RUSSIA'S TWO DISCERNIBLE GEOPOLITICAL COUNTERWEIGHTS TO BALANCE CHINA

Russia's ardent ambition to continue as an 'Independent Center of Power" in global geopolitics was articulated more than a decade back by President Putin. Russia's intent to continue as such, independent of Russia's present strategic linkages with China, seems to have grown more intense.

Russia's strategic denouement with China being underway was analyzed in my article posted on January 15, 2025. Two geopolitical moves in recent past by Russia, draw attention to this trend. 

These concerns seem to have led Russia to draw Iran into its strategic fold and consummate a Mutual Security Treat with Iran in January 2025. 

Similarly, Russia made strategic moves to intensify its relationship with North Korea and reduce North Korean dependency on China.

 Notably, till Russia made the above moves, Iran and North Korea could be said to be beholden to China. China signed a 25 Year Comprehensive Strategic Partnership in 2021.

Contextually, with both Iran and North Korea, standing 'unhinged' from China's strategic embrace, and preferring Russia as a more 'reliable strategic partner' creates serious strategic implications for China.

Much of the import of this realignment of Iran and North Korea has evolved in the wake of Russia's Ukraine Invasion of 2022 and Russia's stalled offensives thereafter.

Iran and North Korea rose up to Russian expectations of provision of sizeable military aid to Russia in contrast to China's pattern of hesitant military aid to Russia.

Russia so gains substantially in terms of geopolitical capital in West Asia and Indo Pacific at the expense of China.

North Korea for decades was considered to be a satellite of China, and its actions then so demonstrated it. This imparted to China a 'halo' by US policymakers that to control North Korea, they had to negotiate and motivate China to twist North Korea's tail.

Not so any longer, as now US policymakers will have to bargain with Russia to do so, to tame North Korea.

Russia's Mutual Security Treaty with Iran is a real game changer not only in West Asian geopolitics but also at the global level. 

In terms of West Asia geopolitical dynamics, United States, West, and Israel, now will have to contend the strategic combination of Iran as West Asia's dominant regional power with Russia as an erstwhile Superpower, notwithstanding, Russia's strategic diminution post-Ukraine.

At the global level, China positioning itself as the sole contender of United States global predominance gets that much diluted. 

In stark geopolitical terms, Russia today has gained two significant 'Strategic Partners' if not outright allies, giving Russia a strategic spread in West Asia and Northeast Asia/Indo Pacific.

 In January 2025, the emerging strategic profile is that of China currently having no substantial 'Strategic Partners' with the exception of Pakistan, which itself is wavering with growing public anti-China sentiments.

Concluding, it needs to be stressed that while the Russia-China Axis may continue tenuously, but a lot depends on new US President Trump's policy approaches to China and China's reluctance to give up its 'Russia Card' in its policy approaches to United States.

IRAN'S TWO SECURITY TREATIES WITH CHINA (2021) AND RUSSIA (2025) --- A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Iran's two Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Agreements with China (2021) and Russia (2025) both need to be read as 'Security Treaties' arising from strategic convergences to put in place existential counterweights by Iran against possible threats of United States military interventions.

Iran noticeably with acute adversarial relations with United States was a '"Strategic Magnet" to China and Russia to be drawn in for a security presence and influence in the world's largest Shia-majority State in a largely Arab Sunni monarchial kingdoms of Gulf, allied to the United States.

Iran before the initiation of these Security Treaties was militarily engaged with China and Russia for decades. 

From Iranian Islamic Revolution of 1979 to 2021, despite Iran being under severe military and economic pressures in a hostile neighborhood, Iran entered into a Security Treaty with China only in 2021 after hard bargaining. It had much to do with China prioritizing Saudi Arabia over Iran, including Chines supplies of CSS2 IRBMs.

The period 2021 to 2024 is strategically notable for Iran in relation to Russia.

In 2022 the Russian Invasion of Ukraine brought Iran closer to Russia wherein Iranian supplies of thousands of Drones assisted Russia in its faltering offensives in Ukraine. Iran also assisted Russia with ammunition supplies for its war in Ukraine.

In October 2023 and 2024, Iran was engulfed in a running war with Israel through its Proxy Militias---Hamas and Hezbollah, and for the first time direct Iranian Missiles/Rockets attacks on Israel.

United States Military Intervention in Iran had now become a distinct possibility, including destruction of Iran's nuclear weapons capabilities.

This hastened the Security Treaty with Russia, finally materializing in January 2025 and with incoming US President Trump's advent as catalyst.

Analytically, the question that comes to the fore is that did Iran feel inadequate with its Security Treaty (2021) with China, in terms of coping with a possible US Military Intervention against it?

Did Iran assess that Russia was a more reliable guarantor of Iranian security and assured source of advanced weapons and weapons technology than China?

Or were there other geopolitical factors weighing-in with Iran which prompted Iran to have an additional Security Treaty with Russia tto beef its security?

The answers will unfold sooner than later.

Judging by available reports in January 2025 what emerges is that Russia's Security Treaty with Iran notably caters for Mutual Security Assistance in case of aggression.

Further, the scale of intensity and levels of   Russia's military cooperation with Iran surpasses the notional Chinese military assistance to Iran since 2021.

 To sum it up, the Security Treaty with China was more of 'economic security' and less of military security for Iran. China's promise to invest $400 billion in Iran infrastructure, more specifically petrochemicals was an inducement for Iran. 

Geographical proximity of Russia with Iran as compared to a 'distant' China may have also weighed in with Iran to prefer Russia over China, in the bilateral context.

Concluding, Iran's 'Security Treaty' with Russia is an ominous development in the Middle East strategic calculus with serious implications and challenges for United States, West and Isreal. 

Possibility of proactive Russian military involvement to assist Iran against any US military intervention will now be a factor for consideration. 

RUSSIA-CHINA AXIS 2025: STRATEGIC DENOUEMENT UNDERWAY?

The Russia-China Axis of the two Communist Giants did not emerge from any strong Communist ideological bonds but from a single point strategic convergence of checkmating United States global predominance with this strategic convergence intensity varying from China's side depending on state of US-China relations.

Strategic denouement between Russia and China seems to be underway, chiefly, in the wake of Russia's lack of military success in its war on Ukraine and China not rising up to the occasion to reinforce Russia's war efforts.

China seems to have perceptively failed in supporting Russia in the much publicized "No Limits" strategic partnership as other than geopolitical support, China seems to have not provided Russia with any substantial lethal military aid that could have turned the tide in Russia's complete military success. 

China could have aided Russia with tanks, artillery equipment and drones from China's massive inventories.

Russia had to turn to North Koea and Iran for lethal war supplies to add punch to its offensive strikes in   Ukraine.hina

Norh Korea's military aid to Russian War in Ukraine was both in terms of fire-power ammunition supplies and more notably sending a much-needed contingent of 10,000 North Korean troops to aid Russian war effort. Russia is woefully short of military manpower.

China expectedly as a 'No Limits' strategic partner of Russia should have aided Russia with its military manpower. China did not do so. North Korea did so.

Iran has provided Russia with hundreds of hard-hitting military drones which have provided Russia with coercive devastation power. Why was China reluctant to do so?

China sustained Russia's Ukraine War by buying Russian oil supplies at dirt cheap rates but that too is waning as reports indicate that a dozen Russian 'Shadow Oil Tankers' anchored off the Chinese Coast are not being allowed to off-load oil supplies at Chines ports.

China has 'shied-off 'fearful of additional US sanctions which prohibit countries buying oil from Russia to drawback Russian Invasion of Ukraine.

China has been fearful in terms of global reactions to any unreserved Chinese military support to Russia. Indicators at the beginning of 2025 point towards China's 'rethink' on its 'No Limits' military aid to Russia.

The other major reason for China's reluctance for limitless military aid to Russia can be analyzed as China's decision not to deplete its military inventories by preserving them for a possible 'War with Unite States' over Taiwan.

In Conclusion, it can be analytically asserted that besides many other pinpricks in Russia-China strategic relations, China's lack of lethal military aid to Russia in its Ukraine War may mark the 'tipping point' for a strategic denouement in the Russia-China Axis with profound impact on global geopolitics.

 partnership

PHILIPPINES SQUARELY IN UNITED STATES STRATEGIC FOLD 2025: OUTGOING US PRESIDENT BIDEN'S SIGNIFICANT FOREIGN POLIC ACHIEVEMENT

United States most significant foreign policy achievement under outgoing US President Biden was to induce the Philippines to squarely re-pivot to the American strategic fold after years of cavorting with Communist Chinese rulers in Beijing under previous Filipino President Duterte.

The Philippines hosted two major US military bases in the Philippines earlier --Subic Bay Naval Base and Clarkes Air Force Base. United States was asked to remove its Military Bases in 1991 when the Philippines Senate voted against US military bases.

Thereafter, limited US-Philippines security ties were kept in existence under the 'Visiting Forces Agreements' in various forms.                

This resulted in a serious military void in the US-crafted security architecture in Western Pacific as these two US Bases were critical 'springboard points' for United States to deter Communist China from invasion of Taiwan and also Forward Military Bases for any US military intervention against Mainland China.

Philippines losses were heavy in terms of domestic economy which thrived on a large US Forces presence in the country.

Geopolitically, the Philippines did not gain anything by its period of flirtation with Communist China, a fact which previous President Duterte realized belatedly at the end of his term.

In 2025, the US Military Bases picture has changed with United States under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr having granted permission to United States not only to return in force to erstwhile five US Military Bases but to establish two additional US Military Bases in the North.

In tandem, joint US-Philippines Military Exercises have intensified to endure more military inter-operability between the two countries.

Notably, Japan, India and Australia as QUAD Security Initiative members are supplementing the US-led military capacity building of the Philippines to withstand Communist China's political and military coercion over China's festering dispute over the Scarborough Shoals in the South China Sea.

India significantly, has sold Three Batteries of BRAHMOS Cruise Missiles which add greatly to Philippines deterrent power against Communist China aggression. Discussions are reported to be underway for additional BRAHMOS Cruise Missiles and other Indian military equipment. Security ties are intensifying.

Japan is intimately involved in enhancing the security profile of the Philippines both in cooperation with the United States and also on its own. Japan- Philippines "Reciprocal Access Agreement" permits both nations to use each other's military bases thereby integrating security mechanisms of bath nations.

Japan too is providing military equipment to the Philippines in addition to various training programs. 

 Philippines also has an "Enhanced Defence Cooperation Program" with Australia which focuses on maritime security and counterterrorism.

While Japan and Australia have long-standing security ties with the Philippines under the aegis of the US security template to counter China, the entry of India as a 'security provider' to Philippines is a recent envelopment and intensifying.

India stands out in terms of providing 300 km range BRAHMOS Cruise Missiles to the Philippines in a glaring & military geopolitical signaling to China.

Highlighting needs to be done that in 2025 what strikes analytically is that besides the bilateral security arrangements with the Philippines, all Four Nations of QUAD are engaged in enhancing the military capacity-building of the Philippines against Chinese aggression.

Concluding, it needs to be emphasized that the strategic location of the Philippines astride the vital sea-lanes of communication traversing the South China Sea over which China claims 'dubious sovereignty' are critical for Indo Pacific security. 

Philippines security can be guaranteed not by Communist China intent on military adventurism in the region, but, by United States and the QUAD Nations--a fact now registered by the Philippines. 

 

UNITED STATES AND INDO PACIFIC SECURITY GEOPOLITICAL PERSPECTIVES 2025

United States is likely to face serious geopolitical challenges as 2025 dawns, bringing into office President Donald Trump for a second time after a lapse of four years, during which global and Indo Pacific strategic configurations stand drastically changed, because of the emergence of the China-Russia-Iran-North Korea Quartet, in the wake of Russian Invasion of Ukraine, which I would like to term as the "CRIN Quartet".

China, Russia and North Korea are located in Western Pacific while Iran lies at the margins of the United States Indo Pacific security template. All four of these are Nuclear Powers with Ballistic Missiles arsenals. All of these four Nuclear Powers are in conflictual/adversarial confrontation with the United States.

In Trump 1:0 Administration, two strands seem to have been adopted by President Trump. Normalization of relations with Russia and North Korea and secondly, putting China under strategic pressures via Trade Wars with simultaneous reinforcement of QUAD as an effective deterrent against Chinese military adventurism.

CRIN Quartet was non-existent during President Trump's first term. It was only the Russia-China Axis that was operative.

Normalization between United States & Russia and United States & North Korea did not make any headway, despite President Trump's concerted drive. 

United States relations with China hardened under President Trump during his previous term. as a result of Trade Wars initiated by him.

Since then, and on eve of President-elect Trump's 2025 inauguration of his second Presidency, significant geopolitical changes have taken place posing grave challenges not only to Indo Pacific security but also with Indo Pacific US-hostile Powers--- China and North Korea, getting actively involved in European conflicts by their military and troops manpower support to Russia.

This new linkage of IndoPacific security to European security will now be a strategic challenge for President Trump.

President Trump ca ill-ignore US imperatives of Indo Pacific security nor can European security be allowed to be diluted by any US compromises under President Trump with Russia.

Iran too has got involved in European conflicts by providing sizeable supplies of "Drones' for Russia's stalled military operations in Ukraine. Iran's collaboration of Western Pacific Powers hostile to United States is an additional challenge.

The above two new complex geopolitical challenges to United States with deep strategic implications cannot be met by President Trump with 'linear solutions'.

United States China-policy stances, under outgoing President Biden, unexpectedly and unprecedently, "HARDENED" against China, including a first-ever United States policy assertion dismissing China's 'sovereignty' over China Occupied Tibet.

United States under outgoing President Biden stood more strongly behind Taiwan against China and the military buildup of the Philippines, including establishment of two additional US military bases, which could be used for against China.

Contextually, therefore, incoming US President Trump on January 20, 2025, has little strategic bandwidth to overturn the existing geopolitical and security templates of 'Hard Policies ' on China put into place during 2020-24.

Then, China only, was the Prime Threat to United States and Indo Pacific security. In 2025, President Trump in his second term, President Trump has now to contend with the crystallization of the "CRIN Quartet", comprising China, Russia, Iran and North Korea----all Nuclear Powers.

If Iran and North Korea can get militarily involved in Europe, aiding Russia in its military operations against US-aided Ukraine, what is the guarantee that in any US-China War in Indo Pacific, Iran and North Korea would not actively supplement Chinese war-efforts against United States?

Therein lies President Trump's most significant geopolitical and military challenge as he enters office in January 2025.

 Ending Ukraine War by President Trump, as per his election promise, by pressurizing Ukraine to submit to President Putin's conditions, would not lessen security challenges to Indo Pacific security with entry of CRIN Factor in the strategic calculus against the United States, dominated by China.

Russian President Putin in a "pay-back" gesture to China, would be obligated to support China's invasion of Taiwan plans underway. Russia would then be more obligated to China than the United States.

During his second term, President Trump would have to face the likely contingency of China's long -stalled military invasion of Taiwan. Even as per US-estimates China has been assessed to invade Taiwan by 2027.

United States under President Trump 2:0 would have no options but to pursue the 'Hard Line' China-policy policy formulations in existence in 2024. 

President Trump's declared policy of 'Making America Great Again' (MAGA) forecloses United States options to go soft on China, as United States submitting meekly to Chinese invasion of Taiwan would mark the "US-Eit" from Western Pacific.

Concluding, the major observation that needs to be made is that ever since 1949 when Communist China emerged with belligerent overtones, United States China-policies of 'Engagement', Congagement', 'Competitor', 'Delinking' and 'Derisking' have failed to motivate China to emerge as a 'Responsible Stakeholder' in regional and global security.

In 2025, perspectives suggest that the United States not only has to deal with China as   the Prime Threat to United States security and Indo Pacific security but also an enlarged and intensified hostile CRIN Quartet.