president Xi Jinping’s visit to Russia from May 7-10, which coincided wiht World War II commemorations in Red Square, served a dual purpose: reinforcing China’s alignment with Moscow and asserting a historically grounded claim to international leadership. China’s interpretation of World War II is crucial to understanding its vision for its role in global affairs.

The “Morally Weighted Narrative”

China is actively linking its current power to what political scientist Rana mitter calls a morally weighted narrative about China’s role in the global order” based on its experiences during World War II. The Chinese narrative emphasizes its suffering and resistance during the “War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression,” presenting China as not only as powerful, but as just and moral” due to its contributions to the Allied victory.

Revising History: Unifying the Nation

While the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) historically exaggerated its role in leading resistance against Japan, diminishing the contributions of Chiang kai-shek’s Kuomintang, the party has shifted its approach in the 21st century. Now, the CCP portray[s] the war as a unifying experience in which China was both victorious and morally righteous. This revised narrative is central to China’s self-perception and its place in the international community.

Xi’s Message: forging a Sino-Russian Bond

Prior to his state visit, Xi Jinping published an article in Rossiyskaya Gazeta, emphasizing the unbreakable bond between China and Russia forged in their resistance to “fascism.” He underscored China’s commitment to the principles of international order that emerged from the defeat of Germany and Japan.

Xi specifically praised the “Soviet Volunteer Group” for assisting China against Japan between 1937 and 1941, fighting alongside the Chinese people in Nanjing, Wuhan, and Chongqing. He also highlighted the role of Yan Baohang, a one-time confidant of Chiang Kai-shek and a clandestine CCP agent, in providing the Soviet Union with crucial intelligence on Operation Barbarossa.

Blurring the Lines: A Strategic Move

This purposeful blurring of the lines between the Kuomintang and the CCP’s roles in resisting japan and aiding the Soviet Union serves two key purposes:

• Asserting an eternal wellspring nourishing our everlasting friendship forged in blood and sacrifice, which strengthens the current Sino-Russian alignment.
• Enabling the Party-state to portray the “War of Resistance against Japanese Aggression” as a shared struggle across class lines that defines the Chinese nation as both strong and victorious, as well as morally righteous.

Redefining the War’s Origins and Key Players

Xi Jinping underlined the need for a correct historical perspective on World War II, recognizing Russia and China as the principal theatres of that war in Asia and Europe. He emphasized their role as the mainstay of resistance against japanese militarism and German Nazism, making pivotal contributions to the victory of the World Anti-Fascist War.

China’s narrative positions the start of the war in 1937 with Japan’s invasion of China,rather than the Nazi invasion of Poland in 1939 or the bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941. It emphasizes Soviet assistance over American aid, highlighting Western allies’ unmet assurances regarding China’s post-war role.

Implications for International Order

Beijing argues that Russia and China’s positions as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are justified by their contributions to defeating Germany and Japan. This perspective shapes China’s conception of international order and its strategic interests.

Xi maintains that the UN-centred international system provides the foundation for the basic norms of international relations, promoting an equal and orderly multipolar world and a universally beneficial and inclusive economic globalisation. This stance contrasts with what China perceives as the unilateralism and protectionism of the United states.

taiwan: A “Victorious Outcome”

Acceptance of the post-World War II settlement, according to China, includes the acceptance of its claims to Taiwan. Taiwan’s restoration to China, Xi asserts, is a victorious outcome of World War II and an integral part of the post-war international order, embodied in international legal instruments like the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation.

However, it’s crucial to remember that the China that made these contributions and had Taiwan “restored” to it was led by the Kuomintang, not the CCP.

De-centering the United States

Xi’s history lesson was thus not primarily about Sino-Russian relations. Rather, it concerns the Party-state’s unfinished business in constructing a new nationalist narrative that appropriates the record of its once mortal enemy, Chiang Kai-shek, in the service of de-centring the role of the United States in both the waging of the Second World War and the settlement that followed.