Categories
analysis

Chinese-Russian Relations Are The Model For Inter-State Interaction

Chinese-Russian Relations Are The Model For Inter-State Interaction

26 NOVEMBER 2021

Chinese-Russian Relations Are The Model For Inter-State Interaction

The state of their bilateral relations is now indeed a model of effective inter-state interaction in the 21st century exactly as President Putin described them. They trust one another, treat each other as equals, and prioritize political solutions over saber-rattling and rumor-mongering. This is the exact opposite of the US’ relations with the rest of the world.

President Putin said earlier this month that “Some Western partners are blatantly trying to drive a wedge between Moscow and Beijing, but this is obvious for us and together with our Chinese friends we will further respond by expanding cooperation in politics, the economy and other areas and will coordinate steps on the international arena.” This is because Chinese-Russian relations “are a model of effective inter-state interaction in the 21st century.” These observations will now be elaborated upon.

Regarding President Putin’s warning, it’s become increasingly clear that the US is attempting to “triangulate” between itself, China, and Russia. After all, American media and think tanks openly spoke about this ahead of last June’s summit between Presidents Putin and US President Joe Biden in Geneva. They built upon prior fake news narratives to wildly speculate that Russia might somehow be tempted to go against China in exchange for limited relief from the US-led Western pressure upon it.

Not only did that never happen, but it’s also absurd to countenance. That’s because the Chinese-Russian Strategic Partnership is mutually beneficial. Their leaders share the same worldview with respect to jointly accelerating the emerging multipolar world order. Chinese President Xi Jinping and his Russian counterpart adhere to international law and support the UN’s central role in International Relations. Their countries’ economies are also mutually complementary and there exist no bilateral disputes.

Everything could have been very different around the end of the Cold War. China and the erstwhile Soviet Union had a falling out a few decades prior. They even clashed along their then-disputed frontier on several occasions. Instead of being swayed by Western ill-wishers, they responsibly decided to discuss their problems and ultimately founded what’s now known as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is Eurasia’s premier socio-economic and security organization.

The resultant state of their bilateral relations is now indeed a model of effective inter-state interaction in the 21st century exactly as President Putin described them. They trust one another, treat each other as equals, and prioritize political solutions over saber-rattling and rumor-mongering. This is the exact opposite of the US’ relations with the rest of the world. It doesn’t even trust its NATO allies since it’s been caught spying on them several times before, it treats them as vassals, and always pressures them.

Just this last May, for example, it was reported that Denmark helped the US spy on outgoing German Chancellor Angela Merkel from 2012-2014. This is in spite of Germany hosting more US military forces than any other NATO country. Expanding on the reality of German-US relations, Washington has also sought to unsuccessfully coerce Berlin into canceling the Nord Stream II pipeline with Russia. Furthermore, it’s tried to pressure its ally into curtailing its trade and investment ties with China.

This politically inconvenient reality is emblematic of how the US treats its so-called allies. America’s attitude towards those dozens of other countries that are less strategically important for it than Germany is even worse, but highlighting how it abuses Berlin is instructive for showing that even its “highest standard” in bilateral relations falls far short of the standard set by Chinese-Russian relations. One can only imagine how terribly the US treats its African and Latin American partners.

By contrast, China and Russia employ the exemplary model of inter-state relations that they pioneered with one another in all of their other foreign partnerships. This naturally includes those African, Asian, European, Latin American, and Oceanic countries that the US always mistreats. The emerging model of International Relations being led by those two major countries is accelerating the multipolar world order exactly as their leaders envision. This is in turn helping to stabilize global affairs.

While some observers have high hopes that the US might learn from those two for pragmatism’s sake, that’s unlikely to happen. Instead of applying the lessons that China and Russia are teaching the world, the US stubbornly continues to cling to its counterproductive model of aggressively imposing its hegemony on all others. The more independently that its so-called allies behave, the more pressure that it puts upon them as evidenced by the earlier explained German example.

The American model is therefore strategically unsustainable. It cannot continue to uphold its influence by coercion, threats, and even sometimes force. The international community is taking the opportunity to embrace the pragmatic multipolar model jointly spearheaded by China and Russia in order to collectively forge a community of common destiny for mankind. It’s only a matter of time before the US isolates itself, but before then, it can be expected to make a lot of trouble for its own allies.

EgjymzKXcAEZe3b

 

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

Tags: Russia, China, Putin, Xi, US, Multipolarity.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Asia Pacific

Stop Making A Big Deal Out Of Russia’s Support Of Beijing’s Sovereignty Over Taiwan

Stop Making A Big Deal Out Of Russia’s Support Of Beijing’s Sovereignty Over Taiwan

19 OCTOBER 2021

Stop Making A Big Deal Out Of Russia

Reaffirming this reality isn’t a sign that Russia is ‘aligning’ with China ‘against’ the US, but is simply a statement of legal fact.

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov reaffirmed his country’s support of Beijing’s sovereignty over Taiwan last week. According to the Eurasian Great Power’s top diplomat:

Just like the overwhelming majority of other countries, Russia views Taiwan as part of the People’s Republic of China. This is the premise we proceed from and will continue to proceed from in our policy.”

This prompted Newsweek to headline a piece titled “Russia Says Taiwan is Part of China as Two Powers Further Align Against U.S.”, which presented this policy declaration as some kind of anti-American move.

It’s nothing of the sort though, and Moscow’s motivations deserve to be elaborated upon to clarify matters. Russia is firmly in support of the UN-centric world order, not the US’ subjectively defined so-called “rules-based order” which selectively imposes double standards in a desperate attempt to indefinitely stave off its fading unipolar hegemony. According to international law, Taiwan is a rogue province of the People’s Republic of China over which Beijing has formal sovereignty. Reaffirming this reality isn’t a sign that Russia is “aligning” with China “against” the US, but is simply a statement of legal fact.

Making a bigger deal out of this than it is implies ulterior perception management motives. To explain, those that are hostile to both multipolar Great Powers hope to promote the false impression that they’re “allies”, which is misleading. While they closely cooperate with one another and are indeed strategic partners, neither will go to war in support of the either, not over Taiwan or Crimea, among other potential flashpoints. Nevertheless, implying that this scenario is possible is meant to justify the US-led West’s escalations against them on the manipulated pretext that such aggressive moves are supposedly “defensive” in nature.

Some in the Alt-Media Community (AMC) push this warped perception of reality for ideological reasons since they wishfully believe that such a false interpretation of their partnership is true. It seemingly serves the purpose of rallying their supporters, though it carries with it the immense risk of backfiring once reality sets in and these same supporters might become disappointed to the point where their emotional reactions are exploited to make them susceptible to hostile narratives such as claiming that one of them sold the other out. After all, Russia is actively “balancing” China, though in a “friendly/gentle” manner that few dare to talk about.

I explained this in three prior pieces titled “Why Structural Realists Are Wrong To Predict That Russia Will Help The US Contain China”, “Russian Scholar Karaganov Articulated Russia’s Balancing Act With China”, and “Towards Bi-Multipolarity”. They’re of varying lengths and detail but should at the very least be skimmed by those who are interested in this topic. The purpose in referencing them is to show that exaggerated claims of their strategic partnership don’t reflect the reality of their relations. President Putin even declined to support China’s claims in the South China Sea just last week, which speaks to his country’s balanced position.

It’s crucial to clarify all of this in order to simultaneously discredit the manipulation of these false perceptions to put more pressure on both of them as well as preemptively avert the exploitation of well-intended but naive individuals’ disappointment with the facts once they inevitably become more self-evident due to these strategic dynamics. Both the Mainstream Media and AMC may find it “politically inconvenient” for their own reasons to accept the strategic insight that was shared in this analysis, but honest observers should appreciate this since it’s intended to make it much less likely that they’ll be misled by either of those two in the future.

EgjymzKXcAEZe3b

 

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

Tags: Russia, China, US, Taiwan, Balancing, Multipolarity, New Cold War, Alt-Media.


FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Expert Analysis

The Strategic Significance Of The Syrian Elections

The Strategic Significance Of The Syrian Elections

25 MAY 2021

The Strategic Significance Of The Syrian Elections

Syria’s presidential elections signify the country’s victory in the decade-long Hybrid War of Terror and will help it transition towards its inevitable post-war future.

The Hybrid War of Terror on Syria isn’t yet fully over, but the country’s presidential elections nevertheless signify its victory. The entire purpose of that campaign was to forcefully remove President Assad from office, after which Syria would surrender its sovereignty to its neighbors, first and foremost “Israel” and Turkey. The country’s infrastructure and economy have been devastated by the humanitarian crisis that this conflict provoked, yet the Syrian people still stand strong. Although there exist some among them who despise their leader, the vast majority of the Syrian people still proudly support him, in some cases even more now after ten years of war than they did at its onset. That’s because many of them eventually realized that this is about much more than him personally, but the future of their civilization-state.

As it stands, Syria is presently divided into three “spheres of influence” – the liberated majority of the country, the American-controlled eastern portion beyond the Euphrates River, and the sliver of Turkish-controlled territory along the northern border that also importantly includes Idlib. Syrians in the last two regions didn’t have the chance to exercise their democratic rights since the occupying authorities naturally prevented them from doing so. In fact, they’ve made it all but impossible to reunify the country since the military situation is such that the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) doesn’t want to risk a much larger war by attacking NATO forces there despite having the international legal right to expel the invaders. Resolving this dilemma will be among the top tasks facing President Assad during his next term seeing as how few doubt that he’ll win the elections.

I proposed some solutions in the analyses that I published back in February about how “Syria Should Talk With The US Since Its Iranian & Russian Allies Are Already Doing So” and “Balancing Regional Interests In Syria Is The Only Way To Reach A Compromise Solution”. In short, some form of decentralization granting broader political rights to the occupied regions might be a pragmatic means of resolving this dilemma, though of course, the devil is in the details so to speak. Iran’s military presence in the country, despite being legal and premised on fighting international terrorism there, is a major problem for the US. It’s unlikely that America will agree to any compromise solution so long as Iranian forces remain in Syria, but it’s also equally unlikely that Syria will ask them to leave, even through a phased but dignified withdrawal. Damascus depends on Tehran’s anti-terrorist support, and the Iranian presence also prevents Syria from falling under disproportionate Russian influence.

On the topic of Russian-Syrian relations, ties remain excellent and continue to diversify into other fields beyond the military one, but there hasn’t been as much progress on courting Russian businesses as Syria had hoped. The unilateral US sanctions regime acts as a powerful deterrent to reconstruction efforts, though these are unlikely to be lifted so long as Iranian military forces remain in the country. America seems to have realized that President Assad isn’t going anywhere since he genuinely enjoys tremendous grassroots support among the vast majority of his people so regime change no longer remains a viable policy option. Instead, the US will predictably seek to transition towards “regime tweaking”, or pressuring Syria to make certain political changes that accommodate American interests such as decentralization.

It’s unclear whether such a policy will succeed, especially remembering that Iran probably won’t be asked to withdraw from Syria, so observers can expect for this issue to remain unresolved for the indefinite future. That being the case, President Assad’s other top priority is to more comprehensively rebuild the liberated majority of the country. This will be difficult so long as the US’ unilateral sanctions regime and secondary sanctions threats remain in place, but progress could prospectively be achieved through a combination of Russian, Iranian, Chinese, and Emirati efforts. So long as their companies have the will to face possible American sanctions, which is admittedly questionable, they’ll be able to help rebuild Syria. As an incentive, Damascus could offer them preferential partnerships, but this still might not be enough for some of them to take that risk.

It’s indeed possible for there to be no political or economic breakthroughs in Syria anytime soon, in which case the country will continue to struggle but nevertheless continue making gradual progress in a positive direction. The only real security threats that remain come from ISIS sleeper cells, mostly outside the most populated areas judging by recent reports about their attacks. This will always be a problem and probably won’t ever be fully resolved considering the nature of the threat itself. Even so, the Syrian intelligence agencies and their allies will continue to infiltrate and dismantle such groups, but some will always evade detection until it’s too late. That, however, shouldn’t represent any considerable obstacle to Syria’s gradual reconstruction, but highly publicized attacks might dissuade all but the bravest international investors.

Another priority of President Assad’s next term in office will be encouraging his compatriots who fled over the past decade to return home and help rebuild their country. Some will decide not to if they retain political grievances or committed war crimes of course, but it’s expected that more Syrians will eventually move back over the coming years. The state will therefore have to continue supporting this special category of citizens, made all the more difficult by the never-ending economic crises caused by the US’ unilateral sanctions regime, but it also has a lot to gain in the sphere of soft power so it’ll probably do its best in this respect in order to show the world that the situation is normalizing. With time, and combined with possible investment incentives amid continually improving security, Syria might be able to turn the tide on its economic crisis.

Returning back to the lead-in topic of this analysis, the strategic significance of the Syrian elections, it can be said that they represent a new phase of normalization there. The last ones in 2014 took place during the worsening war, but this time everything is comparatively much better. The Western Mainstream Media will continue to delegitimize the Syrians’ exercise of their democratic rights, but policymakers will pragmatically realize that it’s a dead-end for them to continue agitating for regime change. Syria might even eventually repair some of its political relations with certain Western countries, not right away of course, but with time. Its political and economic challenges will likely remain unresolved for a while, but even so, the world should realize that Syria emerged victorious in the decade-long Hybrid War of Terror and that better days are surely ahead.

EgjymzKXcAEZe3b

 

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

Tags: Syria, Hybrid War, Color Revolutions, Regime Change, Infowars, Terrorism, Multipolarity.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Expert Analysis

Lavrov’s Trip To South Asia Is A Major Event

5 APRIL 2021

Lavrov

Russia will reinforce its traditional relations with India while continuing to pioneer its new partnership with Pakistan.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is visiting India and Pakistan this week. His trip to South Asia is a major event because of the larger strategic context in which it’s occurring. Russia’s top diplomat will be accompanied by Russian Special Envoy for Afghanistan Zamir Kabulov, who’s expected to brief both regional countries about the latest progress in the Afghan peace process. Moscow recently hosted yet another round of talks on this issue which saw all sides make progress towards a political solution to the long-running war, but it wasn’t without a little bit of controversy.

Some in India were upset that their country wasn’t invited to participate. That wasn’t an intentional slight on Russia’s part since it clarified that only those states which have ties with both warring parties – the Kabul government and the Taliban (which is designed by many as a terrorist group) – would join the talks in order to facilitate further progress. India doesn’t have any ties with the Taliban and had also only participated in previous rounds of Russian-hosted talks in an unofficial capacity as a result. Nevertheless, Mr. Kabulov is expected to bring the Indians up to speed about what was accomplished.

The Russian Foreign Minister might also update India about the outcome of his recent trip to China. Moscow previously praised February’s synchronized disengagement agreement between Beijing and New Delhi which saw them responsibly take steps to peacefully resolve last summer’s dispute along the Line of Actual Control (LAC). Russia passionately believes in the merits of trilateral coordination through the Russia-India-China (RIC) framework, so its top diplomat will probably discuss that as well even though it isn’t the main item on his agenda. It’s important for Russia, India, and China to more closely cooperate against American aggression.

Speaking of which, India’s planned purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense systems will probably be among the most important topics that Foreign Minister Lavrov discusses during his trip. The US is threatening to sanction India if it goes through with this deal under the controversial “Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act” (CAATSA). This stance is extremely counterproductive for its own national interests since it stands to complicate those two countries’ newfound strategic partnership. India thought that it could trust the US as a reliable ally but it’s quickly learning that such an optimistic expectation might have been premature.

Russia is arguably a much more reliable ally for India than the US ever will be, but economic ties between the two continue to disappoint their supporters. It’s for this reason that Foreign Minister Lavrov will likely discuss ways to scale them up in order for trade to finally reach its full potential with time. One of the most exciting means through which this could be accomplished is through the Vladivistok-Chennai Maritime Corridor (VCMC) that both sides unveiled in September 2019 during Prime Minister Modi’s attendance at the Eastern Economic Forum in Vladivistok as President Putin’s guest of honor at the time.

Moving along to Pakistan, Foreign Minister Lavrov’s trip will be first time in many years that Russia sent its top diplomat to the South Asian country. Russia and Pakistan used to be Cold War-era rivals and even fought a proxy war in Afghanistan in the 1980s, which is why it’s ironic that it’s Afghanistan of all issues that’s largely responsible for their rapid rapprochement in the present day. Both sides will of course discuss the Afghan peace process, but also other topics of shared interest such as anti-terrorist cooperation and energy. Earlier this year, Russia agreed to build the Pakistan Stream Gas Pipeline, which will begin construction this summer.

Moreover, Foreign Minister Lavrov will likely learn more about Pakistan’s multipolar grand strategy that its political, diplomatic, and military leaders simultaneously unveiled in the middle of last month during the inaugural Islamabad Security Dialogue. Pakistan envisions itself serving as the “Zipper of Eurasia”. It believes that its geostrategic location and hosting of the Belt & Road Initiative’s (BRI) flagship project of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) enable it facilitate the integration of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the Eurasian Economic Union, and the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC).

It’s for these strategic reasons why Foreign Minister Lavrov’s trip to South Asia is a major event. Not only will it advance the Afghan peace process, but it’ll also strengthen Russia’s regional presence in South Asia. Moscow will reinforce its traditional relations with New Delhi while continuing to pioneer its new partnership with Islamabad. This shows how important South Asia has become, both for the 21st century in general and Russian grand strategy in particular. Russia’s balanced approach in dispatching Foreign Minister Lavrov to both India and Pakistan perfectly epitomizes the win-win principles of President Putin’s Greater Eurasian Partnership.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

MORE GEOPOLITICAL ISSUES:

GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL NEWS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Expert Analysis

Secretary Of State Blinken Won’t Succeed In Breaking Chinese-EU Bonds

29 MARCH 2021

Secretary Of State Blinken Won

The continual improvement of Chinese-EU relations is irreversible since it embodies the driving force of history, particularly as it relates to the inevitable integration of the Eurasian supercontinent as an outcome of the emerging Multipolar World Order.

China and the EU are economically complementary partners and equally rich civilizations that are unprecedentedly expanding their cooperation through last December’s Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI). This deal enables them to more closely connect their economies and pursue mutually beneficial outcomes through their shared win-win philosophy. Nevertheless, America has attempted to aggressively break their bilateral bonds out of hegemonic jealousy, furious at the scenario of its transatlantic partners evolving from patron states to independent players in International Relations.

This is evidenced by US Secretary of State Blinken’s trip to the bloc last week where he sought to turn its 27 member states against the People’s Republic. The relaunching of their previously frozen dialogue under the former Trump Administration isn’t intended to advance anything other than America’s efforts to divide the EU from China. It was preceded by the Brussels imposing its first sanctions against Beijing in over 30 years as a result of Washington’s pressure upon it to tow the propaganda line on debunked allegations of human rights abuses in Xinjiang.

The People’s Republic swiftly responded in a symmetrical manner that’s fully in line with its rights under international law, thereby dealing a principled tit-for-tat intended to show that no provocations will ever remain unanswered but that Beijing also harbors no intention to escalate matters with Brussels. Both moves are mostly symbolic for the most part but they still worryingly show that Washington is trying to regain its hegemonic influence over the EU. The bloc’s 27 members must therefore be extremely wary of their historic transatlantic partner since it doesn’t have their best interests in mind.

The continual improvement of Chinese-EU relations is irreversible since it embodies the driving force of history, particularly as it relates to the inevitable integration of the Eurasian supercontinent as an outcome of the emerging Multipolar World Order. International Relations are changing from their hitherto zero-sum outlook to the new perspective of win-win engagement, which is led by China’s active efforts to popularize this philosophy across the world. A lot of progress has already been achieved, and although external meddling might lead to a few road bumps along the way, the path ahead is still clear and desired by both parties.

The next step to strengthen Chinese-EU ties in the face of US resistance is to expand their existing cooperation into other strategic spheres such as jointly containing the COVID-19 pandemic, combating climate change, and collaborating on 5G technological solutions for facilitating the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Some EU member states are under heavy American pressure to choose between their their traditional transatlantic partner and their newfound East Asian one in these fields, but such a zero-sum choice is a false one that’s only being forced upon them for hegemonic reasons. In reality, they can and should cooperate with both countries.

Unlike the US, China doesn’t pressure its partners, whether it comes to any aspect of their bilateral ties or especially not in terms of their relations with any third party. All that Beijing asks is that their pragmatic cooperation remain free from any external influences and focused solely on pursuing win-win outcomes. This speaks to how sincerely China treasures the principles of multipolarity as articulated in the UN Charter, which contrasts with the American approach of exploiting strategic elements of its relations with certain states for the purpose of advancing zero-sum outcomes vis-a-vis its perceived rivals such as China.

The world is in the midst of full-spectrum paradigm-changing processes which will unleash an exciting future for all. Everyone stands to benefit as International Relations continue becoming more multipolar, which will open up new opportunities for development that will in turn improve people’s living standards. The EU must resist American pressure to revert back to the discredited model of zero-sum thinking and instead proudly embrace the win-win philosophy that defines the new model of International Relations. That is the only means through which the EU can enhance its strategic independence and truly remain a meaningful player in global affairs.

EgjymzKXcAEZe3b

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

Tags: China, EU, US, Multipolarity, Eurasian Century.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

MORE GEOPOLITICAL ISSUES:

GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL NEWS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Expert Analysis

The Rise Of The Eurasian Century

25 MARCH 2021

The Rise Of The Eurasian Century

China, India, Pakistan, and Russia all share the same goal of improving connectivity between them and their many partners, with their visions increasingly converging in light of the latest events.

Fast-moving recent developments inspire hope that the Eurasian Century is rising a lot quicker than even the most optimistic observers could have expected. The relevant events are last month’s Chinese-Indian synchronized disengagement and the Indian-Pakistani ceasefire, the US’ threats to sanction India for its planned purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense systems, the scandals that America provoked last week with China and Russia, last week’s inaugural Islamabad Security Dialogue, and the latest progress in resolving the Afghan War. The importance of all five will now be briefly discussed prior to putting them into the larger strategic context.

The China-India-Pakistan triangle over the UNSC-recognized disputed territory of Kashmir always had a high conflict potential, which the world was reminded of during the Indian-Pakistani air battle of February 2019 and last summer’s Chinese-Indian clashes in the Galwan River Valley. All sides to their credit realized that their interests are best served by stabilizing the tense situation there through last month’s earlier mentioned synchronized disengagement and ceasefire. This de-escalates everything and creates a conductive environment for peacefully resolving their disagreements.

The US’ repeated threats to sanction India for its planned purchase of Russia’s S-400 air defense systems will also improve the security situation in Eurasia, as strange as it may sound. India must by now realize that the US isn’t as reliable of an ally as some in the country had previously thought. America is attaching unacceptable political, economic, and strategic strings to military cooperation with India through the Quad that many suspect is tacitly aimed at containing China. Should Washington go through with its threats, then New Delhi might in turn take a step back from the Quad, which would by default further improve Chinese-Indian relations.

Last week’s Anchorage meeting between Chinese and American diplomats ended with the latter patronizingly talking down to the former and thus preventing a lot of meaningful progress from being made. In addition, US President Joe Biden’s agreement with an interviewer who asked him whether he thought that Russian President Vladimir Putin was a “killer” prompted Moscow to recall its ambassador for the first time since 1998. Coincidentally, Russia’s Foreign Minister visited Beijing this week to discuss strengthening bilateral ties, which aren’t aimed against any third party such as the US but are only intended to improve the situation in Eurasia.

The inaugural Islamabad Security Dialogue was also held last week and saw Prime Minister Imran Khan, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, and Chief Of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa jointly present Pakistan’s new multipolar grand strategy. Importantly, Islamabad encouraged New Delhi to take the first step towards resolving their dispute over Kashmir in order for Pakistan to then facilitate Indian connectivity with Afghanistan, the Central Asian Republics, and beyond (perhaps as far as Russia and the EU too). This very friendly outreach could revolutionize Eurasia’s economic connectivity capabilities if India positively responds to Pakistan.

Finally, the recent progress that’s been made on peacefully resolving the Afghan War could unlock the potential for Central Asian-South Asian connectivity. This is especially so when considering last month’s agreement between Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Uzbekistan to construct a railway between them. Keeping in mind the Pakistani political, diplomatic, and military leaderships’ unprecedented joint outreach to India last week, then the plausible possibility exists of finally pioneering a Central Asian-South Asian connectivity corridor upon the eventual end of the Afghan War. This would unquestionably be to all of the Eurasian supercontinent’s benefit.

Altogether, the fast-moving developments of recent weeks strongly point to the rise of the Eurasian Century. China, India, Pakistan, and Russia all share the same goal of improving connectivity between them and their many partners, with their visions increasingly converging in light of the latest events. The best-case scenario is that the Chinese-Indian synchronized disengagement and Indian-Pakistani ceasefire hold in parallel with meaningful progress being made on resolving the Afghan War and the Kashmir dispute. That outcome would enable all players to more easily resist the US’ divide-and-rule schemes and thus ensure a win-win future for all.

EgjymzKXcAEZe3b

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

Tags: Eurasia, Eurasian Century, Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir, US, Multipolarity.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

MORE GEOPOLITICAL ISSUES:

GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL NEWS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Expert Analysis

China And Russia Are Jointly Leading A Real-Life Justice League

24 MARCH 2021

China And Russia Are Jointly Leading A Real-Life Justice League

Before the world’s eyes, a real-life Justice League is quickly emerging, jointly led by China and Russia.

America loves its superhero films, but fiction is fast transforming into fact as China and Russia aspire to lead a real-life Justice League. The comic book series and film of the same name refers to a collection of superheroes who save the world from evil, which is essentially what those countries are trying to do. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi told his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov on Tuesday during the latter’s two-day visit to the People’s Republic that “We should act as guarantors of justice in international affairs.”

He also added that “China is ready to promote the international system established by the United Nations, protect the world order based on international law, and abide by universal values such as peace, development, justice, democracy, equality and freedom.” This was preceded by Mr. Lavrov’s support the day earlier for their shared Venezuelan partner’s earlier proposal to assemble a worldwide anti-sanctions coalition. He said that “We must form a maximally wide coalition of countries that would combat this illegal practice.”

Russia’s top diplomat also declared on Monday that “We must deviate from the use of the West-controlled international payment systems. We must lower risks of sanctions by means of enhancing our own technical self-dependence, transition to payments in national currencies and international currencies, which are alternative to the [US] dollar.” The two Foreign Ministers then released a joint statement calling for a UN Security Council (UNSC) summit “to resolve humankind’s common problems in the interests of maintaining global stability.”

Before the world’s eyes, a real-life Justice League is quickly emerging, jointly led by China and Russia. These two rising powers are multipolar and strictly ascribe to the principles of the UN Charter. They stand in firm opposition to America’s hegemonic bullying and its doomed philosophy of zero-sum gains. By embracing its foil of win-win cooperation, they hope to inspire the rest of the international community to follow their lead in charting a new era of International Relations with their excellent bilateral ties serving as the perfect example.

It deserves mention that this year also marks the 20th year anniversary of their historic Treaty of Good- Neighborliness, Friendship and Cooperation, which stands in hindsight as a defining moment in International Relations whereby two large and powerful countries proved that it’s possible to put aside their past differences in cooperating to build a better future for all. The resilience and lasting relevance of this pact serves as proof that pragmatic relations are always mutually beneficial and stabilize the international system.

The US should seriously consider China and Russia’s joint call for convening an urgent UNSC summit at the earliest availability. America’s aggression has destabilized the world, made all the worse by the fact that everyone is still struggling to contain the COVID-19 pandemic. Instead of continuing to provoke those two countries, Washington should pragmatically cooperate with them on matters of shared interest such as nuclear non-proliferation, climate change, epidemiological security, cyber security, and reviving the global economy.

In the event that America declines their peaceful proposal, then it’ll finally expose its true intentions once and for all before the eyes of the world. The real-life Justice League jointly led by China and Russia will continue to peacefully promote their new model of International Relations inspired by the shining example of their comprehensive and strategic partnership with the aim of restoring true equality to the global system. The first order of business clearly rests in enhancing victimized nations’ capabilities to resist unilateral sanctions.

America’s policy of economic coercion was long considered to be the ace up its sleeve that it could pull out in lieu of costly military pressure to more easily impose its will onto others, yet that trick is increasingly losing its luster as China and Russia take meaningful steps to neutralize its effectiveness. Their real-life Justice League will inevitably succeed in fulfilling Mr. Wang’s vision of “act[ing] as guarantors of justice in international relations” by restoring the primacy of international law and genuine equality between all nations with time.

EgjymzKXcAEZe3b

By Andrew Korybko

American political analyst

Tags: Russia, China, Putin, Xi, Justice League, US, UN, Multipolarity, Sanctions.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

MORE GEOPOLITICAL ISSUES:

GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL NEWS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.


Categories
Expert Comments

Will The US Be Responsible For A Russian-Chinese-North Korean Missile Alliance?

15 MARCH 2021

Will The US Be Responsible For A Russian-Chinese-North Korean Missile Alliance?

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova warned last Friday that the US’ reportedly planned deployment of intermediate-range missiles to Japan “will certainly entail our retaliation”, which could realistically take the form of informally creating a Russian-Chinese-North Korean missile alliance in defensive response to that destabilizing scenario.

The US is so obsessed with attempting to “contain” China that it might ultimately be responsible for creating a Russian-Chinese-North Korean missile alliance if it doesn’t reconsider its reportedly planned deployment of intermediate-range missiles to Japan. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova warned last Friday that such a move “will certainly entail our retaliation” because it “would have an extremely destabilizing effect from the standpoint of international and regional security.” The Neo-Realist theory of International Relations preaches that states will always put their security interests first, which in this case could realistically lead to Russia, China, and North Korea coordinating their defensive response to America’s emerging missile-driven threat as is their right under international law. Such an outcome would arguably be against the US’ regional security interests, including those of its Japanese and South Korean allies.

It must be remembered that the Russian-Chinese Strategic Partnership received an enormous boost in 2014 following the simultaneous onset of Western sanctions against the Eurasian Great Power during the Ukrainian Crisis in parallel with the US’ doubling down on its provocative actions in the South China Sea. The US’ strategic rivals as it officially considers them to be nowadays were pushed closer together than ever before due to their shared interests in responding to these provocations along their peripheries. Nevertheless, neither feels comfortable becoming the other’s military ally because they don’t want to get caught up fighting their partner’s possible wars in Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia respectively. That calculation might informally change as a result of the US’ reportedly planned intermediate-range missile deployment to Japan since such a move goes against both of their security interests in Northeast Asia, as well as that of their shared North Korean partner.

Russia and China already closely cooperate in the military sphere, with Moscow even helping Beijing construct a missile-attack warning system. This speaks to how much they trust one another. With that in mind, it’s only natural that they’d be pressed to take their military cooperation even further in the face of the US’ possible missile threats against them in Northeast Asia. North Korea might also coordinate with them in the event that it decides to double down on its missile program in response, thereby likely scuttling the already stalled denuclearization talks and possibly leading to another related crisis in the region. More multilateral pressure being put upon North Korea in that scenario would only push it closer to its Russian and Chinese neighbors, who both share Pyongyang’s concerns about the possible deployment of the US’ intermediate-range missiles in Japan. As such, an informal missile alliance between them wouldn’t be surprising.

The US doesn’t want Russia and China increasing their military cooperation even further than they already have, yet those two would have little choice but to do so as was argued, including through possible coordination with North Korea in the missile sphere. Some have previously speculated that such a scenario would be nightmarish for the US, but that’s exactly what the US is practically forcing them to do. In other words, from the American strategic standpoint, this outcome would be completely counterproductive for its interests. This observation raises the question of why responsible policymakers aren’t warning about that scenario considering how obvious it is. It can’t be known for sure, but it might very well be that the American strategic community has been captured by Sinophobic ideologues who are so blinded by their hatred of the People’s Republic that they don’t see how disadvantageous their so-called “missile diplomacy” with China is.

From the opposite perspective, those in favor of accelerating the onset of the Multipolar World Order will probably cheer the informal creation of a Russian-Chinese-North Korean missile alliance as a long-overdue development. They’ve been hoping that Russia and its partners would take such a step for a while already, yet it might ironically turn out that they needed American pressure to do so. It’ll remain to be seen what happens of course, but it seems unlikely that the US will hold back on its reported decision to deploy intermediate-range missiles to Japan or elsewhere in the region, thus catalyzing some form of the predicted response from Russia and its partners and thus potentially turning that scenario into a fait accompli. In any case, the world will find out soon enough what will ultimately happen, with the outcome interestingly being decided by none other than the US since its decision whether or not to provoke an Asian missile race will prove pivotal.


MORE EXPERT ANALYSIS:

EXPERT ANALYSIS

MORE GEOPOLITICAL ISSUES:

GLOBAL GEOPOLITICAL NEWS

FREE SUBSCRIPTION

Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.