China - Ukraine - Europe - USA So that China is not the only arbiter in Europe

It does not matter that for more than six months the front line has hardly moved and that on both sides the dead are added to the wounded for nothing. This was clearly seen by the Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Mark Milley. Unfortunately, paralyzed by domestic problems, President Joe Biden cannot listen to him, and unfortunately, the Europeans blindly follow him. It is therefore on the basis of preconceived ideas that they refuse to take into consideration the negotiation plan proposed by China. China, which, in the eyes of the world, will be able to act as an arbiter in a European conflict.

The starting point of this reflection, and to clarify the context, is an observation: for more than six months in Ukraine, whatever the sacrifices of the belligerents, the front line that separates them has not changed significantly. It is in vain that on both sides, but more noticeably on the Ukrainian side, we deplore dead and wounded without result.
 
This is what the highest U.S. military authority, General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, notes when he says, "While neither Ukraine nor Russia shows any signs of willingness to negotiate, it is likely that the war will end at the negotiating table. It will be almost impossible for the Russians to achieve their political goals by military means. It's simply not going to happen." Symmetrically, "it will be very difficult for Ukraine to expel all Russian forces from occupied territory. This could only result in the collapse of the Russian army. He concluded, "It will be up to Ukraine to decide how, when, or if it will negotiate with the Russians1 ."
 
China's analysis of the conflict is close when it comments on its proposals on the political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis in its official media. "The conflict between Russia and Ukraine has reached a stalemate, and it is difficult to imagine that it will be resolved in the short term." And the Chinese editors add, "No one in the international community can accept the continuation of a war of attrition. Its impact on a large number of developing countries, which are in urgent need of achieving their development goals, is particularly direct and strong. It is precisely for this reason that these countries do not want to be forced to choose sides in the conflict, but strongly hope that all parties can find a rational and peaceful solution2 . A message to which they add this point to Washington: "There is no end in sight to this conflict that has used Europe's money, cost Ukrainian lives, brought wealth to the United States but pain to the world3 ."
 

This is why China "cannot stand idly by". Its positions on the negotiations "respond to the demands of Russia and Ukraine" with very well thought-out proposals that fully recognize the complexity and difficulty of the issue, and that show that China is a responsible country. In drafting and distributing it, China has sought to be neutral, without remaining passive. It is an "active neutrality" that does not seek to take advantage of the situation.
 
In the East, China's positions on the political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis are unreservedly appreciated by Alexander Lukashenko, an unconditional ally of Moscow. After meeting with Xi Jinping, he said: "We are going through a very difficult period that requires new and unorthodox approaches [...] They must prevent the slide into a global confrontation that will see no winners. That is why Belarus is actively pushing for peace proposals and fully supports your initiative for international security."
 
In the West, they are rejected.
 
In the United States, President Joe Biden, already on the campaign trail and still being pushed around by Donald Trump, was prevented from drawing the consequences of the diagnosis of his Joint Chief of Staff, Mark Milley. On February 27, the State Department issued a declaration of non-acceptance of a "so-called peace plan published by the PRC": first and foremost, this plan calls for respect for the sovereignty of all countries. If the PRC were to comply, it would clearly side with the UN Charter and all those who support Ukraine, who oppose Russia in its war of territorial conquest. For the time being it is not on that side.
 
In Europe, it was useless for Wang Yi, as a high-ranking diplomat, to be dispatched to announce the proposal and to underline China's desire for "neutrality", and for him to call on his interlocutors to reflect on the conditions to be met for a cease-fire, on the framework necessary to bring about lasting peace and stability, and on the role that Europe should play to assert its strategic autonomy. Everything he said "fell flat", the rejection is unanimous4 .
‍

• Respecting the consensus of European governments that only a Ukrainian victory can end Putin's war, the President of the European Council is silent;  
  ‍
• For the President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, China has not presented a peace plan, but only a statement of principles. Before examining them, they must be put in their context, that of an unlimited friendship declared just before the beginning of the invasion of Ukraine by Russia. China is not neutral, it has taken sides;
  ‍
• The EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Josep Borrell, is on the same line. In his blog, "he shoots down" the Chinese proposal: "It is not a peace plan, but essentially the well-known Chinese positions, reiterated. The main problem is that it does not distinguish the aggressor from the victim, placing the parties on an equal footing." And to recall, "it is only by relying on the resolution of the UN General Assembly and the peace plan of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that we will achieve peace;
  ‍
• According to the European Council on Foreign Relations, China's "peace plan" only underlines its sympathy for Russia and its concern to protect its own interests

‍
 
Europe, paralyzed by its internal dissensions and by the Atlanticist leanings of many of its members, is voiceless. Thus, it is allowing China to interfere in its affairs and to pose as an arbitrator to put an end to a European conflict. Is it possible to let this situation continue? Can we not find a negotiator who can represent Ukrainian interests to China? In the absence of a European voice, which does not seem to be found, could France, if it were empowered by Ukraine, in the continuity of the discussions it had with President Zelensky, not be the country that will respond to China?

(1).General Milley: Russia-Ukraine war will end with negotiations, The Kyiv Independent, 16/02/2023
(2).Time will prove the enormous value of China's position paper: Global Times editorial 23/02.2023
(3) How US manipulates Russia-Ukraine conflict with lies 25/02/20232
(4) You ain't no middleman: EU and NATO slam China's bid to be a Ukraine peacemaker, politico.eu ? 24/02/2023

‍