Below is the full article by Andrei Bodrov from Mehr News Agency.
Two centuries ago, Carl von Kroiswitz said, “War is a continuation of politics by other means.” Since then, there have been many changes in this world. Today, the political action of global players is a continuation of war. This is a war that has been waged through modern methods in the realm of ideas, economic competition, and cyberspace. But the goal remains the same. It is to ensure economic and political influence in a world that Fukuyama believed to have frozen in its final form.
The deepening of the world economy into the Fourth Industrial Revolution dominated by advanced computing technologies and new energy systems has shifted traditional power poles across a range of areas, from demographics to fundraising. The global South economy is growing at an accelerated pace, but former world leaders are now refusing to abandon their position as they are currently in crisis.
Overlaying timelines for such technological transitions with timelines for major military conflicts reveals that they are largely in line with. During these periods, the economy will undergo a significant recession, and our time is no exception. The world is blessed with a “global economic crisis” and major players feel it. To survive, they are trying to expand their market and geopolitical impacts. This was true when our distant ancestors moved from jungle life to the plains and into the first attempt at farming.
This is particularly evident among social structures with imperial heritage.
– China, its Belt and Road Initiative,
– Türkiye, expansion into the Middle East,
– US is fighting a tariff war,
– Russia, builds its own macro region.
Their attempts to secure resources and strengthen their positions ahead of difficult times define their interests, political tools, and conflicts.
New amazing game
– In pursuit of “the great America,” Trump claimed Greenland and the Panama Canal, fought a tariff war on China and half of the world, putting pressure on Europe to extract technology and personnel.
– The UK is seeking greater control of Eastern Europe and is actively interfering in Ukraine and the Middle East.
– Israel is expanding to its neighbouring territory.
– Russia is building a “security buffer” between itself and Europe.
– The EU is resisting the expansion of Russia’s territorial and economics.
These factors turn negotiations on the conflict in Ukraine into many unknown equations. Today, Russia and the US are discussing not about the future of Ukraine, but about the structure of a new world order. Other key players are:
– Europe, in a deep crisis, use Ukraine as a weapon against Russia and Trump’s “Great America” project.
– China forecasts US market losses and expects to approach Europe. This is an unacceptable scenario in Washington.
– The UK aims to establish an impactful range in Baltics, Poland and Romania through the “Intermarium” project.
The central interest of key players
1. US administration
– Observing the progressive collapse of the «Bretton Woods System» and the failure of military management in distant regions, the United States aims to build a macro domain composed of:
-We
– North America (Greenland, Canada) for future Arctic expansion.
– Central America is fighting against China.
– The latest US strategic doctrine identifies “China, not Russia” as the main threat.
– Trump’s focus has shifted to «indo-pacific», putting too much priority on Europe.
2. Russia
– It aims to prevent Eastern European countries from becoming Western proxies for military and economic containment.
– We are seeking equal status among the world’s great powers, and we need neutrality or control tomorrow today, Eastern Europe and the South Caucasus/Central Asia.
– Important goal: lift sanctions to increase economic growth and internal stability.
3. China
– Predicting conflict with the US and losses in the US market, Beijing is building logistics and cooperation infrastructure across Eurasia.
– Taking advantage of Europe’s energy shortage and industry decline, China is trying to acquire European technology, replace US investment and expand to Africa.
4. EU
– The EU senses a decline in US interest in European security and is desperately looking for new tools for economic and military stability.
– Resistance from Hungary and Slovakia against Brussels exacerbates fear.
– British intervention in Eastern Europe has disrupted EU politics.
Three Personal Factors Influencing Disputes
1. Trump needs to show his basic and concrete success before the next election.
2. The Kremlin wants to end the conflict by establishing new security systems.
3. Zelensky’s administration relies heavily on its EU and UK partners.
Three possible scenarios in Ukraine
1. The US forces Europe to follow
– Washington puts pressure on the EU and the UK to abandon Ukraine.
– Zelensky will recognize the annexation of Russia, accept neutrality, military cuts, and possibly federalization, and quickly sign peace agreements.
– Obstacle: Moscow may deem Zelensky illegal and demand new Ukrainian elections.
2. The US prioritizes dealings with Russia over Ukraine
– The US declares a strategic agreement with Russia, eases sanctions and reduces aid to Ukraine.
– The Ukrainian army runs out of weapons provided in the West in a month or two, leading to collapse.
– Russia will seize more territory and force full surrender or stricter conditions of peace.
3. We are Europe extending the war
– The stalling of negotiations. The EU and the UK continue to support Ukraine.
-But Europe’s limited weapons and Ukraine’s depletion talent will only delay scenario #2.
– Most dangerous outcomes: Ukraine suffers catastrophic losses, cities and infrastructure will be destroyed, and the western region may retain the Democrats to join Poland or Romania.
Hidden dangers in Scenario #3
Contrary to the background of long-term military defeat, Ukrainian military and politicians may expand practices that destabilize other regions. Therefore, the fact of resale of weapons supplied from the west in the hands of groups of crime and terrorists, which have been repeatedly pointed out by foreign analysts and special service officers, could be a widespread way to secure “golden parachutes” for many officials and military personnel before fleeing the country. Interpol Chief Jurgen shares and many security experts have spoken about the fact that weapons supplied to Ukraine go to the black market. The fact that Ukrainian troops are reselling weapons from the west was even confirmed by representatives of Ukrainian security services. The press also reiterates that weapons from Ukraine have appeared in arms markets in Türkiye, Syria and other regions.
This situation could lead to an increasing degree of terrorist threat around the world, the development of conflicts in areas with unstable circumstances, and more and more casualties in ongoing conflicts.
Conclusion
Today’s most likely scenario is scenario No. 1. Despite the White House statement, the Trump administration continues its negotiation efforts. From our perspective, this is the only scenario that every aspect of the process will lose least. The breakdown of the negotiation process threatens to raise tensions in Europe, the Middle East and the South Caucasus. The international community should make every effort to prevent the implementation of the second most likely scenario No. 3. The Ukrainian conflict is no longer about Ukraine, it is a battle for the future world order. The current choices will determine whether the outcome is a negotiated reorganization or a long-term disruption from the global outcome.
MNA/