03.04.2023
During a UN Security Council briefing in February 2023, Chinese ambassador, Zhang Jun, referred to the blowing up of the Nord Stream gas pipelines, which took place on September 26, 2022. The pipelines were damaged due to acts of sabotage, which experts from the European Union and the Russian Federation both confirmed. The fact that it still not known who was responsible for the sabotage has caused additional tensions between the Russian Federation and the European Union, and in a broader context, between the East and the West. As the “act of sabotage” affected global energy markets and geopolitical dynamics, China - as a major energy consumer - has a vested interest in this matter, as it seeks to expand its economic and political influence in Europe. In addition, as China is widely regarded to have the world’s second largest economy, it is vital to analyze Beijing's stance on the matter. Is China inclined to officially support any of the parties in terms of sabotage? Is China's understanding of the recent Baltic Sea developments skewed by Russia’s aggression in Ukraine?
China’s position on the Nord Stream incident
The briefing conducted within the UN Security Council on February 21, 2023, was devoted solely to issues related to the damage of the Nord Stream pipeline, once used to export Russian natural gas transported from the vicinity of Russia's Vyborg to Greifswald in the Federal Republic of Germany. Its main perceived asset was bypassing transit countries (e.g., Poland, Ukraine, and other countries in the Baltic Sea basin). Zhang Jun acknowledged that the Nord Stream gas pipelines were the region's main cross-border infrastructure in energy transportation. The act of sabotage destroyed two Nord Stream pipelines and considerably damaged one of the Nord Stream 2 pipelines. The event raised additional concerns such as environmental pollution and an escalation which could have resulted in a regional spillover of the Russian war in Ukraine. As noted by a Chinese diplomat, the dysfunction of gas arteries led to energy shortages for businesses and households in some EU countries. Zhang Jun confidently stated, "what happened to the Nord Stream gas pipelines was not an accident, but rather a deliberate action." In September 2022, when at an open meeting of the UN Security Council it was immediately stated that there had been an act of sabotage, numerous countries were urged to launch an independent investigation into the matter to "discover the truth and identify the responsible forces".
Such an approach was in line with the People's Republic of China’s official position, with the country having continuously attempted to portray itself as a global defender of globalization, multilateralism, and international law in the last few years. Beijing officially condemned "any intentional sabotage of cross-border infrastructure" and characterized the previously mentioned action as "malicious". According to Zhang Jun, a possible failure to identify the aggressors "will send the wrong signal to those with bad intentions and make them believe in their impunity." Zhang Jun suggested the possibility of the UN playing a more active role in executing international investigations and ensuring the security of cross-border infrastructure.
This would therefore support the draft resolution submitted by Russia to the UNSC, emphasizing the importance of granting "authorization for an international investigation into the sabotage of the Nord Stream gas pipelines." The Russian draft was an attempt to change the negative perception of the Russian Federation at the UN forum in the face of Russian aggression against Ukraine. What is more, possible obstruction by other members of the UN Security Council, commonly classified as "representatives of the West", could lead to Chinese and Russian attempts to change the narrative, blaming the coalition led by the United States that adopted the use of an aggressive tone, resulting in “the letter rather than the spirit” of enforcing international law.
China's diplomatic support for Russia's resolution should be perceived in two aspects, i.e., it should determine the consistently implemented policy of the "global defender of international law" and determine to what degree Beijing's diplomatic support for Moscow is in the context of the Kremlin's recent international actions, especially regarding Russia's attack on Ukrainian territory. However, academics in China are divided on the matter of whether the UN could and should lead an independent investigation of the Nord Stream incident. This prompted a discussion within Chinese academic research circles. Cui Heng, an assistant research fellow from the Center for Russian Studies of East China Normal University said, "The UN has been under the influence of major countries, especially after the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The UN General Assembly, for example, has become a stage for political containment by the US-led West”, and elaborated, “while it is practical for the UN Security Council to lead the investigation, it is difficult to collect evidence and hold relevant parties accountable as there is no legal international institution for this purpose”. Cui argued that: “The UN Security Council and Secretariat need to show the principle of the collective decision-making process in which the US and other countries may vote against an investigation.”, hinting at the US-led coalition disrupting a possible UN investigation. Another Chinese scholar, Tang Bei, associate professor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs at Shanghai International Studies University, said that “the UNSC could pass a resolution and form an investigative team or wait for relevant countries, such as Germany and Norway, to submit their probe results to the UNSC which will decide if it demands any further action”. In an interview for Global Times, Tang Bei argued that "There is another possibility that the Nord Stream blasts will become another 'Cheonan sinking' - an unresolved case with no clear findings”, with clear reference to the South Korean navy ship that sank in 2010, leading to Seoul accusing North Korea of firing on the vessel although without having any definitive evidence of Pyongyang’s involvement in the incident.
Moreover, China interprets recent reports of potential sabotage scenarios concerning the Nord Stream pipelines as beneficial to the Russian Federation, which aligns itself with Beijing's interests. Criticizing and undermining the coalition led by the United States unquestionably remains an important goal of the CCP leadership. It is a consistently pursued policy of “rejuvenation”, proposed by President Xi Jinping in 2013, which is in stark contrast with the “hide your strength, bide your time” policy that was introduced by Deng Xiaoping. The Nord Stream incident was also used to achieve China’s particular goals in conducting international policy, as the fact of carrying out "sabotage" was embedded in the broader context of the need to build a "durable concept" of security. It directly referred to the Global Security Initiative (GSI) presented by Xi Jinping, in which, according to Zhang Jun, China would provide a new direction and new ideas for eliminating the root causes of conflicts, breaking the impasse in organizing a secure international environment, and permanently maintaining global security. The publication date of the GSI, which coincided with the UNSC’s deliberations, was seen as an attempt to permanently include it in the UN agenda. If the GSI were to be included, it would undoubtedly be a major success for Chinese diplomacy in terms of incorporating Chinese political thought into international discourse.
Is the Global Security Initiative a solution?
Referring directly to promoting Chinese “solutions and practice” in the international arena, selected elements of two strategic documents, whose aims are to include Chinese discourse in international politics, should be examined. It should be noted that implementing such solutions would probably lead to the international community’s conclusion that this is China’s attempt to develop an alternative platform to the currently prevailing international order. The first of these strategic documents is the aforementioned Global Security Initiative, first introduced by Xi Jinping in April 2022.
The official Global Security Initiative document is divided into four sections: context (international); basic concepts and principles; cooperation priorities, and cooperation platforms and mechanisms.
In the first section, PRC diplomacy justifies the introduction of its own security concept including what Beijing regards as the characteristics of so-called "regional hotspots", i.e., regions with a constant escalation potential for armed conflict. Beijing argues that the current international situation is "an era full of challenges but also full of hope." The international community's challenges include the COVID-19 pandemic, "progressive unilateralism, economic protectionism," and "traditional as well as non-traditional security threats". By eliminating the causes of international conflicts and improving global security management, the GSI aims to promote "global development and prosperity" in the spirit of the win-win concept announced and promoted by Chairman Xi Jinping.
The second section deals with basic concepts and principles and consists of six main points, predominantly referring to the recognition of the importance of the goals and regulations of the United Nations Charter, respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as a genuine commitment to building lasting security and resolving "disputes and differences" through dialogue and consultations.
The third section, relating to cooperation priorities, mainly refers to determining the methods of the PRC's involvement in international security processes. It relates primarily to bilateral activity but also mentions multilateral cooperation, especially within international organizations. The overriding priority of collaboration, entitled “common aspiration” through the diplomacy of the PRC, was defined as "achieving lasting peace in the world so that all countries can enjoy a peaceful and stable external environment and their inhabitants can lead a happy life with full guaranteed rights." Twenty minor tasks were listed, with a general description of the planned activities divided into individual tasks, regions, and organizations. In this context, the issues of international cooperation in the field of outer space, non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, banning the use of chemical weapons, health protection, food and energy security, maintaining stable supply chains and industrial chains, as well as combating climate change were addressed in a task-oriented manner.
When it comes to cooperation and solving regional problems, the most important issues to be mentioned were connected with Central Asia, Africa (in particular, the Horn of Africa, the Sahel, and the region of the African Great Lakes), the Middle East, and the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean as well as the island states of the Pacific, and last but not least, Ukraine. In the Chinese view, the UN should take a central coordinating position concerning cooperation within the organizations. However, calls were made to solve problems and increase international collaboration through bodies such as the League of Arab States, ASEAN, Lancang-Mekong Cooperation, the African Union, and the World Health Organization.
The last section devoted to cooperative platforms and mechanisms again emphasizes the central role of the General Assembly and the UN Security Council in creating and enforcing international law. However, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS forum were also given emphasis. These organizations were based on the consensus of the leading countries in the international arena, excluding the United States and their most important allies, thus emphasizing the role of the Russian Federation in shaping global policy, especially in regional terms. Central Asia, East Asia and the Persian Gulf regions were distinctly mentioned in this context. It has also been proposed to organize a "high-level conference" within the Global Security Initiative framework.
Moreover, as part of the "GSI Concept Paper", further initiatives with a central role for Beijing were promoted. These include the China-Africa Peace and Security Forum, the Middle East Security Forum, the Xiangshan Forum in Beijing, and the Global Security Cooperation Forum (Langyungang). In addition, Chinese diplomacy insists on creating more international platforms and exchange mechanisms to undertake more international cooperation in counterterrorism, cybersecurity, biosecurity, and technological security. Moreover, mutual exchange and collaboration between military and police academies, at the university level were proposed, and China was willing to provide five training opportunities by 2028, exclusively for developing countries. At the end of the document, China invited and expected cooperation from all parties oriented to "the pursuit of happiness to meet all kinds of traditional and non-traditional security challenges (…) and together create a better future for humanity."
The second document, entitled "China's position on the political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis”, was published in the form of twelve points, which, especially in Europe, has been called "China's plan for peace”, as it was understood to provide help to resolve the conflict in Ukraine. However, it should be emphasized that this document presented only the PRC's political position on the conflict. The postulates contained within the document reiterate the official position of China in the international arena, mainly that formulated at the UN forum. Therefore, China will continue to avoid direct mediation between the parties, in line with its position presented during the UN Security Council, where Beijing has called for the creation of appropriate conditions for a negotiation process between the parties of the conflict, thereby negating any attempts by third parties to join direct talks. This naturally influenced the possibility of a peaceful resolution of the conflict with the participation of China, as the postulates contained in the official statement do not include an active role for the PRC in the mediation processes. The document, however, does include references Chairman Xi Jinping’s aforementioned initiative, the Global Security Initiative, whose use is intentionally aimed at reaching a wider group of recipients, especially the countries of the Global South.
Regarding its position on the Nord Stream sabotage and Russia's war in Ukraine, China has been using the "media coverage" of these events to achieve two main goals: to dismiss accusations of being passive regarding the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict, with the twelve points in its peace initiative intended to serve this purpose. Secondly, Beijing has used these two events to disseminate and pique public interest in its concept of international security contained within the Global Security Initiative.
Moreover, China is laying the groundwork in an attempt to present itself as a promoter of a global mediation process, without actually participating in the process itself. According to an official statement from the Liaison Office of the Central People's Government in Hong Kong S.A.R., the International Mediation Institute had been established with the aim of becoming “an important international initiative to promote the harmonious and amicable settlement of international disputes through mediation." The central government in Beijing expects to create a permanent multilateral, intergovernmental international organization that will provide "friendly, flexible, economical and effective" mediation services to settle international disputes.
Summary
The Global Security Initiative (GSI) as a major multilateral project introduced by China, aims to expand its global influence, and ensure long-term security and prosperity. The initiative includes several key aspects, such as China’s ongoing military modernization efforts, a focus on maritime security, diplomatic efforts to promote China’s global economic interests and influence through the incorporation of Chinese narratives on international forums, and lastly - a focus on soft power. However, there are several challenges to the introduction of such a project, including the lack of trust and cooperation among the major powers – mainly the US – as well as difficulties in addressing the root causes of international conflicts, and resistance from some countries that view the GSI as a way for China to expand its influence and challenge the existing international order in favor of the introduction of China’s understanding of contemporary international relations.
One of the main goals of the GSI is to enhance China's military capabilities and make it a more capable and visible global player. This includes expanding and modernizing China's People’s Liberation Army, improving its intelligence and surveillance capabilities, and developing advanced weapons and technology. Another goal is to focus on maritime security, which is critical to China's economic and strategic interests. This involves protecting China's maritime borders, securing its shipping lanes, and expanding its naval presence on the world's oceans. Additionally, the introduction of such an initiative will serve China’s economic interests and extend its global influence by investing in strategic industries and infrastructure projects in various countries, thus expanding its economic influence in key regions around the world via actions such as the Belt and Road Initiative. China is also focused on promoting its cultural and ideological influence around the world through expanding its media presence and promoting the country’s language and culture, thus possibly making Chinese propaganda more amenable, especially in developing countries. This is one of the most important tasks for Chinese diplomacy as China suffers from a lack of soft power capabilities, when compared to countries such as the US, Japan, India, and South Korea. It is also crucial to acknowledge that the introduction of the GSI has raised concerns among major global powers because China's growing capabilities and influence could challenge the existing global world order and lead to the destabilization of regional security.
China’s creation of the International Mediation Institute in Hong Kong is aimed at making China a mediation broker for international crises, as demonstrated by its involvement in brokering the recent agreement between Iran and Saudi Arabia. However, whether China is seen as a legitimate and effective mediator will depend on many factors, including its relationship with the parties involved in the conflict, its claimed and perceived neutrality and impartiality, and its capabilities and track record in successfully resolving conflicts. In the case of the Iran-Saudi Arabia agreement, China's involvement was likely facilitated by its longstanding economic and political ties with both countries. China is a major importer of oil from both Iran and Saudi Arabia and has in recent years pursued closer economic ties with both countries through its Belt and Road Initiative. Additionally, China has worked to maintain good diplomatic relations with both Iran and Saudi Arabia, despite the often-tense relationship between the two Middle Eastern countries. China's mediation role has been welcomed by some developing countries as a positive contribution to regional stability as it is strongly promoted within the UN, but raised eyebrows in Washington, which saw it as a challenge to its influence and interests, and which may lead to increased tensions between the two major powers.