In recent days, a Russian female journalist posed difficult questions that put Chinese Foreign Ministry spokespersons in a tough spot. Guo Jiakun sidestepped the substantive issues, while another spokesperson, Geng Shuang, was reshuffled as a scapegoat for wolf warrior diplomacy. With China’s National Security Bureau withdrawing from Afghanistan, Xi Jinping’s diplomatic policy is experiencing a comprehensive collapse.
The current international situation has made life difficult for Chinese Foreign Ministry spokespersons.
According to the Chinese Foreign Ministry website, on March 9th, during a regular press conference hosted by Guo Jiakun, a journalist from Russia Today (RT) almost verbatim repeated a statement made by Estonian Foreign Minister Sakkna at an official press conference on the 5th: “Putin’s friends are either in heaven, in hell, or in prison, with only a few left. This comment has sparked some attention and controversy. What is China’s comment on this?”
Guo Jiakun’s response was, “China upholds the principle of mutual respect, equality, and mutual benefit in developing friendly cooperation with countries around the world, including Russia. We hope that the Estonian side objectively and rationally views the relationship between China and Russia and avoids making irresponsible remarks.”
From the content on the Foreign Ministry’s website, it appears that the Russian journalist’s question was puzzling – why would China need to comment on Putin’s friends? Guo Jiakun’s response was off-topic, deflecting the issue back to China and Russia, a question which Russia did not ask. A closer look revealed that a key sentence, “such as North Korea and China,” was omitted from the Foreign Ministry’s statement, leading observers to believe that both sides had lost their minds in the exchange.
“Russia Today” was established by a direct order signed by Putin to integrate Russia’s state-owned media. Regardless of the intent, this kind of question is at least a direct offense to Putin on the surface. Mouthpieces of the Chinese Communist Party’s media would never dare to pose similar offensive questions to foreign governments, such as making Xi Jinping uncomfortable unless truly pushed to the limit. This at least demonstrates that Russia’s press freedom far surpasses that of China.
So why did the Russian journalist pose such a question? In fact, it was to seek an official rebuttal from China in a public diplomatic setting to reinforce the narrative of China-Russia friendship, even if it might be embarrassing for Putin.
This indicates that there are indeed problems in the China-Russia friendship, to the extent that Russian state media journalists felt compelled to force China to publicly state its official position. Since it was Russia requesting China to take a stance, at least from Russia’s perspective, the issue lies with the Chinese Communist Party.
But what the outside world sees is Russia reaching out for the olive branch extended by Trump. Trump set aside the United Nations to form the Gaza Peace Commission, a move strongly opposed by China, yet Putin has shown interest in joining. Russia is also contemplating reverting its “de-dollarization” policy and returning to the mainly dollar-based international settlement system, effectively undermining China’s position, as China has been advocating for countries like Russia, Venezuela, and Iran, sanctioned oil-exporting nations to settle in yuan, forming an independent financial system from the US dollar.
So, does Russia have a basis for forcing China to take a stance? US media revealed last June that a clandestine intelligence unit of the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB) considers China as an enemy, ramping up its espionage activities against Russia during the Russia-Ukraine conflict, even recruiting agents within Russia.
If this was just an assessment by an intelligence unit, another piece of news is enough to make the Kremlin worry at the policy level.
During the Munich Security Conference, the Ukrainian Foreign Minister disclosed the content of a meeting with Wang Yi. China offered Ukraine free energy equipment, mainly to restore infrastructure destroyed by Russian bombing, changing its previously pro-Russia stance pre-war. Although China’s military industry had sought Russian assistance, which was declined, they received long-term help from Ukraine.
This indicates that China’s pro-Russia stance in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is not sentimental but part of China’s global strategy. Switching to help Ukraine couldn’t have been a moral epiphany but likely a warning or threat towards Russia.
Guo Jiakun did not provide a direct answer to the Russian journalist’s question. One possibility is that he understood the question but was unwilling or unable to respond, refraining from making assurances to Russia beyond the “limitless cooperation” or potentially misunderstanding the intended question and offering a non-sequitur official response to avoid the awkwardness of being forced to take a stance.
The position of Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson is truly a sympathetic one.
Since the beginning of this year, Chinese diplomacy has been a disaster. Geng Shuang’s experience could be seen as a mirror. Geng Shuang, a deputy permanent representative of China to the United Nations, was recently found to be serving as the vice president of the China Association of Diplomacy. From an official standpoint, this might seem like a lateral move, but as a deputy permanent representative to the UN, with a prominent role in diplomacy, while the China Association of Diplomacy is subordinate to the Foreign Ministry, playing a minor role, the vice president position is mainly ceremonial.
Transitioning from official diplomacy to unofficial diplomacy within the Chinese system marginalizes him. What remains is essentially retirement. The official website of the China Association of Diplomacy shows that Geng Shuang has taken on the role of vice president. Although Geng Shuang is still listed as the Deputy Permanent Representative of China to the UN on the Foreign Ministry’s official website.
At only 53 years old, Geng Shuang graduated with a Master’s degree in International Relations from Tufts University in the United States. He rose to prominence as a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry in 2016, known for his tough critiques of the US, regarded as one of China’s wolf warrior diplomats. In July 2020, Geng Shuang was promoted to Deputy Permanent Representative and Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary to the UN, participating in multilateral mechanisms such as the Security Council and General Assembly, delivering pointed remarks in defense of China and criticism of the US.
Some external media suggest that his reassignment is due to a warming in US-China relations, as the aggressive wolf warrior image needs to change, and Geng Shuang’s new role will involve promoting exchanges between retiring officials and private institutions in China and the US. These speculations appear to overlook several key factors.
Geng Shuang is a career diplomat, and his hawkish image has been consistent from his time as a Foreign Ministry spokesperson to the UN representative, echoing Xi Jinping’s diplomatic approach. It is a political necessity rather than individual behavior; replacing him does not reflect China’s sincere efforts to ease relations with the US.
Moreover, US-China relations have not warmed up. Trump’s recent actions, such as targeting Maduro, canceling Panama’s port operating rights, and bombing Iran, regardless of the motives, have dealt heavy blows to China’s decades-long efforts to secure key overseas interests, barring occasional praises from Trump claiming Xi Jinping as a close friend, there are no signs of improving relations.
These three significant actions by Trump have greatly impacted China. Xi Jinping’s frustration with the diplomatic system is evident, blaming it for not implementing his visionary global strategy adequately. Xi believes that the diplomatic intelligence and analysis systems have failed, catching him off guard.
Especially with the epic fury directed at Iran, while the UN Security Council convened an emergency meeting, it only discussed the “Middle East situation” without passing any resolutions. The Security Council failed to reach a consensus, issuing no condemnations for the US, no enforced resolutions calling for a ceasefire, failing even to progress to formal resolution procedures.
This reflects China’s actual influence and effectiveness in international affairs, or rather, Xi Jinping’s diplomatic policy, when faced with real-world events, is completely overshadowed by the US. Regardless of who assumes the role of Deputy Permanent Representative and Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary, this situation will not change. However, somebody must be held accountable, thus, Geng Shuang is likely being made the scapegoat for the UN’s inaction.
China’s global strategy continues to collapse. Following the loss of Venezuela, the Panama Canal port, strategic support in the Middle East, particularly Iran, remains in struggle, with Cuba on the brink. The latest strategic contraction was China’s National Security Bureau’s forced withdrawal from Afghanistan.
Starting from the end of last year, the security personnel from China’s National Security Bureau and some diplomatic staff in Kabul have gradually evacuated from Afghanistan for a safety perspective due to “changes in the security situation and adjustments in personnel arrangements,” deemed as “normal rotation and safety considerations.” In reality, the National Security Bureau’s permanent security team of about 10 to 15 individuals in Kabul was mostly drawn back to Beijing by the end of November last year.
The main reason for the evacuation from Afghanistan stems from increased internal conflict within the Taliban between the “hardliners” and “pragmatists” since the latter half of 2025. The hardliners have become increasingly hostile towards foreign powers, including China.
They have repeatedly demanded China’s “public support for the Islamic Emirate” and organized protests in Kabul against China’s “interference in internal affairs,” leading the National Security Bureau to assess sharply rising security risks. Moreover, attacks against Chinese individuals and enterprises in Afghanistan have escalated.
Since the Taliban regained power in Afghanistan in 2021, China chose to cooperate with them. Coming to this point, it is likely a strategic misjudgment. Afghanistan nearly brought the Soviet Union to its knees, ultimately forcing the Soviet Union and the United States, as two superpowers, to retreat. As foreign outsiders, what reason did China have to believe it could fare better than the US and the USSR?
All of these events have unfolded during Xi Jinping’s tenure, exemplifying a typical foreign policy debacle.