Anchor of Stability and Source of Prosperity: International Situation and Chinese Diplomacy 2022

The international situation continued to change in a complex way in 2022， with accelerating evolution of profound changes unseen in a century. Guided by Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy， China calmly met perplexing and profound changes in the international situation， appropriately handled new difficulties and new challenges coming its way， and creatively advanced major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics.

Major-Country Relationship Undergoes Reorganization

Under joint impacts of multiple factors such as continued evolution of China-US competition， the outbreak of Russia-Ukraine conflict and its spillover effect， division and reorganization of major-country relationship accelerated in 2022.

First， China-US strategic competition continued to evolve， but the needs for both sides to manage competition was also on the increase. Affected by changes in the world pattern and readjustment of US China strategy， China-US relations underwent major inflection. Over the past two years of the Biden administration， its China policy has featured ideological penetration， selective pressurization， small-blocs building， and impetuosity on trial basis.  The readjustment of US strategy towards China led to rapid increase of uncertainties in the international order at global， regional and bilateral levels. However， in a complex contest， the necessities for both the Chinese and American sides to manage competition were also on the increase. It was in the common interests of both countries to manage their competition and prevent against a free fall slide in their relations. It was against this background that common interests between China and the US were not on the decline but rather on the rise. In his two telephone calls with US President Biden upon the latter’s requests and in his face to face meeting with the latter held in Bali Island， President Xi Jinping gave an analysis of the essence of China-US relations and pushed the relations back to the right track of healthy and stable development based on the three principles of mutual respect， peaceful coexistence， and mutually beneficial cooperation. Not only did the heads of state diplomacy of the two countries steer clear the course of China-US relations， it also has created more possible space for continued communication between both sides in the future， for the benefit of further exploration of how both countries should relate to each other in the new era.

Second， Russia’s relations with the West fell to freezing point， with deepening structural contradictions difficult to resolve. Since the outbreak of Russia-Ukraine conflict， Russia and the West have been in a process of sustained confrontation， and even though both sides displayed readiness for dialogue， the structural contradictions between them deepened and became difficult to resolve， a fundamental breakthrough in their relations not being in sight. First of all， Russia and the West had long lacked strategic trust. Secondly， Russia’s national character of maintaining security in its neighborhood and its actions in promoting reintegration of the Commonwealth of Independent States （CIS） were considered by Western countries as security threat and “imperialist” conduct. Third， internal contradictions between the US and Europe impeded the process of negotiations. As domestic political differences made it difficult for the US to come to agreement with Russia on security issues， within European countries there were different political factions and opinions， and likewise there were differences on the Russian issue， which made it difficult to come to terms on negotiation policy. In short， the West takes Russia for a long term “security threat” that needs to be contained. Between Russia and the West， there is serious antagonism at the strategic concept level such as cognition of international order， geopolitical interests， and values， both sides lacking basic strategic mutual trust， with increasing antagonism on human rights and cybersecurity.

Third， there were more factors of instability arising in US-Europe relations. Currently， Russia-Ukraine conflict was an important factor affecting US-Europe relations. Although the Biden administration actively mended US-Europe relations after taking office， the formation of the AUKUS， a trilateral security pact between Australia， the United Kingdom （UK）， and the US， and US troops pullout from Afghanistan brought new cleavages to US-Europe relations. At the outset of Russia-Ukraine conflict， the US and Europe for a while displayed strong strategic consensus and determination. However， as the conflict perpetuated， division happened within European countries， with right-wing forces coming to the fore. Meanwhile， as Europe became more dependent on the US for security and energy， US control and exploitation of Europe were on the rise. In economic domain， Russia-Ukraine conflict exasperated people’s misgivings about the risks of European “de-industrialization”. US Inflation Reduction Act （IRA） of 2022 heavily subsidizes US made battery electric vehicles， renewable energy and battery industries， posing a serious existential threat to European economy. With perpetuation of Russia-Ukraine conflict and continuation of US “harvesting” interests， even more factors of instability and divisions happened to US-European relations. It was more likely for Europe to once again set store by economic globalization and multilateralism， enhance strategic autonomy， and pursue its own development and international status.

Regional Hot-spot Issues Become Complex

Issues like Russia-Ukraine conflict， the Middle East situation， and the security situation of the Asia-Pacific region became more complex， deficits in global governance intensifying further.

First， Russia-Ukraine conflict set to perpetuate. Since its breakout in February 2022， Russia-Ukraine conflict has lasted for a year， and in the duration， though there were talks between both sides， the spread of the conflict did not stop. Incidents such as the referendum for “accession into Russia” held in four oblasts in East Ukraine， the blast of Nord Stream Pipelines， and the Crimean Bridge explosion led to continued escalation of the conflict. For Russia， its strategic objective was yet to be achieved. At the same time， the West continued to strengthen its assistance to Ukraine and increase the intensity of the latter’s antagonism with Russia. The West’s control over international public opinion and algorithm enhanced the legitimacy and sustainability of war assistance， the future trends of the crisis being led and manipulated by the US， which had scooped huge interests from Russia-Ukraine conflict and would not quit in the short run.