China increasingly sees the war in Ukraine -- and the roles of the United States and its NATO allies in backing Kyiv against Moscow -- as a reflection of future tensions to come between the military bloc and Beijing in the Indo-Pacific. Ever since Russian tanks first crossed into Ukraine on February 24, Beijing has walked an awkward line between not giving outright support to Moscow's invasion while accusing the United States and other NATO countries of provoking the war by allowing the security alliance to expand eastward despite protests from the Kremlin.
Now, as the war continues to grind on with the Russian military suffering major setbacks on the battlefield, China has ramped up its rhetoric to warn about NATO and the United States' footprint in Asia.
"NATO, a military organization in the North Atlantic, has in recent years come to the Asia-Pacific region to throw its weight around and stir up conflicts," Wang Wenbin, a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, said in late April. "NATO has messed up Europe. Is it now trying to mess up the Asia-Pacific and even the world?"
Wang's comments were in response to earlier remarks from U.K. Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, who called for boosting NATO in the wake of the Ukraine war and warned China that it should "play by the rules."
The added focus on NATO from Beijing comes as both China and the United States see Russia's invasion as a foil for future tensions between the two countries in Asia. NATO said last year that it intended to focus more on China and Beijing is expected to play a large role in the bloc's strategy moving forward.
Likewise, Washington is increasingly convinced that the conflict provides it with an unexpected advantage in the long term, with Bloomberg reporting on May 10 that U.S. officials believe that bolstered European defense spending and a weakened Russia could allow it to accelerate a security shift toward China.
Those aims are part of the shared distrust toward NATO and the United States that has led Beijing and Moscow to become closer in recent years and why many analysts believe that China has not abandoned Russia throughout its brutal war in Ukraine.
Similarly, experts and Western officials warn that Beijing is closely watching the response to Russia's invasion and drawing potential lessons for any tensions over Taiwan, which China claims as its territory and has threatened to invade if Taipei refuses to submit to its control.
"If China joins the West in condemning Russia, it will be much applauded in Washington and most European capitals. But it will lose Russia's partnership," Senior Colonel Zhou Bo, a retired officer of China's People's Liberation Army (PLA), wrote in The Economist on May 9. "And it is only a matter of time before America takes on China again. The Biden administration's policy towards my country is 'extreme competition' that stops just short of war."
Ukraine War As a 'Mirror'
The parallels drawn between U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific and NATO's expansion in Europe are not new, with both China and Russia underlining this point in the 5,000-word joint statement they released in February when Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin declared a "no-limits" partnership.
The document voiced their opposition to the "further enlargement of NATO" and pledged to "remain highly vigilant about the negative impact of the United States' Indo-Pacific strategy."
Despite Chinese protests, experts point out there are key differences between NATO's role and U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific region, which also includes a wider range of economic and political policies beyond the bloc and the United States dealing with its long Pacific Ocean border.
Related: Russia Cuts Gas Supply To Seized German Gazprom Unit
Still, the Ukraine war is set to affect the region, with Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister Le Yucheng saying in March that the crisis could be used as a "mirror" to view the security situation in the Asia-Pacific region.
For the administration of U.S. President Joe Biden, the move toward Asia is seen as critical and long overdue.
Washington has increasingly warned about China abusing its military and economic clout in the region, pointing to the country's moves to exert greater control over Hong Kong, expand its military presence in the South China Sea, and crack down on human rights in Xinjiang Province, which has seen more than 1 million Uyghurs, Kazakhs, and other Muslim minorities interned in camps.
But while both U.S. and Chinese officials see parallels between the Ukraine war and rising tensions in Asia, they are each drawing different lessons.
U.S. officials continue to view increased defense spending in Europe, as well as both Finland and Sweden on an immediate path toward NATO membership, as positive security developments that could allow the United States to follow through on its long-delayed "pivot to Asia." That policy was first outlined by U.S. President Barack Obama and the move is seen as necessary as U.S. policy circles increasingly view China, not Russia, as the country's main military adversary.
Chinese officials and experts, however, are reaching different conclusions from the reflections they see in Ukraine.
Beijing -- and Xi in particular -- has long supported "strategic autonomy," a concept pushed by French President Emmanuel Macron that calls for Europe to play a more independent role in its defense that relies less on the United States.
In a May 10 call with Macron, Xi pushed the French president and other European leaders to take security "into their own hands," echoing earlier comments from a May 9 call with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz.
While the long-term implications of the Ukraine war are still uncertain, as is the future of European "strategic autonomy," Beijing increasingly seems to believe that it could further delay the U.S. strategic pivot to China and lead to a lasting division among European and NATO allies.
"Joe Biden had hoped to put Russia policy on a 'stable and predictable' footing in order to focus on America's Indo-Pacific strategy. The war in Ukraine undoubtedly will distract America's attention and [siphon] away resources," wrote Zhou, the retired PLA officer. "The question is...how long Mr. Biden will allow Ukraine to remain a distraction."
More Top Reads from Oilprice.com:
- Europe Looks To African Gas To Reduce Dependence On Russian Imports
- IEA: Lower Demand Changes Everything For Oil Markets
- Mexico’s Push For Energy Independence Comes At A Cost
The outcome of this conflict will have huge strategic, economic and geopolitical implications for the global economy, energy resources, the US dollar and the future of Asia-Pacific region particularly the fate of Taiwan.
While Russia is the one who initiated the military operations in Ukraine, the grounds for the conflict have been prepared by the United States with the dual purpose of weakening Russia and causing a split in the Chinese-Russian strategic alliance.
China sees the direct involvement of the US-led NATO in the Ukraine conflict as a dress rehearsal for an inevitable confrontation between China and the United States over Taiwan with direct involvement by NATO.
And contrary to the wishes of the United States and NATO, the Ukraine conflict has solidified further the strategic alliance between China and Russia.
Dr Mamdouh G Salameh
International Oil Economist
Visiting Professor of Energy Economics at ESCP Europe Business School, London
So their capacity for a conventional war, imo, should not be viewed as insufficient to take on a third world country. I dare say that our invasion of Iraq, or Afghanistan, would not have gone as well if Russia or China had supplied the equivalent amount of real time intelligence reports and equipment. Can you imagine what approx. 40,000 Stingers and Javelins would have done to our invasion's chances of success? And what amount and type of troops and supplies would be where, and when?
My concern is that NATO taking off the gloves, so to speak, will set a precedent for Russia or China to follow in any future US/NATO localized conflict.
The advent of a new type of warfare will be needed for us to continue the military dominance of the last 30 years. Our best course will undoubtedly be the militarization of space through SpaceX (logistics) and the Starlink (ISR) system.
Also an even greater potential is AI sourced computer software wars. There may be an indication of that currently occurring as there is a noticeable absence of Russian sponsored cyberwar attacks against Ukraine and NATO. There is opacity regarding the Us and Chinese AI capabilities, but I would give the current advantage to the US due to (indirect) control of the chip manufacturing machines.