The China-Russia Entente in East Asia

To the south, Russia increasingly backs Beijing’s actions to pressure Taiwan as Taipei reaches out to democracies worldwide. Moscow’s support for Beijing has been particularly pronounced during major cross-Strait events in recent years. In the South China Sea, Russia tries to balance historical relationships with Southeast Asian states even as its power wanes and subservience to China deepens. For example, Russia’s cooperation on energy projects with Vietnam shows that Beijing’s and Moscow’s regional interests sometimes diverge.

How China and Russia manage their relations in East Asia will be a major factor shaping the regional diplomatic and security environment. Moscow’s presence and power in East Asia have already suffered because of its disastrous war in Ukraine. Over time, Russia likely will become even more subservient to China. The China-Russia entente might therefore prove most useful for Beijing in its home region.

To contend with these trends, U.S. and allied policymakers should adopt the following principles and recommendations:

• Structure policies around the reality that Russia is no longer a geopolitical balancer in East Asia.
• Identify and track metrics for the China-Russia partnership, including factors bringing them together and areas of tension.
• Strengthen coalitions to counter the China-Russia entente in East Asia.
• Expand discussions on extended deterrence and contingency planning to account for China-Russia collaboration.
• Deepen security, diplomatic, and economic ties with nonaligned and loosely aligned countries in East Asia so they have alternatives to Russia and China.
• Conduct principled diplomacy with Beijing and seek to keep lines of communication open with Moscow but keep expectations in check and allies informed.

Introduction

Closer cooperation between Beijing and Moscow is a trend that continues to shape global geopolitics. Analysis of this trend, however, tends to focus on assessing the general relationship without examining specifically how the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and Russia are working together in critical regional and functional areas. This report addresses the understudied question of how cooperation between China and Russia shapes East Asia. It focuses on the region’s most critical diplomatic and security issues rather than attempting an exhaustive analysis of these multifaceted relationships. The report proceeds in three parts. First, it considers the trajectory of China-Russia relations after more than two and a half years of war in Ukraine. Second, the paper assesses the dynamics of Beijing-Moscow cooperation across major regional flashpoints: the areas around Japan, the Korean Peninsula, Taiwan, and the South China Sea. Third, it provides recommendations for U.S. policymakers for how Washington and its allies and partners can counteract China-Russia cooperation where it undermines U.S. interests or values.

About the Indo-Pacific Program

The Center for a New American Security’s Indo-Pacific Security Program addresses opportunities and challenges for the United States in the region, with a growing focus on issues that originate in the Indo-Pacific but have global implications. It draws on a team with deep government and nongovernment expertise in regional studies, U.S. foreign policy, international security, and economic statecraft. The Indo-Pacific Security Program analyzes trends and generates practical and creative policy solutions around five main research priorities: U.S.-China strategic competition, India’s growing role in the Indo-Pacific, American alliances and partnerships, the North Korea threat, and challenges in South and Central Asia.

Acknowledgments

The authors are grateful to the many officials and experts—both in the United States and elsewhere—who shared their perspectives over the course of this project. They are particularly indebted to Elizabeth Wishnick, Jeffrey Mankoff, and Ayumi Teraoka for their presentations at the project workshop, and to Richard Weitz, Joseph Webster, and Lisa Curtis for their expert reviews of this paper. Finally, this paper would not have been possible without assistance from a host of CNAS colleagues, including Maura McCarthy, Melody Cook, Caroline Steel, Emma Swislow, Allison Francis, and Jake Penders. The views presented here do not represent those of CNAS or any other organization, and the authors are solely responsible for any errors in fact, analysis, or omission. This report was made possible with the generous support of the Government of Japan.

As a research and policy institution committed to the highest standards of organizational, intellectual, and personal integrity, CNAS maintains strict intellectual independence and sole editorial direction and control over its ideas, projects, publications, events, and other research activities. CNAS does not take institutional positions on policy issues, and the content of CNAS publications reflects the views of their authors alone. In keeping with its mission and values, CNAS does not engage in lobbying activity and complies fully with all applicable federal, state, and local laws. CNAS will not engage in any representational activities or advocacy on behalf of any entities or interests and, to the extent that the Center accepts funding from non-U.S. sources, its activities will be limited to bona fide scholastic, academic, and research-related activities, consistent with applicable federal law. The Center publicly acknowledges on its website annually all donors who contribute.