act of nuclear proliferation and threat to regional stability to stoke international concerns about the trilateral security partnership and press countries to limit engagement with U.S.-backed alliance.
In recent years, global public opinion of the PRC has fallen, particularly after the PRC’s response to COVID and continued coercive foreign and domestic policies. Out of 24 countries across Europe, Asia, and the Americas surveyed by the Pew Research Center in spring 2023, 15 countries registered their most negative feelings towards the PRC in 2022 or 2023. Similarly, five of the eight middle-income countries polled saw the PRC in more negative light after the pandemic. In the 2022 Pew survey, only 18 percent of global respondents trusted Xi Jinping do the right thing regarding world affairs. These reports are only the most recent in a series of surveys showing an increasingly negative perception of the PRC across the U.S., Europe, and Asia.
Russia’s War on Ukraine. The Russian war on Ukraine represented a major, unexpected challenge for Beijing as it sought to react to the largest military conflict in Europe since the end of World War II. Despite multiple warnings of Russia’s intentions towards Kyiv, Beijing was caught completely off guard by the full scope and scale of Russia’s war on Ukraine. For example, on the first day of the invasion and as Russian and Ukraine air forces battled over Kyiv, the PRC Ambassador to Ukraine publicly announced that PRC was organizing an aerial evacuation of Chinese citizens. Although the PRC eventually shifted to an overland evacuation of its citizens once the reality of the conflict became apparent to PRC officials, the PRC’s initial reaction is indicative of the PRC’s continued struggles to anticipate geopolitical risks and protect its overseas interests.
As Russia’s war of aggression in Ukraine has continued, Beijing has increasingly sought to balance its strategic partnership with Russia while avoiding the reputational or economic costs that would result from providing undeniable offensive material or “lethal” assistance to Russia. PRC leaders and officials have parroted Russian narratives blaming the U.S. and NATO for causing the conflict. Beijing has also refrained from directly criticizing or condemning Russia for using military force to infringe on Ukraine’s sovereignty despite Russia’s actions in Ukraine violating the PRC’s Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. Of note, Beijing has also become a willing buyer of Russian energy exports to buoy Russia’s sanctioned-battered economy and has ensured Russia’s continued diplomatic participation in multilateral organizations. At the same time, Beijing probably has taken a discreet, flexible, and cautious approach to providing material support to Russia to enable the PRC to maintain plausible deniability, control material transfers, create off-ramps to renege on agreements, and maximize the PRC’s options to aid Russia. It remains to be seen whether/when Russia becomes more of a liability than an asset in the Chinese calculus.
- To date, Chinese officials have publicly denied providing any lethal assistance to Russia. However, as Beijing deliberates the scale and scope of materiel commitments, it probably will seek to balance its strategic partnership with Russia while avoiding reputational or economic costs that could result from its assistance. Russian customs data revealed that Chinese companies, including state-owned enterprises under the purview of Beijing, have sold civilian,
14
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
Annual Report to Congress: Military and Security Developments Involving the People's Republic of China
