By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has stated that China has aided Russia during the war, making it ineligible to be a security guarantor in a future peace deal. Zelenskyy cited China’s failure to prevent the war and its support for Russia, including opening the drone market. Despite China’s calls for a peaceful resolution, its economic support for Russia has damaged its neutral standing with Ukraine and Western leaders. This stance suggests China will be excluded from the peace process, and security guarantors should be limited to countries that have supported Kyiv since the 2022 invasion.
Read the original article here
Ukraine’s Zelenskyy rules out China as security guarantor in any peace deal. This statement from President Zelenskyy essentially closes the door on China’s potential role in guaranteeing Ukraine’s security in a future peace agreement with Russia. The rationale behind this decision is multifaceted and speaks volumes about the current geopolitical landscape. It reflects not only a distrust of China’s actions during the ongoing conflict but also a broader assessment of its long-term strategic goals.
The core reasoning behind Zelenskyy’s stance can be distilled into a few key points. First and foremost, China’s actions during the war have been perceived as not supportive of Ukraine’s sovereignty. The criticism here is not just about a lack of outright condemnation of Russia’s aggression, but also the absence of any meaningful efforts to halt the conflict from the outset. This passive stance, from the Ukrainian perspective, suggests a lack of commitment to Ukraine’s territorial integrity and a reluctance to stand up against Russian aggression.
Furthermore, China’s relationship with Russia itself is a critical factor in this decision. The “no limits” partnership between Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, cemented around the anniversary of the invasion, sent a clear signal of continued support for Russia. This includes the provision of vital resources, parts, and potentially even weapons, which essentially undermines Ukraine’s defense capabilities. The implications are pretty clear: a country that’s actively assisting the aggressor can hardly be seen as a trustworthy guarantor of the victim’s security.
It is worth remembering the history. In 2013, China provided nuclear security assurances to Ukraine. The promise was, if invaded with nuclear weapons or threatened, China would step in. This promise has been broken. Today, Ukraine faces constant nuclear threats with no intervention. This experience, as Zelenskyy made clear, is a factor in the distrust of China to act on their word.
Another key point driving Zelenskyy’s decision relates to China’s broader geopolitical ambitions. There is concern over China’s stance on territorial integrity, especially considering its own intentions toward Taiwan. A country that seems to favor powerful nations taking over smaller ones cannot be regarded as a suitable security partner. The perception is that China is pursuing its own interests, and these interests may not align with Ukraine’s.
It’s also essential to consider the current dynamics. China is providing material support to Russia by opening the drone market and buying large quantities of Russian oil. This all points to the reality that China is funding the Russian war machine and is not an unbiased party.
Ultimately, Zelenskyy’s decision is rooted in a realistic assessment of the current situation. This is not a sentiment that can be dismissed as mere politics; it’s a strategic calculation. It is about recognizing who the friends are in this conflict, as well as the enemies, and making sure the players involved in any peace deal are genuinely invested in a peaceful and secure future for Ukraine.