Analyst Tsuladze: ‘out of question China will mediate between Russia, US or help end Ukraine war’

US President Donald Trump’s visit to Beijing and his talks with President Xi Jinping have become a central event on the global agenda. In an interview with Front News, international analyst Avtandil Tsuladze says that despite the traditional “America First” rhetoric, there will be no escalation of the trade war between the parties, although the fundamental geopolitical confrontation between Washington and Beijing remains unchanged. According to the analyst, China is taking advantage of the West’s temporary weakness in order to establish a Cold War-like bipolar system in which it would have the advantage, while the main informal understanding between the leaders did not concern geopolitics but rather the division of influence in the field of artificial intelligence. At the same time, the expert stresses that the key to resolving the Ukraine crisis currently lies in the Middle East and that global shifts depend on Trump’s next steps regarding Iran’s nuclear programme.

Q. US President Donald Trump’s statements in Beijing, on the one hand, are based on the traditional “America First” rhetoric, but on the other hand they also suggest a search for compromise with China. In your view, what is the main aim of these negotiations: preventing a new trade war, or a complete redistribution of global influence? And what specific changes should we expect in the world economy?

A. There have been no major changes, but the positive development is that there will be no escalation of a trade war between the United States and China. In this regard, an understanding has been reached that we remain competitors, but in areas where both sides have an interest, we should cooperate. According to Xi Jinping, there are two superpowers in the world – China and the United States. This means that these two countries are trying to establish a bipolar system similar to that of the Cold War. This is important in the sense that China previously supported a multipolar system, as the weakening of the US and Europe suited it. Now, however, when Xi Jinping believes that the West is weak and there is a rift between the US and Europe, China is taking advantage of the moment to establish a bipolar system in which Xi believes China will have the advantage.

In my view, the key point here is that Trump brought a large business delegation to China. These are representatives of high technology sectors, mainly related to artificial intelligence. The United States and China are two major monopolies in this field. The development of artificial intelligence will be the key technology and resource of the future. In this area, it appears that certain agreements were reached, although they have not been publicly disclosed. There will be a redistribution of spheres of influence in this direction.

Q. At this stage, the interests of both countries differ radically: Washington demands a reduction in the trade imbalance and restrictions on the expansion of Chinese technology, while for Beijing the priorities are economic stability, maintaining red lines on Taiwan and a multipolar world order. How realistic is it that Trump and Xi Jinping can find common ground on these fundamental contradictions?

A. As for geopolitical issues, the situation remains unchanged. Trump cannot make concessions on Taiwan and China likewise cannot abandon its position. Xi Jinping and Trump agreed that Iran must not acquire nuclear weapons, but there is nothing particularly new in this. China was already against Iran having nuclear weapons. Regarding the Hormuz Strait crisis, Xi Jinping promised Trump that China would not supply weapons to Iran, but no one knows whether this promise will be kept. In my opinion, China is trying to use America’s deadlocked policy to strengthen its own geopolitical position. The same applies to the war in Ukraine and I believe China’s position will not change.

Q. Western media have been actively reporting that Trump would raise the issue of the war in Ukraine in his meeting with Xi Jinping, particularly in the context of China supplying dual-use goods to Russia. How successful do you think Trump was in pressuring Beijing to reduce its support for Moscow and was a specific “peace plan”, which Trump has been actively promoting, discussed?

A. Trump had hoped to use Xi Jinping as a mediator with Russia and somehow resolve the deadlocked situation in Ukraine, but this did not prove realistic. From China’s perspective, these crises weaken the West and strengthen its own geopolitical position. Therefore, the more chaos there is in these areas, the better it is for China. As I mentioned, the only agreement reached at this stage concerns artificial intelligence, which is important for both countries. Trump believes that artificial intelligence is the main lever of American development. The geopolitical situation, however, will not change significantly.

Q. The Iran issue is critically important for Washington, while China is the largest buyer of Iranian oil and an economic pillar for Tehran. Was this topic discussed during the leaders’ meeting and how realistic is it that Trump could receive guarantees from China regarding the use of economic leverage over Iran to prevent escalation in the Middle East?

A. As for oil, Trump announced that China is buying American oil to replace Iranian supplies. Therefore, American business actually benefits from the Middle Eastern crisis. However, the country itself does not benefit, as this leads to inflation and higher prices in the United States. Thus, China continues to benefit from the weakening of the West globally. We can see that, amid these crises, Europe’s economy is weakening. The American economy is also in a difficult situation. At the same time, Russia is also struggling due to the war. So for China, the current situation is very favourable – it is increasing its own capabilities while its rivals are being weakened and it is using this as leverage.

Q. After Trump’s departure, Russian President Vladimir Putin is expected to visit China immediately. Russian media present this as an “unshakable strategic partnership” between Moscow and Beijing opposing the Western bloc. Does such scheduling of leaders’ meetings suggest that Xi Jinping is trying to play a kind of “mediator” role between the US and Russia, or has China ultimately chosen Moscow’s camp? Or, as you noted, is it using everyone for its own purposes?

A. Regarding the situation in Russia, the economic situation there is severe. Russia is interested in economic support from China. However, China is not interested in Russia recovering from this crisis. If Russia recovers, it will become stronger again. China does not want this, as historically Russia has been its geopolitical competitor. Of course, no significant or decisive outcomes should be expected from this summit or Xi Jinping’s meeting. China’s aim remains to maintain control over Russia. Parts of the Russian elite favour a deal with Trump. For China, this is of course unacceptable. This is precisely what will be discussed – preventing a rapprochement between Russia and the United States. It is out of the question that China will take on any mediating role between Russia and the US or contribute to ending the war in Ukraine.

Q. What solution might the United States find regarding the war in Ukraine? Do you expect Trump to intensify sanctions against Russia further, or to increase pressure on Ukraine to make certain concessions at the negotiating table?

A. For the United States, the main issue at the moment remains Iran. The key question now is whether Trump will begin a second phase of war in Iran. June marks the 250th anniversary of American independence and he must decide on the Iran issue by July. For Trump, resolving the nuclear weapons issue is currently the priority. He is less concerned about the closure of the Hormuz Strait than about Iran’s nuclear programme. Therefore, it is not ruled out that Trump may be forced to begin a second phase of war.

As for the war in Ukraine, I do not expect any significant changes regarding a ceasefire. On the contrary, I expect Russia to prepare a new wave of offensives by spring. The issue of the war in Ukraine may only move forward if the Iran problem is resolved. If the Islamic Republic’s regime in Iran collapses and change occurs, Russia will lose an important supporter and ally in the Middle East. In that case, Russia would be forced to come to the negotiating table regarding Ukraine. Therefore, much now depends on developments around Iran.