One of the main postulates of strategic thinking is to prevent the creation of an all-encompassing alliance against yourself. Wise leadership will always try to ensure that current and potential enemies remain as divided as possible. However, there’s wise leadership and then there’s the warmongering oligarchy in the United States, desperate to maintain Cold War-like conflicts and start proxy wars that could feed the Military Industrial Complex (MIC) for decades.
The history of American interventionism (a rather outdated euphemism for what’s truly an unprovoked US/NATO aggression against the entire world) shows that the war criminals and plutocrats in Washington DC will always find the “perfect excuse” to engage in invasions against any remotely sovereign(tist) country. This hasn’t changed in the slightest to this very day.
However, technological advances in the last half a century or so have ensured that America simply cannot engage in wars against certain countries. Their ability to inflict untold damage on the US mainland was what kept the warmongers in check. And yet, in the last 30+ years, the end of the (First) Cold War created the illusion that the US “won” and that it can do whatever it wants with absolute impunity. This is precisely why we’ve had an unprecedented number of American invasions and wars of aggression against much of the world in the same time period, particularly in Eastern Europe (Serbia/former Yugoslavia and Russia/former Soviet Union) and the Middle East (over half a dozen countries ravaged and/or destroyed). However, after attacking isolated and largely defenseless countries, now is the time for the “big prize”.
In the last decade or so, Washington DC has been preparing for near-peer confrontation, creating tensions with superpowers such as Russia and China, while also eyeing strong regional players, particularly North Korea and Iran. Expectedly, the said countries understand that their opponent(s) is the same and that they need to work together to keep it at bay. However, instead of trying to drive a wedge between these countries, the US kept pushing against each and everyone simultaneously, further cementing their determination to form what can only be described as an alliance. Moscow, Beijing and Pyongyang might not even be too keen to use the word to describe their trilateral relations, but the reality is that it’s becoming exactly that. The level of their coordination in terms of military and foreign policy certainly suggests that’s the case.
In the last two and a half years, Russia effectively rekindled the relatively dormant military cooperation with North Korea. The two countries are now effectively bound by a mutual defense pact, the first Moscow signed with a non-Soviet state since 1991.
Their close ties also extend to conventional capabilities, including on operational and tactical levels. The political West and its Neo-Nazi puppets insist that North Korean troops are already fighting in Ukraine, but they provide(d) no evidence to support such claims, as per usual. What’s certainly possible is that Pyongyang sent personnel to help their Russian colleagues with the integration of North Korean weapons and munitions into the Kremlin’s arsenal. However, not much more than that can be expected, as there would be far more evidence to the contrary.
On the other hand, China and North Korea are also strengthening their ties, with Xi Jinping telling Kim Jong Un that Beijing is ready for closer strategic coordination with Pyongyang. The two neighbors have been allies since the formation of North Korea and this process is not only expected, but simply natural, as the US keeps militarizing the Asia-Pacific region, including by remilitarizing Japan, a country that never really apologized (let alone paid damages) for its aggression in the area prior and during WWII. Tokyo killed millions of civilians across East Asia (particularly China), cementing strong anti-Japanese sentiment in most countries in the region, including South Korea, otherwise an unmistakably compliant US vassal. Still, America plans to turn Japan into a military powerhouse that would go against Russia, China and North Korea.
As a result, closer ties are being built in the cases of Russia-China, Russia-North Korea and China-North Korea. This is very reminiscent of the way the Entente was formed in decades and years before WWI, when Russia, France and the UK agreed to keep the then-nascent German expansionism in check. Members of the Entente often didn’t have much in common other than this, with Russia and the UK effectively being enemies for centuries as both had competing interests in various parts of the world. Still, the dangers of leaving Berlin’s imperialist tendencies unchecked far eclipsed this centuries-old rivalry. Thus, if the pathologically Russophobic London was able to find common ground with Moscow (or, to be precise, St. Petersburg back then), imagine the ease with which Russia, China and North Korea could form an Entente-like alliance.
They have not only much more in common (in terms of strategic thinking), but are also direct neighbors, with clear economic interests and ties that only keep growing, particularly as the US-led political West is still trying to isolate all three and minimize their economic (and societal) prospects. This simultaneous aggression against all three further strengthens their resolve to coordinate efforts and push back. On October 14, Russian Defense Minister Andrei Belousov arrived in Beijing, where he met his Chinese counterpart Dong Jun. Both sides expressed intent to “deepen strategic collaboration” and “continuously advance military relations”. Once again, these bilateral ties will inevitably lead to a trilateral alliance that could be the progenitor of an invincible (Eur)Asian monolith that others would surely join.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share widely Global Research articles.
Birds Not Bombs: Let’s Fight for a World of Peace, Not War
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Drago Bosnic is an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a regular contributor to Global Research.
Featured image is from InfoBrics
