In Europe, until now, very few politicians and political analysts have understood what has happened in recent months between the leaders of the United States, Russia and China. This misunderstanding was promoted and stimulated by most of the world media that presented information that does not correspond to real events, or distort reality, distract attention and create artificial and fictitious priorities and threats.
The main political event of 2021, was the start of the creation of a new world strategic security system that is being designed and established by Washington, Moscow and Beijing. It was initiated by J. Biden inviting Vladimir Putin to negotiations in Geneva, and then Biden’s online summits with Xi Jinping, on November 16, and with Putin, on December 7, and followed by Biden’s invitation to Putin for the second online summit in late December or early January 2022. The summit took place on December 30, and the exact day was proposed by Putin.
In the course of these negotiations, in fact, a new supreme governing body of world politics has already been created and has begun to operate, though this body does not yet have an official name.
The architecture of world relations has changed dramatically, and at its top the Super Group of Big Three – SG3 or G3 — has been created that includes the United States, Russia and China.
Will other states have a chance to enter SG3, the Premier League of the world politics? Wil it become SG4 or SG5?
The Narrow Gates to the Premier League of world politics
On December 15, Russia handed over to the United States the drafts of “Treaty between The United States of America and the Russian Federation on security guarantees” and “Agreement on measures to ensure the security of The Russian Federation and member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization”. I intend to make a detailed analysis of these documents in a separate article after the completion of the first round of negotiations, which will begin between Russia and the United States on January 9, 2022, and between Russia and NATO on January 12, and after Washington’s counter-proposals become known.
However, I would like to note that Vladimir Putin started to actively transform Russia’s military power into a diplomatic form of representing Russia’s interests, and Washington was surprised by the open position taken by the Russian Foreign Ministry. Moscow first published a draft treaty in the open media. By publishing the draft, Moscow not only demonstrated its readiness to work with Washington directly and to take over the initiative in that process, but also proposed to set aside and prevent US allies from solving the most important security issues.
Later, Moscow began to provide detailed information about each round of the negotiations in the media or interviews with diplomats of the highest level who are directly involved and are responsible for the results of the negotiations. Moscow made it clear that it does not want to lose in the information war anymore and will not allow free interpretation or distortion of information by the media.
It goes without saying that the main contours of a new world order based on mutual guarantees of the strategic security of the superpowers — the United States, Russia and China — have already been discussed during the talks between Biden and Putin, Putin and Xi Jinping, as well as Biden and Xi Jinping. All the months that have passed since the meeting of Biden and Putin in Geneva, diplomats and the military, primarily the United States and Russia, have been conducting intensive negotiations, discussing possible options for a strategic agreement, which should finally establish the new order of management of world politics.
Moreover, the US position is already known. Its main parameters are reflected in the speeches of Biden himself, and in more detail in the speeches and interviews of the national security adviser Jake Sallivan, for example, in his lecture at the Lowy Institute of World Politics (Australia).
Sallivan said nothing about the creation of the SG3, but his vision of the future world presupposes the creation of new alliances, blocs and organizations that meet the tasks and needs of the world that is being formed at a new level of development technological, and most urgently to prevent or to get under control the forthcoming financial and economic crisis.
Apparently, at this stage, it was unwise and unreasonable for Washington to disclose its plans in detail. However, Vladimir Putin decided to accelerate the development of the situation and bring the idea of creating a new governing body of the world to the public. It follows from the draft of the Treaty, as well as from information provided by the Kremlin after the telephone conversation between Biden and Putin on December 30, 2021, that the Kremlin and the White House have agreed on creating and entering into SG3, a kind of «Big Three» or «Premier League of World Politics», which, apparently, includes China.
Washington has confirmed that it is ready to discuss the draft of the Treaty produced by the Kremlin. Beijing has twice commented on the proposals of the Russian Foreign Ministry. First, Xi Jinping, during an online summit with Putin, said that he supported the position of Russia, and later, the Chinese Foreign Ministry has officially confirmed its support to the Russian proposal.
The US allies, — individual countries, alliances and organizations, — including NATO and the EU, will be kept outside, outside of the “narrow gate” and will be transferred to the second and third «leagues». While the views of the most significant allies in Washington will be heeded, these allies will be forced to act as decided by Washington, and the White House will act within the framework of its agreements with Moscow and Beijing.
Moscow does not hide its attitude towards Washington’s allies. The attitude of the Russian leadership towards NATO Secretary General Jens Soltenberg and the alliance itself was expressed in an interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov on a Russian TV channel. Speaking about the meeting between Biden and Putin in Geneva, Lavrov said that “there was an absolutely adult conversation on specific things with the full understanding that we strongly disagree on key matters. But the adults and the most experienced politicians spoke to each other and eventually outlined the paths of dialogue. This dialogue has not happened for many years. “Not-adults” have gathered in NATO. «
Later, Lavrov also expressed himself quite openly about the upcoming negotiations with NATO: “The negotiator will not be J. Stoltenberg, who is, by and large, the chief administrative manager of the Secretariat of the North Atlantic Alliance. These will be key members of the bloc, primarily the United States. It was not for nothing that US President George Biden reacted after the launch of our initiative. He mentioned the circle of negotiators: «USA + four leading Western states.» Other NATO members and even Ukraine immediately reacted to this, declaring that it was obliged to participate in these negotiations. What is important for us is not the form in which contacts with NATO will be conducted, but the essence of these negotiations. First of all, the need to speak at the military level professionally and responsibly.”
Moscow’s attitude towards the EU is now no better than towards NATO. In the same interview, Lavrov, characterizing the EU policy, noted with a mockery: “When J. Borrell finished preparing a new initiative, the European Council… solemnly proclaimed a new approach (in politics towards Russia — VM): “to push back, to restrain and to involve ”. Imagine the choreography of it all. Sorry, this is the political Kama Sutra.»
It should be noted that it was Biden who initiated negotiations with Putin on the signing of Treaty on security guarantees. Such an agreement is needed not only by Russia and China, but above all by the United States, so Washington has to compromise with Moscow in Europe, ensuring its security at the expense of the interests of its partners, but calming them down, taking into account their interests when possible and creating the appearance of their participation in the process of forming a new architecture of international relations..
The terms on which the treaty will be concluded are unknown, but there is little doubt that the treaty between the United States and Russia will be agreed upon and signed. There is no alternative to strategic security guaranteed jointly by the United States, Russia and China. More precisely, the alternative would be a series of wars or a War …
The creation of the SG3 does not suit most of the NATO members. At first, almost everyone began to speak out against the «Putin plan», and many continue to this day. However, the number of critics began to decline sharply at the end of December. Great Britain, France and Germany began to avoid sensitive topics. The rhetoric of their leaders and mainstream media has changed and has become more restrained and cautious, and this has already been noted in Moscow. The leadership of these countries, which Moscow began to call «countries of the second plan,» understood that a radical restructuring of international relations is taking place, and this restructuring will determine their place and the extent of their influence on events in the world for a long time.
The forthcoming changes will be especially sensitive for Great Britain, France and Germany. These countries will try (and some are already actively trying) to get a place in the Premier League transferring it into SG4 or SG5…
Despite close ties with the United States, China and Russia, Germany has practically no chance of crawling through the “narrow gate” and jumping into the departing The New Yalta Express. Its military potential is too small, its economy depends too much on the Chinese economy, and to Berlin, especially under the control of the Greens, will not be able to play a noticeable role in world politics.
London has chances, but small, and Paris has even less, although Macron can significantly increase these chances if he makes good use of the next six months, when France will be acting as President of the EU Council. As the Gospel of Luke says: «… strive to enter through the narrow gate, for, I tell you, many will seek to enter, and will not be able to.»
The peculiarity of the situation is that in order to be admitted to the Premier League of world politics, the consent of three parties will be required: personally Joe Biden, personally Vladimir Putin and personally Xi Jinping.
The SG4 and the Beijing Summit missed by London
It may be unexpected for many that it is not the United States that is interested in admitting London and Paris to the top league. No matter what Washington says officially, the White House is satisfied with the subordinate position of its allies, including Great Britain and France. Russia and China may be interested in including London and Paris in the Premier League, as they turned out to be interested in giving India a chance to join the Premier League. Putin had already informed Modi about the Chinese-Russian decision during their meeting in Delhi on December 6.
For Biden, Putin’s promptness in Delhi may have come as a surprise, but Washington will not oppose India’s entry, not immediately, but later, into what may become the SG — 4. India has long been regarded as a US ally and «the world’s largest democracy.» Delhi can become an ally of Washington and secure the balance of power in the Big Four: 2×2, two Democracies against two Autocracies … Although, India has never raised its voice against Russia, like Russia never acted against India …
Other countries, for example, Vietnam, whose president urgently flew to Moscow for talks with Putin, as well as Indonesia, Mongolia and other countries, have already shown activity in searching for their place in the new world system of relations. It cannot be ruled out that Russia is beginning to create its own political bloc alternative to the Summit of Democracies, that will include those countries that do not want to be drawn on one side or the other into a possible confrontation and even a conflict between the United States and China in case of failure in the negotiations between Washington and Beijing. A union with Russia is viewed by these countries as a chance to maintain their strategic neutrality.
I intend to analyze in detail the likelihood of creating of a new political block by Russia, India, Vietnam, Indonesia, Mongolia and a number of other countries, as well as the reasons for the possible interest of Moscow and Beijing in admitting Great Britain and France to the Premier League of world politics, in separate articles, but now I want to note one systemic feature of those alliances taking Russia and Great Britain as an example.
Where Russia is strong, Great Britain is weak. Where Russia is weak, Great Britain is strong. This creates conditions for the effective pooling of efforts of the two states.
So it was for centuries of lost opportunities, starting from the 16th century, from the time of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, from the moment of establishing direct ties and the exchange of the first embassies between the Kingdom of Great Britain and the Moscow Tsardom.
Tsar Ivan the Terrible already then realised this perfectly well and tried to create an alliance between Moscow and London. The British did not understand this, did not realize, did not accept the Tsar’s proposal. They sailed to Muscovy by accident, in search of colonies, hoping to find a new way to India, free from the Portuguese and Spaniards, and they looked at Muscovy as a «second India», as a potential colony, figuring out its weaknesses and trying to find and seize leverage control and influence. Russia of Ivan the Terrible was not India.
The British did not understand that Great Britain, which was not yet a colonial power, but was only striving for it, faced Russia that had already turned into a huge continental power, surpassed Great Britain by 23 times in territory and continued to grow, despite internal tensions and problems, ongoing wars and occasional and temporary setbacks on the western borders.
In Russia, in the Kremlin, they did not even understand that the British viewed the Moscow Tsardom as an object of subordination and conquest, and the brazen actions of the British, which sometimes bordered on disrespect and insult, for example, an attempt by the British to organize a trade blockade of Muscovy in the North Seas, where Russian traders had the only free access to the world ocean, were explained by strange English national character and bad manners.
The English explained the tolerance of the Russians by weakness, by the fact that Muscovy, «like a young horse», does not understand and does not realize its strength, and it is enough to find a bridle for this horse, and even a child could control it. This is how Richard Chancellor, who discovered Muscovy of Tsar Ivan the Terrible for the British, wrote about Muscovy. And this opinion about Russia has been preserved for centuries and has survived to this day …
Then the British got to India, and the times of the «Great Game» began. Russia has turned from an object of conquest and subjugation into a rival and a threat to English rule in India … And so it went on for centuries, and so it continues now …
The only difference is that in the 21st century, India, represented by its Prime Minister Narendra Modi, received assurances from Vladimir Putin during his visit to Delhi, of Russia’s support for India’s plans to enter the Premier League of world politics, that Putin discussed this issue with Xi Jinping and received his consent, that Putin and Modi are coming to the Olympics in Beijing at Xi’s invitation, and the leaders of China, Russia and India will gather before the Olympics in February 2022 in Beijing to discuss the situation, their problems and agree on positions. Great Britain received neither Putin nor Xi support, and Boris Johnson refused to travel to the Olympics in Beijing and did not even receive an invitation from the Chinese leader, but limited himself to phone calls that did more harm than good to London …
Putin does not like to forgive
The last telephone conversation between British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and Russian President Vladimir Putin, during which the issues important primarily for Johnson himself and the UK were discussed, took place at the height of an information campaign in the Western, including in the British media, about Russia’s intention to invade Ukraine.
In the course of this conversation, Johnson considered it necessary to raise an unpleasant question for Putin about a possible Russian intervention in Ukraine. The British prime minister expressed concern about what the Kremlin said was «large-scale movements of Russian troops along the Ukrainian borders.»
Given the nature and mentality of Putin, Boris Johnson’s «concern» did not improve relations between the two leaders. And allegations immediately appeared in the Russian media that Putin did not intend to personally meet with Johnson … Little has changed since the times of Ivan the Terrible…
Here I would like to draw the attention of readers to another message that appeared on the same day in the Ukrainian media, and which emphasized the inappropriateness of raising the issue of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in Johnson’s conversation with Putin, if the British Prime Minister wanted to achieve some kind of positive shift in relations between Moscow and London.
On the same day that the news about the conversation between Johnson and Putin appeared, the Secretary of the National Security and Defence Council of Ukraine Aleksey Danilov, the man who, according to his position, is obliged to know best about the threat to Ukraine from Russia, in an interview with the Ukrainian news agency UNIAN said that the number Russian soldiers on the border «pose no threat to Ukraine.»
Danilov noted that for two months in the foreign media there were reports of «large movements» of Russian troops near the borders of Ukraine. «We have not seen these large movements,» he said. «What we have today, I can say that we are monitoring. The situation is under control … Today, the number of soldiers is not threatening our country.»
Danilov explained the information campaign in the Western media by the fact that earlier the Western media and the politicians “did not pay attention” to the Russian troops stationed in the Russian regions bordering Ukraine. Now they have noticed the troops, although little has changed over the past year.
Here are Danilov’s words from an interview he gave a little later: “When on October 30th, through the Washington Post, they began to inflate the situation that there was a large concentration of military personnel and the like. We made it clear that we had information. At that moment there were no military threat. Is there now an increase in the military presence on the borders with our territory? Yes, there is. But it is not so critical as to say that tomorrow they will start (the offensive). We clearly understand what is going on within a radius of 200 kilometres from our borders up to 400 kilometres from our border. We realize what kind of groups they are, their number and what they are equipped with. We have all this under control. Today we do not see such a danger. «
On December 30, , at a regular briefing, Aleksey Danilov said that Ukraine at the moment does not see a great danger and a large concentration of troops near its borders, and also threats of aggression» from Russia. “Today we do not see a great danger at the borders… and threats to open aggression from the Russian Federation,” he said.
What could Putin have thought as he listened to Johnson’s fears of a Russian military build-up and a possible invasion of Ukraine? Putin knew better than anyone that Russia was not planning any invasion. Moscow did not need an invasion. Russia and Belarus supply electricity to Ukraine, on which not only the political situation, but also life in Ukraine depends in winter. Russia supplies coking coal, without which the metallurgical industry will stop… In 2021, exports from Russia to Ukraine increased by 25%, and from Ukraine to Russia — by 6%. Russia ensures the transit of Ukrainian cargoes to the East to Asia… It doesn’t look like preparation for war …
All this should be known to the British Prime Minister if he somehow prepared for a conversation with Putin, who prepares for all his negotiations very carefully. Different questions could have been raised in the Kremlin. Could it be that Johnson, knowing the situation very well, deliberately raised the issue in order to get Putin’s irritation and displeasure? Or, was he misinformed by his assistants and government agencies? Or, is his opinion shaped by the British media? Is the tail wagging the dog in London? Then, how can Putin talk about Britain joining the Premier League?
It takes usually very long time for Putin to forgets such conversations… if he forgets. And he does not forgive unreasonable and groundless attacks on him, and Boris Johnson has loved to criticize for many years and to «bite» Putin for a convenient reason.
If Washington accepts, even with amendments, the Russian proposals on the treaty, then Boris Johnson will have to try very hard to get Putin to give his consent to London’s entry into the Premier League and to sign an appropriate treaty with Johnson … No time to be in alliance, it seems.
When the tail wags the Russian dog
But the tail wags the dog not only in the West. In Russia, too, inaccurate and even false information appears, which contributes to the escalation of tension not so much between Kiev and Moscow, but between Russia and the West, for example Great Britain.
In October 2020, Ukraine and the UK signed a memorandum of cooperation in the military and military-technical spheres, which provided for the allocation of a 10-year loan by Britain for up to £ 1.25 billion and assistance in the construction of two military bases in the seaports of Berdyansk and Ochakov.
Of course, there was nothing pleasant for Moscow in this, but the desire of Kiev to strengthen its naval forces is not only completely understandable, but also legitimate, especially since Ukraine does not have modern naval bases, as well as the fleet. Suffice it to cite as an example the ratio of the missile strike capabilities of the Ukrainian Navy and the Crimean grouping of the Russian Navy. The ratio is 0: 200. That is, the Ukrainian fleet can respond to a simultaneous strike by 200 missiles launched from ships of the Russian Navy by launching 0 missiles.
There is nothing surprising and illegal in the actions of London, which intends to provide a loan to Kiev, from which the supply of British equipment and work by British designers and engineers, will be paid. Nothing good for Russia, but nothing illegal or strange.
Of course, the Russian media had every right to criticize the actions of London, which has demonstrated its commitment to anti-Russian and pro-Ukrainian policies. However, this is not a reason to distort the facts.
Nevertheless, some Russian media outlets quickly, demonstratively and boorishly replayed the situation, changing it as if they were the authors of a script that it is not clear who instructed them to write. Great Britain’s participation in the modernization of Ukrainian naval bases has been turned into the creation of British bases on the territory of Ukraine. This false information was picked up and promoted, first by the state media, and then by independent ones or those who seek to preserve their independent position and image.
State media, including television channels, spoke of the future British bases in Ukraine as a fact that was beyond doubt. Others, who pretend to be objective, have followed the state media outlets. Moreover, I am sure that many journalists and political analysts in Russia spoke about the bases, being completely confident in the reliability of the information.
It got to the point that Karina Gevorgyan, respected among the so-called independent media, speaking on the «Aurora» information agency, about the «growing role» and «intrigues of Britain», cited the example of British naval bases in Ukraine as proof. True, at the same time, she remarked perplexedly that Britain itself now has «almost no fleet» …
Here I must admit that I myself got into an unpleasant situation when I spoke about this in London with those who have many years of experience in the British government and in Parliament.
— Where is the proof? – I was asked with indignation. — Without parliament, such decisions cannot be taken! In parliament, nothing is known about the British bases in Ukraine! Give sources of information and facts, and we will demand a parliamentary investigation!
I promised to find sources and confirmation that British bases were under construction in Ukraine.
I found only one link to a source that converted British credit into British bases, and that was one of the Russian state TV Channels. Does the Russian tail, like the British tail, wag its dog? Undoubtedly.
Some Russians may object to me that Putin, Ushakov, Shoigu, Lavrov and those who are supposed to receive reliable information know perfectly well what is really being constructed in the Ukrainian sea ports and what is planned to be created. The tail of the Kremlin is unlikely to succeed in wagging “the Fortress dog”.
This is correct, however, there is another aspect of that problem.
Distortion of information and outright lies spread by the media, especially by state agencies and channels, not only irritate foreign leaders and public, but create the image of a swindling, dishonest, ready to make a forgery state leadership. Leaders, politicians and media of those countries can lose respect and trust.
What is the bottom line? The British government considers the Russian media to be mired in propaganda that is based on fabrications and distortions, that the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation covers up and even orders such fabrications. As a result, the Kremlin is losing the trust it so needs in the international arena.
The situation is changing dramatically. As a member of the SG -3, Russia should conform to the image of a superpower that bears direct responsibility for the future of the world. The trust and reliability are more valuable than gas, electricity, titanium or supersonic missiles and nuclear rocket engines and powers stations in space.