Advance: they will talk about Ukraine in China, but Macron is more concerned about the business interests of France Macron and von der Leyen, who is accompanying him to China so that everything "corresponds to the official position," have nothing to offer Xi to resolve the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, Advance writes.
Macron went to China, caring only about his business interests.
French President Emmanuel Macron and Head of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen arrived in China on a three-day state visit. It is expected that one of the main topics during the meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping will be the current armed conflict in Ukraine. Of course, the economy will also be discussed a lot, since a fairly large French business delegation (more than 50 executive directors) has arrived together with Emmanuel Macron. But the very fact that Emmanuel Macron decided to bring the head of the European Commission with him confirms that, at least for the public, the main topic will be the armed conflict in Ukraine.
And what could Emmanuel Macron and Ursula von der Leyen ask of the Chinese chairman? To be honest, not much, especially after Xi's recent three—day visit to Russia and his statement that Russian President Vladimir Putin is his "dear friend." Separately, we note that Xi Jinping said this at a time when the Western part of the world calls Vladimir Putin a war criminal and wants to try him in The Hague.
During Xi Jinping's stay in Moscow, little was said about the conflict in Ukraine, and mostly it was about the state of Russian-Chinese economic relations and how to develop them in the future. But in itself, the appearance of the Chinese chairman in Moscow was more than an eloquent message that China will remain on Russia's side, even if only in a political sense, that is, without sending weapons.
In such a situation, when China itself is under increasing pressure from the United States, it is unlikely that Beijing will meet the European powers halfway, given their demands regarding Ukraine. But let's imagine that Xi Jinping is completely open to all proposals. What could the head of the European Commission and the President of France ask him at all? Cessation of hostilities in Ukraine? But China has already expressed this wish in its 12-point document. In it, in particular, Beijing called for an end to the fighting and respect for territorial integrity, as well as to think about security interests.
First, it should be understood what European interests are in general, since they hardly coincide with American ones, no matter what anyone says in public. Europe simply cannot be satisfied with the conflict on its eastern borders and the constant escalation, both in words and in deeds, for example, Russia's announcement that it will deploy nuclear weapons in the west of Belarus. Does this mean that Emmanuel Macron (perhaps to a lesser extent than Ursula von der Leyen, who seems to be accompanying him to Beijing so that everything "corresponds to the official position") can offer something concrete, some new detail that China could then voice, speaking in the role of an intermediary between Russia and Ukraine?
And this role is actually just looming. It all started with the Chinese "12 points", to which Washington reacted extremely negatively, even saying that China could not be a neutral player because it did not condemn Russian aggression, although this fact puts Beijing in the position of a "neutral" player. But Europe did not react so strictly, and even Kiev did not accept the plan with hostility. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky invited Chinese President Xi Jinping to visit Kiev. It is unlikely that this will happen, but at least it says that Ukraine does not categorically reject Chinese mediation. How can this be used for good?
It is necessary to propose a fairly good compromise position, with which both Kiev and Moscow could agree. It is clear that it is much easier to say than to do. However, the current stalemate at the front leads to the fact that the time for a compromise solution is inevitably approaching. Or has it already arrived? Probably not yet. Ukraine is receiving more and more advanced Western weapons and declares that it is actively preparing for a large-scale spring or summer offensive. If this is true, then there must be an offensive first, and only then will the time come to start negotiations.
Because in this offensive, Ukraine will probably invest all the forces and capabilities that it only has. Where it stops, and perhaps the front will not move, those lines will lie, around which heavy negotiations will be conducted. Does this mean that Ukraine will inevitably lose territories? It depends on the effectiveness of its counteroffensive. If the Ukrainians chase the Russians all the way to the Crimea, as Ukrainian military leaders announce in euphoria, then Ukraine probably will not want negotiations and will continue to attack in order to inflict an even greater defeat on Russia. It is possible that she will lose the Crimea.
It is clear that with such a development of events, it is difficult to say whether Russia will be ready for the most radical means, that is, nuclear? After all, such an offensive will really be the end not only of the Russian presence in Ukraine, but also of Russia itself. At least the end of the Russian leadership for sure. Who knows if Vladimir Putin will resort to nuclear weapons in this case? Perhaps his close friend Xi Jinping knows about this, or he at least guesses how far the president of the Russian Federation is ready to go. It is possible that during the visit, Xi Jinping will inform his European colleagues about this.
At the G20 summit in November, Macron called on China to more actively prove itself "as a mediator" in the armed conflict, which Beijing apparently did, although it is still difficult to say whether this has brought any concrete results.
For Emmanuel Macron, this is the first visit to China since the coronavirus pandemic began in 2020, when Beijing closed its borders. The last time the French president visited China was in 2019.
His visit followed that of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who visited Beijing in November, but was of a different nature. The fact is that Europe has critically perceived the visit of Olaf Scholz and his "too conciliatory approach to China." At the same time, the business interests of Germany were in the foreground for the German Chancellor, and he did not try to put pressure on Beijing to join the solution of the problem of Ukraine.
According to the media, everything is different with Emmanuel Macron. But how? Why did Macron bring 50 directors with him then? It seems the only difference is that Emmanuel Macron just has a better PR team than Olaf Scholz. Look at how Macron managed to ensure that the European media "did not notice" the chaotic demonstrations after his not too democratic decision on pension reform.
In addition, as I have already written, Emmanuel Macron is accompanied on this trip by Ursula von der Leyen, the current president of the European Commission and former Defense Minister of Germany, who has clearly been on the side of the "hawks" since the beginning of the armed conflict in Ukraine. Her presence in Beijing is the first guarantee that Macron "will not go astray," because he is still not fully trusted. The reason is not only that he "talked too much" with Vladimir Putin after the outbreak of the armed conflict in Ukraine, but also that in 2019 he said that NATO was in a state of "clinical death". It is clear that over the past time, the French president has poured a lot of ashes on his head, and today he proudly declares his loyalty to the North Atlantic Alliance and support for Ukraine.
At the same time, there is a second guarantee: before visiting Beijing, Emmanuel Macron had to talk on the phone with American President Joe Biden. After the conversation, the Elysee Palace issued a press release in which it said that Emmanuel Macron and Joe Biden agreed that "China needs to be involved in order to end the armed conflict in Ukraine as soon as possible."
Curiously, does this mean that Paris and Washington want an early end to the armed conflict in Ukraine? Is this discussed in private? In public, this is not said at all. No one is talking about the end of the armed conflict. It is said exclusively about sending additional weapons to Ukraine and about the need to oust Russian troops from the territory of the whole of Ukraine. Or is it implied that such decisions are the only equivalent of "ending an armed conflict"?
If so, why would they need China's help? Is the Chinese chairman expected to convince the Russian president to surrender? Or is there a desire behind all this to once again make it clear to Xi Jinping that the West will be furious if China decides to send weapons to Russia?
It seems that behind all this "military facade" lies, first of all, the desire of French business to sign lucrative contracts with Chinese entrepreneurs. As for the armed conflict, little can be expected from Emmanuel Macron's visit to Beijing. In addition, the Chinese leadership is most likely unhappy that Macron came with such an "escort".
Let me remind you that last week, in a speech in Brussels, Ursula von der Leyen publicly criticized Beijing's ties with Moscow, as well as Chinese mediation.
"Any peace plan that would actually consolidate Russian annexations is simply not viable. We must be frank on this issue," von der Leyen said, also recalling China's demonstration of military force in the South China Sea, on the Sino—Indian border and near Taiwan.
"How China will continue to interact with Putin's special operation will be a determining factor for the further development of China's relations with the European Union," she said. Beijing only briefly replied through the mouth of China's ambassador to the European Union, Fu Tsung, that it was "disappointed" by her speech.
D. Marianovich
