Trump's Diplomatic Vision: Can He Drive A Wedge Between China And Russia?

In a striking declaration made during an October 31, 2024, interview with right-wing commentator Tucker Carlson, former President Donald Trump articulated a bold vision: separating China and Russia would be a priority of his administration if he were to reclaim the White House. Trump's remarks come amid a backdrop of increasingly tense relations between Western powers and the two authoritarian regimes. He asserted, "I’m going to have to un-unite them, and I think I can do that, too." This statement echoes a historical strategy reminiscent of the Nixon era, where the U.S. sought to create a rift between China and the Soviet Union. As it happens, this strategy might prove naive, given the unprecedented degree of cooperation between China and Russia today.

The geopolitical scenario today is far more complex than during the Cold War. Both nations share considerable strategic interests, primarily countering the Western liberal order led by the U.S. In fact, since the fall of the Soviet Union, their alignment has grown steadily stronger. This burgeoning partnership was highlighted in February 2022, when Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping announced a "friendship without limits" just before Russia's invasion of Ukraine. By 2024, trade between these two nations hit a record high, amounting to over $237 billion. This figure signifies profound economic interdependence, challenging any American attempts geared at fracturing their alliance.

Despite occasional historical rivalries, the current geopolitical tides favor a close relationship between Beijing and Moscow. Both countries have adopted more assertive military postures: China in the South China Sea and around Taiwan, and Russia's actions in Ukraine and former Soviet territories illustrate a united front against perceived threats. The West's unified stance aiming to counter this dual challenge has only served to further solidify their bonds. On the topic, Trump suggested that a singular focus on containing Chinese influence was necessary, seemingly disregarding the deep-rooted connections that have formed between China and Russia.

While there are indeed dynamics that Trump could exploit to drive a wedge between the two nations, such as their shared but sometimes diverging interests in regions like India, the reality remains. Putin, aware of the thriving cooperation with China, may not find a wider military coalition against Beijing appealing. Trump's past strategies of attempting to cozy up to Putin might not yield the desired results either; during his first term, he often imposed tougher sanctions on Russia than the Obama or Biden administrations. Trump's pledge to cut a peace deal that prioritizes Russia and sacrifices Ukraine is seen by critics as an acknowledgment of weakness, particularly from Beijing's perspective.

The current political landscape raises significant questions about America's commitment to Taiwan. Trump’s reluctance to unequivocally commit to defending the self-governing island if China were to act militarily has raised alarm bells in Taipei. His past imposition of tariffs on Chinese goods during a trade war is juxtaposed with his willingness to negotiate with President Xi Jinping. This ambivalence may signal a tactical shift in U.S. foreign policy, which many in Taiwan find disconcerting.

Among these complexities, another pertinent issue is the U.S. sanctions regime. The effectiveness of economic sanctions against Russia has been under scrutiny, especially as Russia has managed to adapt to these measures through subterfuge and support from allies like China. Importantly, China's greater economic integration into Western markets provides a cushioning effect not available to Russia, further complicating any strategies aimed at isolating it.

Recent commentary from U.S. and Ukrainian leaders also frames the realities of the ongoing crisis. On March 25, 2025, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky welcomed agreements brokered by the U.S. aimed at halting strikes in the Black Sea and on energy infrastructure, but he voiced criticism against the easing of restrictions on Russian exports. Zelensky’s perspective emphasizes the inherent tensions in negotiating with Russia under conditions that could appear to favor its foreign policy ambitions.

Analyst Peter Zalmayev of the Eurasia Democracy Initiative expressed a cynical view of the situation. "Putin is feeling very confident he can continue playing Donald Trump for a fool," he stated, capturing a sentiment among skeptics of Trump's diplomatic approaches. Such statements suggest an understanding that Western powers must maintain a united front to effectively counter aggression in Eastern Europe and that any notion of a transactional relationship could risk undercutting that unity.

Amid these intricacies, Robert B. Zoellick proposed a significant shift: transferring over $300 billion of frozen Russian assets to a special fund set up for Ukraine as a means of strengthening its defensive capabilities. Under the Repo Act signed into law, this idea has garnered bipartisan support, though concerns remain about its implications for the European economy. Zoellick argued that the prevailing hesitation to act has effectively allowed unacceptable geopolitical dynamics to persist, placing Ukraine's sovereignty at risk while evidently strengthening Russian power.

The relentless pursuit of peace or a settlement through transactional dialogues, without substantial backing, leaves Ukraine vulnerable. Trump's intention to navigate peace terms while neglecting to offer meaningful security guarantees underscores the precariousness of the surrounding conflict. Observers point out that simply initiating dialogues without reinforcing Ukraine's military and economic strength may ultimately trivialize the grim reality of its struggle against Russian aggression.

The stakes are extraordinarily high. As Trump contemplates a route towards brokering what he perceives as peace over Ukraine's interests, it raises profound implications for not only the region but also for global geopolitical norms. The image of a potential U.S. under the leadership of an assertive Trump, eager to realign statuettes on the international chessboard, does little to quell fears and concerns that vital geopolitical principles are being sacrificed along the way.

In summary, whether Trump's aspirations to un-unite China and Russia will materialize remains uncertain at best. The realization of shared interests against the common backdrop of Western interventions paints a complex picture of international relations that requires careful scrutiny. For Ukraine and its allies, the path towards a durable solution demands unwavering unity and resolution to navigate threats from both East and West.