As the Ukrainian war fails to deescalate substantially, political diplomacy between the world powers seeks new ways to halt the Russian aggression and prevent a more extensive world conflict. At the same time, the role of China in weighing the future consequences of the war has not been underestimated, but it is still to be accessed for its actual impact.

Putin has miscalculated

More than a month after the beginning of the war, it is evident that Vladimir Putin has miscalculated the outcome of his operation in Ukraine. Instead of a quick win that would come effortlessly, he has drawn Russia into an aggressive war with its conterminous country, whose citizens are unwilling to surrender. His narrative, built upon the “denazification” of Ukraine and the takeover of previous Soviet territory, is so empty that it cannot even stand as an argument. If we also consider the decisive response of the West, the complete Russian isolation due to the Western sanctions and the growing discontentment inside the country, Putin needs a way out. The shift in the Kremlin’s narrative, which recently stated that the war enters a new “phase” and that Moscow is now focusing mainly on the Donbas region, could well be a bluff. Still, it is also certainly an indication that things are not going as planned for the Russian administration. However, that could make the situation rather worrying as well.

The autocrat has failed to prove that he is always willing to make rational decisions, while, at the same time, he has used even the threat of a nuclear war in case the Russian demands are not fulfilled. Whoever thinks he is bluffing should rethink. A man who has found his way to stay in power for decades, paying no respect for democratic values, the rule of law, and citizens’ interests, will do whatever it takes to secure that he will not retreat as a loser.

US’ aggressive rhetoric

Before the war started, the US was the first to underline that Russia would invade Ukraine. They were repeating it daily, and they were eventually right. Since the war started, they worked together with the EU, and they responded assertively with sanctions that have seriously damaged the Russian economy and its future reliability.

The difference between the US and the EU comes down to the rhetoric that they have used regarding Putin’s actions. While EU leaders maintain a relatively moderate diplomatic rhetoric, President Biden does not act the same way. He has not been reluctant to use aggressive remarks when speaking about Vladimir Putin. He recently called him a “butcher”, and he even stated that “this man cannot remain in power”, a phrase that was probably not scripted and later forced the White House to issue a corrective statement.

US irritation regarding Putin is not helpful since it sabotages possible chances of compromise. Unless the US attempts to have a constant escalation on the war front, it would be wiser to follow the EU rhetoric on the issue. In diplomacy, you should always provide your enemies with a bridge over which they can retreat. Biden’s rhetoric destroys that bridge.

The role of China

President Xi Jinping has hitherto been unwilling to condemn his Russian counterpart, whereas he has indicated his will to help put an end to this war. China claims that this is a stance of neutrality, while the US did not lose the chance to criticize the Chinese role as helpful to the Russian aggression.

The truth is that China and Russia have had close relations for years. This is not only due to economic interests but also because they share the same indifference to democratic values. Especially during the last decade, when the US has followed a non-interventionist foreign policy doctrine, autocrats around the world have found a way to cooperate. Russia has already asked for military and monetary help from China, and the US has claimed that China has already decided to provide financial support. If that is proven and the US retaliates with sanctions against China, the problem could only worsen.

The West should find ways to create a line of communication with China and search for common ground, possibly on the economic front. China is the country most benefited from the free market economy of the 21st century. It does not want to lose the competitive advantage which made it achieve its astonishing economic growth. The recent developments and the Chinese reluctance to condemn the Russian aggression have caused investors and fund managers to be sceptical about their exposure to the Chinese markets. Surely China does not want to witness a further acceleration of the global investors’ unease.

If the Ukrainian war turns into a conflict between Democracy and Autocracy, the world will take a massive risk with unprecedented consequences. During WWII, the Allies cooperated with Stalin to defeat the Nazis. The same rules apply today as well between the West and China. Recollecting Winston Churchill’s statement: “If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference of the Devil in the House of Commons.”