China’s delicate balancing act in the Ukraine war Caught between giants

The ongoing war in Ukraine has profoundly reshaped global alliances, thrusting China into a diplomatic tightrope that underscores the complexity of its foreign policy. As detailed in a recent Foreign Affairs article, China finds itself navigating a treacherous middle ground between its historic ties with Russia and its economic and strategic interests in Europe. This war, while geographically distant, has become a defining test of China’s global ambitions and its ability to manage competing pressures at home and abroad.

At the heart of China’s dilemma lies a fractured domestic narrative. Within its political and intellectual circles, as well as among the general public, opinions about the Ukraine conflict are deeply divided. On one side, many Chinese officials and citizens empathize with Ukraine’s defense of sovereignty, recalling China’s own painful history of foreign invasions. China’s official rhetoric upholds the principles of territorial integrity and opposition to military aggression, aligning with the UN Charter and supporting Ukraine’s claims. Ukraine is not just a distant state but also a technological partner, notably in jet engine technology, essential for China’s military development.

On the other side, a significant faction interprets the war as part of a broader geopolitical struggle, where Western expansionism and NATO’s eastward push threaten Russia’s traditional sphere of influence—an anxiety they parallel with China’s own experience of Western containment. This view paints Russia’s actions as reactive rather than aggressive, reflecting a historic continuity of regional tensions following the Cold War. For many Chinese citizens, Russia’s confrontational stance resonates as a bold challenge to Western dominance, and Beijing’s diplomacy is often seen as overly cautious or restrained.

This internal contradiction is reflected in China’s official 12-point policy on Ukraine, which simultaneously stresses respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity while acknowledging “legitimate security concerns” that implicitly defend Russia’s fears of Western encroachment. Such duality encapsulates China’s broader foreign policy: a careful balancing act shaped by competing priorities and strategic culture that discourages open confrontation with its allies.

Despite its strong ties to Russia—including a $250 billion annual trade relationship and a shared border spanning over 2,600 miles—China’s engagement with Ukraine remains significant, with bilateral trade reaching nearly $8 billion in 2024. Yet, economic relations with Russia have faced hurdles, especially due to Western sanctions, causing stagnation and even decline in trade growth.

China’s role as a potential peace broker remains highly limited. While Beijing has demonstrated capacity for mediation in conflicts such as the Iran-Saudi Arabia rapprochement, the Ukraine war presents unique challenges. China’s reluctance to pressure Moscow and the deep mistrust between Russia, Ukraine, and Western powers make a Chinese-led resolution improbable. Western skepticism toward China’s neutrality and Beijing’s strained relations with the U.S. and Europe further diminish its prospects as a credible mediator.

The war also deepens the rift between China and Europe, with Beijing perceiving European criticism as misguided and unfair, reinforcing China’s decision to maintain its Russia relationship. How the conflict ultimately concludes will significantly influence the future security landscape of Europe and the post-Soviet space, directly impacting China’s regional strategy and economic ambitions.

In sum, China’s navigation of the Ukraine war reveals a foreign policy caught between competing allegiances and strategic interests. The conflict has exposed the limits of Beijing’s influence, underscoring the broader challenges of multipolar diplomacy amid an increasingly polarized global order. As Foreign Affairs highlights, China’s struggle to reconcile internal divisions and external pressures signals that, while it may aspire to be a global peacemaker, it remains tethered to the realities of power politics that complicate its rise on the world stage.

By Vugar Khalilov