Ukraine invasion: China may be world’s best bet for brokering peace between Russia and the West
- The threat of nuclear force calls for greater attempts at negotiation and a willingness by the West to make concessions to provide Putin with a way out
- Beijing’s relations with Moscow, plus its core principles of non-interference and ‘no first use’ of nukes make it an ideal mediator
In global diplomatic circles, what is not uttered publicly can reveal more than that which is out in the open. Perhaps no one captured this with more spice and sauce than Charles Maurice De Talleyrand-Périgord, the acknowledged French maestro of European diplomacy from the second half of the 18th century into the 19th. As he memorably proclaimed, “speech was given to man to conceal his thoughts”.
Speech concealment is thus hardly unknown in current diplomacy but for the Chinese diplomat, having to carry the burden of an alliance of some sort with Russia at a time of the latter’s gruesome humanitarian criminality in Ukraine must be hard on the nerves.
Keep in mind that the Moscow-Beijing relationship is not exactly blood brothers under the skin. Russia has not always been such a good neighbour. At a length of more than 4,000km (2,485 miles), the border between them is the world’s sixth longest – about the distance between Washington and Los Angeles.
The publicly articulated non-interference in another’s internal affairs is a red line. In some respects, leaving aside evil humanitarian crises, it is not so bad an operating principle, and, though not always observed in saintly fashion, remains prominent in Chinese Communist thought.
Another principle – easily defensible – is China’s stated policy of never using nuclear weapons except in retaliation for a first-strike nuclear attack. If all nations adhered to this sensible norm of no-first use, nuclear war, at least from the point of view of pure logic, would be a non-starter: no one could go first. Alas, all nations do not honour the Chinese norm. One that doesn’t is the US.
Recently, I informally polled a group of more than two dozen distinguished international professionals and asked whether there was any valid justification for Nato/US military intervention – whether creating a no-fly zone over Ukraine or getting down and dirty with actual boots on the ground.
No one said they wanted to go there – and this is the Western consensus view. And so, the Russian-initiated war is slated to last weeks, if not months or more, assuming Ukraine resistance remains, and Putin leaves the key to his nuclear Pandora’s Box in his back pocket.
03:04
Ukraine says Russia has taken control of Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Plant
But suppose instead that the enemy’s continuing defiance – and the region’s eventual warming that will melt hard surfaces into tank-immobilising mud – pushes a frustrated and nervous Putin to reach into his back pocket to operationalise tactical nukes. Even an initial modest run up the first steps of the nuclear ladder would cross the international humanitarian line into unchartered zones.
The infamous 1945 Hiroshima atomic bomb, by today’s nuclear metrics, would be rated merely “tactical”. It destroyed only one city. Today’s thermonuclear monstrosities could dramatically redefine global warming and potentially pulverise much of our planet.
This pioneering track-two, historically anti-war organisation, with offices in Europe as well as Washington, has brought forth an eight-point plan of de-escalation which strikes me as the height of sanity.
We need to think ahead if we’re not to fall behind evolving events and slide into even wider, deeper war. The West is not negotiating from weakness but, due to its commendable solidarity, from strength. It should drop the provocative Nato option for Ukraine if abandoning it provides the off-ramp that Putin requires to stop burying Ukrainian cities. Wise compromise is not cowardly.
‘It has to be China’: EU’s Borrell calls for mediator in Ukraine crisis
The Xi Jinping government should aim to broker a deal consistent with its core principles and reveal China as a pro-peace prime-time international player. Beijing is not the only one that can mediate but, at this moment, it may be the best possible mediator the world has.
LMU Clinical Professor Tom Plate authored “Understanding Doomsday”, an early study of nuclear war. He is vice-president of the Pacific Century Institute, a track-two pro-peace non-profit focused on America and Asia
