EXPLORE THIS STORY
UNITED KINGDOM PERSPECTIVE
PUTIN HEADS TO BEIJING AFTER TRUMP COURTS XI: CHINA'S MOMENT?
AI-generated content — Analyses are produced by artificial intelligence from press articles. They may contain errors or biases. Learn more
DOMINANT ANGLE
London sees Beijing's sequence of visits as confirmation that China now occupies the center of gravity of global diplomacy, hosting Trump and Putin just four days apart, leaving the West facing an uncomfortable strategic equation.
Dominant angle identified — does not reflect unanimity of this country’s media
ANALYSIS
London, May 18, 2026. Four days after Donald Trump's departure from Beijing, Vladimir Putin is set to land. The sequence has not escaped British analysts: never since the end of the Cold War had a country hosted the American and Russian presidents in such a short time. The Global Times, China's state-owned tabloid, immediately described Beijing as the 'focal point of global diplomacy.' London observes this pivot with concern.
For The Guardian, Putin's visit on May 20 and 21 marks the 30th anniversary of the Sino-Russian strategic partnership, but it occurs in a radically altered context since the large-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Xi Jinping and Putin, who have met more than 40 times — a number unmatched between Xi and Western leaders — exchanged 'letters of congratulations' as early as Sunday, Xi praising a bilateral cooperation that 'has continued to deepen.'
What catches the attention of British diplomats and analysts is the scale of economic support Beijing is providing to Russia's war effort. Since the start of the invasion, China has bought over $367 billion worth of Russian fossil fuels, according to data from the Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air. These purchases have supplied Moscow with significant revenue while strengthening China's energy security, which has become critical since tensions in the Red Sea have disrupted supplies via the Strait of Hormuz. China now absorbs over a quarter of Russia's exports and is its main source of imports.
The issue of Ukraine has remained remarkably absent from the Trump-Xi exchanges last week: the American statement made no mention of it, and the Chinese statement only briefly mentioned 'the Ukrainian crisis.' London notes this omission as a strong signal: Washington appears willing to set aside the Ukrainian issue to obtain commercial breakthroughs and an agreement on the Strait of Hormuz.
Joseph Webster, a senior researcher at the Atlantic Council, suggests that Taiwan could be the subtext of the Xi-Putin meeting. Beijing is seeking to secure more fossil fuel supply contracts with Moscow, particularly for the 'Power of Siberia 2' gas pipeline — an additional 50 billion cubic meters of capacity — in anticipation of a potential conflict around the island. This reading directly concerns London, an ally of Washington in any scenario of confrontation in the Indo-Pacific.
KEY POINTS
- China has bought over $367 billion worth of Russian fossil fuels since the start of the invasion in 2022 (Center for Research on Energy and Clean Air)
- Xi Jinping and Putin have met more than 40 times, a pace unmatched with Western leaders, and exchanged letters of congratulations before the visit
- The Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline (50 billion cubic meters of additional capacity) is on the agenda, potentially linked to China's energy security in the event of a conflict around Taiwan according to the Atlantic Council
COGNITIVE BIASES IDENTIFIED
Security-Western framing: British analysis systematically evaluates the Sino-Russian relationship in terms of its implications for Ukraine and NATO, less from the perspective of Beijing's or Moscow's own interests
Preference for Atlanticist sources: the Atlantic Council researcher is cited as the primary reference for geopolitical analysis, without alternative Asian or Russian voices
Limited coverage of American concessions: the absence of Ukraine from the Trump-Xi statement is noted but not developed, leaving in the shadows potential US compromises with Beijing
SOURCES (1)
Does this analysis seem accurate?
