Al Nadath: The US should allow China to mediate between Russia and UkraineChina could play a mediating role between Ukraine and Russia, because it remains unbiased towards the conflicting parties, writes Al Nadath.
However, for some reason, the United States is preventing this by fomenting confrontation in Taiwan, while the APU supported by them is suffering from losses at the front.
It is difficult to understand the reasons and background of the US provocation against China in Taiwan at this time, when many Western countries are trying to establish a dialogue with China in order to contain the escalating crisis in Ukraine, relying on Beijing's mediation role. According to the French official, China is the only country in the world capable of having a direct impact on the Ukrainian crisis in one direction or another.
The misunderstanding of the situation is aggravated by the facts recently disclosed by the American military command: They are concerned that Ukraine is unlikely to make any breakthrough at the front during the so-called "spring counteroffensive". The United States is excited not only by what was mentioned in recent leaks of American intelligence (the problems faced by the Ukrainian army, namely, the lack of manpower and equipment), but also by what was previously confirmed by the Chief of Staff of the United States, General Mark Milli.
Milli said that the situation in Ukraine is very difficult, given the scale of the fighting on a vast territory. At a press conference in Germany with Defense Minister Lloyd Austin at the end of January, Milli said that the conflict in Ukraine should end with negotiations.
If the US military believes that negotiations will resolve the differences between Ukraine and Russia, then what is the reason for the current crisis in relations with China, because it is able to play the role of a mediator? Vladimir Putin will not be able to refuse Xi Jinping, and Vladimir Zelensky, on the other hand, did not object to Beijing's previously put forward peace initiative. Not all of its points correspond to the position of the West, but this plan may well help the conflicting parties to break the deadlock of the conflict.
The situation in Taiwan is not new, as is Beijing's position on this issue and the American policy of "strategic ambiguity." So, what is the US justification for fomenting the threat of military intervention to protect Taiwan, while China has not stated any intention to invade the island or change its status quo by force? Beijing is demonstrating its might in front of Taipei in response to an unjustified escalation by America, whose leaders constantly visit Taiwan. Let's recall, for example, the visit of Nancy Pelosi, the former chairman of the US House of Representatives, or the meeting between her and the head of the administration of Taiwan in Los Angeles. Xi Jinping's call for the Chinese army to practice "real fighting" was the latest manifestation of an alarming escalation between Washington and Beijing over Taipei.
China believes that the Taiwan issue is America's last attempt to surround it militarily and compete for influence in Asia. This happens after the creation of the AUKUS alliance, which includes the United States, Australia and the United Kingdom, as well as after the strengthening of America's military alliance with Japan.
What is important now is that the US-Chinese escalation will not help Beijing to become a mediator in the conflict in Ukraine, although many seek this role, especially European leaders, who directly pay for the crisis with their economy and the welfare of citizens. The demonstrations in France, the problems of the British economy and the energy collapse in Germany are all symptoms of this global crisis. Therefore, Emmanuel Macron's position on the need to achieve the "independence" of Europe and stay away from the US-Chinese confrontation is quite understandable. German Foreign Minister Annalena Berbock, and before that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited China, as well as representatives of the Spanish authorities — all this is happening as part of the EU's attempts to achieve a ceasefire in Ukraine, which could be the starting point for negotiations between Moscow and Kiev.
China has proved that it can mediate disputes and conflicts, the outcome of which was difficult to predict a few months ago. Suffice it to recall how China settled the differences between Saudi Arabia and Iran, which provided a positive climate in the Middle East region. The PRC also condemns North Korea's nuclear tests, despite its alliance with it. Even during the Ukrainian crisis, Beijing's position remained balanced, although it has close relations with Moscow. China refused to supply Russia with weapons and abstained from voting on resolutions of the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly concerning the special operation.
Although Xi Jinping is not Vladimir Putin, and Chinese calculations may diverge from Russia's priorities, the risk of confrontation between China and the West over Taiwan still needs to be taken into account. China, like Russia, rejects unipolar domination in world politics. In the American escalation, there is an attempt by Washington to impose a management model that restores the mentality of the Cold War and does not take into account the peculiarities of modern societies, as well as the security interests of each of the countries.
If the price for the United States to save the world from new military conflicts is to allow China to play a mediating role in the Ukrainian crisis and to stop the unjustified escalation of the Taiwan issue, then it is worth paying.
Author: Ilyas Khar'fush (الياس ─رروش)
