Is there a new ‘axis of evil’

This is not the first time I hear about a new "axis of evil." This statement is already at the level of political stereotypes. Therefore, I decided to speak on this topic in a broader format.

Despite its declared neutrality, there has been information that China is providing Russia with military and dual-use technologies for use in the war against Ukraine. There is also reliable information that Russia is actively courting North Korea (DPRK) in search of weapons and ammunition. Of course, do not forget about Iranian drones and the fact that the Kremlin is trying to draw African and Latin American countries into a new axis of evil. In this regard, the question is: what can the democratic world do to counter this growing alliance of authoritarian regimes?

Read also:

• China reacts to NATO criticism, warns of ‘resolute response’

• China ‘likely’ supplying Russia with military technology – US intel

• China to impose restrictions on drone exports

This is not my first time hearing about a new "axis of evil." This statement is already at the level of political stereotypes. Therefore, I decided to speak on this topic in a broader format.

First, I would like to warn against journalistic exaggerations and inadequate assessments of Russia's interaction with other states. We should not frighten ourselves with invented and exaggerated horror stories.

Read also: France and India seek new negotiating solution to end war in Ukraine – media

At the moment, there is no global and systemic confrontation between the democratic world and a coalition of authoritarian regimes, something like the Cold War that took place in the 1950s and 1980s between the Western world and the Soviet bloc. Theoretically, something like this is possible in the future under certain circumstances. But there is no such situation now. For example, Turkey and India, countries with formally democratic political systems and closely connected to the global West, interact with Russia. These countries are dominated by selfish economic interests, and partly by geopolitical attitudes in their relations with Russia. Many countries simultaneously interact with both Russia and Ukraine, and even more so with the West. The most striking example is Turkey, but most countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America maintain a moderately neutral position in their relations with Russia and Ukraine.

Read also: Preparing for a war of attrition

The critical point is that economic and political cooperation between individual countries and Russia does not mean they support Russia's war against Ukraine and are part of the "axis of evil." The vast majority of countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America do not support Russia's war against Ukraine. Still, at the same time, they do not condemn Russia's actions, maintaining a conditionally neutral position and limiting themselves to calls for peace. Even China and Iran, which some commentators have labeled a new "axis of evil," do not officially support Russia's war against Ukraine or recognize the annexation of Crimea and other occupied Ukrainian territories. Their support for Russia is driven by economic interests and the fact that they perceive this war as a confrontation between Russia on one side and the United States and NATO on the other. Their interest is that Russia does not lose this war, which would mean strengthening the United States and the West. But they will not get involved in this war on Russia's side.

Only a few countries directly support Russia's aggressive actions against Ukraine: Belarus, North Korea, Syria, Nicaragua, and Eritrea. A few more countries can be added to this list, but in total, there will be a maximum of a dozen. This can be easily verified by voting at the UN General Assembly.

There is no such alliance. There is tactical and situational interaction between such regimes. In some cases, there may be contradictions between them, such as between Iran and Russia, over the territorial affiliation of some islands in the Persian Gulf. There is an apparent increase in China's international influence. And there are spikes in Russia's foreign policy activity. But even the Russia-Africa summit showed a decline in African states' representation level in cooperation with Russia.

As for the supply of weapons and dual-use products – yes, this is happening. More often unofficially, concerning dual-use products – sometimes even from Western countries, bypassing sanctions. Some countries can do this concerning both Russia and Ukraine. Very few countries directly sell weapons to Russia, or rather, ammunition and dual-use resources. China, for example, does not officially do so. China sells dual-use resources, as well as helmets, body armor, etc. As for non-combat drones, we also buy them from China.

There is only one way to counteract the supply of weapons and dual-use goods to Russia – by strengthening sanctions, especially secondary sanctions, against companies that help circumvent the current sanctions regime.

Another pressing question from journalists is: Why does the West not give Ukraine everything it needs to crush Russia on the battlefield, as this would accelerate the collapse of the Putin regime and significantly weaken the axis of evil?

The West, or rather, the United States in particular, is not giving us everything we need for one simple reason: they fear an excessive escalation of the war between Russia and Ukraine, and NATO's involvement in this war, as well as the risks of Russia using nuclear weapons. Their conditional strategy is first to prevent Ukraine's defeat in the war against Russia and then, through limited support for Ukraine, to force Russia to end the war and liberate most of the occupied territories.

Read also: US not planning to escort Ukrainian grain cargo ships, says White House

As the likelihood of a prolonged war between Russia and Ukraine grows, the debate in the West is once again heating up over the future strategy for Russia's war against Ukraine. There are two competitive positions: 1) it is necessary to increase the supply of weapons and ammunition to Ukraine to change the balance of power in favor of Ukraine and force Russia to end the war; 2) it is necessary to start negotiations on the cessation of hostilities to prevent the war from being dragged out indefinitely.

The actual policy of the United States, and the West in general, regarding the war between Russia and Ukraine will fluctuate between these two positions. However, the closer we get to the start of the US presidential election campaign, the more insistently the topic of peace talks will be raised.

In four to five months, six months at the most, our partners will begin to convince us in a substantive way of the need for peace talks. This does not mean negotiating peace on Russia's terms. The negotiations will only be about ending hostilities, including mutual shelling of the territory of Russia and Ukraine, and about restoring navigation in the Black Sea. But even the mere fact that such negotiations have begun will not mean that agreements will be reached quickly. Our partners and we must prepare for the possibility that Putin may try to drag out the war (in a limited intensity mode) until the US presidential election.

Read also: Putin is unable to invade Ukrainian ports, we will simply sink his fleet – Zelenskyy

As for the collapse of the Putin regime, the West either does not believe in it or, on the contrary, fears that an uncontrolled collapse of the Putin regime will lead to chaos in Russia and the risk of losing control of nuclear weapons. This also explains the White House's cautious actions. However, it is not in the interests of the United States and the EU to end the current war on Russia's terms. And it is certainly not in our interests.

We’re bringing the voice of Ukraine to the world. Support us with a one-time donation, or become a Patron!

Read the original article on The New Voice of Ukraine