A rare firsthand account by a Chinese diplomat of the warnings, judgments, emergency meetings, and evacuation efforts in Ukraine before and on February 24, 2022.
It’s so vexing that Jiang’s warnings — issued weeks ahead of the February 4 proclamation of a “no-limits friendship” in Beijing — didn’t make it up the chain of command. The senior leadership in Beijing was, by all accounts, caught completely off guard, and had believed that Putin’s hand was so strong that NATO would have to fold, especially now that Beijing had effectively signaled support for the Kremlin. I’m not 100% sure that, had the senior Chinese leadership known that the decision to launch a full-scale invasion had already been made, they would have either made that announcement on Feb 4 or been so reluctant to criticize Russia openly after the invasion began, but there would have certainly been more room for Beijing to adjust its position. What a tragedy. Jiang’s account here really only flicks at the reasons why their warnings went unheeded, in one paragraph, but it’s nonetheless quite telling.
Nonsense. The Americans had warned the Chinese Foreign Ministry, multiple times & in multiple ways. If senior leadership in BJ was “caught off guard” that’s bc it chose to ignore warnings from the US and from its own diplomats.
Yeah, there were American warnings. Who exactly heeded them? Not Zelensky or any of the top Ukrainian leadership either. Can Beijing be faulted for ignoring warnings from the U.S.? So yeah, Beijing was indeed caught off guard, as were so many other actors.
The real question is still, did China’s leadership know the Russians were massing and not want to believe anything would actually happen because the Russians denied it; or was the very top leadership told in advance that the invasion was planned.
I think the Chinese leadership assessed that the whole thing was a bluff aimed at securing a moratorium on NATO membership for Ukraine. I believe they sincerely thought that by lending their weight through the so-called no limits friendship they would strengthen the bluff and ensure that NATO would ultimately fold.
That’s possible. Signing up to “no limits” when you believe there’s a limit is a leap of faith… whereas Chinese diplomacy is normally pretty careful, no?
Everyone I’ve asked about this — the think-tankers, the IR academics, the Foreign Ministry people, the plugged-in journalists in China — all basically have told me the same thing. Yes, I think this departs from diplomatic norms for China, but these days we know who makes the decisions, and it isn’t someone who always obeys longstanding institutional logic.
The article itself is an exemplary illustration of a skilled and knowledgeable insider understanding exactly how far he can go in criticizing the system in which he is a part, taking the criticism right up to the line but not one jot farther. As you indicate, there are enough hints in the text to see where he pulls his punches and where he glamourizes to buy credit to use in making the veiled criticisms.
That the Chinese did not understand at a high level that the Russians were going to attack, despite credible information from within their own system, is a serious criticism of their ability to absorb information that challenges preconceived ideas.
This was an extremely interesting article, thank you so much for getting it out to the world. I wish there were more people who understood China as a rational actor rather than whatever bogeyman both sides of the American political talk of war wish to understand. It is always interesting hearing things from a Chinese perspective.
What I read is, despite this individual might be smart and competent by himself, the Chinese diplomatic systems is bureaucratic and dysfunctional as hell. That's obviously not news to anybody, given Chinese diplomacy has always been more about performance for domestic audience than anything else.
Setting aside all the foresights about the imminent Russian invasion you now proclaimed, why didn't you warn Chinese nationals in Ukraine at the time to leave or otherwise brace for the imminent carnage?
It’s so vexing that Jiang’s warnings — issued weeks ahead of the February 4 proclamation of a “no-limits friendship” in Beijing — didn’t make it up the chain of command. The senior leadership in Beijing was, by all accounts, caught completely off guard, and had believed that Putin’s hand was so strong that NATO would have to fold, especially now that Beijing had effectively signaled support for the Kremlin. I’m not 100% sure that, had the senior Chinese leadership known that the decision to launch a full-scale invasion had already been made, they would have either made that announcement on Feb 4 or been so reluctant to criticize Russia openly after the invasion began, but there would have certainly been more room for Beijing to adjust its position. What a tragedy. Jiang’s account here really only flicks at the reasons why their warnings went unheeded, in one paragraph, but it’s nonetheless quite telling.
Nonsense. The Americans had warned the Chinese Foreign Ministry, multiple times & in multiple ways. If senior leadership in BJ was “caught off guard” that’s bc it chose to ignore warnings from the US and from its own diplomats.
Yeah, there were American warnings. Who exactly heeded them? Not Zelensky or any of the top Ukrainian leadership either. Can Beijing be faulted for ignoring warnings from the U.S.? So yeah, Beijing was indeed caught off guard, as were so many other actors.
The real question is still, did China’s leadership know the Russians were massing and not want to believe anything would actually happen because the Russians denied it; or was the very top leadership told in advance that the invasion was planned.
I think the Chinese leadership assessed that the whole thing was a bluff aimed at securing a moratorium on NATO membership for Ukraine. I believe they sincerely thought that by lending their weight through the so-called no limits friendship they would strengthen the bluff and ensure that NATO would ultimately fold.
That’s possible. Signing up to “no limits” when you believe there’s a limit is a leap of faith… whereas Chinese diplomacy is normally pretty careful, no?
Everyone I’ve asked about this — the think-tankers, the IR academics, the Foreign Ministry people, the plugged-in journalists in China — all basically have told me the same thing. Yes, I think this departs from diplomatic norms for China, but these days we know who makes the decisions, and it isn’t someone who always obeys longstanding institutional logic.
The article itself is an exemplary illustration of a skilled and knowledgeable insider understanding exactly how far he can go in criticizing the system in which he is a part, taking the criticism right up to the line but not one jot farther. As you indicate, there are enough hints in the text to see where he pulls his punches and where he glamourizes to buy credit to use in making the veiled criticisms.
That the Chinese did not understand at a high level that the Russians were going to attack, despite credible information from within their own system, is a serious criticism of their ability to absorb information that challenges preconceived ideas.
This was an extremely interesting article, thank you so much for getting it out to the world. I wish there were more people who understood China as a rational actor rather than whatever bogeyman both sides of the American political talk of war wish to understand. It is always interesting hearing things from a Chinese perspective.
What I read is, despite this individual might be smart and competent by himself, the Chinese diplomatic systems is bureaucratic and dysfunctional as hell. That's obviously not news to anybody, given Chinese diplomacy has always been more about performance for domestic audience than anything else.
Setting aside all the foresights about the imminent Russian invasion you now proclaimed, why didn't you warn Chinese nationals in Ukraine at the time to leave or otherwise brace for the imminent carnage?
Thank you for this post. Very moving. A reminder of our common humanity in the face of militaristic thuggery.