The great reversal of U.S.-Russia relations and China’s diplomatic choice

Ma Xiaolin, Professor at Zhejiang International Studies University, Director of the Mediterranean Research Institute
Zhang Lupeng, Professor at Zhejiang International Studies University, Director of the Slavic Research Center at the Mediterranean Research Institute

On February 27, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated at the annual meeting of the Federal Security Service (FSB) that Russia and the United States are ready to re-establish cooperative relations. He noted that not everyone is pleased with the U.S.-Russia dialogue and that some are attempting to disrupt the process. On the same day, U.S. and Russian delegations held the first round of closed-door bilateral consultations in Istanbul, Turkey, lasting over six hours. The focus of the talks was the operation of embassies in each other’s countries and visa issues.

This meeting followed a series of significant events, including the phone call between the U.S. and Russian presidents on February 12 and a milestone diplomatic meeting between senior representatives of both countries in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on February 18. These developments indicate that with the advent of the Trump 2.0 era, the two major adversaries—Russia and the United States—are attempting to turn the page on the dark chapter of the Ukraine crisis and move rapidly toward the normalization of bilateral relations. Additionally, according to Bloomberg, the two countries are discussing the Arctic as a new area for economic cooperation, including joint resource extraction and the development of Arctic trade routes.

At this delicate moment of a sharp adjustment in U.S.-Russia relations, Chinese President Xi Jinping spoke with Putin on the phone on February 24—the third anniversary of the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war. Two days later, Xinhua News Agency published a commentary stating that the conversation between the Chinese and Russian leaders sent a “clear signal to the world” in three key aspects: “China-Russia relations are mature, stable, and resilient”; “steady advancement of cooperation in various fields”; and “timely communication on important issues.”

As U.S.-Russia relations quickly warm, U.S.-European relations become tense, and the Russia-Ukraine war potentially accelerates toward an end in 2025, several key questions arise: Will U.S.-Russia relations see substantial improvement? Will China-Russia relations be affected? How will China respond to U.S.-China and China-Europe relations? How will China maximize benefits while avoiding harm? These are new and critical choices China must confront.

The U-Turn in U.S. Diplomacy and Russia’s Strategic Relief

The Russia-Ukraine war has lasted for three years. While Russia has occupied parts of four eastern Ukrainian regions, strengthened Putin’s leadership position, improved the Russian military’s combat experience, and deepened strategic cooperation with North Korea, it has also paid a heavy price. This includes but is not limited to: damage to its international reputation, strained diplomatic relations, declining regional influence, a NATO expansion forming a C-shaped encirclement around Russia, threats to maritime security in the Black and Baltic Seas, risks to overseas military outposts, massive war expenditures, economic sanctions disrupting trade and energy exports, reduced foreign investment, significant casualties, domestic tensions, and population loss. These difficulties have created unprecedented challenges for Russia. However, Trump’s pro-Russia stance has presented Moscow with a strategic opportunity, significantly easing external—particularly U.S.—pressure.

First, Russia’s “special military operation” is expected to achieve its strategic goals. The Trump administration has essentially accepted Russia’s conditions, including Ukraine not joining NATO, halting NATO’s eastward expansion, the resignation of the Zelensky administration, suppression of Nazi influences in Ukraine, and Russia’s control over portions of the four eastern Ukrainian regions. This includes gaining substantial land, resources, and population in the Donbas region. Meanwhile, peace talks will prevent further escalation of the war, reduce external military threats to Russia, and ensure the country’s strategic security.

Through three years of military action, Russia has reinforced its influence in the post-Soviet space, blocked Ukraine’s westward integration, demonstrated its resolve and ability to defend national interests, strengthened its voice on the international stage, secured its position in the Black Sea, and maintained control over the crucial strategic stronghold of Crimea. Furthermore, the new Syrian government has shown friendliness toward Russia, agreeing to allow Russian military bases in Tartus and Hmeimim as strategic footholds in the eastern Mediterranean.

Based on current trends, future peace negotiations will likely ensure Russia’s geopolitical interests in Ukraine, particularly its control over eastern Ukraine. Consequently, Russia’s geopolitical influence in Europe will be enhanced, positively affecting its security environment and increasing its leverage in negotiations with Western countries.

Additionally, Russia’s previously difficult situation is expected to improve comprehensively. The restoration of U.S.-Russia relations and peace talks with Ukraine could allow Russia to rebuild ties with Western nations, reduce international isolation, ease sanctions and external pressures, improve its global image, and expand diplomatic space. This, in turn, would better protect Russia’s national interests and enhance its international influence.

The Long-Term War’s Severe Impact on the Russian Economy

If Russia can collaborate with the United States to reach a peace agreement on the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it may gradually lift or ease sanctions, restore normal economic and trade exchanges with other countries, and stabilize energy prices. This would alleviate economic pressure and create favorable conditions for domestic economic development.

The Trump administration has claimed that it will not only cooperate with Russia in the fields of economy, energy, and space but also support Russia’s re-entry into the G7. These policies would be beneficial for Russia’s economic recovery and growth. Recently, the continuous strengthening of the Russian ruble indicates that the market is generally confident in the Russian economy. Once the war ends, Russia will be able to redirect more energy and resources from the military sector to domestic economic development, social progress, and improving people’s livelihoods. This would promote the comprehensive development of the country and society, enhance living standards, strengthen domestic stability and cohesion, and restore the country’s overall strength.  

China-Russia Relations May Be Affected, and China Needs to Adjust Timely and Prudently 

The improvement of U.S.-Russia relations will profoundly impact the Russia-Ukraine situation and the global landscape. The Trump administration, by strengthening U.S.-Russia relations and promoting peace talks between Russia and Ukraine, may readjust the United States’ global strategic layout, focusing more resources and efforts on other key regions and areas. This could lead to increased pressure and containment efforts against China.

First, Russia’s strategic dependence on China may decrease, requiring China to adjust its expectations. The frequent high-level interactions between Russia and the U.S. suggest a trend toward normalization of bilateral relations. Russia is expected to resume cooperation with the U.S. in several areas of shared interest, including Ukraine’s future and Middle East governance, as well as in the fields of economy, energy, and space exploration. As the Trump administration relaxes restrictions on Russia, the overall Western sanctions pressure will gradually decrease, expanding Russia’s strategic space for survival on the international stage.

At the same time, this also means that Russia’s dependence on China will gradually diminish, and its strategic autonomy will increase. The previous trend of Russia’s “pivot to the East and South” may slow down. As a result, China’s initiative in cooperation with Russia may decrease, and it will have to adapt to a scenario where Russia regains greater strategic autonomy and bargaining power in bilateral exchanges.

Second, the improvement of U.S.-Russia relations will not be smooth, and China need not be overly anxious. The current interactions between U.S. and Russian leaders only indicate a trend toward easing tensions, but resuming contacts does not equate to genuine improvement in relations. U.S.-Russia relations are still in the early “ice-breaking” stage, and there is still a long way to go before full normalization. Similarly, reaching a Russia-Ukraine peace agreement will require extensive work. Therefore, it is premature to declare a U.S.-Russia “honeymoon period” or predict that the Russia-Ukraine war will soon end.

China should closely monitor U.S.-Russia interactions, maintain communication with Russia, Ukraine, the EU, and the U.S., and coordinate with key Global South countries through mechanisms such as BRICS. This would allow China to continue playing a constructive role in the Ukraine issue while safeguarding its own interests.

Third, Trump’s major policy shift toward Russia faces resistance.

1. Domestic political opposition – Trump’s policy proposals are highly controversial in the U.S., as the Democratic Party broadly supports continued assistance to Ukraine. Trump’s push for a Russia-Ukraine peace agreement could exacerbate partisan divisions and internal political struggles in the U.S., affecting the government’s decision-making efficiency and execution.
2. Impact on the U.S. military-industrial complex – A peace agreement would immediately reduce military-industrial demand, which could lead to open or covert opposition from defense contractors and military-industrial capital.

3. European dissatisfaction – Trump’s push for a Russia-Ukraine peace deal has already sparked dissatisfaction among European allies, who fear that the U.S. move will weaken NATO’s cohesion and leave Europe more vulnerable when facing Russia alone. This could lead to fractures in U.S.-Europe relations and impact traditional transatlantic alliances.

As a result, the trajectory of the Russia-Ukraine conflict will also depend on the responses of the EU, Ukraine, and other involved parties—it is not solely dictated by the U.S. and Russia. The Trump administration faces constraints from the Democratic Party establishment and military-industrial interests at home, and given Trump’s unpredictable leadership style, the process of restoring U.S.-Russia relations will not be entirely smooth. Whether there will be obstacles, how significant these obstacles will be, and whether there will be setbacks remain areas worth continuous observation and attention.

Managing Complex Relations with Russia and the U.S.: China Holds the Initiative 

1. Putin is not Trump; Russia-China relations under Putin will not experience drastic swings.

In the next four years, China should focus on consolidating and strengthening the comprehensive strategic partnership with Russia in the new era and enhancing communication and coordination with Russia on the Ukraine issue. As U.S.-Russia relations ease significantly, Russia’s diplomatic situation will gradually improve. However, under Putin’s leadership, Russia is unlikely to place more trust in the U.S. within just four years of Trump’s presidency than in its long-term strategic partners such as China.

Unlike Trump, who comes from a business background, Putin is a more stable and far-sighted politician who will undoubtedly make long-term, stable plans for Russia’s strategic development and national interests.

The world is generally adopting a wait-and-see attitude toward Trump’s current administration, closely observing whether his team can effectively govern the United States, suppress the Democratic establishment, build his own loyal political base, and achieve his goal of “Making America Great Again” by suppressing all competitors and consolidating U.S. global hegemony. The ultimate objective is to ensure that, four years from now, the MAGA faction can continue executing Trump’s policies and securing the interests of the Trump family.

2. China should remain strategically clear-headed and not allow the Trump administration to disrupt its pace.

China should maintain strategic clarity, stability, and direction to the greatest extent possible, avoiding falling into a strategy of attrition set by its competitors.

In recent years, a common view among China-U.S. strategic think tanks is that within the next ten years, the power balance between China and the U.S. may shift. If, by then, China’s national strength surpasses that of the U.S., Washington may adjust its stance toward China—potentially abandoning its suppression strategy and choosing to cooperate with China in governing the world.

This is, of course, the ideal scenario. However, under this logic, China would need to accelerate its development over the next decade and surpass the U.S. in various key indicators. The danger of this approach, however, is that it could lead to excessive consumption of China’s developmental potential and exhaust the nation.

During the Cold War, the U.S. used military competition to drain the Soviet Union, eventually leading to its collapse. The Reagan administration’s “Star Wars” program forced the Soviet Union into an unsustainable arms race, depleting its national strength. This was a carefully planned U.S. strategic trap.

The current China-U.S. competition is a long-term struggle involving both economic development (“charging energy”) and strategic military capabilities (“releasing energy”).

– China’s institutional advantages, economic and social potential, and cultural resilience allow it to engage in a long-term battle of endurance rather than rushing to surpass the U.S. in every aspect.

– China does not need to engage in a direct competition for dominance with the U.S., nor does it need to exhaust itself in the process.

– Instead, China should focus on preserving national potential, balancing its relationships with the U.S., Russia, and Europe, and maintaining strategic stability on the Taiwan issue.

– China should leverage soft and smart power strategies to outmaneuver its opponents while ensuring sustainable and long-term national development.

– The ultimate goal remains the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, achieved through a balanced and methodical approach to strengthening both hard and soft power.  

3. China should strengthen relations with Europe, especially restoring cooperation with Central and Eastern European countries.

Trump’s pro-Russia stance has alarmed and dissatisfied European nations. Many EU countries fear that after suffering major economic losses due to the Ukraine crisis, they will also face U.S. security blackmail.

China should take concrete measures to help the EU enhance its strategic autonomy by strengthening economic, technological, and trade cooperation and ensuring shared benefits.

– Central and Eastern European countries, in particular, are increasingly concerned about their security as Russia gains the upper hand amid U.S.-Russia reconciliation.

– This presents an opportunity for China to revive the “16+1” China-Central and Eastern Europe Cooperation Mechanism.

– China should closely monitor these developments and strategically plan the restoration of China-Central and Eastern European cooperation.

Over the next three to four years, China should, under the framework of international norms, enhance mutually beneficial relations with Europe, boost trade exchanges, reduce tariff barriers, expand cooperation in artificial intelligence and renewable energy and strengthen people-to-people exchanges to increase China’s strategic maneuverability in Europe.

4. Strengthening and protecting China’s strategic deterrence, particularly its nuclear deterrence and national security capabilities.

China must continue developing its strategic deterrence, particularly its nuclear deterrent and overall national security infrastructure.

– Enhancing the technological advancement and ensuring the absolute security of China’s nuclear capabilities is a key pillar of national security and territorial integrity.

– Regardless of whether they belong to the Republican or Democratic Party, U.S. politicians fear Russia’s strong strategic nuclear forces. As a result, the U.S. has always been cautious when dealing with Russia.

– Ukraine, on the other hand, lost its strategic nuclear deterrence and suffered severe consequences—its national security and territorial integrity were brutally violated.

To ensure China’s long-term national security, it is imperative to maintain a robust strategic deterrence, including nuclear capabilities, and reinforce national defense to deter potential threats.

Conclusion 

1. Putin’s Russia will not abandon its long-term strategic partnership with China in favor of short-term gains from Trump’s U.S.
2. China should remain strategically patient, avoiding unnecessary exhaustion in competition with the U.S.
3. China must seize the opportunity to strengthen relations with Europe, particularly Central and Eastern European countries, amid U.S.-Russia reconciliation.
4. Strengthening strategic deterrence, especially nuclear deterrence, remains a crucial safeguard for China’s national security.

By following these principles, China can effectively navigate the shifting geopolitical landscape while ensuring its long-term stability and prosperity.