One year on from the start of Russia’s attack on Ukraine, the pain and suffering mounts. The US’ most senior general estimates that Ukraine has seen in excess of 100,000 soldiers killed and injured, while US and European officials suggest Russia may have suffered close to 200,000 dead or wounded. A staggering eight million refugees are dispersed across Europe, a number not seen since World War II. Many Ukrainian cities and towns lie in ruin, with the eventual rebuilding cost at least US$349 billion or as much as US$750 billion, and rising. Today a harsh, dangerous, unpredictable cold war is unfolding between the US and its Western allies, and Russia and China . At this crucial point, China’s leadership has two branching pathways ahead of it, and it is unclear which President Xi Jinping will select, although the signs are modestly positive. The first road is the most alarming: to double down on an uncritical alliance with Russia. China can ramp up dual-use exports and other types of material support, including oil and gas imports , and even possibly direct military exports to Russia. The US administration clearly fears this is the option China’s leaders are about to take – hence US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s warning to China’s top diplomat Wang Yi of the risks associated with such steps. US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has underscored this message. If China’s support shifts to include dual-use and military materials, additional US and European sanctions will be a practical certainty. The cold war will get colder for the Chinese economy, just as it tries to rebound post-Covid, to re-energise domestic growth , and to avoid the worst effects of a housing and construction crisis and price declines. By shifting to directly supporting Russian President Vladimir Putin’s war, China could pay an enormous price, as global trade ties would be further stretched to breaking point. Let’s not forget the scale of these trade flows. In 2021, the European Union imports from China were worth €472 billion (US$498 billion) while exports to China were worth €223 billion. Last year, US imports from China were worth US$537 billion while exports were worth US$154 billion. Compare these massive figures with China’s trade with Russia – worth a relatively paltry US$190 billion in 2022 – one-seventh of the flows China could put in jeopardy by going all-in behind Russia, a declining power, and an unreliable President Putin. Of all nations, China has arguably benefited most from opening to world trade, the strengthening of globalisation and the rules-based interconnected system. It stands to be hurt the most if it goes down the wrong path. Surely it is in China’s best interests – and those of the US and EU – to avoid the war further undermining and dismantling a globalised world that is already exhibiting the strain of geopolitical competition and disputation? China has a better second path available: to use its leverage and closeness with Russia to broker an exit from this disaster and an eventual end to the war. The release of Chinese 12-point position paper calling for a ceasefire and talks as the “only viable solution” is very important and a first step. This could be a springboard for progress. China’s leadership should now go further and offer to support serious negotiations, possibly mediated by a third neutral party, such as the Swiss. In doing so, China can demonstrate it is not only a rising but also a great power. It should use its influence with Russia and Putin to create real space for peace talks. Ukraine on agenda as China-Nato military talks resume after Covid break Thus, just as US president Theodore Roosevelt secured the Treaty of Portsmouth in 1905 and so ended the Russo-Japanese war, President Xi could demonstrate his global foresight and growing geopolitical power and influence by now pressing President Putin to negotiate, in good faith, an exit before yet more lives are lost and even greater global risks loom. This is China’s chance to be an honest effective broker of a balanced acceptable deal that Russia and Ukraine both need. Acting as a broker of talks, China can concretely demonstrate the country’s commitment to global peace and prosperity. In doing so the country could come away from negotiations stronger and more influential. This can be the outcome for China even if the negotiations are difficult, protracted, strenuous and fitful, as they most certainly will be. To conclude, if China wants to lead, the country should do so on Ukraine by creating pressure for and room for a deal, rather than siding with the aggressor and sliding into being an active military supplier to Russia. Great leaders take risks. They push people together. They press allies and foes to recognise reality and to start talking. We hope China’s leadership chooses the right road. One leads to an end to globalisation, an entrenched cold war and a dangerous ongoing, costly, tragic, proxy military clash on Ukrainian soil. The clash will be worsened by rising distrust and economic decoupling . The better China-facilitated and negotiated pathway could lead combatants towards peace, and significantly raise China’s stature across the globe, help restore economic calm, lower energy prices, allow coexistence, competition, and eventually, once again, cooperation and collaboration on common global goals. William R. Rhodes is a former chair and CEO of Citibank and author of Banker to the World Stuart P.M. Mackintosh is executive director of the Group of Thirty