The recent revelation that Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told EU leaders that Beijing does not want to see Russia lose its war in Ukraine is not just a diplomatic slip; it is a moment of clarity. Behind closed doors, China has dropped the mask of neutrality and revealed a sobering truth: it views a Russian defeat not as a moral failure or geopolitical catastrophe, but as a threat to its own strategic ambitions.
This quiet admission, made to the EU’s foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas, cuts sharply against Beijing’s carefully curated public stance. China claims it is a disinterested bystander in the Ukraine conflict. However, Wang’s remarks confirm what many in global diplomatic circles have long suspected: China’s interests are best served not by stability, peace, or sovereignty, but by a distracted, divided, and weakened West.
To understand why, we must revisit the so-called “no limits” partnership between China and Russia, announced just weeks before the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. Although not a formal military alliance, this strategic pact underscores a shared worldview. Both nations resent the dominance of liberal democracies and seek to reshape the global order in their own authoritarian image.
Since the invasion, China has supported Russia’s economy through trade, provided diplomatic cover in international forums, and participated in joint military exercises. At the same time, it continues to claim neutrality, masking its support for Russia behind the guise of plausible deniability.
Wang’s frank admission reveals the deeper logic behind this alignment. If Russia collapses in Ukraine, the United States and its allies will be free to pivot fully toward the Indo-Pacific and focus on deterring China’s growing assertiveness, especially regarding Taiwan. In this strategic calculation, the prolongation of war, and the suffering it causes, is considered an acceptable cost if it keeps the West overextended.
This is a profoundly cynical and destabilizing position. It confirms that, in the eyes of China’s leadership, values such as territorial integrity, international law, and the protection of civilians are expendable. It also exposes a chilling willingness to allow or even encourage ongoing conflict if doing so creates space for China to advance its own interests.
As an alumna of the Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China (IPAC), I have worked alongside legislators from democracies large and small who see this moment for what it truly is: a test. China is not simply observing how the West responds to Russia’s invasion. It is studying our unity, our resilience, and our tolerance for risk. The outcome in Ukraine will directly influence Beijing’s decisions regarding Taiwan and its broader conduct across the Indo-Pacific.
In the Pacific, this challenge is no longer hypothetical. It is unfolding in real time. Through cyber influence operations and debt-leveraged infrastructure projects with potential military uses, Beijing is actively reshaping the region’s strategic landscape. For small island developing states, whose survival depends on the integrity of international law and multilateral institutions, any erosion of those norms poses a direct threat to sovereignty and self-determination.
This is why continued support for Ukraine is not solely about defending the right of a European nation to exist. It is about upholding a global order that protects all nations, especially those that are small and vulnerable. If Ukraine is forced into a territorial compromise, or if the West retreats under pressure, it will send a dangerous message to authoritarian powers everywhere: that aggression is effective, that might makes right, and that democracies lack the resolve for prolonged resistance.
China’s leaders are betting on that retreat. Wang Yi’s comments were not an error in diplomacy. They were an intentional signal. It is now the responsibility of all of us, from Brussels to the Blue Pacific, to respond with unity, determination, and an unshakeable commitment to the values that have preserved peace for generations.
If we fail to meet this moment, the next confrontation may arrive much closer to home.
