The factor of the war in Ukraine is becoming particularly important against the backdrop of deteriorating relations between the PRC and the US. A number of analysts have suggested that despite China's disinterest in a protracted war, it nevertheless creates a hotbed of distraction for NATO, emptying the alliance’s arms depots and reducing its military capabilities. NATO analysts argued along similar lines when they announced the possibility of Chinese arms sales to Russia in late February. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg claimed that US and other NATO intelligence agencies saw indications that Beijing was considering the move. He stressed, however, that there was yet no evidence of a decision or direct preparation for arms deliveries. Following Stoltenberg's statement, a number of US diplomats issued warnings to China not to support Russia directly: otherwise, China could be isolated from the world and subject to sanctions, which would cause nothing but damage to all parties involved.
While no new information has since emerged on the possible arms shipments, Politico recently published an investigation revealing that some Chinese companies (notably China North Industries and Da-Jiang Innovations) have supplied Russian companies with UAV parts, body armor and low-caliber rifles through Turkey and the UAE. However, these are most likely not government-approved shipments to support Russia in the war. Although the equipment may be used by Russia in Ukraine, all the products mentioned in the report are dual-use, the volumes of deliveries are relatively small, and cooperation between the companies was already in place before the start of the war. Moreover, no evidence has yet been found of Russian use of Chinese rifles or body armor on the battlefield, and the products may indeed have been used for direct, non-military purposes.
However, despite increasing tensions between the West and China, the PRC has not engaged in open confrontation in recent months. On the contrary, it is actively seeking to play the role of a mediator and peacemaker. On February 24, the Chinese Foreign Ministry published Xi Jinping's long-promoted “peace plan,” officially titled “China's position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis,” which was announced in Wang Yi's speech at the Munich Security Conference. In reality, the “plan” does not offer any concrete action, but rather a set of general principles and proposals, such as respect for the territorial integrity of all countries – without specifying exactly what this means regarding the war in Ukraine and Russia's occupation of its territories – as well as a ceasefire, the resumption of peace talks, rejection of the “Cold War mentality” and so on. Western countries’ reactions to the “peace plan” have been cold. EU foreign policy spokeswoman Nabila Massrali criticized it as “blurring the roles of the aggressor and the aggressed” and building on a “misplaced focus on the so-called ‘legitimate security interests and concerns’ of parties, implying a justification for Russia’s illegal invasion.” European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen in turn accused China of bias and selectivity.