Communist China’s Disinformation War: BRICS Versus NATO

The Chinese regime is in high gear, attempting to discredit NATO as the defense alliance pivots toward the Asia Pacific, confronting the threat from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA).

In response to the recent NATO summit, the PLA’s official English news website, China Military Online, wrote, “Although the NATO Summit held on July 9 in Washington, D.C. was claimed to be ’the most ambitious summit since the end of the Cold War’ by the US Secretary of State Blinken, the 75-year-old organization is in deep trouble both internally and externally.”

CCP influencers; state-controlled media; the 50 Cent Army, or “wumao”; and bot accounts have been actively promoting propaganda on social media that aligns with this aim to displace the United States as the dominant economic, military, and diplomatic power. Recently, there has been a surge in activity promoting BRICS as wealthier, more influential, and more powerful than the Group of Seven (G7) and NATO.

Even though BRICS is essentially a CCP tool to grow its own power while displacing the United States, pro-BRICS messaging portrays the bloc as a symbol of a multipolar world, with power distributed among various global centers rather than dominated by Western institutions such as NATO. BRICS is portrayed as central to this multipolarity, while NATO is depicted as a Cold War relic, overly aggressive, and a source of global instability. NATO has acknowledged facing disinformation campaigns from the Chinese regime aimed at undermining its solidarity. In contrast, BRICS is presented as a peaceful, cooperative group respecting sovereignty.

The Global Times claims that NATO is escalating the Russia–Ukraine war into a world war. The CCP propaganda portrays NATO’s involvement in Ukraine as undermining regional peace and meddling in Russia’s internal affairs and then relates this to the United States and international support for Taiwan, which the CCP sees as a violation of China’s sovereignty.

Much of the propaganda highlights BRICS for its economic cooperation and potential to create an alternative financial system to the Western-dominated  International Monetary Fund and World Bank. However, BRICS remains just a grouping without a free trade agreement or a common currency because of the disparity in economies and reluctance to abandon national currencies. It lacks a central bank, a necessity for a common currency. Its only institution is the New Development Bank, a largely dollar-denominated development bank led by China.

CCP media have used the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan as a warning to Ukraine and Taiwan that the United States is an unreliable defense partner. More recently, similar messages have targeted Manila amid rising tensions between China and the Philippines. Headlines such as “Ex-U.S. Marine intelligence officer tells the Philippines: ‘America is here only to use you’” aim to weaken U.S.–Philippines relations. Other recent propaganda includes claims that the United States is using the people of Ukraine as cannon fodder. This narrative, suggesting the United States is responsible for causing or prolonging the Ukraine war, benefits the CCP by feeding into its propaganda that tells Taiwan it is being used by the United States. This approach aims to weaken U.S. alliances and diminish support for American foreign policy in these regions.

In addition to the CCP’s urging countries not to trust the United States and NATO, recent wumao activity claims that BRICS has a more powerful military than NATO. This is ironic because BRICS has no defense agreements, whereas NATO is a defense alliance. The United States alone has more firepower than Russia or China, and partnering with NATO nearly doubles its capabilities. Furthermore, the United States maintains military bases in Saudi Arabia and the UAE. Additionally, the United States is increasing defense collaboration with India, a member of the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue, which counters Chinese aggression in the Indo-Pacific. These facts challenge the notion of BRICS as both a military and diplomatic power.

One of NATO’s strengths is its close alignment with the G7 and the European Union. Many NATO members are also EU members, which amplifies its diplomatic and economic power and broadens shared interests. The G7 countries, representing some of the world’s largest economies, enable coordinated economic policies and sanctions against China, Russia, and Iran. This alignment, combined with the EU’s Common Security and Defence Policy, complements NATO’s military capabilities and fosters unified responses to security challenges, including those posed by the CCP. Additionally, the combined diplomatic reach of NATO, the G7, and the EU spans a significant portion of the globe. The fact that the CCP is attacking and attempting to discredit these Western alliances shows that Beijing knows that BRICS pales in comparison.

This social media activity is part of a broader geopolitical rivalry in which the CCP seeks to challenge Western dominance and promote its governance models. This use of social media is a key component of modern information warfare, in which winning hearts and minds is as crucial as traditional military engagements. By leveraging these tactics, the CCP aims to erode trust in Western institutions and reshape the global balance of power to its advantage.