When Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his invasion of Ukraine on February 24, he envisaged a quick seizure of Kyiv and a change of government analogous to Soviet interventions in Budapest in 1956 and Prague in 1968. But it wasn’t to be. The war is still raging, and no one knows when or how it will end.

The raging Russia-Ukraine conflict is a stark reminder of the urgency of effective management of weapons of mass destruction. The international community must come together to restart the long-stalled international negotiations over arms control and nuclear disarmament by fully utilizing the existing mechanisms and platforms and generating greater consensus and impetus among all stakeholders. A staunch supporter of the international arms control and nuclear disarmament regime, China adheres to its longstanding nuclear policy of maximum restraint and remains committed to the pursuit of a new path leading to a world of enduring peace and stability.

Up till now, the fighting has been going on for over 100 days, with the two warring sides still in an offensive and defensive stalemate. Questions about this ongoing crisis can be listed in a long line, most of which no one can answer at this time. Yet among all the uncertainties, one thing is certain: what the Russian troops crossed on February 24 was not simply the land border between Russia and Ukraine, but rather more symbolically, the River Rubicon of the post-cold war international order.

Geopolitical risk, sanctions, and covid in China are redefining how we think about the future of global supply chains. Nations must start considering how to better secure their supply chains through regional trade partnerships, reshoring essential manufacturing capabilities, and sourcing goods from multiple nations and regions.

Differences over the rules for world affairs will not be resolved easily and won’t be resolved in favor the U.S. Countries are interdependent, and a divided world serves no one’s best interests.

The Ukraine crisis has demolished many boundaries. It was out of control from the beginning, since Russia, Ukraine and the U.S. are all unwilling or unable to compromise. Time will tell, though it may not indicate which side to take.

In The Economic Weapon: The Rise of Sanctions as a Tool of Modern War, historian Nicholas Mulder reminds us that even when Britain and Russia were savagely battling each other during the 1853-56 Crimean War, they continued to service their debts to each other. Likewise, when hedge funds launched predatory attacks on Asian currencies during the 1990s Asian financial crisis, they ultimately still played by the rules (even though their unethical behavior brought some East Asian countries’ economic progress to a halt).

Economic globalization — with more participants — is in Europe’s interest. Following the lead of the United States and kicking Russia and its allies out of the international system will only cause global fragmentation.

U.S. President Joe Biden often talks about leading the world. But if sanctions are what he meant, and if abusing the national security exception against WTO members is the means, the global economic system would be better off without America.

Economic sanctions against Russia have laid bare the limits of Western-controlled financial infrastructure, and may have exposed some misguided preconceptions about how the global economy is evaluated.