Vladimir Putin’s unusually extended visit to China from August 31 to September 3 maps out a clear strategic declaration amidst shifting global tensions. Far from a routine summit stop, the itinerary—spanning the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit in Tianjin and Victory Day Parade in Beijing—projects Russia’s determination to anchor itself firmly alongside China as its primary geopolitical and economic partner. Kremlin aide Yuri Ushakov framed this “large-scale” visit as a sign of Moscow’s prioritization of Sino-Russian relations amid persistent discord with the West.
On August 31, Russian President Vladimir Putin arrived by plane in Tianjin. (Xinhua News Agency photo)”
The visit’s packed schedule extends well beyond Sino-Russian dialogue. Putin’s meetings with leaders from India, Iran, and Turkey, alongside multi-lateral engagements at the SCO summit, reveal Russia’s broader ambition to cement strategic ties with the Global South and diversify its alliances. In Beijing, his meeting schedule includes leaders from Pakistan, Serbia, Congo, Vietnam and likely North Korea. All these signal Moscow’s efforts to maintain diplomatic initiative and regional influence amid complex global geopolitics.
Economically, the trip aims to deepen robust trade relations already reflected in a 7.5 percent growth in bilateral trade reaching US$244.9 billion in 2024. Over 90 percent of transactions now use local currencies, a crucial adaptation in the face of Western sanctions. Energy cooperation remains central, supplemented by expanded agricultural exports, co-investment in automotive projects, aerospace, and co-operation on the lunar research station project, underlining the technical depth and futurist orientation of the partnership. Chinese firms’ local production in Russia further illustrates this integration.
Putin will attend the 2025 SCO Summit. (Xinhua News Agency photo)
Politically, the visit is laced with historical symbolism and pointed messaging. Maria Zakharova, Russia’s Foreign Affairs spokesperson made it quite clear that Moscow’s emphasis on the 80th anniversary of Victory in the War against Japan, the shared WWII camaraderie, and rejection of Western “historical distortion” are not mere ceremonial rhetoric but a strategic narrative tool reinforcing bilateral solidarity. Putin’s pledge to update Chinese leaders on his mid-August talks in Alaska with U.S. President Donald Trump indicates the strategic scope of Sino-Russian communication now includes global power dynamics, signalling coordinated positioning against the West.
Xinhua News Agency photo
From the Kremlin’s vantage, this 4-day visit transcends diplomacy to affirm an evolved, comprehensive strategic partnership. Beijing’s enthusiastic reception and description of the relationship as a pivot point of “true multilateralism” in an uncertain world further bolster the message: Sino-Russian ties have entered a new phase with global reverberations far beyond bilateral cooperation. In a fracturing international order, China stands undisputed as Russia’s priority partner. Putin’s rare prolonged presence is both an act of political theater and substantive strategic signalling.
This visit draws a line: Sino-Russian relations are shaping the contours of global geopolitical and economic alignments in 2025 and beyond.
Mao Paishou
** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **
The New Year barely begins, and Washington drops a flashbang on global diplomacy. A sitting president is forcibly detained and taken out of his own country — a move that blows past diplomatic convention and rams straight into international law’s red lines. On Taiwan, the chatter instantly turns into self-projection, as some people try to shoehorn a faraway conflict into the island’s own storyline. Anxiety spreads fast.
Maduro in cuffs, in a US federal courtroom — the raid’s image problem. (AP)
The South China Morning Post says the US action against Venezuela ignites a fierce debate on the island. Some commentary links the raid to the PLA’s recent encirclement drills around Taiwan, arguing parts of those exercises look, at least in form, like the US’s so-called “decapitation operations”: essentially a leadership-targeting operation. Some American scholars also warn this kind of play could set a dangerous precedent and invite copycats.
“Justice Mission-2025” rolls on as the Eastern Theater Command drills.
That debate doesn’t stay academic for long. It pumps up the island’s unease, with some people asking whether the same kind of military method could one day be copied and pasted into the Taiwan Strait. Even if it mostly lives in public talk, a high-tension political environment turns speculation into something that feels like risk.
People on the island don’t read the US move the same way. A small minority treats it as a US power flex, packed with intel integration, precision strike, and long-range reach. But the more clear-eyed view is harsher: such action chips away at the basic consensus of international order — because if major powers can raid at will and topple other countries’ leaders for their own aims, “rules” stop acting like rules.
Anxiety turns into politics
That worry quickly lands in Taiwan’s political arena. On Jan 5, multiple Taiwan legislators pressed Deputy Defense Minister Hsu Szu-chien at the legislature, asking how he views the US action against Venezuela and whether the PLA might replicate a similar model in the Taiwan Strait. Hsu doesn’t answer head-on. Rather, he merely mentioned preparing and drilling for all kinds of sudden contingencies.
Then he pivots to money. He urges the legislature to pass military budget appropriations quickly and plays up the urgency of delays eating into “preparation time.”
That kind of sidestep, unsurprisingly, only deepened public unease.
SCMP, citing multiple security experts, says the DPP authorities try to play down the association — but outsiders don’t fully rule it out. The reason, those experts argue, is the PLA’s continuing push to improve its ability to shift from exercises to real combat. On the island, that alone works like an anxiety amplifier.
Back in the real world, the PLA Eastern Theater Command has been running “Justice Mission-2025” exercises since Dec 29 last year. Official statements spell out the purpose: a stern warning to “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and external interference, and a move aimed at safeguarding national sovereignty and unification. The message is public and clear, there’s no gray area.
Some US think-tank voices pull a more confrontational takeaway from the US action. American Enterprise Institute senior fellow Hal Brands warns the US raid on Venezuela could create a “demonstration effect,” and he speculates China would watch those tactics closely. Some military commentators on the island seized the moment to hype fears, claiming the mainland might act during a “window” when US power is stretched thin.
That line of talk sounds like analysis, but it functions like a panic pump. US scholar Lev Nachman even says bluntly on social media that if a sudden military action hits the Taiwan Strait, the island could suffer “instant collapse” — not just militarily, but as a psychological shock to society.
KMT Chairperson Cheng Li-wun, in an interview, points to Donald Trump repeatedly stressing a shift of strategic focus toward affairs in the Americas. She says the Venezuela incident should be examined through the framework of international law, and she calls for disputes in any region to be resolved by peaceful means rather than force.
Cheng also reiterates the KMT position: uphold the “1992 Consensus,” oppose “Taiwan independence,” and urge Lai Ching-te to clearly oppose “Taiwan independence,” not touch legal red lines, and avoid continuously raising cross-strait conflict risks.
Rules talk meets reality
International reaction also turns critical of Washington’s approach. Multiple governments and regional organizations speak up quickly, condemning the action as a violation of the UN Charter, which explicitly prohibits using force to threaten or violate another nation’s territorial integrity and political independence. The telling part is the silence: the Western countries that often talk about “international rules” either zipped their mouths, or danced around the question this time.
Reuters says that even though China, Russia, and others clearly condemn the US behavior, the Trump administration is unlikely to face strong pressure from allies as a result. That selective muteness, by itself, drains the credibility of the international order.
On Jan. 5, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Lin Jian commented again, saying the US actions clearly violate international law and the basic norms of international relations, and violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. China calls on the US to ensure the personal safety of President Maduro and his wife, immediately release them, stop subverting the Venezuelan government, and resolve issues through dialogue and negotiation.
