Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_1130453738-scaled

China and India remain neutral, even on Russia annexation

Some had interpreted recent statements to suggest that New Delhi and Beijing were getting fed up with Putin.

Analysis | Asia-Pacific
google cta
google cta

Diplomats from China and India may be willing to talk to their Russian counterparts behind the scenes to tamp down the talk of nuclear war, but in the public arena appear uninterested right now in distancing themselves entirely from the Putin regime and its actions in Ukraine.

Russia voted against and effectively vetoed a resolution condemning its annexation of Ukrainian territories on Friday. China, India, Brazil and Gabon abstained.

According to the AP, if passed the resolution would have declared the annexations illegal and demanded an immediate and unconditional withdrawal of all Russia’s military forces from Ukraine.

Reports and op-eds this week suggested there was a back channeling effort afoot by American diplomats to encourage China and India to put pressure on Putin to ease up on the nuclear weapons talk and restrain the potential for their use in Ukraine. These reports seemed to be a bolstered, in part, from public comments made by both countries’ leaders and diplomats during the UN General Assembly meeting last week.

In an op-ed for the Washington Post, former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mike Mullen, former U.S. Senator Sam Nunn, and former U.S. energy secretary Ernest J. Moniz, expressed a level of confidence that Chinese leader Xi Jinping was primed to put the necessary pressure on Putin:

Given Russia’s increasing economic and geopolitical reliance on Beijing, Putin cannot afford an irreparable rift with Xi. A public statement by Xi regarding the unacceptability of nuclear use by Russia in Ukraine would certainly have an impact on Putin. Xi could underline the point by reminding Putin of China’s continuing importance as the No. 1 destination for his energy exports, noting this would have to be reassessed if Putin were to use nuclear weapons.

This may well be true but last night’s UN Security Council vote reminds us that China and India remain unaligned at best with the West, if not slightly differential to Russia for which they both have economic and geopolitical ties that leaders are not yet willing to break. Neither have been persuaded to commit to Western sanctions on Russia. 

Next week the entire UN General Assembly will be asked to vote on a similar resolution condemning the Russian annexations as illegal. It will be interesting to see whether the Global South countries that have been resistant to the West’s coalition-building against Russia will be persuaded to join now as Putin has taken the war up a giant escalatory notch.

It may also show that the U.S. and its Western allies have a lot more work to do to align the world behind its strategy, which for now is focused solely on exacting more sanctions on Russia (to the detriment of the broader global economy) and pouring more weapons into Ukraine (at the risk of world war).


Dear RS readers: It has been an extraordinary year and our editing team has been working overtime to make sure that we are covering the current conflicts with quality, fresh analysis that doesn’t cleave to the mainstream orthodoxy or take official Washington and the commentariat at face value. Our staff reporters, experts, and outside writers offer top-notch, independent work, daily. Please consider making a tax-exempt, year-end contribution to Responsible Statecraftso that we can continue this quality coverage — which you will find nowhere else — into 2026. Happy Holidays!

google cta
Analysis | Asia-Pacific
Gaza tent city
Top photo credit: Palestinian Mohammed Abu Halima, 43, sits in front of his tent with his children in a camp for displaced Palestinians in Gaza City, Gaza, on December 11, 2025. Matrix Images / Mohammed Qita

Four major dynamics in Gaza War that will impact 2026

Middle East

Just ahead of the New Year, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is set to visit President Donald Trump in Florida today, no doubt with a wish list for 2026. Already there have been reports that he will ask Trump to help attack Iran’s nuclear program, again.

Meanwhile, despite the media narrative, the war in Gaza is not over, and more specifically, it has not ended in a clear victory for Netanyahu’s IDF forces. Nor has the New Year brought solace to the Palestinians — at least 71,000 have been killed since October 2023. But there have been a number of important dynamics and developments in 2025 that will affect not only Netanyahu’s “asks” but the future of security in Israel and the region.

keep readingShow less
Sokoto Nigeria
Top photo credit: Map of Nigeria (Shutterstock/Juan Alejandro Bernal)

Trump's Christmas Day strikes on Nigeria beg question: Why Sokoto?

Africa

For the first time since President Trump publicly excoriated Nigeria’s government for allegedly condoning a Christian genocide, Washington made good on its threat of military action on Christmas Day when U.S. forces conducted airstrikes against two alleged major positions of the Islamic State (IS-Sahel) in northwestern Sokoto state.

According to several sources familiar with the operation, the airstrike involved at least 16 GPS-guided munitions launched from the Navy destroyer, USS Paul Ignatius, stationed in the Gulf of Guinea. Debris from unexpended munition consistent with Tomahawk cruise missile components have been recovered in the village of Jabo, Sokoto state, as well nearly 600 miles away in Offa in Kwara state.

keep readingShow less
What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?
Top image credit: Voodison328 via shutterstock.com

What use is a mine ban treaty if signers at war change their minds?

Global Crises

Earlier this month in Geneva, delegates to the Antipersonnel Mine Ban Treaty’s 22nd Meeting of States Parties confronted the most severe crisis in the convention’s nearly three-decade history. That crisis was driven by an unprecedented convergence of coordinated withdrawals by five European states and Ukraine’s attempt to “suspend” its treaty obligations amid an ongoing armed conflict.

What unfolded was not only a test of the resilience of one of the world’s most successful humanitarian disarmament treaties, but also a critical moment for the broader system of international norms designed to protect civilians during and after war. Against a background of heightened tensions resulting from the war in Ukraine and unusual divisions among the traditional convention champions, the countries involved made decisions that will have long-term implications.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.