Washington is sounding the alarm. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said on Sunday February 19 that China would consider supplying “weapons” to Russia to support it in its conflict in Ukraine. But Beijing, which denies en bloc, had until then taken care not to get involved directly, even if it provides real economic support to its neighbor.
“If this were the case, this would constitute a major change in China’s posture, and would completely destroy the facade neutrality that it is trying to display”, summarizes François Godement, adviser for Asia at the Institut Montaigne. , which nevertheless judges the scenario of a delivery of offensive weapons by the communist regime to Russia to be unlikely. But do not rule out the possibility of shipments of ammunition and spare parts. Interview.
L’Express: If it were to be confirmed, would a delivery of arms to Russia by China be a major turning point in the conflict?
Francois Godement: This would be a significant step, although its scale would depend on the nature of the weapons delivered by the Chinese regime. If it is spare parts, semiconductors, ammunition or even drones (which can have civilian or military use), the impact would not be the same as if Beijing decided to provide systems of whole weapons such as tanks or planes. However, I can’t imagine China sending advanced equipment, offensive weapons, to Russia. If so, it would be a major shift in her posture and completely destroy the facade of neutrality she tries to display. Moreover, such a decision would certainly lead to a strong reaction from Westerners.
The support of the second world power would in any case be far from being anecdotal for Russia…
This would have extremely important diplomatic weight. But it should be remembered that China is, in fact, already very committed alongside Russia. Beijing is currently a key economic partner for Moscow: in particular thanks to its purchases of oil and gas, which help to lessen the impact of European and American embargoes. Moreover, China fully endorses the Russian propaganda which rejects the responsibility for this war on NATO and the United States, and denounces the followership of the Europeans. Interestingly, when the Chinese regime calls for respect for the principles of sovereignty and territorial integrity, it does not specify which country it is referring to. China has thus never criticized the annexation of certain Ukrainian regions, nor the occupation of Donbass since 2014, nor does it mention the fact that it was Russia that triggered the invasion of Ukraine. .
Does China really want to tie its destiny to that of Russia?
No, but China does not want a defeat of Russia. She is very worried about the risk of decomposition of the Russian regime that could result. China needs not to be isolated diplomatically and strategically. The Russian screen at the United Nations is, for example, very useful to him. In addition, the conflict in Ukraine complicates the American pivot to Asia, which is good for Beijing. In this context, a defeat of Russia followed by a collapse of its political regime would be a catastrophe for China. It is in this sense that it is linked to Russia. If the war in Ukraine continues, without major accidents, such as the use of weapons of mass destruction, that suits him.
Do Westerners have the means to dissuade China from sending arms to Russia?
They have the economic means, if they unite behind this objective. Logically, the United States would take financial sanctions, and it would be in the interest of the Europeans to follow suit. Since the adoption of very severe economic sanctions against Russia, China is particularly worried about what could happen. However, there is strong interpenetration between the Chinese, European and American economies. The game of sanctions is therefore much more difficult with China than with Russia. Moreover, we see that some Europeans, especially the Germans, are particularly worried about a potential economic decoupling with China.
If China decides to supply weapons to Russia, its interest is not to go too far…
Yes, that’s why I doubt that it would choose to deliver complete weapon systems. Better to help indirectly and economically, without achieving a high level of visibility. If it were content to deliver ammunition or spare parts, it would lead to Western discontent, but presumably not too severe economic sanctions. On the other hand, this would in turn justify a reinforced Western commitment in favor of Ukraine and would undermine the objections of those who want to limit it.