Китайские транскрипты и Украина - март 2022
1 марта
The Ukraine issue has complex historical context and realistic factors. The Chinese side regrets the casualties. The current situation is not what we want to see. The top priority is for all parties to exercise necessary restraint to prevent the situation on the ground in Ukraine from deteriorating or even spiraling out of control. The life and property safety of civilians should be effectively guaranteed, and in particular, large-scale humanitarian crises should be averted.
2 марта
ABC Spanish Daily Newspaper: Will President Xi hold a telephone conversation with Ukrainian President Zelenskyy in future days? Has there been any preparation in this regard?
Wang Wenbin: China and Ukraine have smooth communication channels.
<...>
I would like to reiterate that China firmly opposes all illegal unilateral sanctions, and believes that sanctions are never fundamentally effective means to solve problems. They will only create serious difficulties to the economy and livelihood of relevant countries and further intensify division and confrontation. We ask the relevant parties not to hurt the legitimate rights and interests of China and other parties when handling the Ukraine issue and the relations with Russia.
3 марта
China’s basic position on the Ukraine issue is consistent and clear. We always advocate respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries, and peaceful resolution of international disputes based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. The top priority right now is to ease the situation on the ground as much as possible, and prevent the conflicts from escalating or even getting out of control.
4 марта
We welcome all diplomatic efforts that are conducive to the political settlement of the Ukraine issue, and support dialogue and negotiation by Russia and Ukraine for a political settlement that accommodates both sides’ legitimate concerns and is good for lasting stability and security in Europe.
8 марта
Lately US biological labs in Ukraine have indeed attracted much attention. According to reports, a large quantity of dangerous viruses are stored in these facilities. Russia has found during its military operations that the US uses these facilities to conduct bio-military plans.
According to data released by the US, it has 26 bio-labs and other related facilities in Ukraine, over which the US Department of Defense has absolute control. All dangerous pathogens in Ukraine must be stored in these labs and all research activities are led by the US side. Without US approval, no information shall be released to the public.
Under current circumstances, for the sake of the health and safety of people in Ukraine, neighboring regions and beyond, we call on relevant sides to ensure the safety of these labs. The US, in particular, as the party that knows the labs the best, should disclose specific information as soon as possible, including which viruses are stored and what research has been conducted.
I would also like to stress that, the biological military activities of the US in Ukraine are merely the tip of the iceberg. Using such pretexts as cooperating to reduce biological safety risks and strengthening global public health, the US has 336 biological labs in 30 countries under its control. 336, you heard me right. It also conducted many biological military activities at the Fort Detrick base at home.
What is the true intention of the US? What has it done specifically? The international community has long-held doubts. However, the US has kept stonewalling, and even dismissing the international community’s doubts as spreading disinformation. Besides, the US has been standing alone in obstructing the establishment of a Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) verification mechanism and refusing verification of its biological facilities at home and abroad for the past two decades. This has led to deeper concern of the international community. Once again we urge the US to give a full account of its biological military activities at home and abroad and subject itself to multilateral verification.
<...>
Hubei Media Group: Alice Weidel, co-leader of the German political party Alternative for Germany (AfD), said in public that the hardliners in the West who still live by the outdated logic of the Cold War have promised Ukraine the impossible membership in NATO, thus arrogantly denying Russia’s great power status. It is a historical failure. Sanctions will not be able to end the war in Ukraine. All parties should approach geopolitics with a realistic and cool-headed view and make all-out effort to create a European security architecture, but only without the "black-and-white thinking that we are the West and they are the East". Do you have any comment?
Zhao Lijian: This is a very rational and penetrating view. In fact, dating back to as early as 1997, George Kennan, former US ambassador to the Soviet Union, warned that expanding NATO up to Russia’s borders would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-Cold-War era. In 2014, Dr. Kissinger said that Ukraine must not be either side’s outpost against the other, and Ukraine becoming a member of NATO would be a “red line”. US professor John Mearsheimer said in 2015 that while guided by the Monroe Doctrine, the US has never stopped its effort to drag Ukraine into the Western camp. Russia, as a great power, will never agree to such move by the US and the West. Thomas L. Friedman, a renowned American expert in international affairs, said in his recent article that America and NATO aren’t innocent bystanders in the Ukraine crisis. In his view, a “huge log” fueling this fire was the decision by the US to expand NATO eastward. Regrettably, these fair, objective and rational assessments have failed to be incorporated into the policy of the US, the West and NATO.
9 марта
China’s position on the Ukraine issue is consistent and clear-cut. We hope relevant parties can step up efforts to promote peace talks, ease tensions and promote a peaceful settlement of the Ukraine issue at an early date.
<...>
Lately, the US has been disseminating disinformation about China on the Ukraine issue, with the attempt to shift blame, stoke confrontation and profit from the issue. The practice is despicable and malicious.
The ins and outs of how the Ukraine issue has evolved to what it is today are very clear. The moves by the US-led NATO have pushed the Russia-Ukraine tension to the breaking point. While looking away from its own responsibility, the US criticizes China’s position on Ukraine to seek space for the plot of simultaneously suppressing China and Russia, with a view to maintaining its hegemony.
10 марта
Those who accused China of standing on the sidelines on the Ukraine issue should ask themselves these questions: What roles have they played in this crisis? Who pushed for NATO’s expansion eastward for five times? Who have fueled the situation in Ukraine and hyped up and escalated the tension for months and allowed it to spiral out of control?
<...>
I want to stress that wielding the big stick of sanctions cannot solve the Ukraine issue.
<...>
AFP: China has supported Russia’s claims that the US conducted biological military activities in Ukraine. The White House calls these claims a disinformation operation and the allegations do appear to lack a strong evidence. So what are China’s sources for supporting these allegations? How do you know that you’re not simply repeating Russian propaganda?
Zhao Lijian: The international community has had grave concerns about US bio-military activities for long. The world has no knowledge about what the US has been doing at Fort Detrick on its territory and the 336 biological labs overseas, or whether the activities conform to the stipulations of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC). This is not something you can muddle through in a few words. It is even irresponsible to dismiss the concerns of the international community as “disinformation”. Why has the US been standing alone in opposing setting up multilateral verification mechanisms for 20 years if it has indeed complied with the BWC? Isn’t it confounding?
Since the US mentioned the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) also, why doesn’t it tell the world handily that the US is the sole possessor state party of chemical weapons? The international community has been repeatedly asking the US to complete the destruction of its chemical weapons stockpiles as soon as possible. However, it is regrettable and concerning that the US has twice missed the deadline for destruction.
China firmly opposes any country’s research and development, possession or use of biological weapons and chemical weapons under any circumstances. Under the current circumstances, we call on all relevant parities to keep in mind people’s health and safety in Ukraine, the neighboring areas and the whole world, and ensure the security of the relevant labs. We once again urge the US to earnestly fulfill its international obligations, give a clear account of its bio-military activities both at home and abroad and accept multilateral verification, and complete the destruction of its chemical weapons arsenal as soon as possible.
You asked about the source of the figures I mentioned. When I mentioned these figures the day before yesterday, I made it clear that they were released by the US side.
<...>
Reuters: China has said that the bio-labs in Ukraine are controlled by the US but sources we’ve spoken to say that, in fact, these are just labs that have received funding from the US and are in control of Ukrainian authorities. So I want to ask, what proof does China have that the US is in control of these bio-labs? Both the Pentagon spokesperson and the White House spokesperson yesterday refuted the claims made by both Russia and China regarding these bio-labs. I think the Pentagon spokesman said that the claims were laughable whilst the White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki said that they were simply false. So I was wondering if we could get a Chinese foreign ministry comment on this.
Zhao Lijian: I just shared many details with you. In fact, I also elaborated on this question the day before yesterday.
What has the US been doing at Fort Detrick and its 336 biological laboratories abroad? Do the activities conform to the stipulations of the BWC? Little is known to the international community. The revelation of the secrets of relevant US laboratories in Ukraine cannot be brushed off with just one or two words. And calling China’s statement and Russia’s finding “propaganda” and “laughable” cannot help the US get away. The US should face squarely the concerns of the international community, and give a full account of all the information about its overseas bio-military sites.
14 марта
Recently, the US has been maliciously spreading disinformation targeting China. China’s position on the Ukraine issue is consistent and clear. We have been playing a constructive part in promoting peace talks. The top priority at the moment is for all parties to exercise restraint, cool the situation down instead of adding fuel to the fire, and work for diplomatic settlement rather than further escalate the situation.
<...>
Zhao Lijian: Biological military activities in Ukraine are the common concern of the international community. According to information released lately, dozens of biological laboratories in Ukraine are operated under the order of the US Department of Defense, and the US has invested more than $200 million in the activities of these labs. The relevant US research is aimed at creating a mechanism for the covert spread of deadly pathogens. According to Russian officials, Russia has found more than 30 biological laboratories belonging to the US in Ukraine. Emergency destruction were carried out on the relevant projects, but traces of plague, anthrax and other pathogens were found. US Under Secretary of State Victoria Nuland acknowledged that Ukraine has “biological research facilities” and that the US is working with the Ukrainian side on how they can prevent any of those “research materials” from falling into the hands of Russian forces. US media also reported that the US government lied about the secretive biological labs in Ukraine and withheld the truth about the real purpose of supporting these laboratories from the American people. The WHO also recommended that Ukraine destroy high-threat pathogens stored in the country’s public health laboratories.
In the face of documents, pictures, materials and other evidence found by Russia in Ukraine, the US could not convince others by simply dismissing the concerns as “disinformation”. The US always claims to be “open and transparent”. It should live up to its words. If the concerns are “disinformation”, why doesn’t the US release detailed materials to prove its innocence? What did the US spend the $200 million on? What kind of research has the US conducted on which pathogens? What is it trying to hide when the US Embassy in Ukraine deleted all relevant documents on its website? Why does the US insist on being the only country in the world to oppose the establishment of a multilateral verification mechanism though it claims to abide by the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)? If the US wants to prove its innocence, why doesn’t it open up these bio-labs for independent investigations by international experts?
<...>
AFP: Just to follow up on the earlier question about report that Russia has requested for support from China. Has China received any Russian requests for help in the war in Ukraine so far? Will China consider giving Russia assistance in this war?
Zhao Lijian: In my previous answer to Bloomberg, I already made it clear that the US has been spreading disinformation. China has elaborated on its position on China-Russia relations on multiple occasions.
<...>
BBC: You just mentioned about this accusation that the US has been deleting documents on its website regarding these bio-labs. I checked though they all seem to be there. Has the foreign ministry had a look at the website for the US Embassy in Ukraine, because they seem to be there?
Zhao Lijian: Are you saying the documents are not deleted?
Follow-up: As far as I can see, they’re all there, all the documents. I mean you can have a look on the website. I can give you the URL.
Zhao Lijian: What I saw was different.
Follow-up: Why did you say that information you saw is different? Can you explain it?
Zhao Lijian: As far as I know, relevant documents of these bio-labs have been deleted by the US Embassy in Ukraine.
Follow-up: Would you endeavor to at least check now, have a look at the US embassy website and see if those documents are there?
Zhao Lijian: I just made China’s position clear.
<...>
BBC: Just a follow-up. From one of these documents, which I say is there, I will read it out to you. Now this is the US description, “The Biological Threat Reduction Program’s priorities in Ukraine are to consolidate and secure pathogens and toxins of security concern and to continue to ensure Ukraine can detect and report outbreaks caused by dangerous pathogens before they pose security or stability threats.” The whole program does not seem have anything to do with weapons, but more of securing dangerous pathogens. There seems to be some misunderstanding internationally as to what constitutes a weapons program and what constitutes a program of securing pathogens? Many countries, including China, have research facilities. We all know countries have these things, often or usually they have nothing to do with weapons or war. Could it be that these facilities have absolutely nothing to do with weapons in Ukraine? And could you explain this distinction as the Chinese government see it?
Zhao Lijian: You said the US has been stressing that the facilities are for research purposes. I can tell you that the US response so far has been self-contradictory and perplexing. According to the 2005 agreement between the US Department of Defense and the Ukrainian side, representatives of the US Department of Defense have the right to participate in all aspects of related activities at facilities in Ukraine. Information marked or designated by the US side as “sensitive” should be withheld from public disclosure by Ukraine. According to the document the US submitted to the meeting of the state parties to the BWC at the end of 2021, the US has cooperation facilities in Ukraine including 26 labs.
We wonder, whether the US has sent its people? What specifically is the scope of activities? How many cooperation facilities are there? What kind of sensitive information about public health cannot be shared? Does the Ukrainian side know what the US has been working on in Ukraine?
If the information released by the US is self-contradictory and significantly flawed, how can the US convince the international community that it has indeed implemented obligations under the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC)? Despite the international consensus on ensuring compliance with verification, the US has been standing alone in obstructing the establishment of a BWC verification mechanism. That explains the international community’s suspicion over the bio-military activities of the US.
For decades, the US readily points fingers at others and accuses them of noncompliance, saying that they should accept verification and even resorting to sanctions and military operations. However, when it comes to the US itself, it is refusing verification and trying to muddle through by simply saying “we are in compliance with the convention”. How is that? This is typical double standard. Moreover, given the credibility of the US, it is very difficult for it to win the trust of the international community.
Once again we urge the US to act responsibly, offer a clear account of its biological military activities at home and abroad, and stop standing alone in obstructing the establishment of a BWC verification regime. This will help restore the international community’s confidence in the US’ fulfillment of its international obligations and strengthen global biosecurity.
Follow-up: You said that there are 26 labs the US has in Ukraine. Again, according to the documents on the US embassy website about this pathogen research, these are actually Ukrainian labs that the US is just assisting. Why does the Chinese government believe that they are US labs rather than Ukrainian labs, which the US is assisting with?
Zhao Lijian: Did you follow what I just said? I spoke at length just now. I told you that the US Department of Defense has provided more than $200 million. I also cited a 2005 agreement between the US Department of Defense and Ukraine, which clearly states that representatives of the US Department of Defense have the right to participate in all aspects of related activities at facilities in Ukraine. Information marked or designated by the US side Department of Defense as “sensitive” should be withheld from public disclosure by Ukraine. Please don’t think I haven’t read the relevant information on the website of the US Embassy in Ukraine. If you read the information carefully, it should not be difficult to see that it clearly states that the United States Department of Defense funds relevant projects.
Follow-up: So you have actually looked at the documents on that website, some of them are not deleted?
Zhao Lijian: I have seen some links online.
15 марта
AFP: According to news report, the US told allies that China has signaled willingness to provide military assistance to Russia after Russia requested for equipment like surface-to-air missiles. Can China confirm this? And you mentioned yesterday when we asked about media reports on a similar topic that the US has been spreading disinformation targeting China. So does this mean that China has neither received nor responded to any Russian requests for assistance in the Ukraine war? Or are you saying that parts of these news reports are actually not accurate? And if so, can you please clarify? And which parts exactly are disinformation that you mentioned?
Zhao Lijian: Yesterday I answered similar questions. Enough has been said. The US’ practice is nothing short of spreading disinformation.
Macau Monthly: According to unspecified US officials, on March 14, the US government told allies in NATO and several Asian countries in a diplomatic cable and through intelligence agents that China had signaled its willingness to provide military and economic aid to Russia at the latter’s request. It also noted China was expected to deny those plans. He also said, the move is part of a deliberate strategy move to counter disinformation by being far more open about intelligence matters than usual. What is China’s comment?
Zhao Lijian: I’m sure you have noted that Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov denied the claim that Russia requested military aid from China on March 14. The US has been creating and spreading disinformation from time to time. This is neither professional nor ethical, still less responsible. By doing so, the US will further lose the trust of the world.
What the US should do is to deeply reflect upon its role in the evolving situation of the Ukraine crisis, and do more things that can help to ease the situation.
<...>
The Ukraine issue has a complex historical background and context. China is deeply grieved to see that the situation in Ukraine has reached its current state. The crisis is the result of the interplay of complex factors.
<...>
Reuters: You talked about the US embassy in Ukraine deleting certain documents, if I’m not mistaken, from its website. These documents talk about the labs that the US says are designed to prevent things like epidemics from breaking out, but it seems that Russia and China have suggested many times that they have a military purpose. Where did you originally get this information from? What I found was on February 26, there was, I think, a Bulgarian journalist who uploaded on Twitter some reporting efforts where she claimed that the US embassy in Ukraine had deleted such documents, even though at present no documents she says were deleted. They are still there. So my question is, was this tweet from this Bulgarian journalist your source or did you get intelligence from Russia? Was it your own intelligence services that provide you this information?
Zhao Lijian: Based on our information, the US indeed deleted the documents. You may have to ask the US whether they recovered the documents, or the documents you saw were something missed out by the US, because the US is the one that is responsible for giving an explanation and clarification. You should also ask the US whether its practice is intended to kick up a cloud of dust or to cover more things up?
I want to stress that the concerns of the international community about US’ biological labs in Ukraine boil down to what the US has done and what has been hidden from the public. Why is the US the only party that is opposed to establishing a BWC verification regime? Why not open these bio-labs to independent investigation by international experts? I suggest you ask the US these questions.
Follow-up: Thanks for your answer. But I was asking about your source of information. Could you elaborate a little bit more about that?
Zhao Lijian: As I said yesterday, according to the 2005 agreement between the US Department of Defense and the Ukrainian side, representatives of the US Department of Defense have the right to participate in all aspects of related activities at facilities in Ukraine. Information marked or designated by the US side as “sensitive” should be withheld from public disclosure by Ukraine. According to the document the US submitted to the meeting of the state parties to the BWC at the end of 2021, the US has cooperation facilities in Ukraine including 26 labs.
However, the US Department of Defense said the other day that the US and Ukraine have cooperation in 46 labs. Isn’t this self-contradictory?
We also noted that the US Department of Defense representatives have the right to participate in related activities at facilities in Ukraine. The Ukrainian side shall store all dangerous pathogens at laboratories designated for cooperative research and transfer to the US requested copies of dangerous pathogen strains. Key information, including that marked or designated by the US side as “sensitive”, should be withheld from public disclosure by Ukraine. The US side failed to make clarifications in its statements yesterday.
How could this convince anyone? People cannot help but wonder, did the US send personnel to these labs or not? What is their scope of activity exactly? How many cooperation facilities does the US have in Ukraine?
Besides, according to open sources, these labs in Ukraine operate on the command of the US Department of Defense and the US has invested over $200 million in them. You were asking about the information I have. We noted that Russia has lately disclosed some US research plans in bio-labs in Ukraine. One of them, the UP-4 project, studies the possibility of the spread of avian viruses through migrating birds. The R-781 project considers bats as carriers of pathogens that can be transmitted to humans. Another project code-named UP-8 is aimed at studying the Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever virus and hantaviruses. The evidence revealed by Russia shows that the US is trying to obtain means of releasing biological chemical weapons by experimenting on the relations between migrating birds and the spread of viruses. It also shows that the US and some other Western countries are gathering and transferring in a planned manner biological samples in Ukraine and may have conducted biological research targeting different ethnic populations.
When confronted with evidence revealed by Russia, the US is trying to muddle through by simply dismissing the concerns as “disinformation”. Is this convincing at all? If the US wants to prove its innocence, it needs to give a full account of its bio-military activities in a responsible manner. We welcome a joint assessment of the documents provided by Russia under the framework of the UN and the BWC. More importantly, we call on the US to open up these bio-labs for independent investigations by international experts and stop standing alone in obstructing the establishment of a BWC verification mechanism.
16 марта
CCTV: According to reports, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said about US military biological laboratories, “There are hundreds of such laboratories, including almost 30 just in Ukraine alone”, which pose “life-threatening dangers to a huge number of civilians”. “And many were set up in a number of former Soviet countries precisely along the perimeter of Russia’s borders, as well as on China’s borders, and on the borders of the other countries located there”. He added that Russia will demand that “this problem be considered within the context of the commitments for all countries participating in the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention” and “double and triple our efforts to make the Americans stop blocking our proposal ... about the need to establish a special verification mechanism under this convention”. Does the Chinese side support Russia’s demand?
Zhao Lijian: We have noted Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s remarks. Biological security bears on the common interest of all humanity. The US has the obligation to comply with the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and to offer clarifications on matters the international community is concerned about. In fact, the international community has long-held severe concerns about the biological military activities conducted by the US at home and overseas. This is neither about US labs in Ukraine alone nor a new problem caused by the current situation.
We welcome the international community’s joint assessment of the documents revealed by Russia under the framework of the BWC and the UN. At the same time, US clarifications will also be heard in a fair and just manner. The international community can take this as an opportunity to restart the negotiation process for the establishment of a verification mechanism. Once again, we call on the US to change its position of standing alone in opposing the establishment of such a verification mechanism. It will help restore the international community’s confidence in the US’ fulfillment of its international obligations and will also be conducive to improving global biosecurity.
<...>
TASS: Russian foreign ministry officials told TASS the other day that while warning Russia not to use bio-chemical weapons in Ukraine, the US is in fact evading responsibility for its own bio-chemical activities in Ukraine and concealing a large-scale provocative action the US and Ukraine are preparing. Does the foreign ministry have any comment on the US’ blame-shifting behavior?
Zhao Lijian: As I just said, the international community has long had serious concerns over the US’ biological military activities. According to what has been submitted by the US, the country has 336 bio-labs in 30 countries. This is not a problem confined to US labs in Ukraine alone, or a new issue arising from the current situation. The US has the obligation to abide by the BWC and clarify what it does facing the concerns of the international community. It cannot muddle through by deflecting attention.
For decades, the US has casually accused other countries of not complying with agreements and demanded others to accept verification, which the US cited as grounds for initiating military operations and imposing sanctions. Why does the US exempt itself from verification and try to convince others simply by saying it is “in full compliance”? Besides, the US can hardly earn trust from the international community with its credibility. We still remember that someone decided to illegally invade Iraq with a vial of detergent in his hand.
We once again urge the US to act in a responsible way, give full clarifications on its biological military activities and stop opposing the establishment of a BWC verification regime single-handedly. This will help the US regain the world’s confidence in its fulfillment of its international obligations and improve global biological security.
<...>
Macau Monthly: The US State Department spokesperson said the other day that the basic tenet of the international order that “big countries cannot bully small countries” has been violated in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. What is your comment?
Zhao Lijian: How ironic it is for the US to say “big countries cannot bully small countries”. If the US can reflect on what it did to Cuba and Panama in 1960s, Grenada in 1980s, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia in 1990s, Afghanistan and Iraq at the start of this century, and Syria and Libya afterwards, it would find that these are textbook examples of big countries bullying small countries. Why hasn’t the US said a word about these facts? The US should wear label of the big bullying the small well.
The fundamental way out of the Ukraine crisis is dialogue and negotiation, rather than “rules-based order” unilaterally defined according to one’s own standards, still less coercing others to pick sides and creating the chilling effect of dividing countries into friend or foe.
17 марта
AFP: Staying with the Ukraine crisis, there’s mounting evidence now of several Russian attacks on civilian targets in Ukraine. Yesterday, Russian forces are believed to have attacked a theater in the city of Mariupol. Hundreds of civilians were thought to be sheltering inside at the time, and the Russian word for “children” was clearly painted on the ground outside. And yet they still attacked, killing an unknown number of civilians. My question is given that China has not explicitly opposed Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, should we assume that China therefore has no problem with this kind of indiscriminate killing of civilians? President Biden has called President Putin a “war criminal”. Does China agree that Russia may have committed war crimes in Ukraine?
Zhao Lijian: On the Ukraine issue, China has made its view known that the international community should focus on two things, namely, peace talks and avoidance of a large-scale humanitarian crisis. We have also made huge efforts in this regard. China has proposed a six-point initiative on easing the humanitarian situation in Ukraine and has taken real actions. We will continue to provide new humanitarian assistance as needed.
I want to stress that China’s position on peace talks is consistent. You may refer to China’s statements on hotspot issues including Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Palestine and Israel.
When it comes to civilian casualties and humanitarian situation, I wonder if you were equally concerned about the civilian casualties in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Palestine. Do these civilians mean nothing to you? Do not forget Serbia in 1999, or the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Did you show any care about civilian casualties there? If not, then you are in no position to make accusations against China.
China’s position is aboveboard, objective and just. But the US, NATO and some western media are very hypocritical, especially as some reports smack of racism. We suggest some media focus more efforts on things that are conducive to promoting peace. They may advise the US and NATO countries not to supply ammunition or add fuel to the flame, but to sit down and build peace by talking with Europe, Russia and Ukraine.
<...>
Bloomberg: China’s ambassador to Ukraine Fan Xianrong said while meeting regional leaders in Lviv that “we have seen how great the unity of the Ukrainian people is, and that means its strength”. He also said China was a friend to Ukraine and respected its state, and then it wanted to help Ukraine’s economy develop. Does the foreign ministry support the ambassador’s characterization of China’s position here?
Zhao Lijian: We of course support our ambassador’s statement. China supports all efforts conducive to realizing deescalation and political settlement and opposes any act that is counterproductive to reaching diplomatic resolution or even leads to escalation.
<...>
Reuters: The International Court of Justice (ICJ) in The Hague delivered a binding order saying the Russia must immediately suspend military operations in Ukraine. What’s the Chinese government’s comment?
Zhao Lijian: China has noted the ICJ’s provisional measures based on the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. China will not comment on the specifics as the judges perform their duties independently. In fact, apart from Chinese and Russian judges, four judges have released their declaration or separate opinion on the Order. A judge noted explicitly that he was in favor of the Order indicating provisional measures due to the current situation in Ukraine and the suffering of the people, instead of the legality.
China’s position on the Ukraine issue is consistent. We support Russia and Ukraine in continuing to properly resolve the relevant issues through negotiation and consultation, and the international community in playing an active role in peacefully settling disputes. All parties should avoid making the issue more complicated.
Bloomberg: The former head of Britain’s foreign intelligence service said that only Xi Jinping can influence Putin and stop the war in Ukraine. Has Xi been speaking to Putin about the war? What have those conversations been about if that happened?
Zhao Lijian: I noted the relevant remarks. China has been promoting dialogue for peace and making efforts for peacefully resolving the Ukraine crisis. Such efforts include the phone calls and personal efforts made by President Xi Jinping with leaders of relevant countries. China will continue to play a constructive role in the Ukraine issue. However, it takes the one who started the issue to resolve it. I want to stress that those who caused the Ukraine crisis should reflect on the roles they have played, earnestly shoulder their due responsibilities, take concrete actions to ease the situation and solve the problem, instead of shifting the blame onto others.
<...>
The key to solving the Ukraine crisis is in the hands of the US and NATO. We hope the US and NATO, the culprits of the crisis, can reflect upon their roles in the Ukraine crisis. They should earnestly shoulder due responsibilities and take real actions to ease the situation, resolve the problem and end the conflict in Ukraine at an early date. We also hope that the US can truly work with most developing countries in the world to stand on the side of peace and justice and help to ease the Ukraine situation soon.
<...>
Bloomberg: Can I just follow on what we asked earlier? China’s ambassador to Ukraine said that China would never attack Ukraine. Does that mean China will not supply Russia with weapons or other assistance that could be used to attack Ukraine?
Zhao Lijian: Is this your own interpretation? China has made statements on this on multiple occasions. Such association has no grounds whatsoever.
18 марта
CCTV: US State Department Spokesperson Ned Price said that the US is concerned about Russian attacks on Ukrainian infrastructure which caused civilian casualties. However, China has yet to state its position explicitly. How does the foreign ministry view such criticism from other countries on China?
Zhao Lijian: Human lives are precious. Civilian casualties under all circumstances are heart-rending and lamentable. China has all along called for every effort to avoid civilian casualties. We still remember that in March 1999, the US-led NATO, without the Security Council’s mandate, flagrantly unleashed a ruthless bombing campaign against the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia for 78 days, killing at least 2,500 innocent civilians and injuring around 10,000 people, most of them civilians. Over the past two decades or so, the US conducted tens of thousands of air strikes in places like Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Somalia. The number of innocent civilians killed can be anywhere between 22,000 and 48,000. When professing its concern for the welfare of the Ukrainian people, shouldn’t the US first express concern over the civilian casualties caused by all these military operations?
China has all along held an objective and just position on the Ukraine issue. We have been taking concrete actions to promote talks for peace ever since the conflict broke out. Our just position and constructive efforts, witnessed by all, have received the understanding and support of the international community, especially the vast developing world. What China provides to Ukraine are much-needed humanitarian supplies such as food, baby formula, sleeping bags, quilts and damp-proof mats. In contrast, what the US provides to Ukraine are lethal weapons. On March 16, the US “announced an additional $800 million in security assistance to Ukraine, bringing the total US security assistance committed to Ukraine to $1 billion in just the past week”. Here I would like to share with you the list that Spokesperson Price mentioned. The new package includes, among others, 800 anti-aircraft systems, 9,000 portable, high-accuracy anti-armor systems, 7,000 small arms including machine guns and grenade launchers, and 20 million rounds of ammunition, artillery, and mortar rounds. The list goes on. Will the latest US assistance of weapons bring stability and security to Ukraine or cause more civilian casualties? Which do the civilians in Ukraine need more, food and sleeping bags or machine guns and mortar rounds? It won’t be difficult for anyone in his right mind with a shred of common sense to make the right call.
<...>
The Ukraine crisis has created millions of refugees. The US should have done otherwise as it knows the consequences. Some deep reflections have to be made. What is the root cause of the ongoing refugee crisis? What role did the US play in the Ukraine crisis? What are US’ due responsibilities and obligations? Could the situation evolve to where it is today had it not been for the seriously imbalanced regional security caused by NATO’s five rounds of eastward expansion? Did the countries that insisted on NATO’s eastward expansion despite opposition expect the suffering of refugees today? Don’t you think they are most supposed to accept the refugees? On top of the 11 million displaced refugees with their families torn apart due to the 20-year war waged by the US in Afghanistan, another 2.6 million refugees fleeing the Russia-Ukraine conflict have entered European countries, which are the real victims of the current situation, to be honest. However, the US is still looking on and fooling its European allies. During a recent visit to Poland, the US Vice President responded with a laugh rather than a direct answer to whether the US would accept Ukrainian refugees. What people across the globe are seeing is that as the one who initiated and instigated the conflict, the US is hypocritical on the issue of refugees. This is very ironic and telling. You should all think about this.
<...>
AFP: The US Secretary of State Antony Blinken yesterday repeated President Biden’s assertion that Russian forces are committing war crimes in Ukraine by deliberately targeting civilians. You just spoke about China’s awareness of the scale of damage and civilian casualties in Ukraine. But I’d like to ask whether China has any concerns at all that these civilian casualties have been caused by Russian forces? If it’s possible, could we avoid talking about previous US actions that may have caused civilian casualties in previous conflicts?
Zhao Lijian: I have answered many questions about civilians in recent days. Of course China is saddened by civilian casualties.
There is no point in badgering us on this question. I also have a question for you. As a journalist working with AFP, a mainstream media and news agency in Europe, you need to think about the following questions. As the culprit of the Ukraine crisis, why does the US keep smearing China instead of reflecting on the security predicament in Europe caused by the eastward expansion of US-led NATO? Why doesn’t the US listen to the observation by Dr. Kissinger and other experts that Ukraine must not be either side’s outpost against the other? Why doesn’t the US reflect on its hypocritical move of watching the fire from across the river after fanning the flames? I am not sure if it occurred to the Europeans that the US was fully capable of pushing for NATO’s eastward expansion but sent no troops to support the Ukrainian people. Did you forget that the US was among the first to evacuate civilians and diplomatic personnel from Ukraine? Have you ever imagined that the US would never send a single soldier to fight and die for Ukraine? You are associated with a media outlet from Europe. Did you ever think about why has Europe become a battlefield and a wrestling ground of major-country rivalry? Why has Ukraine become a pawn to be sacrificed in major-country rivalry? Maybe our friends from major European media outlets should also raise these questions to the US.
The last thing the US should do is to sling mud at China which is not a party directly concerned. The despicable move of the US only serves to reveal its guilty conscience and true intention to shift the blame and profit from the Ukraine crisis.
21 марта
Bloomberg: According to a Russian Ministry of Defense press release, we’re hearing that the Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin and the Chinese ambassador to Moscow held talks on Friday. I wonder if you could confirm these reports. If accurate, what was the purpose of such talks? What was the main outcome?
Wang Wenbin: Chinese Ambassador to Russia Zhang Hanhui met with Russian Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin last Friday to exchange views on bilateral relations and other issues. It is the job of diplomats to conduct normal exchange with officials of the countries they are posted in. There is no need to read too much into this.
<...>
AFP: The British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Sunday urged China to join other nations in condemning the Russian invasion in Ukraine. What is the foreign ministry’s response to the request?
Wang Wenbin: China always takes an objective and fair position on the Ukraine issue. During a video call with US President Joe Biden at his request lately, President Xi Jinping pointed out that China does not want to see the situation in Ukraine to come to this. China stands for peace and opposes war. China makes a conclusion independently based on the merits of each matter. China advocates upholding international law and universally recognized norms governing international relations. China adheres to the UN Charter and promotes the vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security. These are the major principles that underpin China’s approach to the Ukraine crisis. China has put forward a six-point initiative on the humanitarian situation in Ukraine and stands ready to provide further humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and other affected countries. All sides need to jointly support Russia and Ukraine in having dialogue and negotiation that will produce results and lead to peace. The US and NATO should also have dialogue with Russia to address the crux of the Ukraine crisis and ease the security concerns of both Russia and Ukraine.
23 марта
China’s position on the Ukraine issue is consistent and clear. We always make independent judgement based on the merits of the matter itself. China advocates a vision of common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security. We support all parties in following the indivisible security principle and establishing a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture. China will continue to play a constructive role in deescalating the situation in Ukraine.
24 марта
AFP: I have two questions. <...> And the second question is, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg has accused China of giving political backing to Russia as it attacks Ukraine by “spreading blatant lies and misinformation”. He has also expressed concerns that China could provide material support for the Russian invasion. How does the Chinese Foreign Ministry view these comments?
Wang Wenbin: <...> On your second question, accusing China of spreading misinformation related to Ukraine is in itself disinformation.
With an objective and just attitude, China has been working actively toward realizing cessation of hostilities as soon as possible, averting a humanitarian crisis and restoring peace and stability. We have always maintained that Ukraine should be a bridge for communication between the East and the West, not an outpost in major power rivalry. European countries should uphold the principle of strategic autonomy and work with Russia, Ukraine and other countries concerned to build a balanced, effective and sustainable European security architecture through dialogue and negotiation following the spirit of indivisible security. The US and NATO should also engage in dialogue with Russia to address the root cause of the Ukraine crisis.
<...>
Macau Monthly: The US Department of State claimed that China has been spreading disinformation that has in the first instance come from Moscow, including about various biological weapons programs. Do you have any comment?
Wang Wenbin: For some time now, the international community has had intense discussions on the US biolabs in Ukraine and raised many doubts. Regrettably, the US has given nothing but a deeply flawed response. All sides have every reason to question it. The US cannot muddle through by clamming up or dismissing it all as “disinformation”. The US needs to offer serious clarifications on whether it is disinformation or not.
What is the purpose of US research in Ukraine-based biolabs? Has the US conducted dangerous research banned at home in labs overseas including in Ukraine? The international community has major concerns over these issues.
The best way for the US to prove its innocence is to open up for international scrutiny. We urge the US to change its course, promptly give a convincing explanation for its biomilitary activities in Ukraine and other places around the globe and stop standing alone in opposing the establishment of a BWC verification mechanism.
25 марта
TASS: The latest deterioration in the Russia-Ukraine situation will affect China’s import of grains from Ukraine. Is China looking at this issue and trying to find new ways to ensure its food security? If Ukraine is unable to export grains including wheat, will China form new supply chains and start buying more grains from other countries such as Russia?
Wang Wenbin: Please turn to the competent authorities for an answer to this question. I would like to say that the situation in Ukraine has had and will continue to have an enormous impact on the global economy and trade, finance, energy, food and the industrial and supply chains, severely affecting the normal life of people in all countries and debilitating the already struggling world economy. The momentum of global economic recovery should not be dampened and people around the world should not be made to pay the price for geopolitical conflict and major power rivalry. China will continue to play a constructive role in easing the situation in Ukraine and stands ready to strengthen communication and cooperation with all parties to provide more positive energy for the steady, sound and sustainable development of the world economy.
<...>
NATO is convening a summit on Ukraine on the 23rd anniversary of its bombing of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. I wonder if the US and other NATO members have asked themselves: What is the root cause of the Ukraine crisis? What responsibility should the US and NATO assume? Before reflecting on their crimes against the people in countries like Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan, the US and NATO have neither right nor authority to judge others. Born out of the Cold War, NATO serves no other purpose than war. It has never contributed to peace and security of our world and will never do so. All those who truly love peace and are committed to advancing peace will resolutely reject NATO’s continued expansion.
<...>
We always believe that security is indivisible. Seeking bloc confrontation and absolute security will only lead to the most insecure scenario. Ukraine should be a bridge for communication between the East and the West, rather than the frontline for major power rivalry. Countries in Europe should work to build a balanced, effective and sustainable regional security architecture, rather than redraw the line of confrontation between the East and the West. The US and NATO should hold dialogue with Russia, rather than start a new Cold War.
We always hold that there should be no double standard in international relations. Ukraine’s sovereignty and security should be upheld, and Russia’s legitimate security concerns should also be respected. Europe’s peace and stability should be defended. The same goes for other countries. One shall not wage wars across the world while saying it’s against war, or wantonly shatter peace while claiming to uphold peace.
28 марта
I would like to stress that the problem now is not about who wants to help Russia circumvent the sanctions, but about the fact that the normal trade and economic exchanges between countries, China included, and Russia have already been unnecessarily hurt. We urge the US to take China’s concerns seriously when handling the Ukraine issue and its relations with Russia and avoid undermining China’s legitimate rights and interests in any way. China will take all necessary measures to firmly uphold the legitimate and lawful rights and interests of Chinese companies and individuals.
29 марта
I have noted the voices for reason and reflection in Europe’s strategic community as the Ukraine crisis continues to generate spillover effects.
For example, some articles pointed out that sanctions are not a solution to end the war and build a security order in Europe. To end the war with reconciliation, diplomatic methods should be resorted to. Managing relations with Russia, a neighbor of European countries, should be the primary challenge the EU must face squarely. When making the security rules of Europe, Europeans should play a central role and Russia cannot possibly be excluded. EU’s leaders should truly heed and seriously address Russia’s concerns and appeals.
Some articles also noted that to resolve the Ukraine issue, the security interests of all relevant countries should be attended to. To address the current crisis, both Russia and Ukraine should bear in mind the realities on the ground and attach importance to legitimate security concerns.
<...>
It is important to discard the binary approach driven by emotions, and review the underlying cause for the Ukraine crisis with reason. It is crucial to avoid going to extremes where no one will emerge as a winner, and create enabling conditions for the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. It is vital to stop profiting from the situation by fanning the flame, and let the common interest of the international community prevail over the selfish interests of certain countries.
<...>
The US should reflect on its due responsibilities in the Ukraine crisis, show repentance for and correct the practice of establishing imaginary enemies, ignoring other countries’ legitimate security concerns and stoking bloc confrontation.
30 марта
TASS: Will China, a permanent member of the UN Security Council, serve as a guarantor of the Russia-Ukraine peace deal?
Wang Wenbin: China supports and encourages all diplomatic efforts for the peaceful settlement of the Ukraine crisis and is happy to see Russia and Ukraine in dialogue and negotiation. China always holds that the legitimate security concerns of all countries should be taken seriously. We are ready to work with the rest of the international community to uphold common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security, and support the establishment of a balanced, effective and sustainable European security mechanism. China has been making an effort for peace and will continue to play a constructive role in its own way in promoting the deescalation of tensions in Ukraine. We will work with other parties toward the direction of the resolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and restoration of peace in Europe at an early date.