Buildup: The PRC has significantly increased its military presence and capabilities in the Taiwan Strait, including conducting naval and air exercises. Taiwan has responded by investing in its own defense and seeking military support from the United States.
4. Economic Interdependence: Despite political tensions, Taiwan and China maintain strong economic ties. Taiwan is a major investor in the mainland, and many Taiwanese businesses have operations there. This economic interdependence has provided stability to the relationship.
5. International Support for Taiwan: While most countries officially recognize the PRC over Taiwan, many nations, led by the United States, maintain unofficial relations with Taiwan and provide support in various forms, including arms sales, to help ensure Taiwan’s security and stability.

Recent Developments:

In recent years, the Taiwan-China crisis has intensified due to several factors:

1. Increased Military Activity: The PRC has conducted a series of military exercises and flights near Taiwan, raising concerns about the potential for armed conflict.
2. Global Attention: Growing international concern about the situation has prompted countries like the United States and Japan to express support for Taiwan’s security and to take actions to deter Chinese aggression.
3. Taiwan’s Global Role: Taiwan has sought to expand its international presence, particularly in organizations related to public health and climate change. Its exclusion from such forums due to Chinese pressure has drawn attention to the Taiwan-China issue.
4. Taiwanese Identity: There is a growing sense of Taiwanese identity distinct from Chinese identity, particularly among younger generations in Taiwan. This has political implications and could influence the island’s future direction.
   The Taiwan-China crisis remains a volatile and sensitive issue in the Asia-Pacific region. While efforts to resolve the situation through peaceful means are ongoing, the complex historical, political, and strategic factors involved make it a challenging diplomatic puzzle. The potential for peaceful reunification, continued status quo, or escalated tensions and conflict all hang in the balance, with significant implications for regional stability and global geopolitics.

NEW WORLD ORDER

The idea of a “New World Order” has been a topic of discussion and speculation in geopolitics and international relations for decades. It represents a conceptual vision of a transformed global order, marked by significant changes in existing global structures and power dynamics. The concept has evolved over time and has been interpreted in various ways.
The term gained prominence in the early 1990s, following the end of the Cold War, when the bipolar competition between the Soviet Union and the United States came to an end. At that time, it was associated with the hope for a more stable, cooperative, and integrated world order.
Some proponents of the New World Order believed that the United States, as the sole remaining superpower, would play a dominant role in shaping global politics and upholding international norms. This perspective emphasized the potential for a more peaceful and cooperative international system under U.S. leadership.However, over time, the concept evolved to recognize the emergence of multiple centers of power, challenging the initial unipolar vision. This interpretation of the New World Order suggests a more complex and multipolar global system.
Another facet of the New World Order concept involves the idea of strengthened global governance mechanisms, international institutions, and cooperation to address transnational challenges like climate change, terrorism, and pandemics. Advocates argue for greater collaboration among nations to tackle shared issues.Despite these ideals, critics of the New World Order concept often highlight the persistence of geopolitical rivalries, conflicts, and power struggles in the world. They argue that the world remains far from a harmonious or ordered state.
One of the fundamental components of discussions surrounding the New World Order is economic globalization. The idea is that increased economic interdependence and trade will promote cooperation and reduce the likelihood of conflict among nations.However, achieving the vision of a New World Order is not without its controversies and challenges. Many nations are cautious about ceding too much authority to international organizations or powerful states, as they fear it may infringe on their sovereignty. Additionally, the realities of geopolitical rivalries and power struggles continue to shape the international landscape, making it difficult to attain a harmonious global order.

Concluding Note

In conclusion, the current global geopolitical landscape is marked by a delicate balance between cooperation and competition, with two significant flashpoints being the Ukrainian War and the Taiwan-China Crisis. These conflicts underscore the complexities of international relations, alliances, and power dynamics in today’s world.

The Ukrainian War, which began in 2014, has evolved into a protracted conflict with regional and international ramifications. The ongoing struggle for control over eastern Ukraine has led to significant humanitarian costs, displacement of civilians, and diplomatic tensions. The United States has played a crucial role in supporting Ukraine, both diplomatically and militarily, adding another layer to the global geopolitical equation.

The Taiwan-China Crisis remains a long-standing and intricate issue, marked by political, military, and economic tensions. While the One-China Policy underpins China’s stance, Taiwan asserts its sovereignty and seeks international recognition. Recent developments have seen increased military activity and growing international attention, making this a critical issue for regional stability and global geopolitics.

Amidst these conflicts, the concept of a New World Order has persisted, evolving from the early post-Cold War vision of unipolarity to a more complex multipolar world. Advocates call for strengthened global governance and cooperation to address global challenges, while critics emphasize the persistence of geopolitical rivalries.

The path to a New World Order remains fraught with challenges, including the balance between national sovereignty and global cooperation, economic interdependence, and ongoing power struggles. As nations navigate this intricate landscape, they must carefully weigh the pursuit of their interests against the imperative of global cooperation and the ever-present potential for conflict. The future of the world’s geopolitical order hangs in the balance, shaped by the ongoing dynamics of our ever-changing world.