OPINION: Mongolia’s Delicate Dance: How Its Neutrality Undermines Ukraine’s Fight for Justice

In the remote, landlocked nation of Mongolia, the arrival of Russian President Vladimir Putin this week was met with a mix of diplomatic caution and quiet resignation. Despite an International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant for his arrest, Mongolia found itself unable – or unwilling – to detain Putin as he stepped onto Mongolian soil. The country’s response? An effective shrug of the shoulders, a tacit acknowledgment by Ulaanbaatar of the impossible position it finds itself in.

Mongolia is no stranger to the complexities of geography and, more pertinently, geopolitics, given it is caught between two relative superpowers: Russia and China, Mongolia’s foreign policy has long been one of balance – carefully treading a path that maintains good relations with both while cautiously extending a hand to Western democracies. This balancing act, however, has become more perilous as the global geopolitical landscape shifts, particularly in the wake of Russia’s war in Ukraine.

As a member of the ICC, Mongolia is legally obligated to execute the arrest warrant issued for Putin. Yet when the time came, Ulaanbaatar’s hands were tied. The reality is stark: Mongolia depends on Russia for 95 percent of its petroleum and a significant portion of its electricity. In a country where winter temperatures can plunge below -40 degrees Celsius, the implications of losing such a critical supply line are not just inconvenient – they are life-threatening. “Mongolia imports 95 percent of its petroleum products and over 20 percent of electricity from our immediate neighborhood, which have previously suffered interruption for technical reasons. This supply is critical to ensure our existence and that of our people,” as one Mongolian government spokesperson outlined to one media outlet.

Other Topics of Interest

Don’t Say Purge: One More Russian General Arrested on Corruption Charges

The Kremlin seems to think that more than a few of its top officers are responsible for filching millions of rubles’ worth of cash and military resources from the Russian war effort.

It’s easy to criticize Mongolia for inaction, but this criticism overlooks the surprising nuanced realities of international relations in this part of the world. For Mongolia, neutrality is not just a policy; it’s a survival strategy. Sandwiched between two historical giants with whom it shares extensive economic and cultural ties, Mongolia’s refusal to take sides is as much about self-preservation as it is about diplomacy.

Yet Mongolia’s balancing act is becoming increasingly unsustainable. As the West – led by the United States – ramps up its rhetoric and actions against Moscow, Mongolia’s reluctance to fully commit to the Western camp is drawing criticism. Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry, for instance, condemned Mongolia’s failure to arrest Putin, labelling it “a heavy blow to the ICC and the international criminal justice system.”

The continued, albeit largely symbolic disapproval from the West is understandable, but it risks pushing Mongolia further into Russia’s embrace. Ulaanbaatar’s decision to welcome Putin with open arms might seem like a betrayal of international norms, but from Mongolia’s perspective, it’s a calculated move to avoid provoking one of its powerful neighbors, both of which share a mutual desire to see the US-led order undermined.

Meanwhile, the Mongolian government is keenly aware of the need to diversify its alliances. The so-called “third neighbor” policy – Mongolia’s strategic outreach to Western democracies – reflects this awareness. US Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s recent visit to Mongolia underscored the country’s importance in the Indo-Pacific, with Blinken hailing Mongolia as a “core partner.” French President Emmanuel Macron, German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier, and other Western leaders have also made the trek to Ulaanbaatar in recent months, eager to bolster ties with this strategically located nation.

But while these visits are significant, they do little to change the fundamental calculus for Mongolia. The country’s economy is deeply entwined with those of Russia and China, and its geographical isolation makes it difficult to pivot away from these powerful neighbors. In 2022, China alone accounted for 41 percent of Mongolia’s imports, while Russia accounted for 26 percent. Nearly all of Mongolia’s trade flows through its two neighbors, leaving Ulaanbaatar with precious little room to maneuver.

Some argue that Mongolia should more boldly assert its independence, taking a firmer stance against Russian aggression in Ukraine. But this advice ignores the reality on the ground. Mongolia’s abstention from UN resolutions condemning Russia’s annexation of Ukrainian territory is not an endorsement of Moscow’s actions; it’s a reflection of the tightrope Mongolia must walk every day. In a region where one misstep could have disastrous consequences, Mongolia’s leaders are choosing the path of least resistance not out of cowardice, but out of necessity.

Yet, the broader implications of Mongolia’s balancing act cannot be ignored. By allowing Putin to visit unimpeded, Mongolia sends a message to the world that international norms can be bent or even broken when national interests are at stake. This could set a dangerous precedent, weakening the ICC’s authority and emboldening other nations to flout international law when it suits them.

Mongolia’s relationship with Russia and China is not just about economics; it’s about survival. But as the country’s leaders seek to deepen ties with the West, they must also navigate the risks that come with it. The recent military exercise, Khan Exploration, involving troops from the US, Japan, and China, is a prime example of Mongolia’s delicate balancing act. By including China in the exercise, Mongolia signals to Beijing that it remains a friend, even as it strengthens ties with Washington and Tokyo.

For Mongolia, the future remains uncertain. As Russia’s war in Ukraine drags on and Western pressure mounts, Ulaanbaatar’s room for maneuver is shrinking. The country’s leaders are well aware of the stakes: maintaining neutrality may no longer be a viable option, but fully committing to one side could be equally perilous.

In the end, Mongolia’s response to Putin’s visit is a reflection of its broader geopolitical reality – a reality shaped by geography, history, and the hard truths of international politics. The world may wish for Mongolia to take a stand, but in a region where the wrong move could spell disaster, sometimes the only option is to stand still.

The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.