In May 2022, former U.S. President George W. Bush made a notable slip condemning “the decision of one man to launch a wholly unjustified and brutal invasion of Iraq.” He swiftly corrected himself: “I mean, of Ukraine.” The gaffe held symbolic significance, inadvertently linking the Iraq War, which led to a decline in U.S. moral authority, to Russia's war against Ukraine, where the United States struggles to rally the world against the invasion.
Although the United States' material power hasn't significantly diminished—its PPP-adjusted share of global GDP remained relatively stable from 19.44% in 2003 to 15.65% in 2022, and its military is the strongest in the world—the country’s moral authority to uphold the multilateral order has waned. The United States' violations of international law have eroded its credibility as a defender of a system it helped establish. This is highlighted by Colombia's President Gustavo Petro, who cites perceived U.S. hypocrisy as a reason for his reluctance to condemn Russia's war against Ukraine: "The discourse that condemns the invasions by certain countries does not sound sincere to us when those who reject these invasions have themselves attacked other countries."
Regardless of size, social orders rely on internal logical consistency and the commitment of the order’s safeguard to abide by its rules. When the guardian violates the norms, the social order loses credibility and is perceived merely as a cynical tool of power. This perception challenges the order wherever the enforcing party lacks the coercive power to sustain it. This is what happened to the international system under U.S. hegemony.
As China seeks to reshape the world order, it should monitor closely and avoid making the same mistakes.
China has articulated its vision for a new international system, advocating for a Chinese-led order that promotes the democratization of international relations. The vision emphasizes economic development, investing significant resources and attention in countries primarily overlooked by the West. Most importantly, the Chinese leadership pledges to establish a multipolar international system of sovereign and independent equals, where common security is achieved through dialogue rather than the use of force. In September 2023, the State Council Information Office of the PRC emphasized that "the big, the mighty and the wealthy should not bully the small, the weak and the poor.”
Assuming that China genuinely seeks to uphold this vision, its policies regarding Russia’s invasion of Ukraine are in direct contradiction to its espoused values.
“Bullying” would be an understatement for Russia’s actions, as the largest country on earth seeks to erase Ukrainian identity, statehood, culture, and language. The Kremlin flagrantly violates international human rights and humanitarian law by kidnapping and abducting thousands of children from Ukraine, bombing civilian infrastructure, including children and maternity hospitals, and likely causing the flooding of the Kherson region by blowing up the Kakhovka Dam. The Independent International Commission of Inquiry on Ukraine has documented instances of Russian soldiers committing rape and sexual violence against women aged 19 to 83. The Commission also reported the "widespread and systematic" use of torture by Russian forces. Additionally, Russian forces employ the Al-Qaedaesque strategy of "double tapping," where they strike civilians and then target medics responding to the initial attack.
China has played a crucial and positive role in preventing its junior partner from using nuclear weapons. However, despite the Chinese leadership's claims of neutrality and restraint from directly supplying weapons, China has effectively sided with Russia and become the most important sponsor of Russia’s aggression.
China is sustaining the Russian war economy by purchasing large quantities of Russian oil, which now makes up 19% of China's oil imports. Additionally, bilateral trade between the two countries has surged by 26% in 2023 alone. Chinese exports are crucial to Russia's military, supplying essential technology for producing missiles and glide bombs. Moreover, China exports at least $14.5 million in drones to Russia, while Ukraine receives around $200,000 in drone shipments from Chinese production. Drones have been weaponized and are playing a pivotal role in the conflict.
China's engagement with Russia is often justified by the notion that Russia could serve as a valuable and economically dependent junior partner in China's broader competition with the West. However, this strategy may be based on grave miscalculation.
Firstly, it's questionable that Vladimir Putin can be controlled through economic dependence. Germany has already made the mistake of trying to moderate the Kremlin through economic interdependence. While China is more economically important to Russia than Germany was in 2022, Putin has shown a deep-seated disdain for modernity and a disregard for the well-being of the Russian people. The Kremlin operates with an imperial and transactional mindset. If Chinese and Russian interests were to diverge, there is no guarantee that Russia, as a nuclear power with over 8,000 warheads, would comply with China, even if it would induce a heavy economic toll on the Russian people.
By deepening ties with Russia, China risks further alienating the United States and, more critically, the European Union, which has remained more open to economic engagement than Washington. This could be a strategic misjudgment, as the EU remains an economic powerhouse relative to Russia, which offers China's struggling economy nothing besides energy resources. Further, if the MAGA movement returns to the White House, its hostile rhetoric toward U.S. allies might allow China to drive a wedge into the Western alliance and improve relations with the EU. Such diplomatic efforts will be challenging if China supports Russia's war in Europe.
But most importantly, by supporting Russia’s war in Ukraine, China undermines the credibility of the multilateral order it supposedly aims to establish. China's peace plan for Ukraine emphasizes respect for Ukrainian sovereignty and the protection of civilians. Yet, it backs a genocidal campaign that continuously seeks to overthrow the Ukrainian government.
China may dismiss inconsistencies between actions and words with whataboutist reference to U.S. hypocrisy, but this approach is short-sighted and undermines Beijing’s long-term interests. In a realist-dominated zeitgeist, reshaping the multilateral system and establishing interstate norms is challenging. This process requires robust enforcement mechanisms and a credible, steadfast commitment from the aspiring hegemon to adhere to the principles it promotes.
By supporting a war that blatantly contradicts the foundations of China's proposed order, China's vision cannot be trusted, resulting in its foreign policy alliances remaining purely transactional and, therefore, more unstable.
Currently, Chinese leadership may find comfort in the many world leaders who, disenchanted with the U.S. or pursuing their transactional interests, approve of China’s Ukraine policy. Still, Beijing should not be complacent; world leaders are observant. In 2003, few loudly criticized the U.S. for hypocrisy when it invaded Iraq, yet today, the term is widely used as the U.S. defends norms it once violated.
China must change its Ukraine policy and cut off support for the Russian war economy, both out of moral duty and self-interest. Otherwise, it risks its leaders stumbling over their stance on the war in Ukraine 20 years from now.