What's new

Politico.eu: You ain’t no middleman: EU and NATO slam China’s bid to be a Ukraine peacemaker

Hamartia Antidote

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
35,188
Reaction score
30
Country
United States
Location
United States

Von der Leyen says Beijing ‘has taken sides’ while NATO’s Stoltenberg says ‘China doesn’t have much credibility’.

The Second Belt And Road Forum For International Cooperation – Day Two

Beijing is a key strategic ally of Russia | Pool photo by Kenzaburo Fukuhara via Getty Images

China’s attempt to style itself as a neutral peacemaker in the Ukraine war fell flat on Friday when NATO and the EU both slammed its playbook for ending the conflict one year after Russia’s full-scale invasion.

Beijing is a key strategic ally of Russia, which it sees as a useful partner against the West and NATO. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Chinese companies are already supplying “non-lethal” aid to Russia, but added there are indications that China is weighing up sending arms — something Beijing denies.

Earlier on Friday, the Chinese foreign ministry published a 12-point, 892-word “position paper” with a view to settling what it calls the “Ukraine crisis,” without referring to it as a war.

“China’s position builds on a misplaced focus on the so-called ‘legitimate security interests and concerns’ of parties, implying a justification for Russia’s illegal invasion, and blurring the roles of the aggressor and the aggressed,” Nabila Massrali, the EU’s foreign policy spokeswoman, said in a press briefing.

“The position paper doesn’t take into account who is the aggressor and who is the victim of an illegal and unjustified war of aggression,” Massrali, said, calling the Chinese position paper “selective and insufficient about their implications for Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine.”

Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, said China’s stance was anything but neutral.

“It is not a peace plan but principles that they shared. You have to see them against a specific backdrop. And that is the backdrop that China has taken sides, by signing for example an unlimited friendship right before Russia’s invasion in Ukraine started,” she said at a press conference in Estonia. “So we will look at the principles, of course. But we will look at them against the backdrop that China has taken sides.”

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg also joined officials in pouring cold water on Beijing.

“China doesn’t have much credibility,” he told reporters on Friday, responding to the latest official document. “They have not been able to condemn the illegal invasion of Ukraine.”

Stoltenberg added that there have been “signs and indications that China may be planning and considering to supply military aid to Russia,” although NATO has not seen “any actual delivery of lethal aid.”

China has been hoping to improve ties with the Europeans, as it doubles down on efforts to discredit the U.S.

Assistant Foreign Minister Hua Chunying, for instance, accused the U.S. of benefiting from the war. Wang Lutong, the head of European affairs at the Chinese Foreign Ministry, appealed directly to the European Union: “China is willing to make joint efforts with the EU and continue to play a constructive role on Ukraine,” Wang said in a tweet, adding a screenshot of the latest proposal.

More doubts​

Merely five lines into China’s newly unveiled official plan on resolving the “Ukraine crisis” — released on Friday marking the first-year point of what Beijing studiously refuses to call a war — Russian propaganda appears.

“The security of a region should not be achieved by strengthening or expanding military blocs,” the Chinese foreign ministry position paper reads, supporting the Russian claim that war broke out in order to prevent Ukraine from joining NATO.

The next point in the Chinese plan: “All parties must … avoid fanning the flames and aggravating tensions.” Chinese diplomats have in recent weeks accused the U.S. of being the biggest arms supplier for Ukraine, while it faces mounting pressure not to provide Russia with weapons.

Oleksandr Merezhko, chair of the Ukrainian parliament’s foreign affairs committee, called China’s position “hypocritical.”

“[China’s proposal] is very reminiscent of the hypocritical Soviet rhetoric of ‘fight for peace,'” said Merezhko. “It’s a set of declarative empty slogans; it’s not backed by specifics or an implementation mechanism.”

Merezhko also asked Europe not to fall for China’s charm offensive as it seeks to split the transatlantic unity on assisting his country. “China, just like Russia, is trying to split the EU and the U.S. and to undermine transatlantic solidarity,” he told POLITICO in response to the Chinese proposal. “It’s very dangerous.”

Central and Eastern European countries, the most vocal supporters of arming Ukraine further, are equally dismissive of Beijing’s rhetoric.

“China’s plan is vague and does not offer solutions,” Ivana Karásková, who heads the China Observers in Central and Eastern Europe think tank based in Prague. “The plan calls on Russia and Ukraine to deal with the issue themselves, which would only benefit Russia; China continues to oppose what it calls unilateral sanctions and asks for the sanctions to be approved by the UN Security Council — well, given the fact that the aggressor is a permanent UNSC member with a veto right, this claim is beyond ridiculous.”
 
The only opinion that matters is the Ukrainian opinion on the Chinese peace plan. The rest are just butthurt that they aren't in the middle of the negotiations and controlling the narrative. Sour grapes from Von der Leyen

 
Turkey is the only logical choice not only as a neutral party to hold the negotiations but also for peacekeeping operations after a treaty is eventually signed.
 
The only opinion that matters is the Ukrainian opinion on the Chinese peace plan. The rest are just butthurt that they aren't in the middle of the negotiations and controlling the narrative. Sour grapes from Von der Leyen

 
Who says China is wanting to be the peacemaker? LOL
 

This is the peace plan presented. Lets look at the first one.

1. Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld. All countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community. All parties should jointly uphold the basic norms governing international relations and defend international fairness and justice. Equal and uniform application of international law should be promoted, while double standards must be rejected. 

How will China make just the first point resolved?

I'll give China the benefit of the doubt as long as they don't start supplying weapons to Russia. If they do, then all bets are off on China's neutrality and their plans as peacemaker to the world.
 
How so?

Whose side is Turkey on?

And if Turkey isn't neutral who is?

Turkey has relatively good relationship with both Ukraine and Russia, but is not a reliable partner, at least for the time being, not because of Turkish people, but because of its position. A weak country economically and politically cannot be a reliable partner, because it can switch sides and change its words whenever the other side pays a higher price. In the last 10 years, Turkey has changed its positions on many issues, from Uighur to air defense system and many others.

China is of course on Russia side. However, it has restrained from worsening its relationship with Ukraine, despite Ukrainian hostile rhetoric in early 2022 (show of stupidity from Ukrainian president, I think), therefore, it is in a very good position to mediate, perhaps, the only one which both sides of the war think it is worth to listen to. In the meantime, the US has taken a firm position on Ukrainian side and no one would trust it to be the mediator.
 
Last edited:
How so?

Whose side is Turkey on?

And if Turkey isn't neutral who is?
Turkey is a NATO member state and Turkey sent weapons to Ukrainians. That makes Chinese neutrality claim much more credible than Turkeys...

Actually no powerful state on earth who can broker peace is neutral in this RUSSIA vs UKRAINE war...
 
remember the song of bayraktar
Yeah, Remember the S400? The nuclear power plant in Akkuyu?
We have good relations with Russia too. Even though we fight on many fronts.

The first round of peace talks were held in İstanbul. Turkey is the perfect place for this.

The problem is that nobody in the west wants peace. This war hurts Russia a lot and they want to use Ukraine as long as they can as a pawn to keep hurting Russia.

So they will pay however much money Zelenski wants, send whatever weapons they can spare because this is a perfect war. Killing thousands upon thousands of Russians without shedding a single drop of American blood.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, Remember the S400? The nuclear power plant in Akkuyu?
We have good relations with Russia too. Even though we fight on many fronts.
here we talk about neutrality . you sold weapon to Ukraine so you can't be called neutral
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom