51吃瓜

All wars do end, usually thanks to a negotiated peace agreement. Consider that a fundamental historical fact, even if it seems to have been forgotten in Brussels, Moscow and, above all, Washington, DC.

In recent months, among Russian President Vladimir Putin鈥檚 followers, there has been much talk of a 鈥渇orever war鈥� in Ukraine dragging on for years, if not decades. 鈥淔or us,鈥� Putin a group of factory workers recently, 鈥渢his is not a geopolitical task, but a task of the survival of Russian statehood, creating conditions for the future development of the country and our children.鈥�

Visiting Kyiv last February, US President Joseph Biden assured Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, 鈥淵ou remind us that freedom is priceless; it鈥檚 worth fighting for, for as long as it takes. And that鈥檚 how long we鈥檙e going to be with you, Mr. President: for as long as it takes.鈥� A few weeks later, the European Council 鈥渋ts resolute condemnation of Russia鈥檚 actions and unwavering support for Ukraine and its people.鈥� 

With all the major players already committed to fighting a forever war, how could peace possibly come about? With the UN compromised by Russia鈥檚 seat on the Security Council and the G7 powers united in 鈥淩ussia鈥檚 illegal, unjustifiable, and unprovoked war of aggression against Ukraine,鈥� the most likely dealmaker when it comes to ending this forever war may prove to be President Xi Jinping of China.

China? Really?

In the West, Xi鈥檚 self-styled role as a peacemaker in Ukraine has been widely mocked. In February, on the first anniversary of the Russian invasion, China鈥檚 as the 鈥渙nly viable solution to the Ukraine crisis鈥� sparked a barbed reply from US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan, who claimed the war 鈥渃ould end tomorrow if Russia stopped attacking Ukraine.鈥�

When Xi visited Moscow in March, the statement Chinese officials released claiming that he to 鈥減lay a constructive role in promoting talks鈥� prompted considerable Western criticism. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 think China can serve as a fulcrum on which any Ukraine peace process could move,鈥� Ryan Hass, a former American diplomat assigned to China. Ursula von der Leyen, president of the European Commission, pointed out that 鈥淐hina has taken sides鈥� in the conflict by backing Russia and so could hardly become a peacemaker. Even when Xi made a to Zelensky promising to dispatch an envoy to promote negotiations 鈥渨ith all parties,鈥� critics dismissed that overture as so much damage control for China鈥檚 increasingly troubled trade relations with Europe.

The symbolism of peace conferences

Still, think about it for a moment. Who else could bring the key parties to the table and potentially make them honor their signatures on a peace treaty? Putin has, of course, already violated UN accords by invading a sovereign state and ruptured his economic entente with Europe by trashing past agreements with Washington to respect Ukraine鈥檚 sovereignty. And yet the Russian president relies on China鈥檚 support, economically and otherwise, which makes Xi the only leader who might be able to bring him to the bargaining table and ensure that he honors any agreement he may sign. That sobering reality should raise serious questions about how any future Beijing-inspired peace conference might happen and what it would mean for the current world order.

For more than 200 years, peace conferences have not only resolved conflicts but regularly signaled the arrival at stage center of a new world power. In 1815, amid the whirling in Vienna鈥檚 palaces that accompanied negotiations ending the Napoleonic wars, Britain emerged into its century-long reign as the globe鈥檚 . Similarly, the 1885 that carved up the continent of Africa for colonial rule heralded Germany鈥檚 rise as Britain鈥檚 most serious rival. The somber grand Hall of Mirrors that officially ended World War I in 1919 marked America鈥檚 debut on the world stage. Similarly, the at San Francisco that established the UN (just as World War II was about to end) affirmed the ascent of US global hegemony.

Imagine the impact if, sooner or later, envoys from Kyiv and Moscow convene in Beijing beneath the gaze of President Xi and find the elusive meeting point between Russia鈥檚 aspirations and Ukraine鈥檚 survival. One thing would be guaranteed: after years of disruptions in the global energy, fertilizer and grain markets, marked by punishing inflation and spreading hunger, all eyes from five continents would indeed turn toward Beijing.

After all, with the war disrupting grain and fertilizer shipments via the Black Sea, world hunger to an estimated 345 million people in 2023, while basic food insecurity now afflicts 828 million inhabitants of Asia, Africa and Latin America. Should such negotiations ever prove fruitful, a televised signing ceremony hosted by President Xi and watched by countless millions globally would crown China鈥檚 rapid 20-year ascent to world power.

The world鈥檚 newest great power

Forget Ukraine for a moment and concentrate on China鈥檚 economic rise under communist rule, which has been little short of extraordinary. At the founding of the People鈥檚 Republic in 1949, China was an economic lightweight. Its massive population, 20% of the world鈥檚 total, was just 4% of global economic output. So weak was China that its leader Mao Zedong had to amid a Moscow winter for an audience with Soviet leader Joseph Stalin just to plead for the industrial technology that would help rebuild an economy devastated by 12 years of war and revolution. In the decade following its admission to the World Trade Organization in 2001, however, China quickly became the workshop of the world, an unprecedented $4 trillion in foreign exchange reserves.

Instead of simply swimming in a hoard of cash like Scrooge McDuck in his Money Bin, in 2013 President Xi announced a trillion-dollar development scheme called the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It aimed to build a massive infrastructure across the Eurasian landmass and Africa, thereby improving the lives of humanity鈥檚 forgotten millions, while making Beijing the focal point of Eurasia鈥檚 economic development. Today, China is not only an industrial powerhouse that 18% of the global gross domestic product (GDP), compared to 12% for the US, but also the world鈥檚 chief creditor. It provides capital for infrastructure and industrial projects to while offering some hope to the still subsisting on less than four dollars a day.

Testifying to that economic prowess, for the past six months world leaders have ignored Washington鈥檚 pleas to form a united front against China. Instead, remarkable numbers of them, including Germany鈥檚 Olaf Scholz, Spain鈥檚 Pedro S谩nchez and Brazil鈥檚 Lula da Silva, have been to pay court to President Xi. In April, even French President and US ally Emmanuel Macron visited the Chinese capital, where he a 鈥済lobal strategic partnership with China鈥� and urged other countries to become less reliant on the 鈥渆xtraterritoriality of the U.S. dollar.鈥�

Then, in a diplomatic coup that stunned Washington, China took a toward healing the dangerous sectarian rivalry between Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia by a meeting of their foreign ministers in Beijing. As the Saudis鈥� and Iran鈥檚 , Beijing had the commercial clout to bring them to the bargaining table. China鈥檚 top diplomat Wang Yi then the restored diplomatic relations as part of his country鈥檚 鈥渃onstructive role in facilitating the proper settlement of hot-spot issues around the world.鈥�

Geopolitics as a source of change

Underlying the sudden display of Chinese diplomatic clout is a recent shift in that essential realm called 鈥済eopolitics鈥� that鈥檚 driving a fundamental realignment in global power.

Around 1900, at the high tide of the British Empire, the English geographer Sir Halford Mackinder started the modern study of geopolitics by publishing a highly arguing that the construction of the 5,000-mile-long Trans-Siberian Railway from Moscow to Vladivostok was the beginning of a merger of Europe and Asia. That unified land mass, he said, would soon become the epicenter of global power.

In 1997, in his book , former US National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brezinski updated MacKinder, arguing that 鈥済eopolitics has moved from the regional to the global dimension, with preponderance over the entire Eurasian continent serving as the central basis for global primacy.鈥� In words particularly apt for our present world, he added: 鈥淎merica鈥檚 global primacy is directly dependent on how long and how effectively its preponderance on the Eurasian continent is sustained.鈥�

Imagine geopolitics as the deep substrate shaping far more superficial political events, even if it鈥檚 only noticeable in certain moments, much the way the incessant grinding of the planet鈥檚 tectonic plates only becomes visible when volcanic eruptions break through the earth鈥檚 surface. For centuries, if not millennia, Europe was separated from Asia by endless deserts and sprawling grasslands. The empty center of that vast land mass was crossed only by an occasional string of camels traveling the .

Now, thanks to its in infrastructure鈥攔ails, roads, pipelines, and ports鈥擟hina is fundamentally changing that geopolitical substrate through a more-than-metaphorical merger of continents. If President Xi鈥檚 grand design succeeds, Beijing will forge a unified market stretching 6,000 miles from the North Sea to the South China Sea, eventually encompassing 70% of all humanity and effectively fusing Europe and Asia into a single economic continent: Eurasia.

Despite the Biden administration鈥檚 fervid attempts to create an , recent diplomatic eruptions are shaping a new world order that isn鈥檛 at all what Washington had in mind. With the economic creation of a true Eurasian sphere seemingly underway, we may be seeing the first signs of the changing face of international politics. The question is: Could a Chinese-engineered peace in Ukraine be next in line?

Pressures on China for peace

Such growing geopolitical power is giving China both the motivation and potentially even the means to negotiate an end to the fighting in Ukraine. First, the means: as Russia鈥檚 for its commodity exports, and Ukraine鈥檚 largest before the war, China can use commercial pressure to bring both parties to the bargaining table, much as it did for Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Next, the motivation: while Moscow and Kyiv might each exude confidence in ultimate victory in their forever war, Beijing has reason to grow impatient with the economic disruptions radiating out across the Black Sea to roil a delicately balanced global economy. According to the World Bank, almost (47%) is now surviving on seven dollars a day, and most of them live in Africa, Asia and Latin America where China has made massive, long-term developmental loans to under its Belt and Road Initiative.

With 70% of its lands and their rich black soils devoted to agriculture, Ukraine has for decades produced bumper crops of wheat, barley, soybeans and sunflower oil that made it 鈥渢he of the world,鈥� providing the globe鈥檚 hungry millions with reliable shipments of affordable commodities. Right after the Russian invasion, however, world prices for grains and vegetable oils shot up by 60%. Despite stabilization efforts, including the UN鈥檚 Black Sea Grain Initiative to allow exports through the war zone, prices for such essentials remain all too high. They threaten to go higher still with further disruption of global supply chains or more war damage like the recent rupture of a crucial Ukrainian that鈥檚 turning more than a million acres of prime farmland into 鈥渄esert.鈥�

As costs for imports of fertilizer, grain and other foodstuffs have soared since the Russian invasion, the Council on Foreign Relations that 鈥渁 climbing number of low-income BRI countries have struggled to repay loans associated with the initiative, spurring a wave of debt crises.鈥� In the Horn of Africa, for example, the sixth year of a crippling drought has pushed an estimated into a 鈥渉unger crisis,鈥� forcing the governments of Ethiopia and Kenya to balance costly food imports with the repayment of Chinese loans for the creation of like factories, railroads and renewable energy. With such loans surpassing in nations like Ghana, Malaysia, Pakistan and Zambia, while China itself holds outstanding credits equivalent to , China is far more invested in global economic peace and stability than any other major power.

Beyond western fantasies of victory

At present, Beijing might seem alone among major nations in its concern about the strain the Ukraine war is placing on a world economy poised between starvation and survival. But within the coming six months, Western opinion will likely start to shift as its inflated expectations for Ukrainian victory in its long-awaited 鈥溾�� meet the reality of Russia鈥檚 return to trench warfare.

After the stunning success of Ukraine鈥檚 offensives late last year near Kharkiv and Kherson, the West dropped its reticence about provoking Putin and began shipping billions of dollars of sophisticated equipment鈥攆irst and missiles, then and battle tanks and, by the end of this year, advanced . By the war鈥檚 first anniversary last February, the West had already provided Kyiv with in aid, and expectations of success rose with each new arms shipment. Adding to that anticipation, Moscow鈥檚 own 鈥渨inter offensive鈥� with its desperate suicide attacks on the city of Bakhmut , as Foreign Affairs put it, that 鈥渢he Russian military demonstrated 鈥� it was no longer capable of large-scale combat operations.鈥�

But defense is another matter. While Moscow was wasting some in suicide assaults on Bakhmut, its specialized tractors were cutting a formidable network of along a 600-mile front designed to stall any Ukrainian counteroffensive.

Ukraine鈥檚 troops will probably achieve some breakthroughs when that offensive finally begins, but are unlikely to push Russia back from all its post-invasion gains. Remember that Russia鈥檚 army of 1.3 million is than Ukraine鈥檚, which has also suffered many casualties. In March, the commander of Ukraine鈥檚 46th Air Assault brigade the Washington Post that a year of combat had left 100 dead and 400 wounded in his 500-man unit and that they were being replaced by raw recruits, some of whom fled at the very sound of rifle fire. To counter the few dozen 鈥渟ymbolic鈥� Leopard tanks the West is sending, Russia has thousands of in reserve. Despite US and European sanctions, Russia鈥檚 economy has actually continued to grow, while Ukraine鈥檚, which was only about a tenth the size of Russia鈥檚, has shrunk by 30%. Facts like these mean just one thing is likely: stalemate.

Beijing as peacemaker

By next December, if Ukraine鈥檚 counteroffensive has indeed stalled, its people face another cold, dark winter of drone attacks, while Russia鈥檚 rising casualties and lack of results might by then begin to challenge Putin鈥檚 hold on power. In other words, both combatants might feel far more compelled to sit down in Beijing for peace talks. With the threat of future disruptions damaging its delicate global position, Beijing will likely deploy its full economic power to press the parties for a settlement. By trading territory, while agreeing with China on reconstruction aid, and some further strictures on Ukraine鈥檚 future NATO membership, both sides might feel they had won enough concessions to sign an agreement.

Not only would China then gain enormous prestige for brokering such a peace deal, but it might win a preferential position in the reconstruction bonanza that would follow by offering aid to rebuild both a ravaged Ukraine and a damaged Russia. In a recent report, the World Bank that it could take $411 billion and over a decade to rebuild a devastated Ukraine through infrastructure contracts of the very kind Chinese construction companies are so ready to undertake. To sweeten such deals, Ukraine could also allow China to build massive factories to supply Europe鈥檚 soaring demand for renewable energy and electric vehicles. Apart from the profits involved, such Chinese-Ukrainian joint ventures would ramp up production at a time when that country is likely to gain duty-free access to the European market.

In the post-war moment, with the possibility that Ukraine will be an increasingly strong economic ally at the edge of Europe, Russia still a reliable supplier of cut-rate commodities and the European market ever more open to its state corporations, China is likely to emerge from that disastrous conflict鈥攖o use Brzezinski鈥檚 well-chosen words鈥攚ith its 鈥減reponderance over the entire Eurasian continent鈥� consolidated and its 鈥渂asis for global primacy鈥� significantly strengthened.

[ first published this piece.]

[ edited this piece.]

The views expressed in this article are the author鈥檚 own and do not necessarily reflect 51吃瓜鈥檚 editorial policy.