On the eve of the summit between Donald Trump and Xi Jinping, Russia drastically intensified its attacks on Ukraine, attempting to project strength and sway the international agenda. According to the Ukrainian Air Force (source: https://kpszsu.mil.ua/), on the night of May 14, Russia launched 56 missiles and 675 drones. Despite the air defense systems intercepting most targets, the strikes claimed 24 lives in Kyiv and caused widespread damage. This escalation is widely viewed as a deliberate act of terror rather than a tactical military strike.
Such massive attacks, timed perfectly before major international negotiations, are a hallmark of Kremlin diplomacy. By creating chaos, Putin attempts to remind the global community that the war in Ukraine remains a central pillar of global security and that no international agreement can guarantee stability without Russian approval. However, these attempts to raise the stakes seem to be backfiring. The summit in Beijing focused on trade, Taiwan, and global market stability, with both leaders signaling that they are prioritizing their own strategic competition over Russian demands.
Political analysts suggest that the ongoing war serves the interests of China by turning a weakened Russia into its dependent satellite. Moscow’s greatest fear is not the rhetoric from Western capitals, but potential backchannel agreements between Washington and Beijing that could relegate Russia to the sidelines of international power. As China seeks to balance its global standing and avoid a direct economic conflict with the U.S. and Europe, its strategic support for the Kremlin may become more calculated and restrictive.
Ultimately, the summit results indicate that global power centers are increasingly seeking ways to resolve international disputes without treating Moscow as an equal player. The terror unleashed by the Kremlin on Ukrainian cities is, in essence, a desperate signal of fading influence. As the world moves toward new geopolitical configurations, Putin’s reliance on military aggression may prove to be his most significant strategic blunder, further alienating him from the major players who are quietly deciding the future of the global order without his consent.