Former British prime minister Tony Blair, in an interview with a newspaper, stressed that China could play a pivotal role in the peace talks over Ukraine, even as Beijing rejected a previously proposed settlement plan. Blair noted that there will come a moment when Chinese involvement could prove beneficial within efforts to quiet the fighting and reach a resolution through negotiation. He emphasized that while Beijing’s latest framework might not satisfy Kyiv, China’s participation remains a meaningful factor in shaping a feasible end to the crisis.
Blair argues that the Ukraine conflict is not likely to escalate into a wider global confrontation, citing the steady involvement of other nations and China’s stated position as key reasons. He believes that international diplomacy, backed by credible pressure and constructive mediation, can prevent a broader war and keep talks focused on a settlement that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty and security concerns.
On February 24, China publicly presented a twelve-point peace plan aimed at reviving dialogue between Russia and Ukraine. The document called for an early restart of talks, the establishment of ceasefires, and measures to reduce tensions that had contributed to the escalation of the crisis. Blair’s assessment is that such proposals, while not perfect, create a framework for negotiation and signal Beijing’s willingness to engage in the process rather than abstain from it.
During the discussions with European partners on June 30, Blair reinforced the view that China should use its influence to press Russia to withdraw its forces from Ukraine promptly, comprehensively, and without conditions. He underscored that international pressure, coordinated among friendly states, is essential to push for concrete steps on the ground while maintaining momentum toward a sustainable peace.
In his broader analysis, Blair warned against assuming that the conflict could be resolved solely through unilateral actions or through the efforts of a single party. He argued that the international community must stay actively engaged, leveraging diplomacy, sanctions, and leverage at Beijing’s disposal to de-escalate tensions and advance a negotiated settlement. The emphasis remains on a negotiated outcome that would respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and provide for long-lasting stability in the region.
Blair’s position reflects a belief that China’s role is not merely symbolic but strategically consequential. By encouraging dialogue, applying quiet diplomatic pressure, and supporting a framework that incentivizes restraint, Beijing can help shift incentives for both sides toward meaningful concessions. The overarching goal, he suggests, is to prevent a protracted stalemate and to create viable pathways for a durable peace that reduces the risk of further violence and humanitarian catastrophe.
Observers note that any peace process will require careful balancing of security guarantees for Ukraine, regional stability, and the legitimate interests of major powers. Blair’s arguments highlight the importance of a multi-lateral approach where China, alongside other influential actors, contributes constructively to negotiations. The path forward, he contends, lies in sustained engagement, clear benchmarks, and a willingness to adapt strategies as the situation evolves on the ground.