A massive public spat between US President Donald Trump, Vice President Vance, and visiting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House has sparked global uproar. Why did the conflict between the two sides escalate to the point of being played out openly? And which particular remark from Zelenskyy ultimately enraged Trump? Huang Jing, Distinguished Professor at Shanghai International Studies University and Director the Institute for American and Pacific Studies, stated in an exclusive interview with Shenzhen TV that Zelenskyy’s repeated public negotiations with the United States might have been the trigger. This conduct made the US side feel disrespected, as if its hegemonic status was being challenged.
Huang Jing: Ukraine finds itself in a tragic situation within international relations, having failed to recognize its own standing. It believed that by aligning with the West, it could secure what it needed. Instead, it ended up doing the bidding for the West, fighting a three-year bloody war, only to be betrayed by others in the end—still counting money for others.
As the Russia-Ukraine conflict enters its fourth year, Trump’s inauguration appears to have pressed the accelerator for peace talks, yet Ukraine has lost its voice in this power politics. In Huang Jing’s view, this represents Ukraine’s tragedy while further exposing the hypocrisy of Europe’s lip-service support for Ukraine over the past three years.
Huang Jing: European leaders often say, ‘Ukraine is fighting for us,’ ‘Ukraine is fighting for democracy,’ ‘We must support Ukraine.’ Yet when Ukraine is fighting on their behalf, Europe refuses to send volunteer forces to the battlefield and doles out weapons to Ukraine like squeezing toothpaste. That’s why every time I attend meetings in Europe, I never mince words when pointing out to those European leaders: You truly are the epitome of hypocrisy.
After taking office, Trump swiftly promoted a thaw in U.S.-Russia relations, triggering high unease in Europe. The BBC stated that this move by Trump signaled a parting of ways with European allies. Not long ago, a heated clash between Zelenskyy and Trump at a White House press conference further heightened Europe's sense of crisis. In Huang Jing's view, Trump’s current objective is very clear: to rapidly ease U.S.-Russia relations in service of America's major-power competition strategy, even if it comes at the expense of Ukraine and the interests of European allies.
Huang Jing: After Trump takes office, the first card he will play is the ‘Russia’ card. He has almost completely sacrificed Ukraine. Trump stated: ‘I will reinvite Russia back to the G8,’ effectively recognizing Russia’s status as a major power, and sanctions would be lifted accordingly. If U.S.-Russia relations ease and they are no longer adversaries, Japan will certainly follow the U.S. lead and immediately reconcile with Russia. India will also warm its relations with Russia, as cooperation with Russia allows for better management of threats. Consequently, both Japan and India would gain more resources and leverage to engage in strategic competition with China, thus making China’s security environment more complex.
Regarding the hyped notion of the “US aligning with Russia against China” in public discourse, Huang Jing believes it should be viewed objectively. On the one hand, China’s peripheral security environment would indeed undergo changes if U.S.-Russia relations improve. On the other hand, the strong political and economic foundations of China-Russia relations will not be easily undermined by U.S. attempts to drive a wedge. In fact, since the beginning of this year, high-level interactions between China and Russia have been frequent. The leaders of both countries communicated directly just before the Lunar New Year and again on the third anniversary of the Russia-Ukraine conflict. China has made its position clear: no matter how the international situation changes, China-Russia relations will proceed steadily and confidently. Not long ago, Nikolai Patrushev, Secretary of the Russian Federation’s Security Council, also visited China and engaged in strategic communication with Chinese officials.
Huang Jing: First, China and Russia share, after all, a comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination, which is inviolable. Second, China and Russia indeed possess a very solid political and economic foundation, which is irreplaceable. Third, and most importantly, China will not allow war and chaos to engulf the Asia-Pacific. This is our firm commitment, and we have the capability to defend it. We possess strong military capabilities and will not tolerate provocations. Therefore, I believe the situation remains manageable.
Now that Trump has been in office for over a month, what style has the Trump administration's China policy taken, and how does it differ from previous policies?
Huang Jing: I wouldn’t say there’s a defined style yet, because Trump’s foreign policy is determined by his team. This team typically consists of Trump himself, his National Security Advisor, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense. However, these individuals haven’t reached a consensus yet; they are still undergoing internal consolidation. After taking office, Trump reverted to Jacksonianism, the core of which is isolationism. Trump is more focused on great power competition. Since coming to power, his primary focus has been on three countries: China, Russia, and India. His strategic layout resembles a chessboard. From this perspective, his foreign policy towards China isn’t fully settled yet, as the issues concerning the other two major powers remain unresolved, and he still has considerable room for maneuver.
Huang Jing believes that Trump’s embrace of isolationism also signifies that he will further abandon the Indo-Pacific Strategy, which requires cooperation from allies. Huang pointed out that the Indo-Pacific Strategy itself is like an empty shell. The most critical partner, India, has consistently remained reasonable and uncooperative as it refuses to be drawn into the whirlpool of the South China Sea issue. This has led to the U.S. implementation of the Indo-Pacific Strategy being characterized by much thunder but little rain, failing to form substantive policies or impacts. Meanwhile, the Philippines, which jumped on the bandwagon of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy, has not changed its approach. Over the past period, it has continued to provoke near China’s reefs and islands in the South China Sea. Huang Jing argues that such provocations primarily serve the Philippines’ domestic political needs, and while there is some U.S. influence involved, it is not significant.
Huang Jing: The Philippines is wrapping itself in borrowed plumes. As we know, any country’s foreign policy is often closely linked to its domestic affairs. The Philippines’ domestic situation is currently in a terrible state. The Marcos Jr. administration is facing multifaceted challenges, including those from the daughter of a former prime minister, resulting in a fragmented internal political landscape. Such provocations must be met with firm countermeasures; absolutely no face should be spared for the other side. As long as they understand that provoking China will cost them more, this will actually create favorable conditions for their opposition forces.
Interviewee | Huang Jing, Distinguished Professor at Shanghai International Studies University and Director of the Institute for American and Pacific Studies, Shanghai Academy of Global Governance and Area Studies
Source | “Shenzhen TV’s Live News Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan”, March 2, 2025
