More than a year after Russian dictator Vladimir Putin illegally invaded democratic Ukraine in a bid — per his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov — to upend the geopolitical status quo, that ‘under new management’ sign has yet to be hung on the international order. Louise Blais, Canada’s former ambassador to the United Nations, writes that even China’s patience with Putin may be waning.

Louise Blais

On a spring day in Brussels this April, Finland left behind decades of non-alignment and joined NATO. This historic accession doubled the Russian Federation’s direct border with the Alliance. And Sweden is in the queue to follow suit. While the latter’s application is being held at ransom by Hungary and Turkey, who wish to extract bilateral concessions from Stockholm, the Nordic country did something that no one would have expected it to do 14 months ago: The quintessential neutral country, even in the Second World War, picked a side.

The expansion of NATO is but one clear sign that Vladimir Putin’s imperialist overreach has backfired badly. By all measures, Russia is worse off today. Yet, in the period following his illegal annexation of Crimea in 2014 and before his full-scale military invasion on February 24 last year, he actually had the West on its collective back foot. Gas was still flowing, sanctions were manageable, he had everyone guessing and divided. A year into his full-scale aggression, Russia’s military is severely depleted, the country’s economy is anemic, and his isolation from western markets has put him at the mercy of China’s demands.

And geopolitically, his actions have given President Joe Biden the unexpected gift of being able to rebuild the transatlantic ties terribly mangled by his predecessor. In fact, so barbaric has been the Russian troops’ treatment of civilians during the conflict, even former friends and energy-dependent Germany and France have been forced to harden their positions against Russia. This blow cannot be underestimated. Putin had astutely cultivated European elites over decades for political and economic leverage. His extensive charm offensive involved a complex web of influence peddling with former and current chancellors, national security advisers and other officials and business leaders.

This systematic campaign was so successful that following the disaster at Fukushima, Germany swore off nuclear power and put all its eggs in the Kremlin’s basket. This was a major triumph for the Russian leader, and a cash cow for his own elites. Putin, who planned this personally, must have thought it guaranteed a nuanced reaction from Western Europe, when the time came to “reclaim” territory. And who could have blamed him? He had history to convince him of that. That’s what happened when he annexed Crimea in the middle of the Sochi Olympics. There was outrage, but there were no real consequences. He seems to have a thing about military incursions during the Olympics, having invaded Georgia in 2008 during the Summer Olympics. Repeating this demonic tradition, his Ukraine invasion was staged four days after the Winter Olympics in Beijing, the delay a favour to China.

But Ukraine was defiant, united and quickly earned the respect and support of the West. The West became de facto “at war” with the Russian Federation. The fact that western countries have maintained diplomatic relations with Putin’s Russia should not be interpreted as business as usual. Russian entrées into global spheres have been closed. Multilaterally, Moscow’s ability to advance its interests though organizations like the G20 or the Arctic Council, has been sharply reduced. And Putin himself is now personally constrained, blocked from travel to dozens of countries per the International Criminal Court (ICC) war crimes warrant for his arrest.

More broadly, the lies, the deceit, the outright assault on international norms accompanying the invasion, have significantly weakened the Russian diplomacy. No where is that more evident than at the United Nations, where despite its affront to the UN Charter, the Russian Federation still has its permanent seat on the Security Council (UNSC). But years of abuse of the veto has eroded, not only its own standing but, along with it, the credibility of the institution itself.

Because Russia has played the role of spoiler for years under the Putin Regime, the Security Council has found it increasingly difficult to reach consensus on a variety of security issues around the world. In fact, only two peacekeeping missions, one in the Central African Republic and one in Haiti, have been authorized since Russia illegally annexed Crimea in 2014.

Observers point to some progress on a few select issues. However, the Syria conflict has been a major source of tension within the Council, given that Russia — sometimes joined by China — has used its veto power nearly 20 times to block resolutions aimed at holding the Assad regime accountable for atrocities and permitting humanitarian corridors.

The expansion of NATO is but one clear sign that Vladimir Putin’s imperialist overreach has backfired badly. By all measures, Russia is worse off today.

The failure of the UNSC is bad news for the entire planet. But arguably, also for the Kremlin. As one of its founding architects and beneficiaries, Russia has undermined the very platform that served it well, all those decades during and after the Cold War. Recent gridlock might have achieved short-term wins, but again, Putin has failed to recognize that at some point, slashing the tires of the car you are riding with others, will also mean you are also stranded.

Before we leave the UN to address China, much has been said concerning the surprising reality that the Kremlin still has friends in the East and in the Global South. That may be so, but that is very flimsy support indeed.

On February 23, the eve of the first anniversary of Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, a resolution was presented at the General Assembly calling for the end of the war and the immediate withdrawal of Russian troops. Of the 193 members, 141 voted in favour (more than two-thirds), with only seven voting against (Russia, Belarus, North Korea, Eritrea, Mali, Nicaragua and Syria). What was even more telling, were the 32 so-called “friends” who were forced to abstain (including China and India) and those 20 who did not cast a vote at all; a particularly feeble move that basically means you probably agree with the resolution but do not want to upset the targeted member state (or, in this case, China) which happens to have economic or other leverage over you. The interpretation can only be that while some countries will have to disregard Russian misdeeds to preserve their interests, political capital has been expended on both sides. And that is a finite resource.

But the most important player in all this, is Vladimir Putin’s number one underwriter, President Xi Jinping of China. China has publicly declared its support for Putin, most notably at a meeting in Beijing at the opening of last year’s Olympics and again this March in Moscow. On one hand, it has reaffirmed its commitment to “sovereignty” (quotation marks based on Beijing’s situational approach to the concept) and “mutual respect” but also softening the blow of the economic sanctions on its neighbour by buying Russia’s natural resources at a discount.

However, recently, there have been signs that China’s patience is wearing thin. The Chinese President’s long call on April 26 to with Volodymyr Zelensky, which the Ukrainian president described as “meaningful”, was perhaps not a surprise to the Kremlin. After all, Moscow must at least be hoping for some mediated way out at this point. That said, the call makes him look like the misbehaved child, whose parent had to intervene to smooth things over with the aggrieved party. A far cry from the kind of show of strength the Russian dictator likes to project.

And while the two leaders pledged in March to build a new world order together, it appears that China is not ready to sacrifice its influence within the current one to cover for Putin’s miscalculations.

Taken all together this means, that while, tragically, the fighting and suffering still goes on in Ukraine, Vladimir Putin has already lost.

Contributing Writer Louise Blais, Canada’s Ambassador and Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN from 2017-21, was a career foreign officer. She is a Senior Adviser at the Pendleton Consulting Group in Atlanta and Diplomat-in-Residence at Université Laval.