Putin’s visit to China brings new cold war – and nuclear threat – ever closer

This month’s high-level diplomatic visits offer a glimpse into how world powers are repositioning themselves for the sake of national interests
No matter how intense geopolitical competition might get, great powers must not cross red lines into nuclear confrontation – tactical or otherwise

C. Uday Bhaskar

Published: 5:30am, 23 May 2024

Why you can trust SCMP

Major power relations have undergone a significant transformation this month. Chinese President Xi Jinping’s trip to Europe, followed by Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to China, may well herald the start of major geopolitical turbulence. Meanwhile, US President Joe Biden has imposed new tariffs on imports of electric vehicles and other strategic goods from China.

Whether this marks a new phase of the US-China trade war is moot. For now, the Chinese commerce ministry has noted that Washington’s decision was driven by domestic politics, adding: “China will take resolute measures to defend its rights and interests.”

These developments point to the major powers positioning themselves to protect their abiding national interests. Second-tier powers such as France and Germany in the European Union, and Japan and India in Asia, will be affected by this competition of the US with China and Russia. The pursuit of issue-based interests is likely to prevail. Regrettably, this is a case of short-term political compulsions trumping issues that may be described as the “global good”, such as equitable free trade and climate commitments.

Xi’s visit to Europe sought to both advance and protect Chinese interests against the backdrop of a deteriorating relationship between Beijing and Washington. When Xi met French President Emmanuel Macron, the objective was to jointly push for an equal and orderly multipolar world. It’s a formulation that challenges the unipolar primacy that China perceives the US to have accorded to itself since the collapse of the Soviet Union. France, despite being a Nato member, is not as closely allied to the US as the United Kingdom is, and so was an appropriate first stop for Xi’s visit.

A joint statement on the Middle East from the Chinese and French presidents highlights the fact that both countries are permanent members of the UN Security Council and “are working together to find constructive solutions, based on international law, to the challenges and threats to international security and stability”.

The subtext here is that Israel is able to act with impunity in its disproportionate use of force against Palestinian civilians only due to American support. France and China were calling this out in the statement without explicit reference to the US. This is not to suggest that there was no divergence between Macron and Xi on other issues. There was plenty when it came to trade, on which neither side made any substantive accommodation.

09:45

How do France’s ambitions as a global leader figure in China-US relations?

Meanwhile, France may be recognising the limits of “strategic autonomy” in the face of Russia advancing into Ukraine and threatening European security. Does China uncritically support Russia when it comes to the war in Ukraine? Putin’s visit to China is instructive and the text of various joint statements offers some important clues to the geopolitical framework of Sino-Russian relations.

In his remarks to the media, Xi said, “China and Russia believe that the Ukraine crisis must be resolved by political means. China has been consistent and clear on this matter by advocating for compliance with the norms and principles set forth in the UN Charter, respecting state sovereignty and territorial integrity for all countries, while taking into consideration their reasonable security concerns.” I interpret this as a gentle but firm rebuke of Moscow’s war and violation of Ukrainian territorial integrity, as well as a call to return to the negotiating table.

Putin chose China for his first visit abroad after he was sworn in for a record fifth presidential term on May 7. He signalled that the Sino-Russian partnership will put up a determined collective resistance to US hegemony. To that extent, if Xi sought to prevent a new cold war with his Europe visit, that is now a lost cause and the rhythms of recent history are set to recur.

But that past is ominous. World War II ended with the US dropping two atomic bombs on Japan. More recently, Putin rattled the nuclear sabre in the context of the Ukraine war again. On May 6, as Xi was visiting Europe, the Russian defence ministry said it would practise deploying tactical nuclear weapons in response to what it called threats from the West. Specifically, it said that “measures will be carried out to practice the issues of preparation and use of non-strategic nuclear weapons”.

02:01

Atomic scientists set ‘Doomsday Clock’ closer to midnight than ever before as nuclear threat rises

Can any nuclear weapon be non-strategic? Ask Hiroshima and Nagasaki. In an article published in the French newspaper Le Figaro on May 5, and later in English on CGTN, Xi wrote: “History is our best teacher. We live in a world that is far from being tranquil and is once again facing a multitude of risks.” He added, “I have stressed that nuclear weapons must not be used, and a nuclear war must not be fought.”

Xi’s commitment to nuclear restraint despite Putin’s sabre-rattling is welcomed and it’s encouraging to note that the Xi-Putin joint statement affirms that “there can be no winners in a nuclear war and it should never be fought”.

While this is a reiteration of a commitment made by the five nuclear-weapon powers in January 2022, it was significant that Xi reminded his interlocutors in France that “China is the only country among the major nuclear-weapon states that is committed to no-first-use of nuclear weapons”.

Nuclear restraint and rectitude are not merely normative objectives for the global good, but ethical compulsions that will determine global survival. Xi’s resolve in this regard should be acknowledged. Even as geopolitical competition between the US and its allies against the China-Russia dyad intensifies, one earnestly hopes that major powers will not cross the red line into any form of nuclear confrontation – tactical or otherwise.

Commodore C. Uday Bhaskar is director of the Society for Policy Studies (SPS), an independent think tank based in New Delhi