How 'China threat' narrative risks derailing any peace plan for Ukraine

There must be a reason why the West is not able to accept differences, especially China's differences.

China is distinct from any other country, and from European countries and the United States in particular.

The core of the problem, though, is not that difference per se, rather the fact that the reluctance to accept this difference has created biases that, remaining unsolved for a long time, will end up becoming unsurmountable.

Let me explain this first with an example and some basic facts.

Top Chinese diplomat Wang Yi visited Europe at the end of February. After a short trip to Italy, France and Hungary, he attended the 59th Munich Security Conference and delivered a keynote speech.

During his speech, Wang highlighted that making the world a safer place is the strong desire of all people and a responsibility of all countries. He also highlighted that, to build a safer world, the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries must be respected, disputes should be peacefully resolved through dialogue and consultation, the principles of the UN Charter should be upheld, and the key role of development must be fully harnessed.

On his way back home, Wang stopped by Moscow, where he met Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov as well as Russian President Vladimir Putin.

While there, he repeated the same idea and, two days after, on February 24, "China's Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis," whose publication had already been anticipated by diplomat Wang in Europe, was eventually issued.

With this document, officially endorsed on the same day by Chinese President Xi Jinping, China is emphasizing the advantages of ending the Ukraine crisis and, beyond that, of stopping the spread of aggressive attitudes that, if left unchained, will inevitably push the whole word on the brink of a more global conflict. The document also notes at point No. 1 the necessity of respecting the sovereignty of all countries.

No analysis based on these facts could argue that China's plan is not clear, logic and promising.

At times people seem forgetting that the world in which the United States can freely impose their ideas on their so-called partners that are in fact vassals does not exist anymore.

The sudden withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan is just another proof of that. As a consequence, imagining that today the end of the Ukraine crisis will follow the humiliation of Russia means either that the US believes it still has the influence that got resized a long time ago, or it simply shows the US lack of capacity to understand that they are no longer able to control and manipulate foreign countries the way they were used to do.

The reluctance to accept this major change is actually understandable, as US dominance lasted for too long. However, continuing to manipulate facts just to turn them in the best possible combination to fit a narrative that is not sustainable any more is dangerous.

Once again, let's go back to facts.

If any other Western leader had raised the same arguments of diplomat Wang, his or her words would have been considered constructive.

If any other Western leader had the chance to talk to Putin, he or her would have been considered as a potential mediator and his or her privileged position a road path to explore, if not to follow.

If any other Western leader had a visit to Moscow planned and the foreign minister of the concerned country was going there to prepare it in details, the exchanges in Russia would have been judged as necessary, useful and promising.

Not for China though. For China it is always different. For Western media reporting on China, there is always a reason to justify whatever China does is a potential threat.

They can even become completely illogical for the sake of confirming the suspected threat.

Once again, let's focus on facts.

It is just not possible to believe that a real negotiation with Russia on the Ukraine crisis can start without talking to Putin. And, China has on no occasions pretended to have the solution already. It is just trying to do something to create an opportunity for constructive talk. It is also possible that China's attempt will end nowhere.

However, what is certain is that by excluding Russia, no step forward will ever be made. Even the Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky has understood that, and indeed right after the China document was issued, he solicited President Xi to talk to him, too.

The eyes of Western observers are so imbued with prejudices that when a few days earlier US President Joe Biden visited Kiev, they all reported on the US loyal commitment to the Ukrainian cause, and they could not even see that Zelensky did not welcome Biden with the usual smiles. On the contrary, several pictures circulating online more show the attitude of a disappointed, annoyed man. So, what did Biden really say to Zelensky? Something that further pushed the latter to change his mind and try to listen to President Xi?

It is hard to know, but what is relevant here is that if international media do not become more factual, they will only make the current situation worse.

Grounding analyses on facts and treating these details with less biases do not mean to believe that China is always right or that it has a solution that is ready to be implemented. It just means trying to assess complex facts in a more neutral way and offering more insightful comments to both international public opinion and decision-makers.

When the contrary is happening, taking the same approach as Western scholars would mean suspecting that the interest for solving the crisis is really missing in Europe. But China will never make this assumption. Falling into the same trap would be even more counterproductive. So better try to remain objective, neutral, constructive, and continue focusing on the real priority: identifying an acceptable solution for all parties involved into the Ukraine crisis.

(The author is an independent researcher based in Paris. The views are her own.)