It's not just
the West that's
supporting Ukraine
on the other side of this conflict.
Russia's allies are also coming out
in support of the Kremlin.
And President Biden
has rejected the new 12 point peace plan
that was proposed by China.
Yeah,
the Chinese
have signaled its willingness,
willingness to play mediator,
but Beijing has yet to condemn its
ally, Russia,
or even use the word invasion,
especially in that peace plan.
CNN's Mark Stewart has more
We have China trying
to portray itself
as a neutral peace broker.
This despite its no limits pledge
with Russia on Friday,
China released a position
paper, a 12 point
document, which, among other things,
calls for a resumption of peace
talks with China
continuing to play a constructive role.
Yet there are no specifics on what
that would look like.
In addition,
China has avoided calling the conflict
in Ukraine an invasion.
The paper
also calls for an end
to unilateral sanctions
and resolution
to the humanitarian crisis.
It also says nuclear weapons
should not be used and nuclear wars
must not be fought.
Yet the document fails
to acknowledge
Russia's violation
of Ukrainian sovereignty.
Here's
the view
from a top State Department
official and China's role.
It can't simply be a cynical cease fire
that allows the Russians
the time to go home,
rest refit and return.
If Xi Jinping can get Putin and his army
out of Ukraine,
I think we'd all applaud
and give a peace prize
As far as reaction, Ukraine's
charge d'affairs called the paper
a good sign
that added
would like to see China
do more to end the war.
This paper comes as officials in the West
have raised concerns
that China may be considering
providing Russia
with lethal military force,
with NATO's chief warning
that would be a big mistake.
Mark Stewart, CNN, Tokyo.
Our thanks to Mark Stewart
for that reporting.
Let's discuss
this Chinese peace
plan aid going to Ukraine
on the somber anniversary
with CNN military analyst
and retired Major General James Spider
Marks and Atlantic staff
writer and Applebaum.
She's also
a senior fellow at the Johns Hopkins
School of Advanced International Studies
and the author of Twilight of Democracy
The Seductive Lure of Authoritarianism.
Thank you
both for joining us this morning.
And a year into this conflict,
who is winning this war?
By all accounts,
the Ukrainians are winning the war.
The Russians believe
the war would be a three day,
maybe a three week event.
They were
they were prepared
already to conduct parades in Kiev.
They had they arrive
with their dress uniforms.
Since then,
they've had to completely readjust
their war games repeatedly.
The Ukrainians have pushed them
back, have held them to the line
and are now preparing a new offensive
We don't know exactly
what that will look like
or when it will take place,
but that the momentum remains on the side
of Ukraine.
And General,
curious to get your thoughts.
Where do you think?
Where do you see things as
they stand now?
Well, clearly, Ukraine
is doing a magnificent job
at the tactical level of engagement.
From a military guys
perspective, they are
they are engaging the Russians
very aggressively,
incredibly creative
use of manpower of the forces
that they have.
I mean, this is innovative warfare
that even
the United States
military is learning some lessons from.
I agree with Ed,
but at the strategic level,
Russia has not departed.
Russia's goal
is to try to wear down
the will of the Ukrainians to resist.
That has not happened yet.
But we are seeing
from the words of President Zelensky
that 2023 is the year of victory
or peace, as he indicated.
So unless the Ukrainians can get
more of what they need and faster
the operational maneuver piece,
you have the tactical fight,
but you've got to tie
it together and achieve
operational momentum
that won't be achieved
unless they can get more faster
this year.
So you move down the path of
what is the likelihood
of some negotiated settlement.
Is that possible?
Zelensky has said it's not.
But you need to look at it realistically
and think maybe that is a possibility.
But that's up to the Ukrainians.
To determine.
And to a degree, I
recognized in
President Zelensky's comments
an urgency that this could be the year
the war ends, in part
because Ukrainian officials
have kind of been irked
by the suggestion from the West
that they'll be there
helping as long as they need to be there.
Fear is that as a war of attrition,
delaying a more aggressive
push against Russia
means ultimately defeat for Ukraine.
So where do you see that line for aid
stopping?
Should the United States give them
those F-16s, for example?
So the
F-16s won't make
a difference in the next few months
because it takes a long time to learn
how to use them.
So in that sense,
I think it's a little bit of a red
herring that that issue
far more important are,
you know, is ammunition
as well as long range weapons
that will enable the Ukrainians to hit
long range targets behind the lines.
Some there was your reporters
this morning said
that some targets
had been hit in Mariupol overnight.
That's good news.
That could mean
that could mean
that they're beginning
to get the technology together
to do that.
The other important point to make,
I think, is that,
you know,
this is also
a psychological war of attrition
that both sides are waiting for
the other to give up.
This is
why it was so important
that President Biden went to Kiev.
It's so important
that a number of Republicans
have been clear
in their support for Ukraine,
because Putin's goal
is to make it seem like
it's it's never going to end
and that you will always get weapons.
And he's never going to leave.
And we have to demonstrate
that we won't be leaving either.
So those things,
I think, are a little bit
more important than
whether Biden
makes an announcement about F-16s.
In general, obviously,
a big concern now is China's role
in all of this.
The Biden administration
putting forth
this intelligence that Beijing
is considering supplying
lethal aid to the Kremlin.
How could that change the dynamic
on the battlefield?
Well, if they chose to do it,
it would depend upon what they provide.
And again,
what's the amount of the support
that they're providing?
Look, Russia's way of war is to put young
men that essentially are not very well
trained into the fight.
This is a slaughterhouse in many cases
without being flippant.
My concern with the Ukrainians
are going to run out of ammunition
because they have.
So it's so target rich.
You're going to see Russian bodies
continue to get piled up.
But that is not an incentive
for Russia to stop.
I think what China is going to do is it
will continue behind the scenes
to provide support to Russia in terms
of its
position, not to acknowledge
that Russia did anything wrong.
But China views the world
through a financial transactional lens.
This war in Ukraine is bad for business.
This is you don't
you don't reinforce your success.
I mean, you reinforce success.
You don't reinforce failure.
And the Russians are failing in Ukraine.
There's no reason
there's no incentive for China
to reinforce
and to support Russia militarily
in this way.
And also,
China wants to have a vibrant
and fulsome and rich relationship
with Western European countries.
It also wants to try to do that
with the United States,
albeit it's starting to cool
a little bit in terms of U.S.
Chinese relationships.
So there's every reason for China
not to do this.
If they were, it would be a big mistake.
It would be a big mistake
for the long term.
And I think China would
then get wrapped up
into this ganglia
of this mess in Ukraine,
and they don't want to part of it.