TESTIMONY: China Secretly Trained Russian Soldiers in Biological Warfare — Generals Involved

The Russian Side: Muradov in Charge

Reuters has precisely identified the Russian generals involved in this operation. The highest-ranking officer on the Russian side is Colonel General Rustam Muradov, deputy commander of the Russian Ground Forces, who led the Russian delegation. His presence at this level signals the strategic importance Moscow attaches to this cooperation. Also present was Major General Rustam Khusainov, who co-signed an agreement on July 2 with his Chinese counterpart, as well as Major General Vitaly Gerasimov, who participated in a course in Bengbu, a city that is home to specialized PLA military facilities.

Muradov’s participation is particularly significant. As Deputy Commander of the Ground Forces—a position at the very top of the Russian military hierarchy—his presence in Beijing to oversee this training indicates that this program was not a peripheral operation. It was an institutional priority for the Russian military, approved at the highest level and integrated into strategic war planning.

The Chinese Side: Li Jinsun and the NBC Academy

On the Chinese side, the central figure is Major General Li Jinsun, director of the PLA’s Military Academy of Radiological, Chemical, and Biological Defense—the Chinese military’s specialized institution for precisely the type of training provided to the Russians. His participation in the opening of one of the courses is documented in reports reviewed by Reuters. Senior Colonel Sun Dayun co-signed the July 2 agreement on the Chinese side. The presence of the director of the NBC Academy at the course opening is not merely a matter of protocol. It is an act demonstrating China’s institutional commitment to this military cooperation.

These names are not mere details. They are evidence. When the deputy commander of the Russian Ground Forces and the director of the PLA’s NBC Academy meet in Beijing to launch a chemical and biological warfare training program for Russian soldiers currently at war, this is no longer a matter of vague diplomatic cooperation. It is a concrete military alliance.

An Unprecedented European Statement

The head of European diplomacy, Kaja Kallas, publicly took a stance on June 15, 2026—two weeks before the Reuters report was published. She stated that Brussels had confirmed through its own channels that the training had taken place and that it was assessing its implications. More importantly, she described China as a “key enabler” of Russia’s war against Ukraine. This phrasing is not insignificant in European diplomatic vocabulary. It implies direct responsibility—and paves the way for punitive measures.

Kallas’s statement came two weeks before the official Reuters report. This means that European governments were aware of the situation. They had confirmed the facts through their own intelligence channels. And they were already discussing internally what additional measures to take. The EU has already imposed sanctions on Chinese companies it accuses of supporting Russia’s war effort. This clandestine military training could justify a significant escalation of those sanctions.

Beijing’s Official Response: Categorical Denial

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs responded to Reuters with a terse statement: “The relevant allegations are entirely unfounded.” Beijing added that its position on the crisis in Ukraine remains “unchanged.” On the Russian side, General Andrei Kartapolov dismissed the report as “complete nonsense,” asserting that the Russian military had nothing to learn from China. These denials are unequivocal. However, they do not address the issue of the internal Russian documents reviewed by Reuters, nor the independent confirmation from the two European sources.

“Entirely unfounded.” This is the standard formula for Chinese diplomatic denial. It does not address the documents. It does not address the European sources. It does not address Kallas’s statement. In the world of international relations, a denial without evidence to the contrary does not negate an accusation backed by evidence. And Reuters has the evidence.

The Operational Content of the Courses

The Reuters report describes in detail the content of the training provided to Russian soldiers. In Beijing, Russian military personnel attended lectures by Chinese instructors, examined a model of a nuclear reactor, and received training in “chemical reconnaissance,” “radiological reconnaissance,” and protecting ventilation systems from contamination. These training programs are specifically designed to enable military units to operate in environments where chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear agents have been used.

In Nanjing and Bengbu, other aspects of the training were covered. A Russian internal report on the training in Nanjing praised the quality of the equipment and the use of modern simulators. The same report noted, with a certain degree of lucidity, the Chinese instructors’ lack of combat experience—a remark that reveals the mutually beneficial nature of this cooperation: China provides the technology, while Russia provides field experience.

A formal agreement signed on July 2

Reuters also reveals the existence of a formal agreement co-signed on July 2 by Russian Major General Rustam Khusainov and Chinese Senior Colonel Sun Dayun. This agreement institutionalizes Sino-Russian military cooperation in the CBRN field. This is not an informal handshake between officers. It is a signed, dated, and archived document—and is now in the hands of Reuters and several European governments. The question is no longer whether this cooperation took place. It did. The question is what the West will do now.

This agreement, signed on July 2, concerns me beyond the training itself. It means that China and Russia have formalized their NBC military cooperation in an institutional document. That this is not an isolated incident. That it is the beginning of a structure—an unconventional military alliance that could deepen—and of which Ukraine is the first direct victim.

From Economic Cooperation to NBC Military Cooperation

Sino-Russian relations have been gradually escalating since 2022. Initially, China maintained trade ties with Moscow despite Western sanctions, supplying dual-use technology components that the Russian military incorporated into weapons systems. Then, Chinese companies were sanctioned by the EU for directly supporting the war effort. Now, Reuters has revealed that direct military training is taking place at PLA facilities on the most dangerous techniques of modern warfare.

This escalation is no accident. It reflects a deliberate Chinese strategy: to remain officially neutral while actively supporting Russia, carefully calibrating the level of support to stay below the threshold that would trigger crippling economic sanctions. But the line has been crossed. Training soldiers in biological and chemical warfare goes beyond the supply of electronic components. It amounts to direct military cooperation. And the West can no longer pretend it is unaware of this.

Implications for Taiwan and Indo-Pacific Security

This revelation must be viewed in a broader context. China is closely watching how the international community reacts to Russian aggression in Ukraine. If this covert training is met with limited diplomatic consequences, Beijing will draw a simple conclusion: indirect military support for an aggressor comes at no real cost. This calculation has direct implications for Taiwan, for the South China Sea, and for the security of the entire Indo-Pacific region. Whether the West’s response to this revelation is firm or weak will be interpreted in Beijing as a signal of what the West is willing to tolerate.

China is playing a multi-pronged game of chess. It is supporting Russia in Ukraine. It is observing the Western response. It is assessing its own room for maneuver regarding Taiwan. These three realities are interconnected. And every time the West hesitates in the face of China over the Russian issue, it sends a signal to Beijing about its resolve on the Taiwan issue. Half-measures come at an immense strategic cost.

A Structural Relationship, Not a Temporary One

The International Centre for Defence and Security (ICDS) has conducted an in-depth analysis of Sino-Russian relations. Its key conclusion: even though the Sino-Russian partnership may have peaked in terms of ideological affinities, it remains functionally robust from a strategic standpoint. The two powers share a common goal: to weaken the Western-led liberal world order. This convergence outweighs their tactical differences or regional rivalries in Central Asia.

The military training revealed by Reuters fits into this framework. It is not China “helping Russia out of friendship.” It is China strengthening a strategic partner against a West that it views as its primary long-term rival. By training Russian soldiers in NBC techniques, China is investing in Russia’s capacity to cause harm—and, by extension, in the lasting destabilization of Europe. Ukraine is the testing ground. The whole world is the audience.

North Korea and Iran: A Triangle of Threats

This Sino-Russian training is part of a broader picture. North Korea has been supplying ammunition and ballistic missiles to Russia since 2023. Iran has supplied Shahed drones that strike Ukrainian cities on a daily basis. And now, China is providing specialized military training in the most dangerous techniques across the military spectrum. These three actors—China, North Korea, and Iran—form a network supporting Russian aggression that the West should address collectively, not separately. These are the same powers that threaten the liberal international order on multiple fronts simultaneously.

North Korea. Iran. China. Russia. These four names are appearing together with increasing frequency in intelligence reports and strategic analyses. This is no coincidence. It marks the formation of a revisionist bloc that shares a common goal: to end Western hegemony. And they are no longer even hiding the fact that they are working together.

An Immediate Operational Risk

The potential presence of Russian soldiers trained in NBC (nuclear, biological, chemical) techniques on the Ukrainian front poses a concrete operational challenge for Ukrainian defense forces. Not because it makes an NBC attack imminent or certain—but because it enhances Russia’s capabilities for protection and deployment in NBC environments. Soldiers who know how to protect their own units against chemical agents can operate more effectively in areas where such agents have been used—and are therefore harder to neutralize with certain types of munitions.

Ukraine is facing a Russian military that is improving technically despite its massive losses. Drones. Missiles. Electronic warfare. And now, NBC capabilities. Every improvement in Russian capabilities means additional challenges for Ukrainian soldiers fighting with more limited human and material resources. That is why continued Western support—in weapons, training, and intelligence—remains indispensable.

Ukraine’s allies must respond

In light of this revelation, Ukraine’s allies have several options. First: impose direct sanctions on the Chinese institutions and generals involved, particularly Major General Li Jinsun and his NBC Academy. Second: deepen investigations into technology transfer networks between China and Russia. Third: share available intelligence with Ukrainian forces so they can adapt their defenses. These measures do not require a declaration of war. They require political resolve—the scarcest resource in Western capitals.

The international community tends to fragment its responses. A company is sanctioned here; an ambassador is summoned there. Faced with military cooperation as systematic as that revealed by Reuters, a fragmented response is insufficient. A coordinated response strategy is needed—and it must be implemented now, not after the next revelation.

Europe: Between Confirmation and Hesitation

Kaja Kallas confirmed the facts on June 15. The EU is “assessing the implications.” Two weeks later, Reuters published the details. The EU is therefore in an uncomfortable position: it can no longer pretend to be unaware, but it is hesitant to go so far as to impose sanctions directly targeting Chinese generals—an unprecedented diplomatic escalation with the world’s second-largest economy. This cautious approach is understandable. It is not necessarily the right one.

The economic consequences of a diplomatic confrontation with Beijing over this issue would be substantial for European economies. China is a major trading partner for Germany, France, and Italy. But the costs of inaction are also very real: by allowing Beijing to strengthen Russia’s war machine with impunity, Europe is accepting that the war will drag on, that Ukrainian cities will continue to be bombed, and that a dangerous precedent will be set in international relations.

The United States and the Trump Administration

The U.S. reaction to this revelation is even more complex. The Trump administration, which has an ambivalent relationship with China on trade issues, will have to decide whether to treat this military training as a major strategic threat or as just one issue among many in its negotiations with Beijing. Trump’s transactional mindset could lead him to use this revelation as leverage in trade negotiations with China—which would be a serious strategic mistake. NBC military cooperation is not a matter for tariff negotiations. It is a fundamental issue of international security.

Trump will have to choose: Is China’s military training of Russian soldiers specializing in biological warfare a bargaining chip, or a red line? I don’t have a definitive answer to that question. But I know what I hope for. And I hope that this time, even Trump will understand that some things are non-negotiable.

A war that is becoming more global with each passing week

A July 1, 2026, report by Reuters highlights a reality that some in the West still refuse to accept: the war in Ukraine is no longer a regional conflict. It is a clash of systems—democracy versus autocracy, the liberal international order versus revisionism—involving actors from multiple continents. North Korea is supplying ammunition. Iran is supplying drones. China is training soldiers. And Ukraine, alongside its Western partners, is facing this de facto coalition with a resilience that commands admiration.

This war has been going on for more than four years. It has cost hundreds of thousands of lives. It has destroyed entire cities. It has created millions of refugees. And Ukraine is still standing. Ukrainian drones are striking Moscow. The Ukrainian army is holding its lines. The Ukrainian defense industry is producing its own weapons. This is not in spite of imperfect Western aid. It is thanks to the determination of a people who have chosen not to yield.

Zelensky: The Target of a Global Coalition

Behind every soldier trained in China, every Iranian drone, every North Korean shell, there is a common intention: to wear Ukraine down. To break its will. To crack its defenses. And behind every Ukrainian strike on a Russian refinery, every defensive line held, every drone shot down over Kyiv, there is Volodymyr Zelensky and the men and women fighting under his command. Facing a coalition of authoritarian powers that support Russia, Ukraine is the front line of democracy. This reality should not be forgotten—neither by Western capitals nor by the citizens who elect their leaders.

I think of Zelensky in the face of this mounting pressure. An empire attacking him. China training his enemies. Iran sending its drones. North Korea supplying its shells. And he, holding his ground. Refusing to give in. Striking back. In the long history of this conflict, when it is written, this resistance will be one of the most remarkable chapters of the 21st century.

Targeted sanctions against the Chinese institutions and generals involved

The first expected response is the most direct: the EU and the United States must impose sanctions on the Chinese institutions and individuals involved in this training. Major General Li Jinsun and his PLA NBC Academy are obvious targets. These sanctions would send a clear signal to Beijing: military cooperation with an aggressor state comes at a cost. It cannot go unpunished. Kallas’s response on June 15 identified the problem. Now, action must follow that assessment.

The second response: to expand the sanctions already imposed on Chinese companies supporting Russia’s war effort. The EU has already begun this work. But the Reuters report shows that Chinese support goes beyond technological components—it now includes specialized military training. Sanctions must be calibrated accordingly. And U.S., European, British, Japanese, and Australian allies must coordinate their responses to maximize their impact.

Strengthen Support for Ukraine Without Delay

Faced with a Russian military that is enhancing its capabilities with China’s help, the most direct response to support Ukraine is to strengthen and accelerate arms deliveries. Additional air defense systems to protect cities. Long-range munitions to continue striking Russian infrastructure. NBC protective gear for Ukrainian soldiers who may face Russian units trained in China. And the confiscation of Russia’s 300 billion in frozen reserves to directly fund Ukraine’s defense and reconstruction. These are not mere wishful thinking. They are concrete policy decisions that are possible right now.

The West has all the tools to respond to what Reuters has revealed. What is lacking is not the capacity—it is the will. And in a democracy, that will is also built by columnists who speak the truth, even when it is uncomfortable. This Chinese training of Russian soldiers is a real threat. The response must be real as well.

Two independent European sources

The Reuters report is based on two independent European officials and classified Russian documents. This is a solid foundation. But it also raises questions about what else European intelligence agencies know that they have not yet made public. If two European sources confirmed this training to Reuters, how much other information on Sino-Russian cooperation is still locked away in intelligence agency vaults, awaiting a political decision before it can be made public?

Kallas’s statement on June 15—two weeks before the Reuters report—suggests that European governments had already had access to this information for some time. This timeline raises legitimate questions: When did they find out? Did they immediately inform their partners? And what measures were taken in the meantime? Transparency on these issues is not merely a democratic requirement. It is a strategic necessity to maintain the credibility of European institutions in the eyes of their own citizens.

What Reuters Cannot Yet Confirm

Reuters is explicitly cautious in its report: it confirms the November 2025 training, the generals involved, and Belousov’s decree. It confirms that some of the trained soldiers have joined the front lines. But it does not confirm that chemical or biological agents were used on the Ukrainian battlefield by these units. This distinction is important. Training in NBC defense does not necessarily imply an intention for offensive use. But it does imply preparation to operate in an NBC environment—which in itself is a serious red flag.

Reuters has done its job thoroughly. What I appreciate about this report is precisely what it does not say: it does not claim to confirm imminent chemical attacks. It documents what can be documented. That is the difference between journalism and propaganda. And that is also why this report deserves to be taken seriously—and acted upon.

China Has Crossed a Line—the Consequences Are Yet to Come

This revelation marks a breaking point in Sino-Western relations regarding the Ukraine issue. Before Reuters, Beijing could maintain the ambiguity of its “official neutrality.” After Reuters, that ambiguity is impossible to sustain. China has secretly trained Russian soldiers in NBC warfare, with the approval of the defense minister and the participation of high-ranking generals. This is no accident. It is not an isolated incident. It is direct military cooperation with an aggressor state.

The diplomatic consequences of this revelation will depend entirely on the West’s response. If the EU and the United States respond with targeted sanctions and sustained diplomatic pressure, they will set a precedent of accountability that may deter China from going further. If the response is timid, Beijing will conclude that it can deepen this cooperation without consequence. That decision rests with governments. But the pressure for them to act rests with citizens, journalists, analysts—and columnists.

Ukraine will continue to fight—no matter what

Whatever the West’s response, Ukraine will continue to fight. It has proven this for more than four years. It proved it when the United States cut off its aid. It proved it when cities were bombed. It will prove it again in the face of a Russian army partially trained by China. But this war should not be a burden that Ukraine bears alone. The Reuters report from July 1, 2026, should serve as a reminder to every Western government that this war is their war as well—and that the cost of failing to win it will be far higher than the cost of winning it now.

After more than four years, I am still sometimes appalled by what this war reveals about the world. China training soldiers. North Korea firing shells. Iran sending drones. And Ukraine resisting, alone, in the name of values that the West claims to defend but sometimes struggles to truly uphold. This revolution—standing tall when everything pushes us to bow down—is perhaps Ukraine’s greatest legacy to the history of the 21st century.

International Humanitarian Law and NBC Training

The training provided by China to Russian soldiers raises serious questions under international law. The Chemical Weapons Convention and the Biological Weapons Convention prohibit the development, production, stockpiling, and use of chemical and biological weapons. Training soldiers in combat on NBC reconnaissance and protection techniques is not in itself a violation of these conventions—defense is permitted. But training soldiers to operate in NBC environments while knowing they will be deployed to an active battlefield raises serious questions about intent.

Furthermore, the agreement signed on July 2 between Khusainov and Sun Dayun institutionalizes direct military cooperation between an aggressor state and a power that claims to be neutral. Even if this agreement does not formally violate any specific convention, it constitutes a serious violation of the spirit of international law—and should be the subject of a formal investigation before the relevant multilateral bodies. The International Criminal Court, the monitoring bodies of the NBC conventions, and UN bodies all have a role to play.

Historical Precedents That Shed Light on the Situation

History offers precedents for this situation. During the Cold War, the two superpowers trained and equipped proxy forces around the world. These operations often led to serious human rights violations and the prolongation of conflicts that could have ended sooner. The Sino-Russian training exercise in November 2025 is part of this pattern of intensified proxy warfare. The difference is that today, international law is better defined, states’ obligations are clearer, and the tools for holding them accountable are more developed. What is lacking is the political will to use them.

I am not a lawyer. But I am convinced that the international community has the legal instruments to respond to this covert military cooperation. What is lacking is not the law. It is the political courage to apply it in the face of the world’s second-largest economy. And that courage is built first and foremost in public opinion—in newsrooms, in parliaments, and in conversations among citizens.

Revelation is not enough—action is needed

Reuters has revealed what European governments already knew. The documents exist. The generals have been named. The soldiers have been trained. Some are on the front lines. The equation is simple: China has helped Russia fight more effectively in Ukraine. This assistance is documented, confirmed by independent sources, and enshrined in formal agreements. The question is no longer “Is this true?” The question is: “What do we do now?”

The West has the tools: sanctions, asset seizures, arms deliveries, and intelligence sharing. It also has something even rarer: published evidence, accessible to all, that makes inaction politically untenable. Ukraine, for its part, continues to fight. It didn’t wait for the West to make up its mind. It strikes back. It holds its ground. It advances. The least the West can do is stand by its side.

On July 1, 2026, Reuters published something that should change the situation. China has trained Russian soldiers in NBC warfare. The evidence exists. The generals have been named. The documents have been seen. Ukraine is fighting. The rest—imposing sanctions, confiscating assets, arming, taking action—is merely a matter of political decision. And political decisions, in a democracy, begin with citizens who understand what is happening.

By Maxime Marquette, columnist