Russia isn’t at risk of becoming a Chinese vassal nor is India at risk of becoming an American one.
Russia’s legal information portal recently published the details of last year’s “Reciprocal Exchange of Logistics Support” (RELOS) military logistics pact with India. RT’s Air Marshal Anil Chopra (Retired) wrote a detailed analysis about it here, drawing attention to how it “allows for the simultaneous deployment of up to 3,000 troops, five warships, and ten aircraft to be stationed on each other’s soil.” There’s more to it, however, as this analysis will explain. Here are the five messages that RELOS sends to the world:
———-
1. Russia & India Remain Each Other’s Special & Privileged Strategic Partner
Pepe Escobar falsely claimed in mid-March that India “betrayed” Russia, yet that couldn’t be further from the truth after RELOS, which restores Russia’s Old Cold War-era permanent military presence in the Indian Ocean Region. Likewise, India will now obtain an unprecedented permanent military presence in the Russian Far East and Arctic if it so chooses, thus symbolizing the strength of their special and privileged strategic partnership. Speculation about a rift between them is therefore bonafide fake news.
2. Russia Is Preemptively Averting Disproportionate Dependence On China
Building upon the above, India’s military presence in Russia’s Far East is a matter of prestige for Delhi vis-à-vis Beijing even though there’s no chance that Moscow would authorize offensive operations from its territory. Nevertheless, the message to China and the rest of the world is clear, and it’s that Russia is preemptively averting disproportionate dependence on China. If it were already its vassal or on the way thereto as some claim, then Russia would never allow India to deploy its forces near the Chinese border.
3. Massive Japanese, South Korean, & Taiwanese Investments Might Follow
The Russian-US “NewDétente” that’s being negotiated could see phased sanctions relief after the end of hostilities with Ukraine, which could lead to massive Japanese, South Korean, and Taiwanese investments in the resource-rich Russian Far East that Moscow just signaled isn’t a Chinese fief as some claimed. Knowing now for sure that Russia isn’t a Chinese vassal or on the way thereto as explained, they might then feel more comfortable investing at scale there, thus accelerating Russia’s “Pivot to Asia”.
4. Russia Won’t Let China Dominate The Arctic Like Some Claimed It Would
CNN and others have long fearmongered that Russia would let China dominate the Arctic upon becoming its vassal, hence the urgent need for NATO to militarize the region. That was never a credible scenario, however, but it’s now debunked due to RELOS allowing Western-friendly India to establish a military presence there if it wants one. India very well might do so too, not only for reasons of prestige (including vis-à-vis China), but to present itself as a responsible stakeholder in the Northern Sea Route.
5. India Has Now Become Russia’s Privileged Energy Partner In The Arctic
A key Chinese company pulled out of Russia’s Arctic LNG 2 megaproject in summer 2024 under Western sanctions pressure, which deeply disappointed some in Russia, who expected that the People’s Republic would show more of a spine in the face of these threats. With India now poised to establish a military presence in the Arctic, thus expanding their special and privileged partnership to this region, it’s expected to be given the first choice over all others for investments there once the sanctions are lifted.
———-
These five messages collectively show that Russia isn’t at risk of becoming a Chinese vassal nor is India at risk of becoming an American one. To the contrary, they’re once again relying on one another to preemptively avert the aforesaid scenarios through the strengthening of their complementary balancing acts, which takes the form of RELOS in this example. That military logistics pact therefore accelerates multipolar processes and thus reduces the chances of a future Sino-US bi-multipolar world order.
Since the monthly consumption of Tomahawk missiles greatly exceeds their yearly production, the United States cannot supply weapons to Ukraine, contain China, and wage war against Iran all at once. Additionally, the US cannot boost production of these missiles because manufacturers are reluctant to work harder for lower profit margins.
The US armed forces could run out of their Tomahawk missile supply in roughly three and a half months if they continue using them at the current pace against Iran. Washington planned to spend $11 billion in the first four days of Operation Epic Fury and another $50 billion on additional military needs, but it appears this could exceed the budget.
According to The Washington Post, since the start of the US-Israeli conflict with Iran, the US has launched over 850 missiles. Given this, the remaining arsenal will last just over three months. The target stockpile level is 3,992 missiles.
Since 2019, Washington has maintained its Tomahawk stockpile through regular recertification and upgrades. This extends the service life by about 250 missiles annually. Additionally, a total of 9,240 missiles have been purchased since production began. During the first 72 hours of Operation Epic Fury, the US Navy fired roughly 400 Tomahawks, nearly half a decade’s worth of production.
This has already left launchers empty and sparked discussions on how to implement US policies to deter China. With such a high usage rate, it will be impossible to replenish Tomahawk supplies before a potential crisis in the Indo-Pacific region. The Americans cannot produce more Tomahawks even if they wanted to – it would take years to ramp up production.
The Tomahawk, made in 1983/84, is quite different from the latest one that allegedly struck a school in Minab, Iran. Back then, you could tell by the paint scheme that it was a Tomahawk 5, which contained about a million dollars’ worth of rare minerals, and the missile itself cost between four and five million dollars. So, not only is it expensive, but they also cannot easily obtain those rare minerals.
China has restricted the export of rare minerals because the US military industry uses them. Washington has also supplied weapons containing rare minerals to Taiwan, which means that China, by exporting rare minerals to the US, would be threatening its own security.
For Americans to increase Tomahawk production, they would have to lower the quality to versions 3 or 4. However, only Tomahawk 5 is currently being manufactured, making such a change practically impossible due to various technical constraints.
The US probably will not be able to significantly increase production in the next five years, maybe by no more than 20 to 30 percent, but that is also uncertain. Washington might try outsourcing, so that other companies besides Raytheon begin production. However, that is also problematic because these are private companies.
The American military industry differs from the Russian and Chinese in that it operates via private companies. In China or Russia, the military industry is state-owned, making it relatively easy to increase production. The American military industry is comprised of private companies, and their primary goal is not to boost production or efficiency, but to generate profit.
As a reminder, for fiscal year 2026, the Pentagon plans to procure only 57 new missiles — 15 times less than what was spent in the first days of the war against Iran. Between 2019 and 2024, only 322 missiles were procured. At the same time, Raytheon cannot produce more than 90–100 missiles annually, and each missile takes up to two years to assemble. A contract has been signed to boost production to about 219 missiles per year, but deliveries will continue until January 2029.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said in March that the US is ramping up the defense industrial base to produce critical munitions faster.
“We’re reviving our defense industrial base and rebuilding the arsenal of freedom,” Hegseth said, adding that new deals would cut “long lead times on exquisite munitions.”
“We’re going to be refilled faster than anyone imagined,” Hegseth said.
The key question is why the American military industrial complex, despite budgets exceeding billions of dollars, cannot boost production to even 200 missiles annually. The reason is strictly profit. It does not matter how much money the American military industrial complex has available or how much it invests in projects.
Although the Americans have dedicated trillions of dollars to their military budget, when at war and lacking the resources, it counts for very little. Resources are needed to boost production, streamline the process, and improve overall effectiveness. The problem is that even the American companies handling this are not interested in speeding up production, because doing so might mean earning less and working more.
Ahmed Adel is a Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
By Andrew Korybko Reposted with permission. Link to his blog HERE.
Whether this was done at the US’ behest or behind the US’ back remains to be determined, but there’s no doubt that this is an extremely unfriendly move, and it’s also very likely that Russia tipped India off.
Six Ukrainians and one American were just arrested in India on the grounds that they illegally crossed from there into neighboring Myanmar to train Indian-designated terrorists in drone warfare. For those who aren’t aware, Northeast India has historically been the scene of multiple ethno-separatist insurgencies since independence, and some of these groups now take refuge in war-torn Myanmar and train there. The most recent conflict to erupt was in Manipur in early 2023 and was reviewed here at the time.
Accordingly, while the US is now on better terms with India, it’s still continuing to contain it through Bangladesh and might want India to allow its border regions to be used for arming anti-government groups in Myanmar for coercing the junta into a critical minerals deal. India is neutral in that war despite having pragmatic ties with the junta and many sympathizing with the unarmed members of the political opposition, however, so one hypothesis is that the US didn’t ask and is doing this behind India’s back.
If that’s the case, then Trump either signed off on it or his “deep state” is also going behind his own back as well, perhaps to unilaterally make progress on the geopolitical project that the former Bangladeshi leader warned about in early 2024 regarding the carving out of a Christian proxy state in the region. Either scenario would bode ill for their newfound détente, but there’s another one that should be considered too, and it’s that Ukraine is doing this on its own initiative without US approval.
Zelensky declared in late January that “Ukraine needs a dedicated, strong intelligence unit capable of operating abroad at a level comparable to the world’s best combat foreign intelligence agencies. Your perspective lies in external operations – not just influence, not just the collection of data or recruitment of agents, but real combat and other asymmetric operations that are essential to protecting Ukraine’s interests.” This follows Ukraine’s mercenary activity in Sudan and Mali that aligns with US interests.
Sometimes its mercenary activity goes against the US’ interests, however, such as with regard to Russia’s accusation that Ukraine has clandestinely partnered with Rwandan-backed rebels in that country’s conflict with the Congo whose resource-centric peace deal Trump brokered last year. This precedent suggests that it might have also gone behind the US’ back in India, likely for cash, or the US could throw Ukraine under the bus on this pretext after India busted what might have actually been a joint operation.
Hopefully the public will be updated about this investigation given the political importance of this case. At the very least, Ukraine was training Indian-designated terrorists in drone warfare, and possibly at the US’ behest. It’s also likely that India was tipped off by Russia, which closely monitors all Ukrainian mercenary activity, thus further debunking the viral claim that Russia believes that India “betrayed” it. The reality is that they’re working hand-in-hand to stop Ukrainian mercenaries in the region.
UPDATE 512PM Pacific Time! It appears that the rumors of at least 112 C-17 aircraft going to the Middle East is correct! Here’s the story from Zero Hedge. Folks they don’t bring that kind of manpower and equipment to bluff, this will be all out war soon!
China gets almost 20% of its oil from Iran so they might. The US continues its huge buildup for war in the Middle East.
Also Beijing asks banks to dump US Treasuries weeks ahead of Trump’s China visit, warns of shock swings. That’s another large blow against the dollar.
THIS IS INSANE Four US C-17 Globemaster heading towards Azerbaijan Suddenly Disappeared from Radar over Caspian Sea Meanwhile another Super Galaxy on it's way to Middle East Now total count on this month is approx 13 Something Big is coming ! pic.twitter.com/VZjuNdwGSR
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
Editors Note: As we discussed in my video yesterday, ALL of the nations around the world are either at war or getting ready to be at war. Now we see 2 old enemies facing off against each other once again, Japan and China. Look up the history between these 2 rivals, especially regarding WW2 and you will understand why China is so upset.
By Drago Bosnik from Global Research. Reposted with permission.
ast month saw a dramatic downward spiral in Sino-Japanese relations after Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi threatened Tokyo’s potential military involvement in the case of an armed conflict in China’s breakaway island province of Taiwan.
She unequivocally mentioned that this would “constitute a survival-threatening situation”, becoming the first Japanese top official since WWII to link the US-orchestrated Taiwan crisis to a possible Japanese military involvement (which would be illegal even according to Tokyo’s own law, including the constitution). Beijing’s initial response came in the form of potential economic and diplomatic measures.
However, instead of taking the warning seriously and reversing course, Japan doubled down, with its Defense Minister Koizumi announcing the deployment of Type 03 Chu-SAM medium-range SAM (surface-to-air missiles) systems on Yonaguni Island. It should be noted that these air defense assets are deployed only on the Japanese home islands, making this announcement particularly concerning, as it could potentially signal a historic change in Tokyo’s foreign policy and military posturing. Considering Japan’s historical responsibility for the merciless slaughter of tens of millions of Chinese (the vast majority civilians), Beijing has every right to respond.
Although it has repeatedly warned Tokyo that it will suffer a crushing defeat if it ever decides to directly intervene in the ongoing US-orchestrated Taiwan crisis, Japan refuses to heed. On December 6, this nearly led to an armed conflict between the two countries after Japan sent its US-designed F-15J fighter jet close to the Chinese Navy amid routine exercises. In response, the PLA’s J-15 (one of many derivatives of the legendary Russian “Flanker” series) locked onto the intruding aircraft, causing widespread panic in the Japanese military. Defense Minister Koizumi stated his country and other US vassals and satellite states in the wider Asia-Pacific region formally protested.
“We have lodged a strong protest with the Chinese side and demanded strict preventive measures,” he said, calling it “an extremely regrettable act” and “a dangerous one which exceeds the scope necessary for safe aircraft operations”.
Expectedly, Tokyo’s version of the event lays blame on Beijing, with the Japanese Defense Ministry claiming that “China’s military aircraft J-15 took off from the Chinese carrier ‘Liaoning’ near the southern island of Okinawa on Saturday and intermittently latched its radar on Japanese F-15 fighter jets on two occasions Saturday, for about three minutes in the late afternoon and for about 30 minutes in the evening”. It was not made clear whether the radar lock incident involved the same Chinese J-15 both times, but what is undeniable is that Tokyo scrambled its jets and sent them too close to the Chinese military and naval forces during a major exercise.
However, Japan still insists that its “fighter jets had been scrambled to pursue Chinese ones that were conducting aircraft takeoff and landing exercises in the Pacific” and that “they were pursuing the Chinese aircraft at a safe distance and did not take actions that could be interpreted as provocation”, as reported by Kyodo News, which quoted defense officials. Tokyo did admit that “there was no breach of Japanese airspace and no injury or damage was reported from the incident”. In other words, this was an entirely unnecessary provocation aimed at the PLA, which was conducting regular drills in an area that’s by no means disputed or off-limits.
Beijing reports that it adequately responded to this intrusion, with PLA Navy spokesman, Senior Colonel Wang Xuemeng, stating that “[PLA] solemnly asked the Japanese side to immediately stop slandering and smearing, and strictly restrain its frontline actions” and that “the Chinese Navy will take necessary measures in accordance with the law to resolutely safeguard its own security and legitimate rights and interests”. Prime Minister Takaichi complained that China’s response is “extremely disappointing” and pledged to “act calmly and resolutely”. Unfortunately, Japan seems neither calm nor composed in recent weeks.
Namely, PM Takaichi’s increasingly aggressive rhetoric is at the very center stage of the latest escalation between the two countries. As previously mentioned, she unnecessarily initiated the crisis by questioning Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity. It should be noted that virtually the entire world recognizes Taiwan as part of China and that any refusal to accept this constitutes a breach of not only international law, but even local laws (including those in Japan). Despite this, Beijing is still trying to limit its response to nonmilitary means. And yet, China is undoubtedly making it clear that restraint doesn’t equate to meekness.
It has warned Takaichi that such a hostile official stance, even when only verbal, constitutes fighting words. Sending armed fighter jets to “monitor” Chinese military exercises goes beyond mere rhetoric, meaning that the Asian giant was compelled to respond with very concrete countermeasures. The latest incident is only one of the recent tense encounters. It should also be noted that Beijing sees Tokyo not only as an old rival whose imperialism and militarism caused so much suffering in China, but also as one of the principal US vassals and an extension of aggressive American foreign policy in the increasingly contested Asia-Pacific region.
Japan had (and still has) a unique opportunity to build at least a working relationship with the Asian giant. Despite unrepentant Japanese atrocities from nearly 90 years ago, China has repeatedly expressed readiness to build mutually beneficial relations, particularly through economic cooperation. Unfortunately, Tokyo’s response has ranged from disinterest to open hostility. This is deeply unwise, to say the least, as Beijing’s growing arsenal of long-range precision-strike platforms, particularly the plethora of its hypersonic missiles that nobody (outside Russia) can possibly match, leaves Tokyo not only outclassed, but also almost entirely defenseless.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Drago Bosnicis an independent geopolitical and military analyst. He is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).
Russia wouldn’t just lose tens of billions of dollars’ worth of yearly revenue if the US’ plans succeed, but tensions with Turkiye might become unmanageable if the complex energy interdependence that tied them together till now is broken, which could destabilize the South Caucasus and Central Asia.
Zelensky announced last month that Ukraine will import American LNG from Greece via the “Vertical Gas Corridor” pipeline. This project complements Poland’s joint LNG plans with the US and to a lesser extent Croatia’s to lay the basis for American LNG completely replacing Russian gas in Central & Eastern Europe (CEE) one day. Although it’s much more expensive, policymakers on the continent are going along with this on energy security pretexts, but US pressure upon them likely played a major role in their decision.
The US’ latest energy power play could also put an end to Russia’s Turkish gas hub plans. These were announced in late 2022 after talks between Putin and Erdogan, but Bloomberg reported last June that they’d been shelved due to technical difficulties in supplying CEE from Turkiye as well as disagreements between it and Russia. Neither party confirmed their report, but now that the US captured more of the CEE market through the “Vertical Gas Corridor” pipeline, the odds of this hub being built have declined.
The Duran’s Alex Christoforou wrote an insightful post on X about this, which importantly noted that the “Eastern Mediterranean (Israel and Cyprus) is watching the start of this vertical corridor closely as it can be utilized to sell future EastMed gas into Europe.” The “EastMed” refers to the proposed underwater pipeline of the same name for exporting Israel’s enormous offshore gas reserves to the EU. Its completion would likely eliminate the need for Russian gas in CEE for good when combined with US LNG.
To make matters even more concerning for Russia, Reuters reported last month that “Turkey’s gas shift threatens Russia and Iran’s last big European market”, which drew attention to how increased domestic production and LNG imports could greatly reduce Turkiye’s future need for Russian gas via TurkStream. Trump’s threatened sanctions on all those who continue importing Russian energy without provably weaning themselves off of it, which could take the form of up to 500% tariffs, could accelerate this trend.
Russia wouldn’t just lose tens of billions of dollars’ worth of yearly revenue if all the aforementioned American plans succeed, but tensions with Turkiye might become unmanageable if the complex energy interdependence that tied them together till now is broken. It’s already expected that Turkiye will inject Western influence into Central Asia through the new TRIPP corridor, thus posing challenges along Russia’s entire southern periphery, which will further complicate Turkish-Russian ties.
If their complex energy interdependence weakens by then, such as if their gas hub plans essentially remain frozen or are officially canceled and Turkiye begins importing less Russian gas from TurkStream, then Turkiye might be emboldened to more aggressively challenge Russia on this front. After all, the scenario of Russia cutting off gas exports in order to coerce concessions from Turkiye during a crisis would be less effective, which could result in more hardline Turkish positions that raise the risk of war.
Russia should therefore seek to revive their gas hub plans and reach an agreement with the US, perhaps as part of the grand deal that they’re trying to negotiate right now, to secure Russia’s gas market share in Turkiye and possibly restore part of it in CEE. That would almost certainly require Russia compromising on some of its maximalist goals in Ukraine, and the US’ word can’t be taken for granted since future presidents could rubbish any deal, but Russia should still consider this possibility instead of ruling it out.
Editors note: This is something to keep our eyes on as well since India and Pakistan both have nuclear weapons and have threatened to use them in the past. The red horse of Revelation is riding, taking peace from the earth!
Tensions between India and Pakistan appear to be on the rise again after both countries’ capitals were rocked by deadly blasts just a day apart from each other, fueling fears of another full-blown clash this year.
On Tuesday afternoon, a suicide bomber self-detonated next to a police car outside a court building in Islamabad, killing at least 12 others and wounding at least 27. Many of those killed or injured were passersby or people attending court appointments, according to Islamabad police.
The leader of the Jamaat-ul-Ahrar group, a splinter faction of the Pakistani Taliban or Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP), claimed responsibility for the attack, according to the Associated Press, although another commander from the group denied association with the attack. The group has split from and remerged with TTP on a number of occasions, including breaking away in 2022 after its leader was killed in a bombing in Afghanistan. A TTP spokesperson disclaimed involvement in Tuesday’s attack.
But Islamabad has been quick to point fingers at New Delhi, even as it says it is still investigating the attack. The Prime Minister’s Office in Islamabad appeared to blame India for the attack, calling it one of the “worst examples of Indian state-sponsored terrorism in the region.” Pakistan’s Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi also claimed the attack was “carried out by Indian-backed elements and Afghan Taliban proxies.”
“We are in a state of war,” Pakistan’s Defence Minister Khawaja Muhammad Asif said in a post on X that did not name India and blamed the Taliban government in Afghanistan. “Anyone who thinks that the Pakistan Army is fighting this war in the Afghan-Pakistan border region and the remote areas of Balochistan should take today’s suicide attack at the Islamabad district courts as a wake-up call: this is a war for all of Pakistan, in which the Pakistan Army is giving daily sacrifices and making the people feel secure.”
India rejected accusations of its involvement, calling them “baseless and unfounded allegations being made by an obviously delirious Pakistani leadership.”
“It is a predictable tactic by Pakistan to concoct false narratives against India in order to deflect the attention of its own public from the ongoing military-inspired constitutional subversion and power-grab unfolding within the country,” Randhir Jaiswal, a spokesperson for India’s Ministry of External Affairs, said in a statement. “The international community is well aware of the reality and will not be misled by Pakistan’s desperate diversionary ploys.”
Less than 24 hours earlier, a car explosion in New Delhi on Monday night killed at least 10 people and injured more than 30 others. The car went up in flames near the city’s historic 17th century Red Fort, or Lal Qila, which is a symbol of India’s independence and a popular area for tourists. Indian authorities have said the incident is under investigation and have not publicly identified any suspects. The case is being investigated by India’s counter-terrorism law enforcement agency, the National Investigation Agency, and Indian authorities invoked the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, an anti-terror law which allows security forces to detain suspects without trial. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi vowed that India’s “agencies will go to the root of this conspiracy and will not spare the conspirators behind it.”Even so, some in India have already cast blame on Pakistan. Indian media reported links between the driver, reportedly a Kashmiri resident, and a Pakistani militant group. Meanwhile, social media users and reports have recalled the language of the deadly armed conflict with Pakistan earlier this year, calling the Delhi attack an “act of war.”
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
US-backed NATO, Pakistan, and the “Asian/Containment Crescent” of Japan, Taiwan, and the Philippines are poised to respectively face off against Russia, India, and China across this century.
The US is sending mixed signals about the Sino–RussoEntente, which was strengthened by the Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline deal, after Trump said in September that he’s “not concerned” about it while Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed that he ordered him to “re-establish deterrence” against them. As was argued here, “Trump 2.0’s Eurasian Balancing Act Has Failed” largely as a result of this development, which importantly involved India’s tacit approval amidst its rapprochement with China.
Far from remaining divided, principally as regards China and India with all the complications that their continued rivalry would entail for Russia’s own balancing act, Eurasia’s three most powerful civilization-states are increasingly coming together to revive their dormant Russia-India-China (RIC) format. This platform is significant on its own but it’s also crucially the core of BRICS and the SCO, which play complementary roles in gradually transforming global governance as explained here.
These RIC-accelerated multipolar processes can’t be countered through direct military force, however, but the way in which the Pentagon might try to slow everything down is through provoking arms races. NATO’s, Pakistan’s, and the “Asian/Containment Crescent’s” (Japan-Taiwan-Philippines) US-backed military buildups (partial in Pakistan’s case) could help achieve this vis-à-vis Russia, India, and China as could reinforced US military presences (or a formal return in Pakistan’s case) in each.
Likewise, the “Golden Dome”, intermediate-range missile deployments in their regions, and more militarization of outer space can place additional pressure on Russia and China to this end, though these moves could also backfire by enhancing those two’s military-technical coordination too. To be clear, Russia and China aren’t allies that would go to war for one another, but their shared military-security and strategic interests raise the chances that they’ll provide support for the other during wartime.
China has thus far eschewed sending military-technical aid to Russia due to its complex interdependence with the West, but Trump’s tariff war, his accusation that President Xi Jinping is “conspiring” against the US, and the Pentagon’s plans for the “Asian/Containment Crescent” might prompt a recalculation. In a similar spirit, Russia might become comfortable sharing cutting-edge military-technical knowledge with China to counterbalance US moves in Japan, which could extend to their shared North Korean ally too.
Although the lion’s share of Pakistan’s military-technical equipment comes from China, the US might break into this market if Chinese exports decrease due to the Sino-Indo rapprochement, which could also lead to a decrease in American exports to India and the need to replace them with exports to Pakistan. Russia might even regain its traditional role as India’s top supplier by far if exports to it spike in response to more US exports to Pakistan in a de facto revival of the region’s Old Cold War-era military dynamics.
All of these strategic dynamics set the stage for a security dilemma between the Eurasian Rimland (NATO, Pakistan, and the “Asian/Containment Crescent”) and the Eurasian Heartland (RIC) instigated by the US in order to “re-establish deterrence” vis-à-vis the Sino-Russo Entente. The purpose is to pressure one of them or their shared Indian partner into capitulating to the US so as to then more effectively divide-and-rule the supercontinent. This hegemonic plot will define Eurasia’s 21st-century geopolitics.
His arrogant and aggressive behavior towards Russia, India, and China is responsible for this.
The global systemic transition to multipolarity is nowadays proceeding along a different trajectory than before due to recent shifts in the international system. Up until this point, Trump 2.0 sought resource and military partnerships with Russia and India respectively that could decelerate China’s superpower rise, which would then make it the junior partner in any “G2”/“Chimerica” deal. His Eurasian balancing act has failed, however, due to his arrogant and aggressive approach towards all three countries.
Ties with Russia took a hit after the Anchorage Summit following increasinglyconcerningreports about US plans to support NATO troops in Ukraine, thus spooking Putin into abandoning his country’s own Eurasian balancing act by pivoting to China. This took the form of the legally binding deal that was just clinched for constructing the Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline. The US’ envisaged resource-centric partnership with Russia, which aimed to enticeconcessions on Ukraine, is now much less likely.
With Russia pivoting to China via Power of Siberia 2 amidst the Sino-Indo rapprochement, the resource and military means for decelerating China’s superpower rise through partnerships with them were neutralized, thus leading to any “G2”/“Chimerica” deal now being in China’s favor instead. President Xi Jinping accordingly espoused stronger rhetoric about reshaping the world order during his speeches at the SCO Summit and V-J Day, which prompted Trump to accuse him of “conspiring” against the US.
The interim Sino-US trade deal is now in jeopardy after he just threatened the imposition of 100% tariffs on China by 1 November or earlier depending on when China imposes its export controls on rare earth minerals. Coupled with his dramatic accusation that Xi is “conspiring” against the US in collusion with Putin and Kim Jong Un, this could presage future military-strategic tensions, even if only indirectly via proxy. That would further destabilize Eurasia per the US’ traditional divide-and-rule stratagem.
In clockwise order, these could take the form of: fomenting Color Revolution unrest in Mongolia in order to undermine Power of Siberia 2; Japan, Taiwan, and/or the Philippines provoking an incident with China at sea in contested waters; obstructing China’s access to rare earth minerals in Myanmar’s KachinState; and/or sowing instability in Central Asia via NATO member Turkiye through the new TRIPP Corridor. China’s response to these scenarios could be to arm Russia and even send troops to help it in Ukraine.
Xi saw how Trump mistreated his friend Modi despite him leading a state that could have joined the US’ anti-Chinese axis, while also watching how he’s betraying Putin in Ukraine after Anchorage, so he expects similar treatment if he agrees to a “G2”/ “Chimerica” deal. He also knows that China now has a target on its back after the latest tariffs and Trump accusing him of a “conspiracy”. It’s therefore little wonder that Trump 2.0’s Eurasian balancing act, which was characterized by arrogance and aggression, has failed.
You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below. Patreon is gone so now we have PayPal, Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options. The buy me a coffee link is below.
For decades, Palestinians have been living under the shadow of war.
Now entering its third year on October 7, Israel’s “war on Hamas” is taking too long to finalize its victory. Israel has killed an alleged 8,900 fighters in the last 19 months, out of 47,653 people listed as active fighters (Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad) in its database. This accounts for only 16.8 percent of the total population killed in Gaza as of May 2025 (combatant-civilian mortality ratio is based on data obtained from a leaked Israeli Intelligence database). Given Israel’s formidable military with advanced surveillance technology and weapons system, how is this even remotely convincing? There is a word for it — propaganda; and it is sustained by Big Tech and the corporate media.
“In order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.” [Additional Protocol 1, Article 48]
The military objective was never the eradication of Hamas but rather mass depopulation and exodus of Palestinians from their homeland to give way to the creation of “Greater Israel” in blatant derogation of the 1948 Geneva Genocide Convention.
Article II of the Genocide Convention reads as follows. It essentially defines acts of genocide, all of which apply to Palestine.
Article II
In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(a) Killing members of the group;
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
Apart from Israel, Who Are the “Actors of Genocide”? The Role of Our Governments
It is not solely Israel which is waging the genocide. Western governments have formally endorsed Israel. They have provided financial support as well as military aid. US-NATO is a partner of Israel in this criminal endeavor.
Western governments are routinely arresting citizens who are protesting against genocide. Millions of people throughout the European Union and around the world have expressed their solidarity with Palestine.
The 1948 Genocide Convention is explicit with regard to the role of our governments: it defines the notion of complicity in Articles III and IV.
“Persons committing genocide or any of the other acts enumerated in article III shall be punished, whether they are constitutionally responsible rulers, public officials or private individuals.”
Two years on (23 months), after 65,344 deaths, 166,795 injuries, nearly one million people displaced, collapsing healthcare system, mass starvation, and unimaginable level of destruction, the Western ruling elites led by the US continue to deny the existence of genocide and stand by Israel’s “right to self-defense.”
Despite several UN General Assembly and UN Security Council resolutions, report from UN commission of inquiry, and ICJ ruling, the international community repeatedly fails to commit to a legally binding intervention aimed at ending the systemic violence and impunity for Israel’s war crimes, crimes against humanity, ethnic cleansing, and genocide. Such neglect permits the intensifying rampage and annihilation which will decisively culminate in the total wipe-out of Gaza.
The Vestiges of Democracy
Advocates of democracy are also the instigators of human rights violations and abuses.
What we are witnessing today is a huge wave of democratic backsliding perpetrated by governments who are simultaneously touting democratic norms and values. In a system of genocide, it is the people who carry the casket of democracy.
Notwithstanding the systematic suppression of dissent through coordinated censorship, smears, and arbitrary arrests, protest movements persist worldwide. From boycotts to mass demonstrations, people around the world refuse to be desensitized to the crimes of the genocidaires.
According to Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and journalist,
these movements “are not built around the single issue of the apartheid state in Israel or its genocide against Palestinians. They are built around the awareness that the old world order, the one of settler colonialism, Western imperialism, and militarism, must end. … These protests are built around a vision of a world of equality, dignity, and independence,” (quoted from his book, A Genocide Foretold, Reporting on Survival and Resistance in Occupied Palestine).
In the Philippines, civil society groups have mounted Palestine solidarity campaigns, urging the national government to take concrete legal measures against the Zionist regime in Israel. The Philippines-Palestine Friendship Association (PPFA), a loose network of pro-Palestine groups and individuals, condemns the government of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. for “continuing to bolster its arms deals and trade ties with Israel.” In a recent statement, PPFA “denounces the continued procurement of Israeli weapons” and urges the Marcos administration to review all arms agreements with the US and Israel amid Defense Secretary Gilbert Teodoro’s disclosure that there will be no new contracts with Israeli arms firms. Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), a left-wing organization, likewise demanded for the cancellation of arms sales involving Israel and the expulsion of US bases and troops in the country, highlighting US support of the illegal occupation of Palestine.
Lawmakers from the same left-wing group as Bayan recently filed House Resolution No. 231 before the House of Representatives urging the government of President Marcos Jr. to cut military and trade ties with Israel. This occurred after Representatives from Akbayan and Dinagat Islands filed House Resolution No. 195 urging the termination of the procurement of Israeli defense equipment.
“Through this measure, we demand that the Philippine government not only speak out against the genocide but also cut all forms of complicity—end military ties, arms deals, and intelligence-sharing that strengthen Israel’s occupation. Our resources must never be funneled, directly or indirectly, toward Zionist aggression,” the lawmakers said in a joint statement. (Inquirer.net)
Sen. Robinhood Padilla also filed Senate Resolution No. 1366 “condemning inhumane treatment, deliberate starvation, and mass killings of Palestinian civilians.”
Amid the reiteration of support for a Palestinian statehood and for permanent ceasefire in Gaza, the Philippine government under President Marcos Jr. still refuses to call the reality for what it is: a genocide. An acknowledgement of the commission of genocide is crucial and necessary in properly addressing the urgency of the crisis. Still, despite the ongoing famine and enforced starvation resulting from the blockade of humanitarian aid, Foreign Affairs Assistant Secretary Germinia Aguilar-Usudan declines to apply pressure on Israel saying,
“Our position is always consistent, that we support the two-state solution, … I think pressure is not the solution to this, but dialogue and understanding.” (Philstar.com)
.
President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr. met with Israeli Ambassador Ilan Fluss in Malacañang Palace in October 2023 (Source)
.
Parallels with Filipino Struggle
Riddled with their own struggle for justice, the Filipino people understand the suffering of the Palestinians and recognize the need for urgent action. As both nations are united by a shared resistance to neocolonialism and imperialism, their aspirations are thus one and the same, that of liberation.
While the Israeli military occupation of the Occupied Palestinian Territories provides a textbook example of settler-colonialism, the growing presence of US military in the Philippines, on the other hand, reinforces the neocolonial status of the latter. Israel is consistently America’s top military aid recipient. In other words, the US is an active enabler of Israel’s atrocities in the OPT that systematically advance forced displacement and dire humanitarian catastrophe. Moreover, the US is leveraging the ongoing crisis in the South China Sea to bolster its military footprint in the Philippines.
From Palestine to the Philippines, the US war machine breeds a culture of militarism which fuels cycles of injustice and inequality. Namely, the augmentation of Philippine national security pushed for a 50.8 percent increase in the defense budget from 2024 to 2025. The prioritization of defense programs over the health sector (among others), whose budget allocation is 24 percent shy of the total defense expenditure, is daylight robbery. And the US and Israel are the leading sources of military imports — a clear manifestation of empty rhetoric. In this regard, poor social services, derived from budget misappropriation and misallocation, instigate a cycle of poverty and inequality — a measure of structural violence that ordinary people need to overcome daily.
Following the report of the UN commission of inquiry that finds Israel guilty of genocide in Gaza, the Philippine government under President Marcos Jr. needs to recalibrate its bilateral approach toward Israel if it is indeed committed to a lasting peace and has respect for international law.
“The Philippines is deeply concerned by recent developments, including the Israeli government’s planned full military takeover of Gaza, the continuing restrictions on access to life-saving humanitarian aid such as food and water, large-scale displacement, attacks affecting civilians, and reports of settlement expansion in the West Bank,” the DFA said in August. “The Philippines, therefore, strongly calls on Israel to heed the ceasefire proposal as a crucial step to protect civilians and revive the path to peace,” it added.
“The international community must reject, without reservation, any proposals that bear even the faintest shadow of ethnic cleansing. While such actions clearly constitute violations of international law, the pressing question remains: who will step in to prevent them? We must focus on meaningful, sustainable solutions that pave the way for a just and stable future, grounded in the principles of international law,” Sen. Loren Legarda stated.
Further, it needs to heed the demands of its people to cancel existing and future defense contracts with the criminal state and abolish military agreements with the US, because to affirm solidarity with Palestine is to secure the liberation of its own.
Conclusion
The Palestinian struggle for liberation rests on the collective intervention of the international community and the global protest movement. Echoes from public opinion should surround the crescendo of genocide, for a free and independent Palestine is the gateway to a world free from the shackles of neocolonialism and imperialism.
*
Click the share button below to email/forward this article. Follow us on Instagram and X and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost Global Research articles with proper attribution.
Jezile Torculas has a graduate degree in International Studies. She is an Associate Editor at Asia-Pacific Research and Global Research.
