Spread the love

By P Kharel

In response to a press query on the effects of the French Revolution, at the 1954 Geneva Conference, Mao Zedong’s Prime Minister Zhou Enlai is said to have remarked that it would take a couple of centuries more to understand its cause and effects better. Zhou was China’s prime minster from 1949 until his death in 1976, also holding the foreign ministry portfolio for the first decade.

That kind of approach to assessing issues calls for patience and deep analysis for a conclusion. Beijing’s diplomacy is not as inscrutable as it was during the 1960s and the 1970s. Hints and clues are strewn at international platforms and during exchanges with foreign counterparts.

In light of that notation, two moves from Russia and China in autumn signalled the course the world is heading for. Both the superpowers issued stern warnings to the No. 1 superpower, the United States, not to unilaterally intervene in other countries. China’s spokesperson made a clear statement against US President Donald Trump’s declaration of the probability of American intervention in Nigeria on grounds of attacks on Christians. A few weeks earlier, Russia had foot its foot down against US aerial and naval attacks on Turkey.

RIGHTS PRETEXT: Beijing opposes any country “using religion and human rights as pretexts” for unilateral intervention in another country”. Moscow raised its stakes by announcing support for the Nicolas Maduro government in Turkey against Washington’s aerial and naval power use on alleged charges of massive drug trafficking.

In an unprecedented three-superpower post-World War II political landscape, things will not be what they were for the last eight decades. However, the much-anticipated multipolar world can add credence only if the principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of an independent, sovereign country is applied to all and on all occasions. Otherwise, a world order dominated by hegemons will only be replaced by more hegemons donning different hats and uttering new slogans.  

No creditably reliable power can afford to live in a cocoon. It has to be in some form of communication—at times candidly and comprehensively. Although well aware of this, the Chinese style presents one of studied silence. It does not hesitate to strike with blunt talk and hard-hitting public reaction, as and when necessary. And both its allies and rivals are acquainted with this.

Beijing’s reluctance to make hasty reactions, only to back down not long after, is to avoid international embarrassment. It seeks to project an image of consistency and willingness to act without bombast. This builds a reputation for more measured response and firm action after the long lap runs its course.

ECONOMIC MUSCLE: China’s exports to the US constitutes just 12 per cent of its total—a fact others cannot but underline. Washington could exert pressure on the European Union and other allies like Canada, Australia, Japan and South Korea, but not without resistance at the popular level in these countries. Moreover, China’s investment, for example, in Nigeria alone is more than $25 billion. 

Are major powers exhausted by never-ending spells of negotiations whose initiators want to have their own agendas through at the end of the day? The latest Sino-Russian forthright response to the US moves in Nigeria and Venezuela seems to suggest so.

Iran provided Russia with hundreds of drones in the Ukraine war. In November 2025, it supplied drones to Turkey President Nicolas Maduro after the US made threatening aerial and naval brinkmanship in the Caribbean. With Russia at the forefront, Iran not far behind and China anticipated to join in support of a nationalist government Carcas, the Trump administration has slowed down.

The ongoing situation does not project Washington on a positive note. Its arch-rivals might have gained some points in the larger international community. There has been a series of false starts ending in celebrations in rhetoric.

Economic coercion stings less than it previously used to. Alternative corridors are being constructed to reduce vulnerability, as government accord high priority to those agreeing to adjustments and fairer treatment. You do not require an axe to cut a paper. Scissors, not an axe, are used for cutting paper.

Beijing’s trademark is to act to be well-prepared for an eventuality. It does so, at times, at some costs caused by delayed response.

STRONG FRONT: To its huge credit,China is not involved in foreign wars, except when issues pertaining to border issues of or with neighboring countries such as the Korean war in the early 1950s or with Vietnam in the 1970s and with India as recently as the 2020s.  

Sino-Russian “ironclad” bonds signal strong message to particularly Asia—the Far East, Central Asia, West Asia—as to which way the wind is blowing. It also brings the African continent closer to the two superpowers vis-a-vis the No. 1 military might with Europe clinging at its coattails.

Joint Beijing-Moscow approaches to key issues in various regions and economic sphere highlight the slow but sure slide in the US hegemony in global affairs. The development puts an unwritten notice to Washington and its traditional allies whose faith in the superpower is cracking on myriad issues after the Ukraine war started.

Dragon dance and eagle encirclement mean trouble for South Asia. Peace gets disturbed in a constant warning that things might take for the worse unannounced. For South Asians, a united front against aggression and assault with priority to the region and neighborhood is the safer answer.

Caught unawares in the Nepal Gen Z uprising in September, China and India have picked up the pieces fast and furious in the landlocked country they flank. One false move by the next government might bring about regrettable consequences.