“Today, the legacy of that catastrophic military defeat still drives Georgian politics. In recent months, as Russia regained momentum in Ukraine, the government in Tbilisi has hewed closer and closer to Moscow, moving away from the Caucasus nation’s longstanding pro-Western aspirations”
Check out The Wall Street Journal article with Tinatin Khidasheli ‘s interview in it👇
As the flames of conflict continue to burn in Ukraine, an alarming alliance is taking shape, one that could upend the balance of power on the global stage.
PRC’s deepening strategic and military partnership with Russia, which intensified following Russia’s offensive against Ukraine in February 2022, is becoming a significant concern for the United States and NATO. In response to this growing partnership, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has recently emphasized the importance of continuing sanctions on Russia to maintain pressure and curb its aggression. China plays a crucial role in supporting Russia’s defense industrial base.
“Chinese contributions allow Russia to sustain its military efforts. They enabled Russia to keep that defense industrial base going, to keep the war machine going, to keep the war going. So that has to stop.” – Anthony Blinken
Initially, there were doubts about China’s direct support for Russia’s war efforts, particularly regarding the provision of lethal aid. However, recent evidence has unmasked this myth, revealing China’s direct involvement in supplying crucial military components to Russia despite official claims of neutrality. Readers can explore the details and implications of this involvement further in the article. Notably, joint military exercises involving Chinese and Belarusian troops, conducted near the Belarusian city of Brest, just five kilometers from the Polish border, underscore their growing military cooperation. The timing of this drill suggests that the Chinese Communist Party is signaling to the United States its potential willingness to support Russia in a conflict involving NATO and Europe.
Unveiling the Truth: China’s Full-Scale Support for Russia in the Ukraine War
China’s involvement in supporting Russia’s war efforts has been multifaceted despite Beijing’s official neutrality. Recent revelations and documents suggest a more complex reality.
Chinese companies have supplied Russia with essential components to sustain its military operations in Ukraine. For instance, records obtained by BelPol reveal that Shenzhen-based Green Cycle Energy provided Belarusian defense contractor BelOMO Holding with precision parts crucial for laser-guided bombs and missiles. This transaction, which continued even after the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned BelOMO, indicates that Chinese companies contribute to Russia’s arms supply chain despite international sanctions. In fact, China’s support for Russia’s military extends beyond mere supply chains. Chinese firms have been involved in transactions with Belarusian contractors directly linked to Russia’s military efforts. For example, Morotack (Tianjin) Technology supplied critical components to BelOMO, and St. Petersburg-based Precision Laser Systems exported laser-related parts with Chinese-produced laser diodes to Belarusian contractors. This interconnection underscores the deepening ties between the Chinese and Russian defense sectors.
According to a CNN report following Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s discussions with US allies, “China continues to steer clear of providing Russia with lethal weaponry, which the US has warned against since the beginning of the Ukraine war, but in many cases, the inputs can be just as impactful as lethal weaponry.”
Beyond supplying components, there is growing evidence of tactical collaboration between Chinese and Russian defense industries. Reports suggest that Russia is sharing battlefield intelligence with China, potentially revealing vulnerabilities in Western weapons systems. This exchange of information is a concern for the U.S. and allied forces, as it may undermine the effectiveness of their military technology in future conflicts. The U.S. and European countries increasingly focus on tightening sanctions and monitoring Chinese companies involved in this indirect support.
Joint Military Exercises in Belarus: Why Is This Important?
On July 15, 2024, as China and Russia launched joint military exercises in the South China Sea, NATO leaders adopted a joint declaration labeling China a ‘decisive enabler’ of Russia’s war against Ukraine. This declaration came just as Chinese and Belarusian troops commenced their joint exercises near Brest on July 8, sending a clear message to NATO. The drills included anti-terror training, interpreted as a warning signal rather than just a routine exercise. This and the fact that such missions were rare and notable for their timing made the situation more alarming. It implied that China was prepared to directly support Russia and potentially challenge NATO.
The deputy head of the Belarusian Armed Forces claimed the maneuvers were a response to Western aggressive foreign policy and Ukrainian provocations, further escalating tensions. These coordinated military maneuvers underscore the PRC’s strategic objective to not only support Russia but also to challenge and threaten NATO’s presence and influence on its eastern flank.
As Beijing and Moscow strengthen their ties, the West faces an increasingly complex and dangerous geopolitical landscape where the traditional dominance of the United States and its allies is seriously threatened. NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg’s recent remarks reflect this heightened urgency, warning that the world has entered a new era of ‘enduring competition with China.’ Stoltenberg emphasized the interconnectedness of European and Asian security, underscoring NATO’s broader strategic focus. The alliance has also highlighted China’s growing role in supporting Russia’s war efforts, signaling a shift in NATO’s strategic posture towards greater vigilance in the Indo-Pacific region. Especially considering the fact that in the last week of July, extensive naval activities have unfolded in the Indo-Pacific, with over 18 Chinese and Russian Navy ships participating in joint exercises and patrols and the Shandong carrier group concluding a 10-day drill east of Taiwan, highlighting China’s increasing military assertiveness in the region. At the recent NATO Summit, leaders reaffirmed their commitment to countering these threats, strengthening cyber defenses, and enhancing collaboration with Indo-Pacific partners to address the challenges posed by China’s global ambitions. Following this summit, a new NATO plan has been revealed, with Germany preparing to mobilize 800,000 troops and massive logistical support through critical infrastructure in the event of a conflict with Russia. Readers can find a more detailed assessment of this plan and its implications further down in this article.
These events have significant implications. As China and Russia strengthen military ties, NATO’s actions—like bolstering its Eastern Flank and forming strategic Asian partnerships—reflect an escalating global power struggle beyond traditional boundaries.
Additionally, another concern is the potential transfer of battlefield innovations and lessons learned from Ukraine to China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA). U.S. officials worry that the PLA could adopt Russian military tactics and countermeasures, thereby enhancing its capabilities in a potential conflict with the U.S. or its allies in the Indo-Pacific region. This concern is heightened by the PLA’s involvement in joint exercises with Russia and Belarus, notably the Eagle Assault-2024 drill near Brest. Despite its “anti-terrorism label,” the exercise is perceived as a show of military strength and resolve against NATO, with tasks like hostage rescue masking its true purpose of demonstrating Chinese and Russian military capabilities.
Strategic Implications for NATO and the U.S.
The strategic partnership between China and Russia, often described as a “no limits” partnership, presents a multifaceted challenge to NATO and the U.S. The alliance’s growing military cooperation, particularly in the fields of nuclear and conventional forces, signals a concerted effort to undermine Western influence and security. The recent NATO declaration, which labeled China a “decisive enabler” of Russia’s war in Ukraine, reflects the seriousness with which the alliance views this emerging axis of power.
China’s support for Russia is not limited to military cooperation. The economic ties between the two nations have strengthened significantly since the onset of the Russo-Ukraine war, with trade volumes surging despite international sanctions on Russia. China’s provision of satellite imagery, microelectronics, and other dual-use technologies has been crucial in keeping Russia’s military-industrial complex operational, further entrenching the two countries’ interdependence.
Amid these developments, the world is also focused on the significant military maneuvers occurring in Europe. While attention has been paid to the China-Belarus military exercises, NATO’s new plan to deploy up to 800,000 troops and significant military assets has surfaced. This plan, detailed by Der Spiegel, outlines Germany’s strategy to rapidly mobilize many troops and equipment across Europe, focusing on key routes that could be vulnerable to Russian attacks. In light of this development, China’s strategic posture is increasingly precarious. It can also be said that the challenges posed by China’s support for Belarus (which undermines the strength of international sanctions) might have partly been motivated by NATO’s decision to deploy up to 800,000 troops, reflecting a heightened response to the evolving geopolitical threat. Additionally, the scale and immediacy of NATO’s deployment plan heighten the stakes for China, which has been strengthening its military alliance with Russia and participating in joint exercises with Belarus. The timing of NATO’s readiness measures intensifies China’s sense of vulnerability and urgency, reflecting a growing geopolitical tension as Beijing recalibrates its strategy in response to the expanded Western mobilization.
The special irony lies in China urging Ukraine to de-escalate in Kursk while actively deepening its military and economic ties with Russia, facilitating the killing of not only Ukrainians but also Russians in this war.
One must also take into account that Polish President Andrzej Duda’s visit to China and the threat of closing the Polish-Belarusian border pushed Belarus to make significant governmental changes. Lukashenko appointed pro-China officials, like Dmytry Krutoy, to strengthen ties with Beijing and Moscow. Krutoy, tasked with overseeing relations with Russia and China and advising the new Belarusian ambassador to China, is a technocrat favorable to China. This maneuver ensured Belarus remained a key transit route for Chinese trade, reinforcing its strategic partnership with China while maintaining support from Russia.
China’s influence increasingly overshadows Belarus’s sovereignty. The joint military exercises and Belarus’s entry into the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization exemplify Beijing’s deepening involvement. China’s strategic engagement with Belarus not only bolsters Russia’s position in the Russo-Ukrainian war but also supports autocratic regimes, complicating efforts for a peaceful resolution in Ukraine.
A Broader Geopolitical Shift
The Sino-Russian partnership is also part of a broader geopolitical realignment that includes other authoritarian regimes, such as Iran, North Korea, and Belarus. This emerging axis is challenging the Western-dominated international order and seeking to carve out a new multipolar world. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which recently admitted Belarus as its 10th member, is one platform where these countries coordinate their efforts to counter Western influence.
For NATO and the U.S., the implications of this strategic realignment are becoming increasingly urgent. Recently, Belarus has been positioning itself for a signficant role within BRICS, anticipating a boost in status from the forthcoming summit in Kazan. This move highlights the growing integration of Belarus into a broader coalition of authoritarian states that includes China, Russia, and Iran. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which Belarus recently joined, and BRICS, where Belarus is seeking membership, both reflect a concerted effort by these nations to challenge the Western-dominated international order.
This evolving axis is not just symbolic; it poses real challenges. The alliance must prepare for potential coordinated actions across various fronts, including joint military operations and economic tactics, which could destabilize Western democracies. The recent discussions in Minsk, attended by representatives from BRICS and other key states, also underscore the seriousness and complexity of this emerging geopolitical landscape.
Author: Mariam Kasradze
The structure and foundations of international law have been commented on and criticized by people across the globe. Some scholars are skeptical about the justice of the international system and criticize it for being power-influenced or West-centric. People from all around the world claim that the system of international law has been created by Westerners, and it does not apply to the cultural position of other nations. For instance, Gathii (2012) explains that the concept of sovereignty was initially created without consideration of African states.
Therefore, the African states did not qualify to be sovereign as their state structure differed from those requirements created at the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648, which became an excuse for colonization. On the other hand, the current form of international order creates norms that depreciate self-centered governments or unregulated international aid, promoting world development and peace.
The world superpowers play a crucial role in the promotion of an international rules-based system and world order. One of the global superpowers is the People’s Republic of China. The international community has often expressed dissatisfaction with the adherence to international laws by China. To understand the attitudes of the PRC towards the international rules-based system and further theorize Chinese actions, it is important to understand Chinese cultural, historical, and diplomatic perspectives on the international order
Firstly, it is crucial to analyze the historical factors influencing the formation of the Chinese perspective and what those perspectives are. Some of the historical events that impacted the formation of Chinese views on international law include the transformative period from the late Qing dynasty to the Republic of China era, the effect of British historiography on the Chinese attitude, the Cold War period, and intricate relational dynamics with the U.S (Yuan, 2024). (Flag of Qing Dynasty)
The transition period from the Qing Dynasty to the Republic of China significantly influenced the formation of the Chinese perspective of international law and how the state positions itself on the global political stage. The adoption of Marxist ideas shaped the tone of the further development of Chinese ideas. Also, British perspectives and colonial influences played a role in forming China as a significant political actor in international law. Moreover, cooperation with the Soviet Union and the intricate relational dynamics with the United States supported the establishment of an international system where China positions itself as one of the leading powers. Two key features of the Chinese traditional approach to international relations and law are based on the normative-ideological dimension, supported by Confucian views, and a power-based or interest-maximizing dimension, supported by legalist views (deLisle, 2000). While the normative dimension focuses on the force of a moral standpoint and informal norms of behavior, the power-based dimension stresses the importance of external force and state power for compliance. These approaches are reflections of Western notions of idealism and realism. During imperialism, China developed a Sinocentric approach to international order, highlighting the normative-ideological dimension of the moral importance of the Chinese emperor. Later, during the nineteenth century, with the development of Western ideas of international order, China had to interact with and tolerate imposed norms on the international stage. However, Chinese scholars did not hesitate to criticize the Western international order, stressing Chinese moral superiority and accusing Western powers of pursuing personal interests with these laws. During the Soviet period, as befits a Soviet state, the Chinese condemned the Western, bourgeois international order while embracing socialist international law. Lastly, rapid economic growth and increased political influence in the post-Mao era raised Chinese engagement with international law (Zuo, 2018). However, strong normativism and state-interest approach effectively described the Chinese approach to “rules-based international order”.
In addition, understanding the modern Chinese views on International order is essential for analyzing of the Country’s approach towards international developmental aid and infrastructure projects. Fundamental principles and concepts of the Chinese approach to international law are based on the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (Gorian & Gorian, 2015).
These principles were adopted at the Bandung Summit on Afro-Asian Solidarity in 1955. The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence include Mutual respect for each other’s territorial integrity and sovereignty, Mutual non-aggression, Mutual non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, Equality and cooperation for mutual benefit, and Peaceful co-existence. These principles are considered to be fundamental in the formation of the Chinese approach to international law. China has used these principles to resolve various border disputes and promote equality, peace, and development. However, in the traditional Chinese views, the law is seen as a tool to promote self-interest (Ruhlig, 2018). As seen in the disputes over the South China Sea, China carefully studies international laws and interprets them to suit its interests. In this case, the state challenged the jurisdiction of international tribunals and reinterpreted historical treaties to maximize its control over the region. While adhering to specific obligations under international law for economic and reputational benefits, the country also strategically interprets and utilizes legal norms to advance its interests, demonstrating a nuanced and pragmatic approach to reconciling traditional values with modern legal norms (Sheikh, 1973).
1. Gathii, J. T. (2012). Africa. In Fassbender, B., and Peters, A. (eds), Regions – Africa and Arabia. The Oxford Handbook of the History of International Law. https://doi.org/10.1093/law/9780199599752.003.0018.
2. Gorian, E., & Gorian, K. (2015). Chinese conception of international law as the response to the challenges of today. Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n3p236
3. deLisle, J. (2000). China’s Approach to International Law: A Historical Perspective. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting (American Society of International Law), 94, 267–275. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25659409
4. Ruhlig, T. (2018). How China approaches international law: Implications for Europe. European Institute for Asian Studies. https://www.eias.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/EU_Asia_at_a_Glance_Ruhlig_2018_China_International_Law.pdf
5. Sheikh, A. (1973). The Peoples’ Republic of China and International Law. The International Lawyer, 7(4), 770–787. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40704832
6. Yuan, D. (2024). Histories of international law in China all under heaven? Centre for Chinese and Comparative Law. https://www.cityu.edu.hk/slw/lib/doc/CCCL/2023110910_HISTORIES_OF_INTERNATIONAL_LAW_IN_CHINA_ALL_UNDER_HEAVEN.pdf
7. Zuo, A. (2018). China’s Approaches to the Western-dominated International Law: A Historical Perspective from the Opium War to the South China Sea Arbitration Case. University of Baltimore Journal of International Law, 6(1). https://scholarworks.law.ubalt.edu/ubjil/vol6/iss1/3
Chinese Perspectives on International Rules-Based System Read More »
Civic IDEA is pleased to present an environmental monitoring report, “PRC’s Contractors’ Environmental Shortcomings on Georgian Highways”.
Since 2018, for the past six years, Civic IDEA has been monitoring PRC state-owned and controlled companies operating within Georgia’s infrastructure sector, focusing on critical projects such as highways, tunnels, and bridges. In this report, we provide comprehensive research on the environmental impacts of these projects, funded by international financial institutions (IFIs) and executed by contractors from the People’s Republic of China. The study offers an overview of the environmental management practices employed and evaluates their compliance, or absence of those, with international standards.
For detailed information, please see the full report below 
PRC’s Contractors’ Environmental Shortcomings on Georgian Highways Read More »
The publication “Foreign Policy” devotes an extensive article to the Georgian government’s attempt to stigmatize civil society. The article quotes the head of Civic Idea who states that non-governmental organizations will not obey the law:
“We will make it very difficult for the government to do anything meaningful against us,” she told me in July. “The problem with the law is that it left lots of loopholes, and we will be using those intensively.”
In June 2024, the author of the article, Maxim Krupski, was one of the speakers at the International Conference on Civic Ideas—Strategic Confusion on the Great Power Chessboard—precisely at the session on the adoption and implementation of “agents” legislation by various countries.
Discover more in the full article below
Chairwoman of Civic IDEA, Tinatin Khidasheli is attending GLOBSEC 2024. This prestigious event serves as a critical platform for addressing key global challenges.
Česká Televize has featured Tinatin in a special reportage covering the forum.
Watch the reportage and the interview here:
Reportage From The GLOBSEC 2024 Forum Read More »
Civic IDEA is pleased to share the 3rd volume of the collection of articles “China’s Expanding Footprint in Eurasia: Geopolitics, Trade and Environmental Implications”. The collection of articles features the insights of authors, incorporating perspectives and comprehensive views on China’s expanding influence in Central Asia and beyond, shedding light on the complexities and consequences of this dynamic on local and international scales. These articles delve into various aspects of China’s influence and regional dynamics:
√ Bernadett Szel – “Chinese Influence in Hungary” – This article explores how China’s economic and political presence has grown in Hungary, analyzing the strategies employed by China to establish and expand its influence within the country. Szelexamines the implications of this influence on Hungary’s domestic and foreign policies.
√ Tatyana Sedova – “China’s influence in critical minerals (CM) development in Kazakhstan and Tajikistan” – Sedova delves into China’s role in the critical minerals sector of Kazakhstan and Tajikistan. She discusses how China’s investment and involvement in the development of these minerals are reshaping the industry and affecting the economic and geopolitical landscape of the region.
√ Olzhas Zhorayev – “Perception of China in Central Asian Countries: Trends and Comparative Analysis” – Zhorayevprovides a comparative analysis of how China is perceived across various Central Asian countries. The article identifies trends in public opinion and governmental stances towards China, offering insights into the factors that shape these perceptions and their potential impact on regional cooperation and policy-making.
√ Fuad Shahbazov – “The increasing role of the Middle Corridor in East-West Trade: What Role for Azerbaijan Kazakhstan Partnership?” – Shahbazov’s article focuses on the Middle Corridor, a key trade route connecting East and West through Central Asia. He examines the strategic partnership between Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan in enhancing the corridor’s efficiency and competitiveness and how this partnership is influenced by China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
√ Vadim Ni – “Will BRI affect public environmental rights in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan?” – The article investigates the environmental implications of China’s Belt and Road Initiative in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan. The article addresses concerns about how increased infrastructure projects and economic activities under the BRI might impact public environmental rights and local ecosystems, proposing measures to mitigate potential adverse effects.
For more information, see the attachment below 
The Georgian Government has increasingly moved to strengthen relations with China, hailing the economic potential of the partnership including high-profile infrastructure projects. But despite the optimism, the relationship has so far remained almost entirely one-sided, and in fact, opens the country up to substantial new risks.
Georgia’s foreign strategic alignment has been profoundly influenced by its geopolitical location, historical context, and aspirations for closer integration with Western institutions such as NATO and the European Union. However, in recent years, China has emerged as a significant player in Georgia’s foreign policy landscape. The two nations have actively sought to strengthen their political relations through a series of high-level visits and agreements, with Chinese initiatives in Georgia progressing at a remarkable pace, marked by significant expansions occurring almost monthly.
A pivotal moment in Sino-Georgian relations was the issuance of the Strategic Cooperation Statement on 31 July 2023, which heralded a new era of bilateral collaboration. The visit of then–Georgian Prime Minister Irakli Gharibashvili to China in 2023 culminated in this strategic partnership statement aimed at bolstering policy coordination and collaboration on regional and international affairs.
This partnership has been perceived as a strategic manoeuvre by China to expand its influence in the South Caucasus, a region traditionally regarded by Moscow as within its sphere of influence. The China-Georgia partnership can thus be viewed as part of a larger geopolitical shift in the region.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the resulting geopolitical realignments have heightened the strategic importance of the South Caucasus. China’s involvement in Georgia could potentially reshape regional dynamics, particularly as it seeks to develop alternative trade routes that bypass Russia, exemplified by projects such as the Middle Corridor, which links China to Europe via Central Asia and the Caucasus.
But despite the deepening Sino-Georgian relationship since 2016, there is no significant economic activity that might be relied upon to reshape the existing dynamics. The progress and developments thus far have been largely one-sided, and the prospects for Georgia’s flagship project for the Middle Corridor, the Anaklia Deep-Sea Port, are not very promising.
And despite few gains, there are several concerns: from foreign policy to economic collaboration, with the cooperation appearing to be overwhelmingly China-centred in various ways.
Link 👇
Opinion | Georgia’s one-sided relationship with China comes with significant risks Read More »
On May 29, 2024, the Georgian Minister of Economy and Sustainable Development, Levan Davitashvili, announced that the public-private partnership selection process winner for Anaklia port development will be a Chinese-Singaporean consortium. This decision marks a significant shift in Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations and raises security concerns due to the geopolitical implications of increased Chinese involvement.
CHOICE (China Observers in Central and Eastern Europe) reached out to Civic IDEA to provide expert analysis on the implications of the Anaklia Sea Port project for Georgia and Europe. Lawyer/Researcher Ketevan Gelashvili and researcher Aksana Akhmedova from Civic IDEA have prepared an in-depth article examining every crucial detail on this subject.
Full Link 👇
Impact of Chinese Investment in Anaklia: Strategic Implications for Georgia and Europe Read More »
We are pleased to announce the release of our report, “Georgia’s Investment Landscape: Comparative Analysis of Chinese and Western Investments (2018-2023)”.
This report uncovers the actual extent of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) investments in Georgia from 2018 to early 2024, demonstrating that Beijing’s economic engagement is significantly less than officially claimed, with investments not exceeding 700 million USD since 2010. The comparative analysis reveals that countries such as the USA, UK, and Netherlands have exhibited substantial and increasing investments in Georgia, particularly in the post-pandemic period. Notably, even EU member countries with smaller economies, such as Malta, have shown a more pronounced increase in their foreign direct investments in Georgia compared to the PRC’s FDI rate.
Read the full report for a clear picture of foreign investment dynamics in Georgia. 👇
