Connect with us

World

How China forgot promises and ‘debts’ to Ukraine, and backed Russia’s war

Published

on

How China forgot promises and ‘debts’ to Ukraine, and backed Russia’s war

As Chinese leader Xi Jinping stood beside Russian President Vladimir Putin in Beijing last week, he claimed to be working towards a “true multilateralism” in which nations treat each other as equals and avoid “hegemonism and power politics” – a vocabulary the Chinese president returns to with regularity.

China is officially neutral in Russia’s war in Ukraine, and Xi has presented himself as a mediator, inviting Putin, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and United States President Donald Trump to Beijing in December for talks.

But China is not equidistant from the neighbours at war.

Xi’s “no limits” alliance with Putin, pronounced just before the full-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, puts him in the camp of an aggressor bent on “hegemonism”, experts tell Al Jazeera.

Three decades ago, however, China was Ukraine’s ally, not Russia’s.

Advertisement

When Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in return for security guarantees from Russia in 1994, China lauded the move and, in December of that year, offered Kyiv nuclear security guarantees should it ever be attacked by a nuclear power.

In 2013, Ukraine and China signed a Treaty of Friendship undertaking that “none of the sides shall take any action that harms the sovereignty, security, or territorial integrity of the other side”.

Vita Golod, an expert on Chinese-Ukrainian relations at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill, said Beijing has betrayed both undertakings.

“These commitments have so far remained largely rhetorical and have not translated into concrete security guarantees for Ukraine,” she told Al Jazeera. “In 2024, Ukraine attempted to remind China of these assurances during its appeal at the United Nations, calling for special security guarantees from nuclear states.”

Instead, China helped Russia scupper condemnations of its invasion of Ukraine in the UN Security Council.

Advertisement

A 12-point position paper China published in February 2023 refused to condemn Russia’s war and echoed the Kremlin’s talking points, such as initiating peace talks without the precondition of a Russian withdrawal from Ukraine.

“Beijing lacks the credibility to act as an honest broker between Ukraine and Russia,” said Plamen Tonchev, a China expert at the Institute of International Economic Relations (IIER), an Athens-based think tank. “I don’t think that it acted as a guarantor. On the contrary, it ditched Ukraine.”

Ukraine’s ‘strategic scepticism’ on China

In June 2024, Ukraine attempted to bring countries to a peace conference hosted by Switzerland. China did not attend, and Ukraine accused it of pressing other Asian nations to abstain.

At a speech in Singapore, Zelenskyy lashed out at Russia for “using Chinese influence in the region, using Chinese diplomats also”, and doing “everything to disrupt the peace summit”.

Xi has met Putin, whom European leaders openly refer to as a war criminal, five times since the full-scale invasion began.

Advertisement

“Ukraine has moved from caution to open strategic scepticism,” said Velina Tchakarova, founder of Vienna-based forecaster For a Conscious Experience (FACE). “China is no longer seen as a potential mediator but as a strategic adversary masked in neutral rhetoric.

“Ukraine is therefore deepening its integration with NATO, aligning with the G7 reconstruction framework, and engaging in tech and defence cooperation with Indo-Pacific democracies as part of a broader anti-revisionist coalition.”

Material interests

China moved quickly from diplomatic support and political rehabilitation to material assistance.

As early as February 2023, then-US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Washington had “information that they’re considering providing lethal support”, in a reference to China.

“The US is in no position to tell China what to do,” responded Wang Wenbin, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman.

Advertisement

Last April, Ukraine accused China of sending artillery shells and gunpowder to Russia and sanctioned three Chinese companies – an aeronautics firm and two industrial components companies.

The European Union followed. In May, it included Chinese firms in a 17th package of sanctions for supplying dual-use goods to Russia’s war machine.

China denied supplying deadly arms and said it strictly controlled the export of dual-use goods.

But a July investigative report by the Reuters news agency said Chinese firms were single-handedly sustaining Russian drone production by shipping engines mislabelled as “industrial refrigeration units” to Russia’s drone assembly plants.

Last month alone, Ukraine said it downed 6,173 drones launched by Russia.

Advertisement
Residents stand outside their damaged apartment building hit during a Russian missile and drone attack in Kyiv, Ukraine, on July 31, 2025 [Thomas Peter/Reuters]

China has also helped Russia financially by refusing to join the EU and the US in banning imports of Russian energy.

On the contrary, Putin and Xi signed an agreement last week to construct a new gas pipeline supplying China with as much as 50 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas a year, in addition to the 38bcm China receives from an existing pipeline. On August 29, China received its first shipment of liquefied natural gas from Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 project, a sanctioned liquefaction plant.

“Russia is cementing its political and economic dependence on China,” said Andriy Kovalenko, head of Ukraine’s Center for Countering Disinformation. “China is … dictating cheap prices, terms, and deadlines, forcing Moscow to sign agreements that turn it into an appendage.”

That dependence may go beyond energy revenues and industrial production. Ukraine suspects China is spying on Russia’s behalf. Last September, Zelenskyy said Chinese satellites were photographing Ukrainian nuclear power plants, possibly in preparation for a Russian strike.

In July, the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) arrested Chinese citizens after it allegedly found classified documents on their mobile phones with the specifications of Ukraine’s Neptune missile system. Ukraine used the Neptune to sink Russia’s Black Sea Fleet flagship, the Moskva, in 2022.

Advertisement

China’s debt to Ukraine

In addition to “Beijing’s pro-Russia neutrality”, as IIER’s Tonchev put it, China has overlooked a historic debt to Ukraine, said analysts.

“China owes Ukraine a lot. It would not now be a peer competitor to the US without significant transfers of technology from Ukraine,” said a European China expert on condition of anonymity.

In 1998, a Chinese national bought the hull of an unfinished Soviet aircraft carrier, the Varyag, from Ukraine and towed it to China, allegedly to convert it into a casino.

“The vessel was later refurbished, militarised, and launched as the Liaoning, laying the foundation for China’s modern aircraft carrier programme and broader naval modernisation,” said North Carolina University’s Golod.

“This early episode exemplified China’s exploitation of post-Soviet weakness to build its own military capabilities using Ukrainian technology,” said Tchakarova of FACE.

Advertisement

“It was the starting point in China’s strategy to build carrier battle groups and enhance the interoperability of its navy and air forces,” said Tonchev.

INTERACTIVE-WHO CONTROLS WHAT IN UKRAINE-1756904554

But another military technology target was of far greater interest.

In 2016, Beijing Skyrizon Aviation sought to acquire a controlling stake in Ukraine’s Motor Sich, one of the world’s top makers of engines for cargo aircraft and helicopters. Rich with Soviet aeronautics technology, the company was impoverished by the loss of its main client, Russia, which had waged war in Ukraine’s Donbas region. China saw Motor Sich as key to its rearmament.

But 2016 was a wake-up call for Europe, as Chinese appliance maker Midea acquired Kuka, Germany’s leading robotics company, and the China Ocean Shipping Company, a state-owned enterprise, bought the Piraeus Port Authority in Greece to facilitate Chinese exports to Europe.

China’s State Grid, another state behemoth, was found to have bought up a string of European electricity networks as the EU thought it was privatising them.

Advertisement

The capital spending had political implications. Eastern European countries like Hungary and Greece were breaking ranks with Europe on policy positions towards China.

“If we do not succeed … in developing a single strategy towards China, then China will succeed in dividing Europe,” German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said in September.

France, Germany and Italy requested a Europe-wide screening mechanism for foreign mergers and acquisitions, and the EU declared China a non-market economy.

In this political climate, and under US pressure, Ukraine stopped the sale of Motor Sich and nationalised the company. Beijing Skyrizon Aviation sued Ukraine for $4.5bn.

“Today … there is no active military or sensitive technological cooperation between Ukraine and China. The relationship has cooled significantly,” said Golod.

Advertisement
Front from left, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un arrive at a military parade to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan's World War II surrender in Beijing, China, Wednesday, Sept. 3, 2025. (Sergei Bobylev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP)
Front, from left, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un arrive at a military parade to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s World War II surrender in Beijing, China, September 3, 2025 [Sergei Bobylev/Sputnik/Kremlin via AP]

There were other interests.

“By 2021, China was the largest importer of Ukrainian barley and corn, accounting for over 30 percent of its corn imports. Ukrainian sunflower oil, iron ore, and titanium were crucial to China’s food security and industrial base,” said Tchakarova. All those goods now come from Russia.

China’s imports from Ukraine now amount to $4bn – a fraction of the $130bn it spends on Russian imports, according to the UN’s Comtrade database.

What, then, is China’s game in Ukraine? It appears to hold a balanced position. China helped discourage Putin from any use of nuclear weapons. It has not recognised the annexation of the four provinces Russia claims – Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson. It is interested in reconstruction. It is willing to host talks and possibly contribute troops to a peacekeeping force.

But, Tonchev said, self-interest drives some of these positions. China’s support of “territorial integrity” and the renunciation of separatism “suited both sides, with a view to Taiwan”, he said. And in discussions he has had with Chinese analysts, “China is unlikely to act as a donor … In fact, when I raise this question, there’s deafening silence.”

Ultimately, believed Tchakarova, China is strategically supporting Russia to drain Western power.

Advertisement

In Beijing, Putin and Xi openly supported a new world order. That, said Tchakarova, meant “replacing the Western-led, rules-based order with a multipolar system that tolerates spheres of influence and territorial revisionism”.

In claiming Ukrainian lands, Russia is clearly in favour of such revisionism in Europe.

World

Why Netflix Hiked Prices, Explained in One Chart

Published

on

Why Netflix Hiked Prices, Explained in One Chart

Why did Netflix just impose a price increase across U.S. plans? As the “KPop Demon Hunters” Oscar-winning hit song “Golden” says: “We’re goin’ up, up, up.”

It’s not rocket science. The formula is pretty simple: Invest in more content (Netflix is eyeing $20 billion in content cash spending in 2026, up 10%) to attract and retain streaming subscribers, and keep your profit margins ticking upward by increasing the retail price.

Under the new pricing, effective March 26 for new users and rolling out to current customers depending on their billing cycle, Netflix’s Standard plan (which has no ads and provides streaming on two devices simultaneously) is rising by $2, from $17.99 to $19.99/month. The ad-supported plan is going up a buck, from $7.99 to $8.99/month, and the top-tier Premium plan (no ads, streaming on up to four devices at once, Ultra HD and HDR) is increasing from $24.99 to $26.99/month..

But the question is: Why now?

First off, it would be difficult to imagine Netflix would have pulled this pricing lever — hiking fees for its approximately 86 million U.S. customers — if the deal to acquire Warner Bros. were still in play. That deal would have required approval by the Justice Department and other regulatory bodies, amid allegations by David Ellison’s Paramount Skydance (the winning bidder for Warner Bros. Discovery) that the combo of Netflix + HBO Max would create a monopolistic entity in the streaming biz.

Advertisement

Netflix strongly disputed that, asserting it would have had a roughly 21% share of the U.S. subscription-streaming market with the addition of HBO Max. However, the optics of a Netflix price hike as the WB deal was pending would be terrible, especially after co-CEO Ted Sarandos testified at a Senate hearing that “We will give consumers more content for less” through the Warner Bros. deal. (Sarandos meant Netflix would have bundled its service with HBO Max at a price discount.)

Without the need to worry about such appearances in the midst of a massive M&A deal, the reason Netflix feels confident in ratcheting up prices in its biggest market is illustrated by this chart from Wall Street analyst firm MoffettNathanson. It estimates revenue streamers generated in 2025 as a function of total number of hours viewed.

In a nutshell, it shows that Netflix delivers the best bang for the buck of this cohort — it pulls in 48 cents per hour viewed, lower than anyone else. That indicates Netflix not only has upside in ad revenue relative to the others but also that has room to raise its pricing from a competitive standpoint.

Even with the new price increases, Netflix will still have a sector-low revenue/hour viewed metric (call it in the 50-cents-per-hour range). As the MoffettNathanson analysts put it: “Netflix delivers significant value to its subscribers that has room to be better monetized over time.”

Advertisement

Note that all of Netflix’s competitors have also recently hiked prices. Disney+ and Hulu, HBO Max and NBCUniversal’s Peacock upped pricing last year, and Paramount+ raised prices in January. Next month, Amazon’s ad-free Prime Video tier (now called “Ultra”) is going up to $5/month.

And Netflix’s new pricing, while higher, keeps it roughly in line with the rest of the field. Indeed, its ad-supported tier remains cheaper than those from Disney+, Hulu, HBO Max and Peacock (and is now the same as Paramount+ with ads):

Netflix’s launch of the cheaper, ad-supported option, first introduced in November 2022, gave it an important tool to mitigate churn as it raises the price on its Standard (no ads) plans. Instead of presenting customers a take-it-or-leave-it price hike, Netflix can now steer those on the Standard package toward the lower-cost package with ads. In theory, the company is agnostic about which plan someone chooses: The ad revenue should make up the difference in subscription fees.

Netflix execs once swore they wouldn’t implement an advertising model, asserting that it’s a subpar user experience. But it’s clear people are willing to sit through ad breaks if it means paying less — and in the U.S., Netflix’s Standard With Ads plan is half the cost of the no-ads tier.

Advertisement

The streaming giant’s U.S. price increases reinforce its long-range strategy, according to MoffettNathanson’s Robert Fishman: It maintains a “wide gap between its highest and lowest tiers to simultaneously maximize monetization of its least price-sensitive subscribers while nudging more price-sensitive customers toward its still-nascent ad tier, driving engagement and, in turn, advertising revenue,” the analyst wrote in a research note Friday. “The result is a ‘best of both worlds’ approach that captures value across the full spectrum of its subscriber base and should drive even higher margins for the leading profitable streaming service.”

Will some Netflix customers cancel over the latest fee increases? Yes, of course. But the math indicates that overall, it will yield higher returns — letting the company dig an even wider moat against competitors.

Pictured top: Sadie Sink as Max Mayfield in Netflix’s “Stranger Things” Season 4

SEE ALSO: U.S. Household Spending on Streaming Video Services Remains Flat at $69 per Month, as 68% Now Pay for Ad-Supported Tiers

Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

The race against time to destroy Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program heats up amid fresh strikes

Published

on

The race against time to destroy Iran’s illicit nuclear weapons program heats up amid fresh strikes

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Iranian regime’s retention of key nuclear weapons facilities and its material for building atomic bombs — highly enriched uranium — has led to new efforts by the U.S. and Israeli militaries to take out the last vestiges of the regime’s program.

On Friday, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said in a statement that, that it’s “Air Force Struck the Arak Heavy Water Plant—A Key Plutonium Production Site for Nuclear Weapons.” The Arak plant is located in central Iran.

Prior to Friday’s attack, an IDF spokesperson told Fox News Digital concerning Arak, that there is a “high estimation” that attacks on “uranium enrichment sites are part of the plan.” The IDF declined to answer more specific questions about its target list and if any ground operations to retrieve the nuclear weapons-grade uranium were being considered.

NEXT MOVE ON IRAN: SEIZE KHARG ISLAND, SECURE URANIUM OR RISK GROUND WAR ESCALATION

Advertisement

An IDF infographic shows Iran’s Arak heavy water plant, described as a key infrastructure for plutonium production. (IDF)

Reuters, quoting regime media outlet Fars, reported that joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Friday hit the Khondab heavy water research reactor. 

A statement released by the IDF said, “Heavy water is a unique material used to operate nuclear reactors, such as the inactive Arak reactor, which was originally designed to have weapons-grade plutonium production capabilities. These materials can also be used as a neutron source for nuclear weapons.”

The IDF statement added that “The plant was a significant economic asset for the terror regime and served as a source of income for the Iranian Atomic Energy Organization, generating tens of millions of dollars for the regime each year.”

The regime’s foreign minister posted a condemnation of Israel and warned the Jewish state, “Iran will exact HEAVY price for Israeli crimes.”

Advertisement

According to an article published by the Washington, D.C.-based Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS), “The IR-40 Arak, aka Khondab, Heavy Water Reactor and Heavy Water Production Plant date to the early 2000s… The reactor core design was ideal for making substantial amounts of weapon-grade plutonium for nuclear weapons.”

STRIKES MAY SET IRAN BACK — BUT LIKELY WON’T END NUCLEAR PROGRAM, UN WATCHDOG CHIEF SAYS

Jason Brodsky, the policy director of United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), told Fox News Digital, “The one nuclear site which hasn’t been hit to date has been Pickaxe Mountain, so striking that site as part of Operation Epic Fury will be important to further degrade the Iranian nuclear program.”

A White House spokesperson referred Fox News Digital to President Trump’s cabinet meeting comments about Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Trump said on Thursday, “We’re free to roam over their cities and towns and destroy all of their crazy nuclear weapons and missiles and drones that they’re building.”

A map shows damage to Iran’s Fordow nuclear site after being struck by the United States in Operation Midnight Hammer on June 22, 2025. (Fox News)

Advertisement

David Albright, a physicist, founder and president of the Institute for Science and International Security told Fox News Digital that with respect to key nuclear weapons facilities that remain, “The elephants in the tent are Natanz and Isfahan. There was an attack on Natanz that the Iranians revealed, but the Israelis said we are not aware of an attack. So it must have been the U.S.,” he claimed.

TRUMP SAYS US, ISRAEL SHATTERED IRANIAN MILITARY CAPABILITIES, PRESSES LEADERS TO SURRENDER: ‘CRY UNCLE’

He said that Natanz has enriched uranium. “The Iranians were doing recovery operations in the underground fuel enrichment plant there and continuing to build this pickaxe mountain tunnel complex, which could hold enriched uranium. Right next to it is another tunnel complex that was built much earlier, around 2007… And the Iranians sealed it up, fortified it. There is something obviously important there.”

Albright said U.S. and Israeli airstrikes “have not attacked the underground Isfahan site. We know, according to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency], highly enriched uranium is in that site.” He continued that, “There may be an enrichment plant under construction in that underground complex. We would like that site to be attacked.”

Iranian worshippers hold up their hands as signs of unity with Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, during an anti-Israeli rally to condemn Israel’s attacks on Iran, in downtown Tehran, Iran, on June 20, 2025.  (Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

Advertisement

Albright warned that the war should not end like the previous U.S.-Israel war with Iran in 2025 with Tehran retaining the “crown jewels” of its atomic weapons program: highly enriched uranium and a number of centrifuges.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

He warned, “You don’t want it to come out of this war with the same kind of nuclear weapons capabilities that it had at the end of June war with a higher incentive to build a bomb.” He added, that is why it’s so important “to finish the job,” in Iran. 

Continue Reading

World

US diplomat Marco Rubio denounces settler violence, tolls in Hormuz strait

Published

on

US diplomat Marco Rubio denounces settler violence, tolls in Hormuz strait

United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio has offered wide-ranging remarks upon his departure from the latest Group of Seven (G7) ministers’ meeting in France, denouncing Iran’s continued chokehold on the Strait of Hormuz as well as settler violence in the occupied West Bank.

Standing on an airport tarmac on Friday, Rubio fielded questions from journalists about reports that Iran plans to implement a tolling system in the strait, a vital waterway for the world’s oil supply.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

Rubio used the topic to double down on pressure for countries to participate in securing the Strait of Hormuz, a demand US President Donald Trump has repeatedly made.

“One of the immediate challenges we’re going to face is in Iran, when they decide that they want to set up a tolling system in the Strait of Hormuz,” Rubio said.

“Not only is this illegal, it’s unacceptable. It’s dangerous for the world, and it’s important that the world have a plan to confront it. The United States is prepared to be a part of that plan. We don’t have to lead that plan, but we are happy to be a part of it.”

Advertisement

He called on the G7 members — among them, Japan, Canada, France, the United Kingdom, Italy, Germany and the European Union — as well as countries in Asia to “contribute greatly to that effort”.

Rubio calls toll plan ‘unacceptable’

The Strait of Hormuz is a key artery for the global transport of oil and natural gas, and prior to the start of the US and Israel’s war against Iran on February 28, an average of 20 million barrels of oil per day passed through the waterway.

That amounted to roughly 20 percent of the world’s liquid petroleum supply.

But since the outbreak of war, Iran has pledged to close the Strait of Hormuz, which borders its shores. The threat of attacks has ground most of the local tanker traffic to a standstill, though a few vessels, some linked to Iran or China, have been allowed to pass through.

Media reports suggest that Iran is setting up a “tollbooth system” that would require passing ships to put in a request through Iran’s armed forces, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). There would also be a fee to secure passage.

Advertisement

“ They want to make it permanent. That’s unacceptable. The whole world should be outraged by it,” Rubio said on Friday.

He added that he conveyed a warning about the polling scheme to his colleagues at the G7.

“All we’ve said is, ‘You guys need to do something about it. We’ll help you, but you guys are going to need to be ready to do something about it,’” Rubio said.

“Because when this conflict and when this operation ends, if the Iranians decide, ‘Well, now we control the Strait of Hormuz and you can only go through here if you pay us and if we allow you to, that’s not only is it illegal under international law and maritime law. It’s unacceptable, and that can’t be allowed to exist.”

The Trump administration, however, has struggled to rally allies and world powers to join the US in its offensive against Iran.

Advertisement

Legal experts have criticised the initial strikes against Iran as an unprovoked act of aggression, though the Trump administration has cited a range of rationales for launching the attack, including the prospect that Iran may develop a nuclear weapon.

Many of the US allies in Europe have maintained that they would limit their involvement to defensive actions. Trump, meanwhile, has accused members of the NATO alliance of being “cowards”, adding in a social media post, “We will REMEMBER.”

In a statement following the G7 meeting, member countries reiterated their stance that there should be an “immediate cessation of attacks against civilians and civilian infrastructure”.

They also underscored the “absolute necessity to permanently restore safe and toll-free freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz”. But the statement fell short of pledging any resources or aid to the US and Israeli war effort.

Achieving goals ‘without any ground troops’?

It is unclear when the war might end. On Saturday, it reaches its one-month anniversary, having stretched for four weeks.

Advertisement

Rubio on Friday echoed Trump’s assessment that the war was going as planned and that the US was achieving its objectives, including to destroy Iran’s navy, missile stockpiles and uranium enrichment programme.

“ We are ahead of schedule on most of them, and we can achieve them without any ground troops, without any,” he said, addressing an oft-raised concern about the prospect of US troops being deployed to Iran.

Rubio also briefly addressed the increasing levels of Israeli settler violence against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank.

Footage has shown settlers this month torching Palestinian homes and vehicles, as well as assaulting residents.

On March 19, the United Nations estimated that more than 1,000 Palestinians have been killed in the West Bank since Israel began its genocidal war in Gaza in October 2023. The international body underscored that a quarter of the victims were youths.

Advertisement

“ Well, we’re concerned about that, and we’ve expressed it. And I think there’s concern in the Israeli government about it, as well,” Rubio responded, adding that it was a “topic we follow very closely”.

He suggested that the Israeli government may take action to stop the violence, though critics argue that Israel has largely turned a blind eye to settler violence.

“Maybe they’re settlers, maybe they’re just street thugs, but they’ve attacked security forces, Israelis, as well. So, I think you’ll see the government going to do something about it,” Rubio said.

Upon taking office for a second term in January 2025, President Trump also moved to cancel sanctions against Israeli settlers accused of grave abuses in the West Bank.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending