Modi Beat Xi to Zelenskyy, and Beijing's 'Opportunist' Charge Reveals Its Frustration

After Prime Minister Narendra Modi sat down with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in Japan, the reaction in China was quick and sharp. Chinese experts branded Modi an 'opportunist' and a 'deceiver'. An opinion column in ThePrint argues that the harshness of those labels says less about Modi than about Beijing's frustration, because President Xi Jinping had been trying to cast himself as the leading peacemaker in the Russia-Ukraine war.

The words Modi used at the meeting were plain. 'I don't see this as a political or economic issue,' he said. 'For me, this is an issue of humanity, an issue of human values.' The author reads this as an approach that avoids the war's economic fallout while still giving Ukraine assurances, and he argues it should continue regardless of how Beijing sees it.

Chinese commentators went after the word 'humanitarianism' in particular. The South Asian Studies Group, an independent project by Chinese scholars, called it 'a clever script that embodies the traditional Indian art of sophistry'. On its Weibo account, the group offered its own translation of Modi's meaning: Western countries must reckon with India's power, because over a billion Indians cannot afford to lose Russian oil and Ukrainian wheat, which it called the true humanitarian disaster. Weibo users broadly saw the meeting as a way of deceiving the West. One wrote that 'Indian sophistry is better than European and American sanctimoniousness'. Liu Xu, a researcher at the Institute of Eurasian Studies at Renmin University, said it would be hard for Modi to change his position but that he might be able to maximise his national interests.

The author sees a second reason for Beijing's unease. China recently sent Li Hui as its envoy to Ukraine, a signal that it wants to mediate peace without calling out Russia. Li is China's Special Envoy for Eurasian Affairs, was personally chosen by Xi to lead the peace effort, and previously served as Chinese ambassador to Russia and to Kazakhstan. The author calls the Kyiv visit largely symbolic, since China's ideological alignment with the Kremlin is not about to shift.

Having lost the chance to meet Zelenskyy, Chinese experts have pointed to a consolation: Zelenskyy travelled on a French government Falcon jet that had to pass through Chinese airspace. The author says such small claims will earn Beijing little goodwill in Europe. Chinese state media meanwhile pushed the line that India stays neutral in order to buy more oil. The author counters that Beijing itself bought 2.1 million barrels of Russian oil in April 2023, citing the Financial Times.

The EU's High Representative, Josep Borrell, recently urged the bloc to crack down on India's Russian oil trade, which he said indirectly funds the Kremlin's war. Chinese commentators welcomed the remarks and read Modi's meeting with Zelenskyy as an effort to dodge EU sanctions. The author argues Beijing would like to see India sanctioned because it believes New Delhi gets the best of both worlds while China absorbs the criticism over its ties with Russia. Opinion among Chinese experts on the war is divided, he notes, but Xi's mediator proposal has pulled them behind Beijing's peacemaker plan.

His conclusion is blunt: calling Modi an opportunist will not help Beijing, since Xi missed his chance to meet Zelenskyy and Modi got there first. What to watch next is whether Li Hui's diplomacy gains traction in Kyiv, and whether the EU acts against India's Russian oil trade.