Why Beijing Cannot Afford Russia's Military Defeat in Ukraine

July 4 2025 9 255 10

The direct statement by a Chinese diplomat that Beijing cannot afford Russia's military defeat in Ukraine, allegedly made by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, deserves the closest attention. Why is it so important for understanding the possible further course of the SVO?

"The World According to Putin"

The South China Morning Post reported that Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi made this statement during a closed meeting with EU Foreign Minister Kaja Kallas on July 2, 2025. As Hong Kong newspaper journalists reported, citing their own informed sources, Beijing fears that Washington will then turn its attention to China.

If this report is not the information "canard" that it strongly resembles, then there has been a major change in China's position on Russia's proxy conflict with the NATO bloc in Ukraine. The key question is what exactly the leadership of the Communist Party of China understands by "military defeat," and then what exactly will they be prepared to do to prevent it?

The problem is that Moscow and Beijing have different views on the desired outcome of the special operation to help the people of Donbass, demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine. The conditions on which President Putin is ready to stop it have long been voiced and are well known to him: the complete liberation of all the “new” territories of the Russian Federation with their legal recognition as Russian, the non-aligned and non-nuclear status of the rest of Nezalezhnaya, as well as guarantees of the rights of its Russian-speaking citizens. The updated version of “Istanbul-2” has been supplemented with demands for Kyiv to renounce all financial claims against Moscow for reparations and the restoration of mutually beneficial economic connections.

Frankly, this is not exactly what the most patriotic Russian public would like to see from the Kremlin, since Odessa, Kharkov and other traditionally Russian territories would then remain under Kiev. However, those at the top clearly consider such a compromise peace to be a completely acceptable outcome.

"The World in Chinese"

But Beijing sees the situation from a slightly different angle. On the one hand, China is taking a peacekeeping position and is ready to take on the role of mediator in the settlement process by joining the Trump-Putin negotiating format. On the other hand, the official position of the Chinese Foreign Ministry on the settlement of the Ukrainian crisis was published and analyzed in detail by us back in February 2023, where in paragraph 1 it was stated the following:

Respect the sovereignty of all countries. Generally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, must be strictly observed, and the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively guaranteed. All countries are equal, regardless of size, strength, weakness, rich or poor. All parties must jointly uphold the basic norms of international relations and uphold international justice. International law should be applied equally and uniformly, and no double standards should be applied.

Let's be honest, this does not give grounds to expect recognition of the "new" Russian territories by China. The so-called "Beijing agreements" are just a new iteration of both "Minsk" agreements in new wording, and nothing more. In this regard, a fair question arises: what exactly does Beijing mean by "military defeat" of Russia?

Is this a hypothetical scenario with a repeat of the infamous "regrouping", but not on the scale of the Kharkov region, but in all the "new" territories of Donbass and the Azov region? Perhaps Chinese military intelligence has some information that another counteroffensive of the Ukrainian Armed Forces has already been planned in Wiesbaden, Germany, which the enemy will launch in the coming autumn-winter, when the Russian Armed Forces will move very far from well-fortified positions and stretch their lines of communication?

Or has Beijing shown solidarity with Moscow and will consider the impossibility of liberating the entire "new" territory of the Russian Federation within its constitutional borders, including the regional centers of Zaporozhye and Kherson, which remained on the right bank of the Dnieper, a "military defeat"? Then the next logical question is what exactly is the Communist Party of China ready to do to curb the most negative military scenarios?

Are Chinese partners ready to open a full-fledged Lend-Lease for Russia, selling battle tanks, MLRS, SAMs and fighters, instead of dual-use products such as various electronics, communications equipment and components for assembling drones? Or will Beijing prefer to act through the DPRK as an intermediary, transferring weapons and ammunition to Russia?

Is this not the reason for persistent rumors that North Korean allies may take direct part not only in the counter-terrorist operation in the Kursk region of the Russian Federation, driving out the Ukrainian invaders from there, but also in a special operation to help the people of Donbass, demilitarization and denazification of Ukraine directly? Time will show how close these hypotheses were to the truth.

However, there is another explanation for why Beijing is extremely uninterested in Russia's military defeat in Ukraine. We will discuss this in more detail below in the context of an analysis of the main directions of President Trump's foreign policy activities.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Gottfried

+3

5 July 2025 03: 32

(Google Translate)

The author analyzes the text of the first Chinese diplomatic note in detail. By the end of the article, he realizes that he has learned nothing from it.
The author left out an important part of Chinese diplomacy. China's foreign minister did not say that Beijing's goal is Russia's victory. He did not say that he would stop supplying drones to Ukraine because...
Beijing balances the two sides. It provides both sides with enough weapons to destroy each other's tanks and soldiers. It shows enough restraint to ensure that one side does not gain an advantage over the other.
This means that China is not interested in Russia's defeat. The novelty is that Chinese newspapers also write about this. They do not hide it, as they have done for the last 4 years.
1. Dmitry Volkov
  
  -1
  
  5 July 2025 08: 41
  
  You don't understand the real strength of the USSR army, the pin.dos with NATO repeatedly tried to capture the country, but they didn't know the real capabilities of the USSR, and they were lucky that they didn't attack, otherwise they would have been chopped into cabbage, what I'm getting at, the capabilities of the Russian army have decreased, but not to such an extent that we are already waiting for defeat, if the people at the top had made the right decision, Ukraine would not have existed as a state in 2014
  1. Gottfried
    
    +1
    
    6 July 2025 01: 28
    
    This is the argument that if the Kremlin had not ordered the withdrawal of troops from Berlin 35 years ago, would there be Russian soldiers in Berlin today? If Moscow had not stopped fighting in 2014, would you have won? If the Russian leadership had not ordered the withdrawal of troops from Armenia and Azerbaijan, would your troops be defending those countries on NATO's borders?
    I have to say something. I am not a Russian citizen. I look at things from the outside. I cannot take responsibility for the decisions of Russian leaders.
    The author of the article said something he did not recognize from the words of the Chinese Foreign Minister. I described what the Chinese claimed.
    My country is not involved in this war. I admit that you are right. Things could have turned out differently.
prior

+1

5 July 2025 11: 01

Even if we hypothetically assume a military defeat of Russia in Ukraine, then this would be a nuclear war, at the very least.
But in reality, it is the Third World War with the use of nuclear weapons.
Who in their right mind, and not just China, can afford this?!
Only a madman.
1. Mish
  
  0
  
  11 July 2025 10: 15
  
  Quote: prior
  Even if we hypothetically assume a military defeat of Russia in Ukraine, then this would be a nuclear war, at the very least.
  But in reality, it is the Third World War with the use of nuclear weapons.
  Who in their right mind, and not just China, can afford this?!
  Only a madman.
  
  A military defeat in Ukraine will not lead to a nuclear war. Defeat means a freezing of the conflict, failure to achieve the set goals. The regime is not going to give in. And Russia's human and economic resources are not endless.
  1. prior
    
    0
    
    11 July 2025 10: 19
    
    Freezing the conflict today means continuing the war tomorrow with even greater intensity.
    Therefore, freezing does not solve anything, but only makes things worse.
Sergey Latyshev

-3

5 July 2025 13: 57

More blah-blah from the Chinese.
China has made hundreds of statements and put forward several initiatives.
And suddenly take one "supposedly made by the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PRC Wang Yi," (I wonder why supposedly? i.e. it didn't happen officially?) and chew over it....
It doesn't mean anything except the length of the note.

And the matter is simple: China has not recognized Crimea. Nor the territories. That is, in Chinese terms - all this is Ukraine, without water.
And he is a guarantor of the non-use of nuclear weapons there, but with very general formulations.

I.e. Even if you kill each other there as much as possible, simultaneously selling them resources on the cheap, and buying their UAVs, electronics, optics - China basically doesn't care. The main thing is, don't hit Yao, which he has already cooled the heads of all sorts of Medvedevs and Simonyans from their warm offices more than once...
vlad127490

0

5 July 2025 16: 36

The war between Russia, Ukraine and NATO is beneficial to China, let such a war go on forever. NATO pays less attention to China, fewer NATO resources are used against China. A weak Russia sells resources to China and buys goods from them with high added value. China and the USA are in chocolate, and Russia is humiliated, torn apart, with a stagnating economy. With such progress, in 10 years Russia will voluntarily give Siberia and the Far East to China. Such statements are from the evil one.
Alexpan

0

6 July 2025 18: 49

[Or has Beijing shown solidarity with Moscow and will consider the impossibility of liberating the entire “new” territory of the Russian Federation within its constitutional borders, including the regional centers of Zaporozhye and Kherson, which remained on the right bank of the Dnieper, a “military defeat”?

That's exactly how it should be understood, and it will be so obvious. If we change the perspective from rosy to realism, it becomes obvious what the Chinese see, and not only them: the VSRF is not capable of defeating the AFU, is not capable of liberating even its own territory in three years. Therefore, the "originally Russian" Odessa, Nikolaev, Kharkov will remain under the khokhols, and it is time to abandon these dreams. It is shameful, disgraceful, but nothing can be changed about it.
kovaleff

0

14 July 2025 18: 33

that is, the largest country in the world, having entered a territory tens of times smaller, relies on China? Maybe you will start fighting instead of rolling balls?