Failure to respect human rights as a possible link between China and Russia

 The visit to China by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, former Chilean President Michelle Bachelet, highlighted how Beijing understands respect for human and civil rights. The occasion was the trip to try to ascertain the treatment received by the ethnic Uyghurs, a Chinese minority of Muslim faith, which is being re-educated by the Chinese authorities. The fact-finding investigation was due to repeated complaints from non-governmental organizations, which reported repeated episodes of violence and oppression by the police; in particular, there have been reports of repression involving numerous incarcerated people including children. The prison regime is marked by an unprecedented harshness, which includes psychological and physical violence, which often leads to the death of people, whose only fault is that of not integrating with the will of the Chinese regime. The accusations are often spurious and constructed and devoid of legal presuppositions, not even those of Chinese law. This struggle in Beijing against the Uighurs has been going on for some time and aims to wipe out the Chinese Muslim culture, interpreted as an alternative to the aims of the Communist Party and the Chinese nation. Beijing justifies the prisons where Uighurs are imprisoned, as vocational training centers, where the forced labor of incarcerated people is exploited at no cost for productions also destined for the Western market. Officially, China claims that most of these facilities have changed destination or even been closed, but, according to several foreign NGOs, they are still fulfilling their original function of prisons to reprogram the Uighur people. The Chinese president's claim about this situation, even Xinjiang, the land of the Uyghurs, was not mentioned is that the development of human rights in China is in accordance with national conditions. This statement implies a relativism for China's own use and consumption, regarding a subject that should not allow for exceptions, at least on the minimum basic standards regarding personal freedoms, civil rights and the freedom to exercise one's political and religious ideas. Obviously China is an authoritarian dictatorship and cannot allow such freedoms, precisely because they threaten the very basis of the country's power; rather, what must be understood as national conditions is the freedom to produce and consume, always respecting what the state wants; all this brings back to the importance of subsistence and development as the only effective rights granted by the Communist Party. Going beyond this vision would mean, in fact, arriving at disastrous consequences for the Chinese state system: replicating models from other countries is seen as a threat to the established order. Now these statements do not represent anything new, the failure and functional consideration of the Chinese government for the respect of civil rights is known, however after the tragic and current Ukrainian experience, relations with a state, which although it is an economic superpower, should be reviewed by part of western countries; in addition, the progressive approach of Beijing to Moscow, despite the aggression in Kiev in open violation of every rule of international law, could favor a further tightening of the Kremlin, precisely on the establishment of Chinese repressive methods linked to the possible declaration of martial law. The preconditions, already very close, of two states would be created, where civil rights are strongly neglected, capable of mutually supporting each other and extending this contiguity to reasons of international order. The Taiwan question has already been compared by similarity to the Russian claims on Crimea and Ukrainian territories on the border with Moscow. For China and Russia, the legitimacy of the conflict against the West will take on the meaning of justifying the denial of democracies, not only as such, but also as carriers of respect for civil and political rights, which represent the obstacles for the legitimation of forms of authoritarian state. The only alternative for the West is to create greater industrial and energy autonomy in the long term and immediately defend the democratic concept of respect for civil rights and international laws, with a more concrete defense of Ukraine and with concrete commitment. to force the naval blockades that prevent the export of grain and promote hunger in the world. This can make it possible to increase a somewhat compromised prestige for Western nations, especially African countries, and remove them from Russian and Chinese influence, in order to progressively isolate Moscow and Beijing.

Russia's responsibility for increasing world hunger

 One of the most important international repercussions that will occur with the invasion of Ukraine consists in the blocking of the export and production of wheat. In rich countries this fact translates into a substantial contribution from the increase in inflation, caused by the increase in raw materials destined for the food industry. The problem is deeply felt and the governments of the industrialized countries have room for maneuver to try to limit the damage, especially for the poorest segments of the population. A very different order of problems, however, occurs for poor countries or even for those whose national wealth has been greatly reduced due to the sum of the contingencies of the pandemic and the time of war. Several African countries, for example, are running out of grain reserves and the prospect of additional reasons to the already present to cause new famines, is becoming more and more concrete. By invading the Ukrainian country and submitting the ports of Kiev, through which grain exports transit, Moscow is creating the conditions for generating a global food crisis; it should be remembered that this factor aggravates previous situations that were already difficult due to the shortage of water and highly unstable political situations, which in fact do not allow food autonomy for many countries. It is hard to believe that these results are merely side effects of a war that was badly thought out and conducted worse. It seems easier to believe in a functional political plan to create a favorable situation for the Kremlin towards Europe. Putin must have been inspired by the various dictators, who used emigration to the European continent, as a form of pressure on Brussels: the tactic has almost always been successful, because it has created deep divisions among the members of the Union, especially on the modalities and amount of reception. Surely the Russian strategists cannot have escaped this possibility, which can become a weapon aimed directly at Europe, however the implications go beyond the geopolitical reasons and contingent on the war itself: the responsibility of starving millions of people must not be underestimated by the enemies of Putin and Russia, as is currently happening, with this factor that seems underestimated and which is not given the necessary political and journalistic prominence. The issue is above all humanitarian: blocking exports of Ukrainian wheat causes the deprivation of basic foodstuffs in most poor countries, triggering processes of food scarcity, which can lead to malnutrition, with the consequent worsening of sanitary conditions, but also linked to political stability, in many cases already precarious in various poor countries. As can be deduced, the implications are so intense that they are no less than the current situation on the Ukrainian battlefields, with the large number of deaths and displaced persons that the Russian invasion has generated. What risks materializing is a number of victims even much higher than those of the calculation of the special military operation; in this sad count must, in fact, be included those who died from food shortages, those due to the effects of hygienic and sanitary conditions resulting from malnutrition, those relating to the probable popular uprisings due to lack of food and, finally, the victims of migration caused by the impossibility to feed. Therefore, if Moscow is to answer to the international courts for the atrocities committed by its soldiers, it will also have to answer in the same offices that it was the cause of having starved millions of people, with all the consequences set out above. While realizing that the world chancelleries are focusing on crimes on Ukrainian territory, the question of the responsibility to starve poor countries does not seem to be treated adequately and with the right relevance. In parallel with the necessary military aid to Kiev, Western countries need to start thinking about strategies that can allow the Ukrainian country to export what they have managed to produce and collect, integrating with food aid the countries that will be most affected by the food famine. : this with the dual purpose of canceling or at least mitigating the effects of Putin's strategy, averting the negative effects on European countries and creating the conditions to effectively combat hunger in the world. This will also serve to give a new image of the West to counter Russian and Chinese actions in African countries.

The Russian diplomatic situation is complicated

 The statement by the Russian defense minister, relating to the fight against the transport of weapons in favor of Ukraine, risks being a further element capable of raising the tension between Moscow and Brussels. The leading exponent of the defense department of Moscow has expressly declared that any means of the Atlantic Alliance that will transport weapons and ammunition for the Ukrainian army will be destroyed; convoys arriving in the Ukrainian country carrying armaments will be considered legitimate targets. These statements, although not new, because some convoys have already been hit, are very serious because they are addressed directly to the Atlantic Alliance, which cannot react passively to the threat of having become an explicit target. For the moment we are still at the stage of threats, which, in a certain sense, is a political situation, albeit at the limit; very different could be the case of an Atlantic Alliance convoy hit by the Russians, especially after these threats. Certainly it is not to be anticipated that Brussels will renounce arms supplies to Kiev, also due to the substantial allocations already foreseen by Biden and, at the same time, it is certainly not possible to think of possible reprisals, in case a convoy is hit. With the current situation, any retaliation would be entrusted to the Ukrainian army itself and not carried out directly by the forces of the Atlantic Alliance, however it is easy to identify opportunities for Moscow to threaten NATO members, which border on Ukraine and increase the possibilities of a clash capable of triggering the third world conflict. Moreover, Moscow has already repeatedly threatened Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and the Baltic countries because they host American military bases and the instrumental search for an accident would be a functional move to proclaim itself an attacked country. In the meantime, Helsinki has again reported an incident involving the trespassing of a Russian military aircraft, which entered the Finnish territory for at least five kilometers; this border breach represents the second episode in just under a month and aims to threaten the Nordic state for its willingness to abandon its status as a neutral country to join the Atlantic Alliance. As we can see, even on this front Moscow is always close to creating an accident capable of precipitating the current state of things towards even more serious consequences. The Russian tactic is probably part of an attempt at attrition, which seems to be a wrong calculation, such as the one that NATO and the European Union would have split up and which has led the Russian country to become a sort of international pariah. From a diplomatic point of view, the actions and declarations against the aggression of Moscow are multiplying: the Portuguese Prime Minister, announcing his visit to Kiev, requested a greater capacity to react to the European Union, especially on the issue of emergencies concerning the Ukrainian people, but also for financial and military support, even independently of the Union accession process. During the visit of the Japanese Prime Minister to Rome, Japan and Italy reiterated the need for the defense of the world order, based on the rules of international law, an implicit condemnation for Moscow, but also a warning for China, because international rules must also apply to maritime issues, to which Tokyo is particularly sensitive due to Beijing's violations in the neighboring sea. The fear of Japan and other international subjects is that the violation of international law perpetrated by Russia will set an example for resolving other international issues with the use of military means, rather than with diplomacy. Moscow has violated a custom that could still be broken in similar ways and it is the duty of the international community to work to ensure that this does not happen again; this theme will be central for a long time and must also concern a necessary revision of the functioning of the United Nations, too conditioned by the vetoes of permanent members; a similar problem that concerns the European Union bound by the unanimity rule in the decisions of the measures. The issue of the decisions of supranational bodies becomes increasingly central in the contrast between the actions of countries where democracy is little or no and authoritarianism has the advantage of the speed of decisions.

Moscow does not want to give in to Crimea and Donbass and is threatening Moldova

 As things currently stand, Moscow places its objectives as essential factors for any peace negotiations: the Kremlin, in fact, does not intend to withdraw from the acquisition of sovereignty, and therefore of the relative official recognition, of Donbass and Crimea as belonging materially and formally to the Russian Federation; despite this, the negotiations with Kiev seem to continue, albeit difficult, even if on premises that do not provide any guarantees. On the part of Ukraine and the western international community, a yielding on these issues, even if justified with the aim of ending the conflict, would provide Putin with a sort of proof of weakness, with the aggravating circumstance that Russian promises could easily be disregarded. It remains to be assessed how the military confrontation can continue, after the concrete possibility exists that there is an enlargement of the Ukrainian border to the West, with the involvement of Transnistria, a Russian enclave between Moldova and the Ukrainian country, which could be assimilated by Putin in the same way of Donbass and Crimea. Raising the tension is a sort of political diversion from Moscow, which suffers from military aid to Kiev, because it allows the Ukrainian forces an increasingly effective defense; the Russian foreign minister explicitly accused the Atlantic Alliance of already being at war with Moscow, precisely because of the supplies of military equipment; the reasoning is that a third world war represents much more than an eventuality, but that it is becoming a concrete possibility, especially after the claims coming from the United Kingdom, which has supported the legitimacy of an attack on Russia. The risk of a nuclear escalation is possible, but Moscow has expressed the concept that an atomic war is unacceptable, being well aware of an unpredictable result, however, the latest Russian rocket launches have hit areas very close to Ukrainian nuclear power plants and an eventual impact with a reactor could trigger consequences equal, at least, to the use of tactical nuclear devices, that is, of short range and less destructive potential; on the Russian hesitation to use atomic force, in one way or another, it is good not to trust too much, especially after the massacres perpetrated by the Kremlin military, in disregard of international conventions and with armaments in turn prohibited by the same agreements. Kiev reacted to the Russian threats of a third world war, as a sign of the weakness of Moscow, which expected a quick and painless conquest of the Ukrainian country, without reactions from Kiev and the West: on the contrary, Putin managed to compact the Western allies, to restore value and political importance to the Atlantic Alliance and to combine the Ukrainian country in the defense of its territory. In reality, the reading of the Ukrainian government appears to be acceptable, because it shows a military and political difficulty of Russian action, which seems to find ever new difficulties at every level, this impression, however, reinforces the idea that Putin has put himself on a path without exit and that this risks making it more and more unpredictable and dangerous. The move to threaten a widening of the conflict beyond Transnistria, to involve Moldova already appears to be a consequence of the Kremlin chief’s difficulties in getting out of the current impasse. Moreover, even the attempts of the Secretary General of the United Nations have not brought results, if not highlighting his slow reaction, given that he moved well after the war had started two months ago; questioning about the real usefulness of the United Nations now appears superfluous: without an adequate and radical reform, the emptying of the powers and effects, even if only potential, of the United Nations is a sure fact on the international scene, which determines the absolute unreliability of supranational body, now a mere facade. The poor results of the diplomatic action, meanwhile, prevent the creation of humanitarian corridors to allow civilians to escape to safety, but behind this block there is a precise Russian tactic, which intends to use the population as a hostage in a way that is functional to its own modalities. of combat. Meanwhile, Moscow’s action focuses on bombing the railways, identified as the main carrier of arms transport, thus creating an additional obstacle for civilian escape.

The Ukrainian war must not divert attention from Islamic terrorism

 With international attention entirely focused on the Ukrainian conflict, there is a real risk that Islamic radicalism will exploit this situation to regain ground, both from the point of view of terrorism and from that of the occupation of territories devoid of international protection. This fear is confirmed by the statements of the new spokesman for the Islamic State, who did not miss the opportunity to urge supporters of Islamic extremism to exploit the situation that sees the confrontation of states usually deployed, even if from different positions, against terrorists and the Islamic radicals. The danger is the concentration of resources and attention on the Ukrainian conflict, which could allow greater freedom of action, both in Europe and in Russia. At this time, despite the threats aimed more at the western part of the European continent, the nation that appears most vulnerable is Russia, because it is directly involved in the conflict and with troops, often used against Islamic terrorists, engaged in the Donbass areas. ; however, the current situation could lead to singular and temporary alliances capable of fighting against common enemies. The unscrupulousness of some of the actors involved could study unconventional and violent retaliation against Western countries, guilty of supporting the Ukrainian resistance in various ways. Dangerous precedents could be created, especially if one side is forced to suffer increasingly heavy sanctions and to prolong a war that it believed would end quickly. From the point of view of Europe, but also of the United States, it appears essential to monitor one's own territories, but this is not enough since it is necessary to prevent a new advance of the Islamic State on territories that have characteristics capable of favoring this scenario. If in Asian countries the threat has been limited, but the phenomenon must not be underestimated, the situation in the sub-Saharan areas of the African continent appears more worrying, where Islamic radicalism manages to impose itself by filling gaps, than the financial shortage of the states. national does not allow to fill. Now the concentration and financial effort to supply Ukraine with the necessary weapons, coupled with the ongoing diplomatic effort to stem the conflict, can divert the already scarce resources to preserve the central African strip from terrorism. It is also necessary to remember the situation of countries such as Afghanistan, where the American abandonment has created favorable conditions for the settlement of terrorist bases or the attitude of formally allied countries in the fight against terrorism, where the ambiguous attitude of governments continues to allow dangerous contiguity with Islamic radicalism. More sheltered from this possible resurgence of terrorism, also by virtue of its political system, China appears on its territory, but which cannot fail to be involved in a state of apprehension in the many countries of sub-Saharan Africa, which have been the subject of substantial funding. . One of the most concrete dangers, in a phase of economic regression and scarcity of resources, exchanges blocked by sanctions, is a further contraction in growth, precisely caused by actions against African extraction and production centers; the increase in food crises and famines caused by the interruption of the exposure of Ukrainian wheat and Russian fertilizers may also contribute to this. The possibilities of action of Islamic terrorism therefore have a variety of tools, which go far beyond traditional practices, based almost exclusively on the use of violence: to attract an ever-growing audience of followers, thanks to the ever-increasing state of poverty. of a substantial part of the African population; for this reason it is important not to abandon African countries and to maintain military garrisons capable of supporting national armies for the protection of local communities. We must not lower the control and the contrast on the economies that favor terrorism, such as the trafficking of human beings and the trade in drugs and arms. If support for Ukraine is fundamental for the survival of Western democracies, no less important is the continuous fight against Islamic terrorism, which, albeit with different methods, has always the objective of countering the very fear of maintaining democracy, in particular. this is certainly no different from what the head of the Kremlin is aiming for.

The Atlantic Alliance set to increase its members

 One of the unwanted and unexpected effects for Putin caused by the invasion of Ukraine was to restore vitality to the Atlantic Alliance, which, during Trump's presidency, was heading towards a conclusion that has now been announced. The brutality of the special military operation combined with evident geopolitical causes have, on the other hand, strengthened the unity of the members of the Atlantic Alliance, providing the organization with new impetus and vigor. Putin's first tactical and then strategic error was the result of a poor analysis, which demonstrated the scarcity of Russian international analysts. It was believed that the division between Europeans within them and between Europeans and the United States were by now irremediable and in some ways this analysis had valid foundations and had the possibility of coming true without causing any situation capable of changing the course of things. In Putin's assessment, the head of the Kremlin judged the effects caused by the invasion of a foreign country as irrelevant to this game. This evaluation, however, had the opposite effects and it cannot be said that for Russia there were no signs to interpret the new situation: the agitation of the Baltic countries and of Poland, against Russian activism should have been enough for a greater caution not to sacrifice a geopolitical situation, all in all, not unfavorable in the face of the conquest of Ukraine in open violation of international law; that, then, the military result is bankruptcy must increase even more the recriminations by the Russian government for having placed itself in a situation that, at the moment, seems to have no way out. As for the state of health of the Atlantic Alliance, which the Russians wanted to a minimum, the situation appears very unfavorable for Moscow. The possible decision to interrupt their neutrality by Finland and Sweden will lead Russia to add a new side of its border where the Atlantic Alliance will be present, precisely one of the reasons that led to the invasion of the Ukrainian country. Although Ukraine has always been considered an area of ​​exclusive influence by Russia and Sweden and Finland do not fall into this category, the neutrality of the two countries has always been considered a fact almost due, first to the Soviet Union and now to Putin's Russia; the alteration of this state of affairs has caused irritation and nervousness in the Kremlin, where more or less explicit nuclear threats have not existed; the presence of tactical atomic bombs, that is, with reduced range, on the Russian borders, is in any case known and the international community is aware of it, however Russia has not missed an opportunity to reaffirm its nuclear potential; moreover, joining the Atlantic Alliance will require Moscow to deploy large quantities of troops on those borders, raising the level of tension, as well as increasing the naval units present in the Finnish Gulf. It should be noted that the two Nordic states already participate in the meetings of the Atlantic Alliance and their soldiers carry out exercises with the troops of the Alliance, in short, there is already a quantitative collaboration, which must only be officially sanctioned. The conditions for joining the Atlantic Alliance are already largely satisfied by the political systems of the two states and it is only a decision concerning their sovereignty, even if it must be said that Brussels could delay at this moment in order not to exacerbate a situation that is already very much tense with Moscow; however, the two Nordic countries have been subjected to Russian threats for about a year and from the end of 2021 the pressures from Moscow are repeated, punctual for each week; it is believed that this has provoked a growing favorable opinion in the societies of the two countries, which, it seems, is now in favor of abandoning the policy of non-alignment in a majority manner. With Sweden and Finland, the members of the Atlantic Allenaza would rise to 32 and Russia would see its border more than doubled with the presence of NATO: a result achieved by the ability and foresight of Putin, a great statesman and connoisseur of international mechanisms.

In Ukraine, Russia is blocked by its poor military and political management

 Despite the great price, unfortunately paid in human lives, which represents the most tragic aspect of the conflict, the Russian advance is proceeding slowly and, in some cases, is even forced to suffer defeats that force departments of the Kremlin to retreat to the ground. This provokes a tactic that involves Ukrainian civilians as functional objectives to weaken the resistance of Kiev, which, on the military level only, that is, without the theoretical involvement of civilians, would be able to contain the Russian effort, although in evident numerical and means inferiority to disposition. This modality has been successfully tested in Syria, where civilian targets, such as hospitals and schools, were deliberately hit to pull back the forces opposed to Assad, whatever their nature, be it democratic forces or the Islamic State; however the scheme, although it has similarities, in Ukraine presents profound differences: Ukraine is a sovereign state with its own army, cohesive with its population and not divided as in Syria and enjoys the unconditional political support of the West, which despite continuing not to intervene, it continuously supplies the armed forces of Kiev with weapons and logistical support. The conjectures about Putin's convictions of a short war are probably true, and the evidence is that the heavy weapons deployed are outdated, the logistical support insufficient, precisely because it was not designed, and the troops, often made up of conscripts, are insufficient. trained and even less psychologically prepared to face a war of such intensity. Some analysts also believe that the employment of Syrian "volunteers" will not be decisive and there are considerable doubts about the contribution of the Chechens. In this context, the choice of indiscriminate bombing appears for Putin to be the only way to avoid being defeated by the conflict and with the internal image irremediably ruined. For this reason, President Zelensky's request for the no-fly zone appears more than legitimate, but Western countries do not yet consider the time to intervene. There is a real danger of the use of chemical weapons by the Kremlin, on the winning experience carried out in Syria, which would constitute the renewal of a very dangerous precedent, which constituted Obama's greatest political failure and which, according to many observers, it was the beginning of the current American political weakness in the world theater. The option of the use of chemical weapons could also constitute the consideration by Moscow of a possible use of the use of nuclear weapons, which has already been threatened since the beginning of the conflict. The danger of an escalation is concrete: Russia is in evident difficulty in its "military operation", is on the verge of financial failure and is politically isolated on the diplomatic scene, especially after the increasingly cautious Chinese attitude on the conflict, caused by the threats of losing access to its most profitable trading markets: the US and Europe. These considerations, if combined with the news, that Russia in the current logistical difficulties, seems to face a further shortage of availability of supplies, both due to increasingly evident practical difficulties, and due to a not infinite arsenal and also an internal situation at the top of the Kremlin, where the major collaborators closest to the president, have been the object of removal from their offices, precisely because of the mismanagement of the war, the possibilities for diplomatic action seem to increase. For Russia, it is estimated that the next ten days will be crucial: if Moscow manages to win the conflict it will have achieved its goal, vice versa for Putin there may be no way out and therefore the Russian president may prefer an honorable exit through an agreement. diplomatic. This eventual agreement, however, passes from a truce that stops the use of weapons and allows safe humanitarian corridors; this eventuality, desirable, is, however, contrary to the current combat mode of the Russian military, which uses civilians as a target to achieve success. At the moment the situation seems to have no way out, but international pressure and some Ukrainian concessions could take away any justification from Russia and allow Moscow an honorable way out, honorable at the moment, because Putin's reputation is hopelessly ruined. , also from the investigation that the International Court of Justice intends to initiate and which appears with an already written conclusion.

China is a collateral victim of the Ukrainian conflict

 The aggression of Putin's new "Soviet Union" against Ukraine, which has violated every rule of international law, has caused a sense of confusion for Beijing, whose main concern remains its own economic growth, which, however, does not it can be released from a state of global stability. The first result of the Kremlin was that of compacting the western front and even more the European Union, which is finding, despite many difficulties, an almost unknown unity of purpose and certainly not predictable in such a relatively short time. This figure is the opposite of what has always been pursued by the Russians, by the Chinese themselves and also by the USA, at least those led by Trump. For all these subjects it was a priority to work to obtain an ever deeper division between the European states in order to deal with individual nations rather than with the whole bloc of the Union. For this purpose, these international actors, who feared a new subject of large proportions on the global scene with their own political and even military and not only economic capabilities, have repeatedly implemented operations, including illegal ones such as illicit computer activities, financing for parties and movements. local sovereigns and an intense diplomatic policy aimed at exploiting the divisions of the states of the Union. The criminal invasion of Ukraine apparently overcame any attempt at division that was painstakingly pursued, ending up damaging the Chinese, as well as the Russians, who, from now on, will have to adapt to the new situation. Beijing, while affirming its loyalty to Moscow and denouncing, albeit alternately, the guilt of the Atlantic Alliance, said it was very concerned about the war situation and announced its willingness to provide a contribution to resolving the crisis. The greatest concern expressed appears to be that of the economic sanctions against Russia, which constitutes an aggravating circumstance to the pandemic situation, for the global economic recovery. It should also be remembered that China was, before the start of the conflict, Kiev's main trading partner, and would not like to lose this primacy, especially if Ukraine, once the conflict was over, gravitated to the orbit of Brussels. Chinese diplomats strive with a kind of equidistance, which asserts that the integrity of each country should be protected, as well as the security concerns of each nation: this attitude provides the perception of a policy taken aback and still undecided about which attitude definitely take. The proximity to Russia should not be taken for granted, because the distance is too great and the respective interests do not coincide, but it is only functional against the United States and, to a lesser extent, Europe. Beijing cannot, precisely in order not to compromise its economic growth plans, initiate new conflicts with Washington, which could affect trade relations with the USA, just as it cannot go against Europe, which represents the richest market to get to. its own products. Probably from a political point of view, Putin’s action does not displease the Chinese, because, despite the denials, they can read similarities with Taiwan, but at the moment even this question seems to take second place compared to the failure to restart the global economy. A further concern for China is the ability expressed by Europe to develop strategies to make up for Russian energy supplies in the not too distant future and the newfound harmony with the USA, which may constitute a starting point for closer trade alliances, which they would determine a lesser capacity for Chinese commercial movement towards what are the richest markets on the planet. It is not known whether in the meeting between Putin and Xi Jingping on the occasion of the inauguration of the recent Winter Olympics, the Russian leader had informed the Chinese one, but it is certain that the Chinese resentment is high due to the developments that the war has caused, even if cannot be expressed. China's studies and plans have been thwarted by a crazy decision that is determining a difficult commercial future for China and, however, for this reason it can be thought that Beijing will not neglect every effort to stop a conflict, which sees it as the greatest victim. collateral.

Italy from a country most damaged in new relations with Russia to a possible protagonist in the case of diplomatic negotiations

 The Russian invasion of Ukraine changes Moscow's international relations with European countries; in particular with Rome with which Russia, despite its respective alignment on opposite fronts, has always been characterized by a good understanding. Only two years have passed since the beginning of the pandemic and the Russian army convoy with medical supplies, destined for one of the most affected northern Italian centers, allowed Putin to reap an excellent result in terms of image. But this was only one of the latest examples of a relationship based on Italian pragmatism, based on its own cultural and commercial nature, which has always exercised a strong capacity for attraction towards Russians. Historically this relationship, pursued even though Rome has always been a great ally of Washington, has also been maintained in the Cold War, with industrial collaborations and thanks to the presence of the strongest Western Communist Party. More recently, these ties have also been maintained by progressive governments, capable of obtaining important energy supplies and opening increasingly intense commercial channels in the genre of luxury, tourism and food. More recently, ties with Putin have developed with the sovereign parties, also due to the Russian president's strategy of wanting to divide the European Union, however this has not prevented a particularly important link with the government in office, where, moreover, the party of the Northern League, which has always had close ties with Putin's party, about large supplies of Russian gas. The Italian economy depends on Russian gas for about 45% of the total, which for now are insured, despite Rome's decision to support the European Union and the West in sanctions against the Kremlin. Despite the conversion plans towards cleaner energy and the contracts for new supplies of liquid gas from the United States, the concern in the social and productive fabric is very high. In addition to economic sanctions against Russia, Italy has engaged in a very vast program of military supplies to the Ukrainian military, which includes anti-aircraft missiles, anti-tank missiles, machine guns of various ranges and ammunition, which could greatly complicate the advance of military forces of Moscow. The combination of dependence on Russian gas with military supplies and sanctions could cause a higher cost for Italians, compared to other member countries of the European Union. In reality, the Italian position was not immediately so clear-cut, precisely because of the fears of the various economic sectors involved in the export to Russia; the particular sensitivity of the government in office, led by the former president of the European Central Bank, towards the economy has led to fears that Rome could have had a less harsh attitude towards Russia, in reality the profoundly pro-European and Atlantic spirit of the government structure, made it possible to overcome these obstacles represented by the prospect of certain losses for the national economy. As far as gas supplies are concerned, however, it is a calculated risk: Italy needs Russian gas, but Russia needs even more to sell it, especially after it has been subjected to the harsh regime of sanctions, on the other hand. Putin's behavior has had the positive effect, but not for Russia, of compacting a European Union, which is now more united than ever and which could prove even more inclined to allow budget elasticity for those who engage in sanctions and policy against Russia and in the reception of Ukrainian refugees. The cornerstones of the Union's foreign political action remain Paris and Berlin, but Rome comes immediately after and due to previous relations with Moscow, it could be decisive in a possible negotiation phase to resolve the conflict, as, moreover, it publicly acknowledged the Russian ambassador to Italy. The firmness of Rome in condemning, rightly, Russia has therefore never been in question, and indeed it is strengthened precisely by the volume of business destined to fall for the Italian coffers, however for the Italian country a leading role could be ready. plan if the Union wants to commit itself, despite being a biased protagonist for the support provided to Kiev, when it will finally have to pass the word from arms to the negotiating table.

The possible Russian tactics and the potential Western responses

 Probably the Russian commitment in Syria was not only dictated by geopolitical needs, such as maintaining the only Moscow base in the Mediterranean, by keeping Assad in power, but it was also a preventive exercise to prepare for military action in Ukraine. Certainly, Putin's intentions and expectations were to quickly conclude the reconnection of all Ukraine under former Soviet influence: a repetition of the subordinate relationship that Belarus provides to the Kremlin; and in fact the plan is still the same: to establish a pro-Russian government in Kiev, which can guarantee that Ukraine maintains absolute distance from the European Union and the Atlantic Alliance. However, despite the overwhelming superiority of the military apparatus, Russia is struggling, on the international level it appears isolated and with devastating internal economic prospects, the European and Western countries have regrouped, overcoming their mutual differences and arriving to massively welcome refugees, thus defusing the Kremlin's intentions to favor internal disputes over immigration, even if they have had too long a reaction time in the face of events and even China appears more cautious in supporting Putin, so as not to hurt the commercial susceptibility of the market more rich in the world. For their part, the Ukrainians, despite all the contingent difficulties, are putting up a resistance that Russia had not foreseen, indeed the Kremlin expected a welcome from liberators for its troops. The set of these answers from the counterparties, added to the obvious erroneous assessments, if they can lead to positive assessments in the immediate future, cannot however prevent us from analyzing what Putin's possible next moves will be. If we start from an analysis of the Kremlin tenant, it is difficult to predict a way out that is configured as a political conflict, that is, an agreement that allows Russia to cede the territories of the Donbass and also of the coastal strip may not be enough. in Odessa. Putin has been clear he does not intend to stop, because he considers Ukraine part of Russia and this admission constitutes his program which he has finally explained clearly. The granting of the opening of humanitarian corridors to make civilians flee opens extremely disturbing scenarios, which preclude, in fact, what happened in Syria and especially in the battles for the conquest of Aleppo. Precisely on that occasion, after the abandonment of the city of most of its inhabitants, the Russians, once they entered, gave a display of particular violence and now, strengthened by that experience acquired in the field, the fate of Kiev appears to be the same. On the other hand, reaching at least as far as the conquest of the Ukrainian capital has, for Putin, the meaning of the victory of the conflict, while for the rest of Ukraine, the part towards the west on the border with Poland, a military operation comparable to the current one is more difficult, but for the Kremlin, it will probably be enough to stop in Kiev. In the West, a possible conquest of Kiev by the Russians, moreover obtained with particularly brutal ways, could provoke a reaction that is difficult to predict. The approach to the borders of the Atlantic Alliance and the European Union, of the Russian enemy, who moreover directly threatens the Baltic countries and opposes the entry into the Atlantic Alliance of Sweden and Finland, as well as the European Union of Moldova and Georgia, would further raise the level of the clash, which until now has been limited to sanctions, albeit large, and military supplies for Ukraine. The approach of the front towards the Polish and Romanian border would significantly bring the beginning of the third world war closer. It is now useless to complain about the passive attitude of the European Union and the Atlantic Alliance, which have lost eight years in useless discussions, when they could have managed the Ukrainian question differently with preventive solutions capable of countering Russian plans: now is the time to put in place solutions are put in place that are capable of opposing Moscow, also from a military and not just a political point of view. Of course, immediately admitting Sweden and Finland of the Atlantic Alliance and Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to the European Union would constitute a political response equivalent to a clear warning in Moscow, but without a military organization and a willingness to directly engage in cases such as the current one. maneuvering is limited. Unfortunately it is bad to say it but the military option is increasingly becoming a necessity and a more probable eventuality.

On Ukraine, China evaluates US behavior, for the future of Taiwan and trade disputes

 That the invasion of Ukraine took place after the end of the Chinese Olympic Games was no coincidence: Putin risked a failure of the action due to adverse weather conditions for heavy vehicles, in order to keep the promise made to the Chinese leader and in homage to the alliance that is developing between the two countries based on commercial exchanges, first of all on the sale of Russian gas to the Chinese, but above all on the political understanding that is developing regarding the project of a new world order, based on values alternative to those of Western democracies and based on the repression of civil rights. The Chinese’s failure to condemn Russian aggression, which is also taken for granted and widely expected, represents a sort of warning for Taiwan, which has always been in the sights of the Beijing government, which supports the project of a single homeland. The moment could be propitious for an invasion of the island, with the Western states unprepared for Putin's action to which they have not substantially resisted: these conditions could also be repeated for Taiwan, which nothing could, like nothing Kiev can, to an invasion. by a power so manifestly superior. There are, however, some practical contraindications for China, which highlight the differences with the situation that is developing in Europe. The first of all is that the main objective of Beijing continues to be economic growth and the economic repercussions of an invasion would greatly reduce the Chinese gross domestic product, on whose growth the efforts of the Communist government are concentrated, also due to the contraction of the world growth due to the pandemic. As for the Ukrainian war, Beijing has replaced Russia as Kiev's first trading partner for the interest in the Silk Road and certainly does not like the current developments even if, perhaps it is estimated that with a pro-Russian government, it could have even greater freedom of movement. About Taiwan, some press media functional to government propaganda have defined the island as the Chinese Donbass, beginning to prepare a sort of preventive justification for a possible military invasion. It is no longer even worth believing that China will not dare to attack Taiwan in order not to undertake an action that is difficult to manage and with consequences that are not easy to predict, precisely because the same thing was believed about Putin, and it has been sensationally denied. It is also true, however, that unlike Ukraine, there are already American soldiers in Taiwan, which makes the scenario more complicated in the event of an attack and also the constant presence of the American navy, both in Taiwan itself and in Korea. of the South and Japan presupposes a direct military commitment, which, combined with presumable sanctions, could complicate a military action much more than for Putin. That of a direct American commitment in the Pacific area is explained by the international doctrine inaugurated by Obama of judging Southeast Asia as more important for the United States, precisely in terms of the ways of communication of goods and because of what it is. Syria has been neglected, there has been a disengagement from the Middle East and Afghanistan and substantially also from Europe, however substantial doubts are legitimate on the real will and ability to conduct a conflict on the part of the current American president, who does not seem intent on taking military action. Be that as it may, the American reaction on Ukraine will be deeply studied by Beijing to undertake strategies, which will not only concern the potential invasion of Taiwan, but also the relations with the USA itself, especially regarding the dossiers that have produced the deepest contrasts between the two countries. An apparent complacency of the Americans, also from the point of view of sanctions against Russia, could authorize Beijing to behave increasingly unscrupulous in trade battles and in relations with other states, both European and African, where China aims to fill the void left from the United States. For Washington a concrete warning to evaluate very well its moves and their consequences on a global level and not just limited to Russia.

Putin favored by the inconsistency of the West

 In the end, the worst omens occurred: Putin maintained his conduct, based on lies and lies and militarily attacked the Ukrainian country, relying on a Western reaction, which to define timid is to use an expression of caution. All the threats of retaliation have turned out to be very little in the face of the determination of the Kremlin, which has raised the level of threats even more against Western democracies. The condemnations of Western leaders were words of circumstance and reassured Russia with the reassurance that no Western soldier will operate on Ukrainian soil, effectively abandoning Kiev to his fate. This is the logical conclusion of the American commitment on the European front, already reduced since Obama, a legitimate choice, but one that damages the main allies of the United States, perhaps in the short but certainly in the medium term and undermines the American leadership itself, not only political but also economic. Russia has acted in this way because it does not want the Atlantic Alliance on its borders, but by conquering Ukraine the borders move as far as Poland and the Baltic countries, where the Western military presence is now rooted. Will the Kremlin tolerate this presence or will it not tolerate it, as Putin has made it clear several times? Physically defending Ukraine with a preventive presence of the Atlantic Alliance, after having welcomed it within it, could have been a deterrent action, which could have allowed negotiations capable of finding a convergence, even if probably based on a sort of balance of the terror. On the contrary, we wanted to choose the path of caution, which bordered on the timidity and protection of the commercial interests of Europe, which never wanted to engage in an active defense of itself. The United States, after the enormous mistake of Afghanistan, is repeating the mistake of leaving the field to more aggressive and determined opponents, choosing a disengagement whose negative effects will be seen entirely in the long term. Biden erases all the positive impressions that accompanied him to his election and repeats, albeit in a more discreet manner, all the failures in foreign policy of his predecessor and will go down in history as one of the worst American presidents, just like Trump. This trend comes from afar and began with Obama, but such a low point, consisting of the sum of the Afghan case with the Ukrainian one, had never been touched by the first world superpower. American behavior has left Europe unprepared and this should not have happened, still without a foreign policy and a common defense, divided internally by states not consonant with having been included within the Union and divided by conflicting commercial interests among its members; among other things, one of Putin's collateral objectives pursued with the Ukrainian war is precisely that of increasing European divisions and contributing to the immediate creation of new problems among member states, the first of which will be fueled by the growing flow of refugees from 'Ukraine. Great Britain, if possible, has behaved even worse, the British premier seemed to want to proceed with extremely heavy sanctions against Russia, but then he decided on a series of measures that do not affect the oligarchs present on his territory because they carry huge liquidity in the British economy. Now Putin has achieved a victory above all political, showing the inconsistency of the West, which could authorize him towards higher goals than Ukraine and not for nothing the fear in the Baltic republics and in Poland has risen a lot: the elaborate sanctions affect only 70% of the Russian economy and not its military power and threats against possible interventions on the side of Kiev, it seems that they have had the desired effects by the Kremlin and have highlighted how the problem is certainly first of all geopolitical but immediately thereafter it invests democratic values, the sovereignty of states, the self-determination of peoples and respect for international law, the minimum basis for coexistence between nations. The commitment to these values ​​must be direct and their defense must concern all the states that are based on them, in order not to incur the loss of these prerogatives themselves. The opposite would mean returning to dictatorship and the denial of democracy, as is happening in Ukraine.

Reactions to Putin's decision to deploy troops in eastern Ukraine

 After Putin's declaration, which recognized as independent the People's Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, openly pro-Russian and therefore formally removed from the sovereignty of Kiev, Ukraine requested an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, which for a a curious coincidence was presided over by Russia. Most members of the Council condemned both the recognition and the subsequent decision to deploy troops in the area, which constitutes the first step in the invasion of Ukrainian territory, although it is the one disputed between Moscow and Kiev. From Putin's point of view, official recognition authorizes the support of the Russian military for pro-Russian insurgents and their militias, but from the point of view of international law it constitutes an evident violation, which, moreover, is not the first made by the Kremlin. The fact that Moscow defines its soldiers as peacekeepers aggravates the judgment on Russia, which clumsily hides behind hypocritical definitions that go beyond ambiguity and good taste. The following Washington declaration opens to an unprecedented series of sanctions, which will involve all US allies and whose consequences are expected to be very serious for the world economy and general equilibrium. In the immediate future, Putin's will is to secure a buffer zone between Russia and Ukraine, to avoid having the Atlantic Alliance presence on the immediate Russian border, even if the entry of Kiev has been repeatedly denied. from Brussels, however, the acceleration of the Kremlin could change the situation: until now the Atlantic Alliance has denied having any plans to accept the Ukrainian country among its members, but this evolution opens up to any possible development. Putin's gamble, however, threatens the economic consistency of the Russian country, which could hardly resist the foreseen sanctions, opening scenarios that could consist of a drastic decline in its popularity in Russia. The positions of the allies of the United States are quite predictable, agreeing on the concrete possibility that the conditions are being created for an almost global conflict; almost all of them expressed condemnation on the violation of the territorial integrity of Ukraine and for the violation of the principles of the United Nations Charter. The representative of Russia to the United Nations, on the contrary, supported Moscow's decision to protect the Russian ethnicity of the recognized territories and how the recognition had long been considered and urged the Western powers not to abandon the diplomatic solution. Ukraine, on its part, has reaffirmed its sovereignty over its territories and has practically challenged Russia, in a clash that it does not seem capable of sustaining. China's position is much more attenuated, which despite its repeatedly expressed closeness to Russia, does not derogate from its principles in foreign policy, choosing a sort of equidistance and recommending to the parties involved the utmost prudence and the intensification of diplomatic action. Beyond the aversion to the United States and the approval of Russian politics, Beijing shows that it is more afraid of the repercussions of a global economic crisis, which could endanger Chinese growth; however, the choice not to play a leading role, above all to increase a pacifying action, by Beijing, reveals how China is still far from becoming that great power on a global level, which it says it wants to become. The opportunity to play a leading role, without being at the side of one of the two parties, but only in favor of peace, could constitute a test viewed with favor from all angles, even in the case of failure, vice versa this fearful attitude reveals all the inexperience and lack of risk capacity of the Beijing government, which remains too tied to the economic aspects to the detriment of those of international politics. President Biden has expressly ordered to ban all types of financing, investments and commercial transactions with the areas invaded by Russia and this certainly represents the first solution that will precede the much heavier sanctions already threatened and foreseen for the decisive attitude. from Russia. What can happen below is difficult to predict.

Ukrainian crisis: the European Union maintains a wait-and-see attitude

 The attitude of Europe, in the face of the Ukrainian crisis, remains marked by the maximum use of diplomacy, even after the increase in the presence of the Russian military on the border between the two countries. The signals, which Brussels has sent to the Kremlin, are of support for a negotiated solution between the parties, which must exclude any military solution, but, at the same time, the firm will to proceed with particularly harsh sanctions has been reaffirmed, if Moscow operates a aggression against Kiev. The president of the European Council reiterated the solidarity of the European Union to the Ukrainian president, assuring the reaction of Brussels to continue to guarantee peace, world stability and common security, concepts which coincide with European values; however, it will be necessary to verify whether these declarations will be followed by concrete steps, which are announced to be necessary even before a possible invasion of the Ukrainian country. The situation, in fact, after the hope of a positive ending, seems to have worsened again in an area of ​​the border about 200 kilometers long. Numerous explosions, about 500, signal the start of bombing in the disputed territories, where there would also have been fighting involving the non-regular forces flanking Russia. The Atlantic Alliance has repeatedly warned of the possibility that Russia could take any opportunity to justify the invasion as a pretext, to the point of envisaging the construction of false attacks against its own military. The current context of border fighting, albeit with irregular troops, could be the decisive pretext to complete the invasion of Ukraine, also to overcome the problem of rising temperatures, which constitutes a significant obstacle to the movements of heavy and armored vehicles in the Kremlin. At the moment, however, the European Union has not judged the situation of the recorded fighting, such as to raise the level of the diplomatic confrontation and therefore not to activate sanctions against Moscow, sanctions, which according to the current regulation, must be approved unanimously and despite the convictions of the High Representative of European Foreign Policy regarding the compactness of the Brussels response, this result does not seem so obvious. The doubts could concern the Hungarian country and Germany itself did not appear too convinced to take clear positions against Putin. The weapons that the Union intends to use concern sanctions capable of targeting financial and technological sectors, in addition to the blocking of movement of Russian businessmen, who usually operate within the territory of the Union. It remains to be verified whether the conviction of the European leaders, of being able to hit Russia very hard, is true; certainly the Russian economy appears to be in difficulty, but it is necessary to carefully evaluate what Putin's expectations are regarding a result that can guarantee to stop the advance of the Atlantic Alliance up to the borders of the territory of Moscow: a political victory is more important, albeit thanks to a military statement, or not yet compromising the situation of an economy in a state of crisis; It will be important to see how public opinion in the country could react, however sensitive to nationalistic aspects, but tested by financial and economic difficulties. It is clear that the European leadership is focusing its strategy on this second point, but this does not seem to be enough for effective action; even before this strategy of sanctions, a solution must be offered that includes an honorable way out for Putin, without this being perceived as a political defeat. Finding a satisfactory solution for all the parties involved does not seem easy: Putin, who as usual acted by raising the level of the clash too much with frankly inadmissible requests, slipped alone into a situation with no apparent way out, where the result , beyond any possible final result, it could still be harmful to the head of the Kremlin. If the accession of Ukraine is not currently part of the plans of the Atlantic Alliance, it could be a point that, at least, could ease the tension, even if only momentarily and represent the starting point for negotiations without the impending military threat. , however, this may not be enough, as sanctions may not be enough and, at that point, it would be necessary to be ready for the consequences of a conflict that will affect the whole of geographic Europe.

The European Commission sanctions Poland

 Poland finally pays for its arrogant attitude and contempt for the rules towards the European institutions. The background is the obstinacy to the exploitation of a coal mine, located in the territory of the Czech Republic, by a Polish state company, which has generated a dispute between Prague and Warsaw; litigation regulated by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Luxembourg. The court of the Union condemned Poland not to continue the exploitation of the field in the Czech Republic; Warsaw's refusal to comply with this ruling resulted in a fine of 500,000 euros per day, which added up for all the days of non-compliance resulted in a sum of 70 million euros to be paid by the Polish state. Despite the agreement subsequently reached between the two countries, Ursula Von der Leyen confirmed the sanction, making it clear that no EU member country is allowed to violate EU rules. The situation was also aggravated by the contemptuous attitude of the Warsaw government against the Luxembourg court, accused of wanting to impose its own rules in an arbitrary manner. It is not excluded that without these attacks the fine could be reduced or even not applied, but the behavior of the nationalist government of Poland has long been under the scrutiny of the European institutions, especially for the anti-liberal and anti-guarantee attitude towards the civil rights. The solution of the European Commission will therefore be to subtract a portion of the funds destined for Poland equal to the total amount of the fine, the aforementioned 70 million euros. From a technical point of view this is no longer a legal decision, because following the agreement between Prague and Warsaw, the ruling of the Luxembourg court becomes outdated, but the maintenance of the administrative sanction as a pure political act, which sets a precedent for direction of community policy, so much so that the case constitutes a novelty, being the first time that the European Commission has acted by withholding funds following failure to comply with a sentence. In addition, Poland will also have to pay 45 million euros to the Czech Republic for damages resulting from the non-suspension of the mining activity. The paradox of the Polish government's declaration that it has declared that it will oppose the Commission's decision in all the appropriate fora is that the only place to appeal is that European Court of Justice which has its seat in Luxembourg and which has been practically disavowed by the Polish government. Warsaw thus appears in a blind alley towards the Commission, also because the question of the disciplinary court that threatens the independence of the Polish judiciary remains open; in this case too, the Luxembourg Court declared the new institution illegal, which in any case continues to exercise its function in open conflict with the provisions of the Union. The tension between Warsaw and Brussels has therefore reached a very high point, despite the hopes of the populist executive of Poland, which hoped for a sort of distraction of the European institutions, more focused on the Ukrainian question and of refugees from Belarus. The choice of the Commission, on the contrary, has favored a sanctioning action to reaffirm the political direction that was wanted to be taken: that of avoiding the repetition, as often happened too often in the past, of tolerating the behavior of some member states in open contrast with the principles in force and inspiring the common European home. The one-way utilitarian attitude, i.e. for their own benefit, of too many European members is no longer tolerable in an association of states whose membership is free but bound by specific rules, which must be universally accepted once they become members of the Union . States such as Poland enter substantial sums in their budgets, which often represent the majority of their budget, directly from the Union, without providing the required contribution in terms of collaboration with other nations and the application and compliance with European law; these are essentially unreliable countries, towards which the sanction for non-payment of funds must be only the first warning, preparatory to much more serious and definitive sanctions. The policy of overcoming unanimity can only favor this direction and perhaps only the states will remain strongly convinced of the idea of ​​Union, with their advantages but also their obligations, certainly respected and not questioned.

China and Russia towards an alliance against the USA

 Russia and China seem ever closer and their bond is strengthened thanks to the common enemy, the United States. If Moscow to avoid the enlargement of the Atlantic Alliance has become a national need, for Beijing the containment of Washington on the international level becomes an even more ambitious program, because it is the clear signal to contain the USA, also using an apparently distant and without issue. strategic importance for Chinese interests. It seems that the direction taken is that of an ever closer alliance between the two superpowers, which have coincident interests in uniting against the Americans. It seems particularly significant that the first meeting in the presence, for over two years, with a foreign leader, Xi Jingping was reserved for Putin at the moment of maximum tension between Russia and the United States and perhaps on the eve of a possible invasion by the military of Moscow in Ukraine. At the basis of this increasingly intense collaboration, there is not only aversion to the United States, but also a broader convergence against popular uprisings in the name of greater guarantees in favor of rights, which have distinguished the two countries. A vision clearly opposed to Western democratic ideals, which stands as a real clash of civilizations, capable of bringing great instability to the world. Both Moscow and Beijing have been condemned several times by the West, for their undemocratic attitude, which they perpetrated with mass repression and violent struggle against dissent: for this common attitude in domestic politics towards opponents, mutual support, framed as an international link, it serves to justify their work on the world stage. For China, the proximity of Russia is also of particular significance, because Moscow recognizes the Chinese right to claim a single China, thus against the aspirations of Taiwan, which is increasingly close to the United States for obvious reasons of necessity. The official version of the progressive rapprochement of the two countries is the realization of true multilateralism, that is, an equal collaboration of the two countries to a closer alliance, which seems ever closer; however, the alliance between China and Russia can only be asymmetrical the more time goes on. There is an evident advantage of positions between Beijing and Moscow, to the full advantage of the former, both from an economic point of view, where Moscow cannot compete with Chinese productive differentiation, because it still has an economy based exclusively on natural resources, and from the point of view from a military point of view, and from a geopolitical one. The impression is that Moscow is well aware of this difference, which in the future may create considerable friction, but, at the moment, it needs to have at its side the largest country capable of opposing the United States, especially in the case of of an effective military intervention in the Ukrainian country. Of course, even economically, Moscow must guarantee itself alternative markets in the face of the possibility of incurring economic sanctions and to this end it has opened up to an increase in the quantity of gas destined for the supply of China. Although this possible alliance opens up to scenarios of great concern, it can also be read as a need for the two states to support each other simultaneously and avoid a sort of isolation, which they are already suffering from their repressive actions within their nations. International disapproval, mostly coming from the western part, but not only, is a source of great concern, especially for China and the economic repercussions that ostracism towards Beijing can produce. For Russia, the need to be able to count on alliances with other countries is very much felt and the next step could be represented by Iran, however it is a tactic that accentuates the ties with states where repression is the policy of common exercise and this it only pushes Moscow away from Europe the economic partner it needs most, in order to revive its disastrous economy, even if the energy link with the countries of the Union appears to be difficult to dissolve, due to mutual needs. It will be more worrying to see the reaction of the United States: the consequences that are likely to generate are highly worrying, not only for the Ukrainian dossier, but also for that of Taiwan and for the Iranian nuclear power itself.

The Russian expansion strategy is also in Africa

The Russian strategy of garrisoning the areas it considers functional to its own interests does not only concern the territories located on its border, where it intends to apply its influence exclusively, but also other areas of the world, which have assumed particular international importance; this is the case of Africa, always at the center of attention, not only for the wealth of its resources, but also for the growing geostrategic importance in the global theater. This time the issue concerns the presence of Russian mercenaries, who have the secure approval of the Kremlin and, probably, act on its behalf, in the African countries of Mali, Libya, Sudan, Central African Republic, Mozambique and Burkina Faso. This increasingly cumbersome presence arouses much concern in Europe and especially in France, which has always been directly involved in these areas. The territory where the Russian mercenaries are present is that of the Sahel, where militias and adherents of the Islamic State are concentrated, which constitute an almost direct threat to the European continent and the Mediterranean. Controlling this area also means regulating migratory trafficking and using terrorism and the flow of migrants itself as a means of pressure on the European Union. Thus, we understand how the Russian presence is functional to exert pressure on US allies, both in general and in this particular moment, where the Ukrainian question is at the center of the scene. The evolution of relations between the coup junta of Mali and France has taken on particularly negative connotations, culminating in the expulsion of the highest representatives of Paris, the French ambassador. The French presence in Mali is substantial: there are about five thousand soldiers directly involved in fighting the presence of the militias of the Islamic state and this presence is considered strategic by both France and the European Union itself. France has repeatedly warned Mali of the need for greater attention to the presence of Islamic State adherents, however the military government, which took office after the coup, has shown that it does not like French policy at all, perceiving it as an interference in his own internal affairs, a circumstance that has led to suspect, if not a mixture with the radical militias, at least the will to use them as a means to oppose the French action, because in contrast with the presence of the coup government. Furthermore, the use of Russian militias, controlled by people close to President Putin, by the new Malian government, is a clear signal of where the foreign policy of the new African government wants to go. Even in Burkina Faso, where a coup has allowed the change of government recently, it seems that there is the presence of Russian mercenaries belonging to the same company present in Mali. This Russian strategy completes the action of the same mercenaries present for the longest time in Libya, Sudan and Central Africa, who carry out missions to guarantee the interests of Moscow in the region through the supply of weapons, training and military garrison to governments and also in support of non-governmental political factions, but which may be functional to the purposes of the Russian federation. This situation raises substantial questions about the effectiveness of the only diplomatic action chosen by Europe and which, by now, appears insufficient to protect its interests in the African region in the face of the emergence of international subjects, such as Russia and China, increasingly present and ready. not only to replace the Union, but also to exert direct pressure to condition its international attitude. The need for a European military force and a common foreign political action is becoming more and more urgent and necessary: ​​it is no longer the time to delay, on pain of political but also economic downsizing of the Union on the international stage.

In the Ukrainian question, Europe is marginal

 Within the Ukrainian situation, the European Union is not playing a leading role due to the exclusion of the talks that Putin regularly holds with the US and the Atlantic Alliance. This situation of marginalization is understandable if we consider Putin's reasons, who intentionally does not want other protagonists close to the United States at the negotiating table and, at the same time, continues in his work of dividing Western allies, but the lack of involvement on the part of Washington, which was to require Brussels to attend the negotiations, appears very serious. On the question, hypotheses can be made, which if true could lead to a difficult situation between the two parties. First of all, it is singular that neither the USA nor the Atlantic Alliance felt the need for a European presence: one cannot but think of the resentment of both parties for the desire to create an armed force directly constituted by the European Union, which was interpreted overseas as an alternative to the Atlantic Alliance and therefore to American influence, both from a strategic, political and also economic point of view, given the great game of military orders that is at stake; however, Germany is still trying to get back into the diplomatic game, taking advantage of the US Secretary of State's stopover and also involving France and the United Kingdom. Berlin, with this maneuver, however, plays a single game, unhooked by a desirable European action. Certainly recognizing that the central question is the maintenance of order and peace is an essential question for Europe, it seems a foregone conclusion, which does nothing but renew the marginality of the Union. Although Europe aspires to play an important role, the German strategy appeared to be a cross between an amateurish attempt and a risky maneuver. France would have the intention of having the Union take its own diplomatic action towards Moscow, but the fear is that the United States does not like this alternative initiative and that the lack of European bargaining strength vis-a-vis Russia, determines an initiative with few practical consequences but with very negative political repercussions. On the other hand, the intentions towards Russia, in the event of an invasion of Ukraine, are very different: if Washington even comes to favor a military response, even if preceded by arms supplies to Kiev and heavy economic sanctions, the Europe focuses exclusively on dialogue, because it is too involved in any sanctions against Moscow due to economic ties and the dependence on energy supplies arriving from the Russian country. Europe finds itself in a stalemate due to the chronic lack of a foreign and economic policy, especially insufficient on the issue of energy supplies, which affect every possible move. The United States itself is moving with the utmost caution, an attitude that could be mistaken for weakness by Putin, who continues to approach the confrontation in a worrying way. Russia has been left too much freedom of maneuver, claiming its area of ​​influence on the territories that belonged to the former Soviet empire may be understandable, but it is not tolerable to force states and peoples who do not like this solution; Meanwhile, Putin's ultimate goal is not to have democratic states on its borders to avoid dangerous contagions with the Russian population, already very dissatisfied with the state of affairs, this is the primary objective, the second, the official one, of refusing the presence of the Atlantic Alliance on its borders may have strategic justifications that do not reconcile with the self-determination of sovereign nations. This alone would be enough to overcome European perplexities of an economic nature: the Russian advance, that yes, at the borders of the Union is a factor of dangerous destabilization of the European order, especially with states within the Union where feelings are blowing undemocratic, which Brussels should no longer tolerate. Despite all legitimate doubts, Europe should strongly support the United States to contain Putin and precisely the lack of this conviction determines his marginality, which cannot be overcome as long as these too timid and moderate positions against prevarication are maintained. of democracy.

Migrations as an impact factor on geopolitical equilibrium and as a European dynamic

 One of the effects of the pandemic, closely related to the increase in poverty, is the increase in the migration of people in irregular ways to Europe; the latest data indicate worrying numerical levels and such as to make management of the phenomenon increasingly difficult. Furthermore, these data indicate that the trend of migratory pressure can only be increasing in the future, both near and in the medium and long term, precisely due to the imbalances of inequality generated by the pandemic, which join the previous reasons for migration: conflicts, famines and atmospheric phenomena caused by global warming. These causes are well known by analysts and politicians, but in the European Union an almost passive attitude remains, characterized by the absence of a common vision, due to the lack of effective tools on the part of Brussels and conflicting interests and political approaches, which, in fact, prevent a unitary and resolutive approach to the problem. 2021 marked an increase of about 57% in arrivals, compared to the previous year, marked by the onset of the pandemic, but the effects of the covid have caused a greater concentration of wealth to the detriment of poor countries and is one of the causes of the increase in extreme poverty of over 800 million people, which generate ever greater needs to seek alternatives to their own state of poverty. Also contributing to migration is the use of pressure on the European Union precisely through the use of migration routes as a factor of blackmail to Western countries and as a tool to increase the division of disputes between the members of Brussels. Lastly, it was the Belarusian dictator who used these methods, referring to what has already been done by the Libyans and Egyptians, among others. The impression is that this political use exploits the quantity of migrations by directing them, but does not affect the overall number as much as the use of migration routes rather than others; however, it is an insurgency that at the political level should stimulate greater unity among European members and instead has the opposite effect. This is an element that should not be underestimated so that Europe does not become a passive victim of instruments that are real sanctions of an asymmetrical type, against which the feeling of national identity of sovereignists or the conduct of Eastern European countries, in the long run , they can do little, precisely because they compromise the coexistence of the members of the Union. Certainly the fact of using human beings in great difficulty raises questions about how to maintain relationships with those who use these tools, but also with those who refuse humanitarian aid that seems undeniable and urgent. This, therefore, highlights the increasingly urgent need to create protected paths for refugees and conditions and rules that can favor regular migration, both for humanitarian and practical reasons, that is to govern the phenomenon without suffering the consequences and blackmail; in this way the exploitation by dictatorships and human traffickers can be defused. To reach this determination it is necessary to build a shared project or act on the unanimity rule that has conditioned the decisions of the Union for too long, also because practical reasons are increasingly urgent to combat the progressive aging of the population and the consequent lack of manpower. necessary for European industries. Taking note of this need by harmonizing it from the legal point of view to ensure legality and security for European citizens could be a good reason to convince the most skeptical and more inclined movements to adopt an attitude of closure. Beyond the obvious humanitarian reasons, autonomously regulating the migration phenomenon by the Union would only have advantages for Brussels and could contribute to the European awareness of great power, necessary to exercise the leading role that the Union must play on the global stage, such as independent subject, but also as a point of balance between competitors increasingly capable of endangering world peace. Migration phenomena are much more than humanitarian emergencies, and this reason alone would be enough to try to solve them, but they have become a geopolitical tool and are intimately connected with general issues such as the necessary reduction of inequalities and the fight against climate change. Therefore, addressing this issue individually is an urgency to be dealt with only in the short term, but in the medium and long term a global project is needed, also to prevent the depopulation and further impoverishment of entire nations and in this only Europe is able to being the protagonist, also because it is the only one.

The withdrawal of the Russians from Kazakhstan is not too sure

 The current president of Kazakhstan has said that the situation in the country has returned to normal and has appointed a new prime minister, who does not fall under the influence of the previous president. The stabilization of the country should lead to the withdrawal of foreign troops present on Kazakh territory, belonging to the Organization of the Collective Security Treaty, to which Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Russia and Tajikistan adhere. The protests had started on January 2 due to the increase in fuel and had revealed the state of profound social, political and economic crisis in the country, a symptom of a generalized discontent that manifested itself in large protests, violently crushed by the police forces, to who had been allowed to shoot directly into the crowd. The demonstrations had been classified as episodes of terrorism on behalf of unidentified foreign powers and were functional to the Russian action to reiterate that the Kazakh country could not get away from the influence of Moscow, which, moreover, feared a repetition of the Ukrainian case . The crackdown on protesters was blessed by Beijing as a means of eliminating the protests, perhaps an attempt to justify by analogy, its action in Hong Kong and against the Chinese Muslim population. The president of Kazakhstan highlighted the need for the intervention of Russian troops and other allied countries to restore order in the country against the dangerous terrorist threat, not well identified, which threatened to conquer the main economic center of the country, Almaty; which would have resulted in the loss of control of the whole of Kazakhstan as a consequence. According to the Kazakh president, allied foreign troops should leave the country within ten days. In reality, it will be interesting to verify whether these timelines are respected: the Russian fear of a country drift towards the West does not seem to coincide with a sudden withdrawal of Moscow's troops, especially after the effort made to suppress the Kazakh protest; a stay of only ten days would not allow effective control of the evolution of a situation of discontent that represents much more than economic dissatisfaction. Defining the protest as a studied emanation of a terrorist plan, without expressly indicating its instigators, means defining it as a sort of attempted subversion of the country from within. That these instincts are entirely true has little importance for Russia, which must reiterate its almost total control over what is now defined as its own area of ​​influence, well defined and absolutely no longer subject to negative variations. After all, Putin himself endorsed the terrorist theory of the Kazakh president, as a justification for the armed intervention he himself planned. Out of the total of 2,300 soldiers employed, the fact that the majority was Russian appears to be quite significant; however, the real needs of the country are clearly present to the new government of Kazakhstan, which intends to promote programs aimed at promoting income growth and making a tax system more equitable where there are serious inequalities; however, hand in hand with these intentions, an increase in the number of police and army forces is planned to better protect the security of the country. These intentions seem to disprove the terrorist hypothesis, used only for the preservation of the Russian regime and intervention, but admit the presence of internal difficulties, difficulties that could potentially make it possible to leave the area of ​​Russian influence. especially in the presence of a democratic turnaround, an attempt previously repressed several times at the local level without external intervention. The need for Russian aid shows how much the country has the ability and the will to seek an alternative to the present situation. These premises place the Kazakh country at the center of attention not only of the obvious Russian interest, but also of the West and the whole world, because it can destabilize the region and Russian control; this implies a new front of possible friction with the USA, certainly not willing to accept Moscow's warning in an anti-Ukrainian key, where the tension is destined, also for this precedent, to reach a limit situation.