China quietly funding Russian war machine MPs told

China is providing decisive economic and technological backing to the Russian war effort in Ukraine, effectively sustaining the Russian ability to continue the conflict while avoiding overt military involvement, defence experts told MPs this week.

Giving evidence to the Defence Committee during a one-off session on the future of warfare, witnesses described a relationship in which Russia is becoming increasingly dependent on China for finance, supply chains and technology, even as Beijing avoids being seen as a direct participant in the war.

Air Marshal (Retd) Edward Stringer, Senior Fellow at Policy Exchange, told MPs that open-source intelligence points to a level of Chinese support that goes far beyond diplomatic alignment. “Open source suggests around 60% of the Russian war effort is being covertly bankrolled by China,” he said. “Russia can only maintain this war because China is essentially bankrolling it.”

Stringer said the support was largely indirect, with China avoiding the export of weapons that could be clearly identified as Chinese military equipment. “It’s not weaponry with a Chinese flag on it,” he said. “But there is a huge amount of support to Russia, and it’s in China’s interests to keep the West, and America in particular, distracted.”

He also highlighted a shift in the technological balance between the two states, noting that Russia is no longer the senior partner in military innovation. “The previous generation of Chinese aircraft and ships were copies of Russian designs. That is not the case now,” Stringer told the committee. “The latest generation of Chinese warships and aircraft are Chinese manufacture. The boot is now on the other foot.”

Dr Keith Dear, CEO and founder of Cassi, said Russia’s growing dependence on China was the result of long-term structural weakness that had been accelerated by the war in Ukraine. “Russia is weak and weakening in technology,” he said. “Its technical talent is leaving, and its education system is deteriorating. That means an ever-growing dependency on China.”

Dear argued that the war has placed Moscow in a subordinate position that benefits Beijing strategically. “It is useful for China to keep Russia occupied in Ukraine,” he said. “It increases Russia’s economic and technological dependency and reduces the threat China faces from the north.”

Asked by Labour MP Fred Thomas whether the conflict was beginning to resemble a proxy war between the United States and a China-backed Russia, witnesses urged caution over the label, while acknowledging the underlying dynamic.

Sir Hew Strachan, Wardlaw Professor of International Relations at the University of St Andrews, warned against oversimplification. “I don’t think ‘proxy war’ is a helpful term because it loses the nuance,” he said. “China did not instigate Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, but it has enabled its continuation.”

Strachan said Beijing’s primary interest lay in preventing escalation rather than ending the conflict. “What I don’t see is any desire on China’s part for this war to escalate,” he told MPs. “It suits China to have this war ongoing and Russian dependency growing.”

He also pointed to the emergence of a geographically contiguous bloc involving Russia, China and Iran, with significant strategic leverage across Eurasia. “You now have a block with extraordinary leverage from its geographic position,” Strachan said. “The question is not how we encourage these states to work together, but how we prevent further consolidation.”

On whether China might encourage future Russian aggression elsewhere after a ceasefire in Ukraine, Strachan said Beijing was more likely to act opportunistically than directive. “China is more candid than that,” he said. “Ukraine was an opportunity. China did not create it, but it has taken advantage of it.”