Lu Shaye, the Chinese ambassador to France, publicly stated in a televised interview that post-Soviet nations “have no effective status” in international law, which caused an uproar. China experts say his remarks probably represent the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) true opinions, unintentionally revealing the CCP’s discontent over the collapse of the Soviet Union more than 30 years ago.
In the April 21 interview with a French television network, Lu was asked whether Crimea belongs to Ukraine; he replied, “It depends how you perceive the problem.”
Further into his answer, he denied the sovereignty of all post-Soviet states.
“Even these countries of the former Soviet Union do not have an effective status in international law, because there is no international agreement that would specify their status as sovereign countries,” Lu said.
The three Baltic States, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, have blasted his comments.
Latvian Foreign Minister Edgars Rinkevics responded via Twitter: “Taking into account the unacceptable statements of the Chinese ambassador in France about international law and national sovereignty, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Latvia has summoned the authorized charge d'affaires of the Chinese Embassy in Riga to provide explanations on Monday. This step is coordinated with Lithuania and Estonia.”
In a Twitter post a few days later, Rinkevics outlined the history of his country’s occupation by the Soviets.
Estonia’s Foreign Minister, Margus Tsahkna, denounced Lu’s comments as “false” and “a misinterpretation of history.”
Ukrainian Ambassador to France Vadym Omelchenko said on Twitter: “Either there are obvious problems with geography, or such statements conflict with China’s official position regarding efforts to restore peace in Ukraine on the basis of international law and the goals and principles of the UN Charter.”
Meanwhile, Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania’s foreign minister, wrote in a Twitter post: “If anyone is still wondering why the Baltic States don’t trust China to ‘broker peace in Ukraine,’ here’s a Chinese ambassador arguing that Crimea is Russian and our countries’ borders have no legal basis.”
Landsbergis wrote on Twitter similarly to the Latvian Foreign Minister’s comments on the Soviets.
Beijing ‘A Cunning Supporter of Moscow’
Following the backlash to Lu’s comments, officials in China attempted to defuse the outcry, saying they were his personal views.Lu’s comments do differ from the CCP’s official statements on national sovereignty within the context of Russia’s recent aggression. On Feb. 24 this year, Beijing released a position statement on resolving the Ukraine crisis.
“China respects the sovereignty of nations. The recognized international law, including the purpose and principles of the United Nations Charter, should be strictly adhered to, and the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of each country should be effectively safeguarded,” the statement said.
But Anders Corr, the founder of Corr Analytics Inc. and publisher of the Journal of Political Risk, told The Epoch Times on April 23 that Lu’s remarks once again revealed CCP’s real stance on the Russian-Ukraine war.
“Lu’s comment is yet another indicator that Beijing sees its interests aligned with Russia and its war against Ukraine. The CCP is in no way a neutral peacemaker, as it has tried to portray itself, but apparently a rather cunning supporter of Moscow that tries its best to stay in the rear echelon of the fight,” Corr said.
Corr said that the former Soviet states had sovereign status under international law. Some of these countries, such as Ukraine, had sovereignty even before the collapse of the Soviet Union.
“Some Ukrainians see the 17th-century Hetmanate as the forerunner of their contemporary independent state. Maintaining independence has required frequent wars over the centuries, and the endurance of the worst of conditions, including Russian and Nazi invasions, genocide, and the purposeful destruction of Ukrainian culture and language by Moscow. Yet, Ukraine has retained its spirit of independence throughout,” he said.
Moscow even arranged for Ukraine and Belarus, which were under its forced control, to become founding members of the U.N. in 1945 to gain more votes for the U.N. General Assembly.
“[Ukraine’s UN membership] and Ukraine’s centuries of resistance to Russian rule, along with its democracy, give it an unquestioned sovereign status under international law,” Corr remarked.
Moscow and Beijing not only deny this but support a war to violate an even later affirmation of Ukrainian independence, which is the Budapest agreement of 1994, “shows that they are unreliable negotiating partners and can only be contained by force and economic sanctions,” he added.
Current affairs commentator Shi Shan told The Epoch Times that the CCP’s irresponsible statements only compound its troubles.
“By openly talking about the uncertainty of Crimea’s status, the Chinese Communist Party not only questioned Ukraine’s sovereign status but also blatantly rejected the Budapest Memorandum of Security Assurances. Not only European countries but indeed the whole world, will doubt how they can expect this ‘superpower’ to be a responsible member of the world.”
Recognizing Post-Soviet Nations
Shi further pointed out that if the CCP really considered the sovereign status of the former Soviet states to be uncertain, it would not have established diplomatic relations with them eagerly.After Mikhail Gorbachev announced his resignation as president on Dec. 25, 1991, the Soviet Union, which had existed as a sovereign state for 69 years, officially dissolved and ceased to exist the next day with the passing of a resolution by the Supreme Soviet.
Immediately after the downfall of the Soviet Union, the CCP rushed to establish diplomatic relations with former Soviet countries. On Dec. 27, the second day of the Soviet Union’s dissolution, then-Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen called the foreign ministers of various post-Soviet countries to announce that the Chinese regime recognized the independence of 11 countries and was prepared to discuss diplomatic relations with them. When the Soviet Union announced its dissolution, a Chinese delegation had already gone to Moscow to prepare for diplomatic relations with these countries.
According to independent analyst Zhuge Yangming, the CCP warmly embraced the newly liberated former Soviet countries to establish diplomatic relations with them ahead of Taiwan.
Beijing After Soviet Union’s Fall
Xi Jinping became CCP leader in November 2012 and in the following month, he convened a meeting in Guangdong Province, telling party cadres that the CCP must learn the “profound” lessons from the former Soviet Union.
In a leaked speech, Xi said, “Why did the Soviet Union disintegrate? Why did the Soviet Communist Party collapse? An important reason was that their ideals and convictions wavered.”
“Finally, all it took was one quiet word from Gorbachev to declare the dissolution of the Soviet Communist Party, and a huge party was gone,” Xi said. “In the end, nobody was a real man, nobody came out to resist.”
To learn from these “profound lessons,” the CCP has written thousands of internal documents, held study sessions, and even produced a documentary film about the collapse of the Soviet Union.
In May 2011, Li Shenming, Vice President of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, wrote an elegy on the fall of the Soviet Union. He claimed that “the demise of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and the disintegration of the Soviet Union were a huge setback and disaster in the world socialist movement, and a major twist and turn in human history.”
According to Li, the collapse of the Soviet Union and former European communist countries was a great disaster for the world socialist movement.
Since then, “10 of the original 15 socialist countries changed their nature or ceased to exist, and the total number of communists in the world, except for the Chinese Communist Party, fell sharply from over 44 million to over 10 million, and most of them lost their ruling positions,” he wrote.
