The case of China in this context also becomes an interesting one. Just preceding the Russian onslaught in Ukarine, Beijing and Moscow had declared a friendship without limits. Beijing, like Moscow had expected the war to be a swift and decisive one. Even though Beijing publicly claims to maintain neutrality, its actions clearly show which side it is on. A few examples in this context include China’s criticisms of sanctions against Russia, Russian statements on how China and Russia withstand the West’s efforts to sow discord, Russia seeking Chinese military equipment, even though China denies it, and China’s vote against the resolution at the UN General Assembly on suspending Moscow from the UN Human Rights Council. Before this China had abstained on votes on Russia, but on this one, it voted against the resolution.

In March last year, the International Court of Justice also asked Russia to suspend its invasion of Ukraine. Vice-President Kirill Gevorgian of Russia and judge Xue Hanqin of China dissented against the order. Examples such as these showing where China stands on the crisis are myriad. A more recent example is from January this year, when the U.S. Treasury sanctioned a Chinese company- Changsha Tianyi Space Science and Technology Research Institute Co. Ltd for providing satellite imagery of Ukraine to support the Kremlin-linked mercenary Wagner Group’s combat operations for Russia. As per the White House, Wagner has about 50,000 fighters in Ukraine, with 80% of them being drawn from prisons.

Another example from January this year is that of Chinese companies’ provision of non-lethal assistance to Russia for use in the war in Ukraine. The non-lethal military assistance and economic support stops short of wholesale sanctions evasion. In June last year, the department of commerce of the United States (US) amended the Entity List and added 36 entities which acted contrary to the foreign policy interests of the US in addition to supplying Russian sanctioned entities. A lot of these 36 entities came from the People’s Republic of China.

The question which arises is what does China seek to gain out of the situation? China has long aspired to be the leader of the international system. Deng Xiaoping’s dictum of ‘hiding one’s power and biding one’s time’ was done away with full clarity by Xi Jinping, who in his 19th Party Congress speech of 2017, stated that developing countries should consider following China’s model. This made it clear that China was now willing to take on the role of a leader offering an alternate model of governance of the international system. China’s aggression be it military or economic or in the sphere of disinformation and surveillance, since then has increased manifold, and the latest effort in supplanting American leadership through any, and all means possible is in the form of a Chinese high-altitude surveillance balloon spotted over continental US. Not too far back in time, in December last year, Chinese spy ship Yuan Wang 5 fitted with several tracking and surveillance devices had entered the Indian Ocean region ahead of India’s plan for a test firing of a long-range ballistic missile in the Bay of Bengal.

China is willing to take over the reins of control of the international system by all means possible, as it believes its time has come. The Chinese view of the existing multilateral world order is vertical instead of being horizontal. A horizontal distribution of power sees different poles or countries in the international system exerting varying levels of influence on the system, whereas a vertical distribution sees one country at the top commanding all other countries beneath it. A revision of the existing multilateral system does not augur well for any country of the world, be it the oldest democracy or the largest democracy and a clearer understanding of China’s revisionist plans through notes sharing is urgent.

The article has been authored by Sriparna Pathak, associate professor and director, Centre for Northeast Asian Studies, OP Jindal Global University, Sonipat.