Follow us on social

Diplomacy Watch: China’s peace plan draws mixed reactions

Diplomacy Watch: China’s peace plan draws mixed reactions

Kyiv said it will “carefully study” the document before drawing any conclusions about Beijing’s proposal.

Asia-Pacific

China released a peace plan for Ukraine today in a move that could dramatically expand Beijing’s role in the conflict.

The plan, which Chinese officials referred to as a “position paper,” calls for a ceasefire and the resumption of peace talks. It also includes provisions calling for countries to respect the sovereignty of other states while noting that the “legitimate security interests and concerns of all countries must be taken seriously and addressed properly.” 

Ukraine has approached the proposal with cautious optimism, calling it a “good sign” for China’s role in the conflict. “We hope they also urge Russia to stop the war and withdraw its troops,” said Ukraine’s chargé d’affaires in China.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba, who saw the plan’s key points during a meeting with China’s top diplomat, said Tuesday that Kyiv intends to “carefully study it and draw conclusions.” Kuleba also noted that Ukraine’s top priority is its own peace plan, which Kyiv released late last year.

Kuleba’s careful reaction — a far cry from Kyiv’s harsh rebuke of a peace proposal made by Mexico last year — signals that Ukraine could be willing to consider China as a credible mediator despite the country’s close relationship with Russia.

The proposal earned a lukewarm reaction from Western leaders. “If the position paper is a positive sign for Ukraine then it’s a positive sign for the [European Union], although we are studying the paper closely,” said the EU ambassador to China, who argued that the proposal should not be viewed as a full peace plan. The German foreign minister also welcomed the plan earlier this week, noting that China’s place on the UN Security Council means that it “has an obligation to use its influence to secure world peace.” 

For its part, the United States has largely dismissed the document. “My first reaction to it is that it could stop at point one, which is to respect the sovereignty of all nations,” said National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan.

As Patrick Wintour noted in the Guardian, the plan will likely earn plaudits from many in the Global South, which has suffered significantly from the war due to its impact on the price of food and other staples. “We cannot limit ourselves to talking about the war,” Brazilian Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira told Wintour. “I am not referring to immediate negotiations – we would have to go step by step, perhaps first create an environment that makes a negotiation possible.”

Meanwhile, there is growing evidence that China isn’t the only superpower pitching a path to peace. Two unnamed Ukrainian officials told Politico Tuesday that CIA Director William Burns did in fact float a peace plan during a meeting with his Russian counterpart last November, a claim that Washington has strenuously denied.

“[T]he officials also confirmed a report that in January, Burns had urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to make as much battlefield headway as quickly as he could, because the scale of military support could start falling off,” wrote Politico opinion editor Jamie Dettmer.

In other diplomatic news related to the war in Ukraine:

— On Monday, President Joe Biden made a surprise visit to Kyiv, where he praised Ukraine’s resistance against Russian aggression and pledged more weapons transfers, according to AP News. “I thought it was critical that there not be any doubt, none whatsoever, about U.S. support for Ukraine in the war,” Biden said. “[Russian President Vladimir Putin] thought he could outlast us. I don’t think he’s thinking that right now.”

— Putin announced Tuesday that Russia is suspending its participation in the New START Treaty, the only agreement that sets a cap on the number of nuclear weapons deployed by Washington and Moscow, according to Reuters. While Russia’s foreign ministry later clarified that the Kremlin does not intend to exceed the limits set out in the treaty, the news is a worrying sign that the agreement could collapse before its 2026 expiration date, leaving no binding limits on the world’s two largest nuclear arsenals.

— The UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a non-binding motion Thursday calling for an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine, according to Axios. The vote largely fell along the same lines as last year’s measure to condemn Russia’s invasion, with both earning 141 votes in favor; 32 countries abstained. Nicaragua and Mali, which had abstained on last year’s measure, opted to vote against Thursday’s motion.

— Russian weapons were on display alongside systems from Ukraine and the U.S. at a major arms expo in the United Arab Emirates this week, according to AP News. Moscow’s presence at the event — which has a reputation for hosting controversial potential buyers like Libyan General Khalifa Haftar — suggests that the Kremlin is still determined to sell weapons abroad despite severe Western sanctions on its defense sector.

— Calls for greater scrutiny of U.S. aid to Ukraine continue to grow as the war passes its one-year anniversary, according to NPR. “When you spend that much money that fast, there's bound to be problems, there's bound to be leakage,” said John Sopko, who led oversight of U.S. assistance to Afghanistan.

U.S. State Department News

In a Wednesday press conference, Beth Van Shaak — America’s ambassador at large for Global Criminal Justice — pledged to follow through on the recent announcement that Washington had formally found Russia responsible for crimes against humanity. “The United States, together with the international community, is committed to holding those responsible – both the direct perpetrators and the architects of violence – to account, no matter how long this might take,” Van Shaak said.


Asia-Pacific
Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare
Top photo credit: Seth Harp book jacket (Viking press) US special operators/deviant art/creative commons

Fort Bragg horrors expose dark underbelly of post-9/11 warfare

Media

In 2020 and 2021, 109 U.S. soldiers died at Fort Bragg, the largest military base in the country and the central location for the key Special Operations Units in the American military.

Only four of them were on overseas deployments. The others died stateside, mostly of drug overdoses, violence, or suicide. The situation has hardly improved. It was recently revealed that another 51 soldiers died at Fort Bragg in 2023. According to U.S. government data, these represent more military fatalities than have occurred at the hands of enemy forces in any year since 2013.

keep readingShow less
Trump Netanyahu
Top image credit: President Donald Trump hosts a bilateral dinner for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Monday, July 7, 2025, in the Blue Room. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

The case for US Middle East retrenchment has never been clearer

Middle East

Is Israel becoming the new hegemon of the Middle East? The answer to this question is an important one.

Preventing the rise of a rival regional hegemon — a state with a preponderance of military and economic power — in Eurasia has long been a core goal of U.S. foreign policy. During the Cold War, Washington feared Soviet dominion over Europe. Today, U.S. policymakers worry that China’s increasingly capable military will crowd the United States out of Asia’s lucrative economic markets. The United States has also acted repeatedly to prevent close allies in Europe and Asia from becoming military competitors, using promises of U.S. military protection to keep them weak and dependent.

keep readingShow less
United Nations
Top image credit: lev radin / Shutterstock.com

Do we need a treaty on neutrality?

Global Crises

In an era of widespread use of economic sanctions, dual-use technology exports, and hybrid warfare, the boundary between peacetime and wartime has become increasingly blurry. Yet understandings of neutrality remain stuck in the time of trench warfare. An updated conception of neutrality, codified through an international treaty, is necessary for global security.

Neutrality in the 21st century is often whatever a country wants it to be. For some, such as the European neutrals like Switzerland and Ireland, it is compatible with non-U.N. sanctions (such as by the European Union) while for others it is not. Countries in the Global South are also more likely to take a case-by-case approach, such as choosing to not take a stance on a specific conflict and instead call for a peaceful resolution while others believe a moral position does not undermine neutrality.

keep readingShow less

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.