# NARRATIVE: Russian Soldiers Trained in China — The Secret Program Alarming Europe > Beijing says it is neutral in Russia's war against Ukraine. Beijing presents itself as a peace mediator. And simultaneously, Beijing welcomes Russian soldiers into its military academies to train them - Author: Maxime Marquette - Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co) - Section: Reportage - Published: 2026-07-02 - Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/recit-soldats-russes-formes-en-chine-l-entrainement-secret-qui-alarme-l-europe ## Introduction: When Beijing Schools Moscow in Chemical Warfare ### An agreement signed in the shadows, generals identified On **July 2, 2025**, two officers put their signatures to a **classified military agreement**. On the Russian side: **Major-General Rustam Khusainov**. On the Chinese side: **Senior Colonel Sun Dayun**. That document, seen by **Reuters** and reported on **July 1, 2026**, laid the foundation for what would become one of the most sensitive military cooperation programs between **Moscow and Beijing** since the start of the war in Ukraine. Under the cover of professional training, approximately **200 Russian soldiers** traveled to China in autumn 2025 for a military training program lasting **three weeks**. These soldiers did not come to learn how to drive a tank. They came to learn how to survive in a contaminated environment. The coursework focused on **radiological, chemical, and biological protection** — what the military calls the **CBRN domain**. Knowledge that would find its way into the Ukrainian trenches. Some of those soldiers are already there. ### Approval at the highest level The training was not the product of an informal initiative between mid-ranking officers. A classified Russian document seen by Reuters traces back directly to an **internal decree issued by Defense Minister Andrei Belousov in August 2025**. He formally authorized this program. Above Belousov: **Vladimir Putin**. Below him: at least four generals from both countries, identified by name by two European officials. The training is not an anomaly. It is a decision of state. ## The Generals Linking Moscow and Beijing ### **Rustam Muradov**, head of delegation **Colonel General Rustam Muradov** leads the Russian delegation. His rank is precise: **deputy commander-in-chief of the Russian ground forces**. He is not a mid-level staff officer dispatched on a routine mission. He is one of the senior officers of the Russian army. His presence at the head of this delegation signals the level of importance Moscow attaches to this cooperation. The **list of participants seen by Reuters** names each officer with rank, date of birth, affiliation, and **security clearance level**. On the Chinese side, **Major-General Li Jinsun**, director of the **People's Liberation Army** (PLA) CBRN Military Academy, attended the opening of one of the courses. His presence was not ceremonial. He oversees the institution that trains China's specialists in chemical and radiological warfare. Sending that academy's director to receive the Russians says something about the symbolic and strategic value Beijing places on this meeting. ### Sessions in Beijing, Nanjing, Zhengzhou, and Bengbu The training did not take place in a single facility. Russian soldiers visited several Chinese military installations: **Beijing** for a central three-week session on **CBRN protection**; **Nanjing**, where an internal report praised the quality of equipment and the high theoretical level of the instructors; **Bengbu**, where **Major-General Vitaly Gerasimov** participated in a specific course. This geographic spread was not accidental. It maximized Russian officers' exposure to different PLA capabilities. An internal Russian military report mentioned by Reuters noted a significant limitation observed during the training: **China's lack of combat experience**. Chinese instructors command the theory, the simulators, the protocols. But they have not fought. The Russians, for their part, are accumulating more than **four years of intensive warfare experience** in Ukraine. This **asymmetry creates** a **paradoxical cooperation**: China teaches CBRN protocols; Russia brings battlefield knowledge. ## The Training Content: Chemical, Radiological, Biological Warfare ### Chemical reconnaissance and contamination protection of ventilation systems The courses documented by Reuters cover very specific areas of the CBRN domain: **chemical reconnaissance**, **radiological reconnaissance**, and the **protection of ventilation systems against contamination**. These three axes correspond to specific warfare scenarios. Chemical reconnaissance allows soldiers to identify the nature and concentration of agents potentially present on a battlefield. Ventilation system protection aims to keep armored vehicles and underground shelters operational in contaminated environments. A Chinese instructor delivered a lecture to Russian soldiers looking at a **nuclear reactor model**. That detail, mentioned in the Reuters article, is not incidental: it places the training in a perspective where radiological risks — Ukrainian nuclear power plants, depleted uranium munitions, industrial nuclear incidents — form part of Russia's tactical calculus on the Ukrainian theater. ### What Russia is really after The **Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant**, occupied by Russia since March 2022, is **the largest in Europe**. Its reactors have been operating under high-risk conditions for more than four years. Ukraine has struck targets deep inside Russian strategic territory. Russia uses drones, missiles, guided bombs. In this context, **CBRN protection** is not an academic curiosity. It is an operational capability directly useful in the ongoing conflict. The cooperation with China gives Russia access to protection technologies and protocols that the Russian military academy did not master as well. This is a competency transfer validated at the ministerial level, involving senior generals from both sides. **This is not an academic exchange. It is active military cooperation in wartime.** ## The European Reaction: Confirmation and Alarm ### Kallas confirms, the EU reckons with the implications On **June 15, 2026**, **Kaja Kallas**, the European Union's foreign policy chief, declared that Brussels had confirmed through its own channels that the training had taken place and was now assessing the implications. Her phrasing was precise: she described China as a **"decisive enabler of Russia's war."** That is not the usual language of European diplomacy toward Beijing. It is a direct accusation. The EU has already imposed **sanctions on Chinese companies** judged complicit in the Russian war effort. A third European official, Brussels-based and cited by Reuters under anonymity, summarized the internal discussion: the EU must **stop viewing China primarily through an economic lens** and focus instead on its role in the war. That shift in perspective — from commercial partner to military facilitator — represents one of the most significant changes in the Europe-China relationship since the start of the war in Ukraine. ### The commercial dilemma Behind the public statements, closed-door discussions within the EU are marked by tension between the need to respond to **Sino-Russian military cooperation** and the **commercial priorities with Beijing**. China is the **world's second-largest economy**. Trade flows between Europe and China run into the hundreds of billions of euros. Seriously sanctioning Beijing for its support of Moscow would have real economic consequences for EU members whose industries depend on the Chinese market. That calculation — protecting Ukraine without severing economic ties with China — is the central contradiction of European policy in the summer of 2026. It has no simple solution. Every additional sanction against Chinese entities sends a signal to Beijing. Every hesitation sends one too. **Beijing watches, calculates, and continues deepening its cooperation with Moscow.** ## Russian and Chinese Denials: The Rhetoric of Emptiness ### "Allegations entirely without foundation" — Beijing China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded to the Reuters article with a categorical formula: **"The relevant allegations are entirely without foundation."** Beijing added that its position on the Ukrainian crisis has remained consistent and described Kaja Kallas's remarks as **"nothing but slander."** That register — allegations without foundation, slander — is the standard lexicon of official denials in the face of documented revelations. It does not refute the facts. It surrounds them in rhetorical fog. China's position of "neutrality" in the **Russia-Ukraine war** runs into a growing coherence problem: the documents, names, dates, and locations documented by Reuters are precise. They implicate a PLA general. They reference signed decrees. They name installations. **Genuine neutrality does not produce files like these.** A secret training program approved at the ministerial level, involving four generals from both sides, is not a marginal incident. ### "Complete nonsense" — Andrei Kartapolov On the Russian side, **Andrei Kartapolov**, chairman of the State Duma's defence committee, described the report as **"complete nonsense"** and declared that the Russian army has nothing to learn from China. That last claim is contradicted by the documents themselves: if Russia has nothing to learn, why did Defense Minister Belousov sign a specific decree authorizing this training? Why did a colonel general lead the delegation? Why did generals attend the opening of the courses? Russia's Defense Ministry did not respond to Reuters's requests for comment. The Kremlin had previously dismissed earlier reporting on this cooperation as **"disinformation."** **The gap between the denial and the documents is itself proof of the nature of this cooperation.** States with nothing to hide do not produce classified decrees to conceal military training programs. ## Soldiers Trained in China, Deployed in Ukraine ### The transfer of knowledge to the front The most concrete finding in the Reuters article is also the most alarming for Ukraine: **some of the Russian soldiers trained in China in November 2025** have since joined the war in Ukraine. The article does not specify how many, or their exact units. But the **causal chain** is established: PLA military academy in November 2025 → Ukrainian trenches in 2026. The CBRN expertise acquired in Beijing, Nanjing, and Bengbu is now operational on the front. This deployment has a direct implication for Ukrainian defenders. Ukrainian forces operate in environments where chemical and radiological risks are real — the Zaporizhzhia plant, zones where Russian forces have documented use of irritants and asphyxiants. **Russian soldiers better trained in CBRN protection are Russian soldiers harder to neutralize in those environments.** The Chinese training carries direct tactical value on Ukrainian soil. ### The combat experience China is studying If Russian soldiers return from China with CBRN skills, Beijing draws for its part a different but equally strategic benefit: direct observation of an army at war. **PLA officers** who spent time alongside the Russian delegates observed men who have been fighting for more than four years in the most intense conventional war since World War II. Reports on **FPV drones, precision strikes, electronic warfare**, logistics under pressure flow back to Beijing through these channels. For an army — the PLA — that has not fought since the brief **Sino-Vietnamese War of 1979**, this vicarious immersion carries considerable **pedagogical value**. **Sino-Russian military cooperation** is not one-directional. It is a structured exchange in which each party maximizes what it can learn from the other. ## Implications for NATO and European Security ### A "decisive enabler" that redraws alliances Kallas's description of China as a **"decisive enabler of Russia's war"** marks a turning point in Europe's official positioning. Since 2022, the EU had tried to maintain a separation between the Ukrainian question and the commercial relationship with Beijing. That line is fading. The revelations about military training are accelerating the process. Europe can no longer pretend that China is a neutral economic actor when official documents show PLA generals teaching warfare to Russian soldiers fighting Ukraine. The alarm generated by these revelations in European capitals is real. **European officials** passed their concerns to their governments as soon as the documents were confirmed. The strategic summary is straightforward: Russia is not fighting alone. It benefits from North Korean munitions, Iranian drones, and now Chinese military training. NATO is confronting a de facto coalition, even if no formal treaty carries that name. ### What NATO can and cannot do NATO is a defensive alliance whose area of responsibility does not extend to China. It can condemn, sanction through its individual members, strengthen its defensive postures. It cannot project military power onto Chinese territory or against PLA installations. NATO's response to Sino-Russian military cooperation is therefore necessarily indirect: **strengthening Ukraine, increasing the defensive capabilities of eastern members, deepening cooperation with Indo-Pacific partners** — **Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand** — who have their own reasons to watch the PLA. This geostrategic realignment — NATO looking increasingly toward the Pacific, Indo-Pacific partners becoming increasingly involved in European security — is one of the lasting consequences of the war in Ukraine. **The post-1991 world is over. The global security architecture** is being remade. And part of it is being remade in PLA classrooms in Beijing. ## The Precedent: Toward a Normalized Sino-Russian Military Doctrine ### From **exception to structured program** The November 2025 training is not an isolated incident in Russo-Chinese military cooperation. It fits within a trajectory that accelerated since the start of **full-scale war in Ukraine** in February 2022. Joint naval exercises have taken place in the South China Sea and the Baltic. Joint military parades have been staged. High-level military delegation exchanges have multiplied. **What was presented as symbolic cooperation is becoming operational cooperation.** Belousov's ministerial decree approval in August 2025 marks a qualitatively different threshold: this is no longer a courtesy visit between general staffs. It is a training program approved at the highest level, covering military capabilities directly useful in the ongoing conflict, and involving generals from both sides as **trainers and supervisors**. **Sino-Russian cooperation has crossed the threshold of military normalization.** ### What this means for the years ahead If this precedent is not countered by effective targeted sanctions or **coordinated diplomatic pressure**, similar programs will follow. Russia will bring its combat experience. China will bring its technologies, protocols, simulators. The two armies will learn from each other, one benefiting from the war the other is waging, the other drawing on its partner's industrial and technological infrastructure. **This is the scenario of military convergence NATO feared** — and it is now materializing. Ukraine is the proving ground for this convergence. Its defenders confront it daily — Russian soldiers increasingly well equipped, trained, supported. The question the West must collectively ask itself is not only "what are we doing for Ukraine today?" It is: **"What world will we live in if Sino-Russian military cooperation continues to deepen without a structured response on our part?"** ## Conclusion: The Forced Transparency of a Cooperation That Thought Itself Invisible ### Reuters and the power of documentation The Reuters investigation published July 1, 2026, rests on military documents seen directly by the journalists: an internal decree signed by Belousov, nominative lists of participants with their ranks and security clearances, reports on course content. This type of investigation is not a synthesis of public information. It is the product of sources at the heart of the apparatus, willing to risk their safety so that these facts would be known. Their courage is the condition of transparency. Russia and China believed this training would remain invisible. They were wrong. The documents speak. The names speak. The dates speak. **And when soldiers trained in China die or kill in Ukraine, that causal chain is now documented, dated, named.** Sino-Russian military cooperation can no longer hide behind the language of neutrality. It has a face, a signature, and a date. ### What comes next The **European Union** is assessing the implications. Additional measures are under discussion. The **NATO summit in Ankara**, on **July 7 and 8, 2026**, will provide a framework for allies to coordinate their response. The central question that remains open is one of proportionality: how to respond to documented military cooperation without triggering an economic or geopolitical escalation that neither Europe nor the United States can manage simultaneously with the war in Ukraine? **That is the West's strategic dilemma in 2026. It does not yet have an answer.** **By Maxime Marquette, columnist** ## Columnist's transparency note ### Editorial stance I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies. I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events. ### Method and sources This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here. **Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies. **Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations. When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**. ### Nature of the analysis The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted. My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors. This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text. ## Sources ### Primary sources - [Reuters — EXCLUSIVE: Russia Approved Secret Military Training in China at Top Level, Sources Say — July 1, 2026](https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russia-approved-secret-china-military-training-top-level-sources-say-2026-07-01/) - [EuroMaidan Press — Rutte: China, Iran, North Korea Remain Central Threats — July 1, 2026](https://euromaidanpress.com/2026/07/01/nato-chief-rutte-tells-trump-europes-arms-spending-supports-195000-us-jobs-300bn-in-orders/) - [Kyiv Independent — Russo-Chinese Military Cooperation and Implications for Ukraine — July 2026](https://kyivindependent.com) ### Secondary sources - [Foreign Policy — NATO, Trump, Erdoğan: The Ankara Summit Confronting Russia and China — June 29, 2026](https://foreignpolicy.com/2026/06/29/nato-trump-erdogan-ankara-summit-europe-defense-russia/) - [The Guardian — NATO Allies Fear They Can No Longer Count on Washington — June 27, 2026](https://www.theguardian.com/world/ng-interactive/2026/jun/27/nato-leaders-fear-they-can-no-longer-rely-on-us-help-if-russia-attacks-trump-eastern-europe) - [Militarnyi — The Russia-China-Iran-North Korea Coalition: The Shadow War — June 26, 2026](https://militarnyi.com/en/news/russia-concentrate-721000-troops-in-ukraine/) - [United24 Media — Syrskyi: 721,300 Soldiers, Target of 33,000 FPV Drones/Day — June 26, 2026](https://united24media.com/war-in-ukraine/syrskyi-says-russia-has-721300-troops-in-ukraine-plans-33000-daily-fpv-drones-20207) --- Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/recit-soldats-russes-formes-en-chine-l-entrainement-secret-qui-alarme-l-europe