World War III, or the US and China agreement by 2026? [Analysis]

In fresh times, more signals are emerging in the Far East, which can be considered as strikes in war drums. July 2023 to the press It leaked news that Chinese leader Xi Jinping on the December 2020 Central Military Commission ordered the army to prepare for war. Information on the hidden actions in this respect did not should be true, but it seems to have been. Especially in the context of the Chinese president in March 2024 official called on the armed forces to prepare for naval conflicts. This kind of appeal has been repeated A fewer days ago. What all coincides with the actions of North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. This – since the fiasco of talks with Donald Trump – has resumed the exercises and tests of rocket missiles that origin concern in South Korea and Japan. The escalation of tension seems to have accelerated in fresh days. due to the fact that Kim Dzon Un first ordered South Korea to send trash balloons to disrupt the south neighbor's airfields. He then issued an order to deploy artillery units along the border, stressing the fact that – located about 40 km from the border – Seoul is simply a kind of hostage of North Korea. Finally, the North Korean government blew up the main roads and railway tracks connecting both Korean states.

At the same time, the Chinese conducted their Joint Sword 2024 maneuvers around Taiwan one more time demonstrating the chance to orbit and isolate Formosa utilizing fleet and aviation. It is hard not to presume that the actions of Pjongjangu and Beijing have been coordinated. And this despite the fact that it is officially said about cooling the relation between the aforementioned capitals due to closer cooperation between Kim Jong Un and Putin. However, there may have been any agreement between Beijing, Pjongjang and Moscow, which could lead to cooperation in exerting force on the United States in the Far East region.

Russian instigator

In June 2024 Vladimir Putin, for the first time in 24 years, visited the Korean People's Democratic Republic. It was then that the military cooperation agreement between Russia and Korea was signed. Although we do not know the content of the agreement, its parties have suggested that it is simply a defence treaty. In another words, it is suggested that Russia could warrant North Korea's safety, and even covered the second with its own atomic umbrella. surely specified support from Putin would let Kim Jong Un to have a more aggressive communicative and abroad policy. For a North Korean dictator could number on Russia's support. The fact that the agreement is simply a military alliance seems to confirm the fact that North Korea has decided to send about 10 1000 soldiers to Ukraine to support Russia (1,500 troops are already there).

It should be assumed, therefore, that Russia's agreement with North Korea had – from the position of the Kremlin – not only to warrant the supply of ammunition from North Korea, but besides to encourage Kim Jong Un to increase force on American allies in the Far East. mostly South Korea and Japan. Most likely an component deal There are besides Russian supplies of natural materials, food and possibly even technology for the isolated on the global marketplace in North Korea. specified assistance, along with safety guarantees, encourages Kim Jong Una to rise the stakes in his plans to break US sanctions, and possibly force South Korea to submit to Pyongyang.

It should be remembered that It is in Russia's interest to make as many conflicts and inflamed places as possible worldwide. So that the war in Ukraine would cease to be the only or possibly even a precedence problem on which the United States focuses its attention. In this respect, Moscow acts towards fueling existing or creating fresh crises. Both in Africa (where Russia sent Wagner Group) and in the mediate (supporting Hezbollah and Iran) as well as in the Far East.

China changes tactics and forces?

From a Chinese point of view, playing planet chaos can be problematic. On the 1 hand, further conflicts take the attention of the US, but on the another hand endanger Chinese interests. These clearly endure after 2022. Furthermore, the Chinese must be careful not to exposure themselves to US sanctions imposed on all entities that straight or indirectly support Russia in the fight against Ukraine. In this context, the large engagement of North Korea requires Beijing to distance itself from Pyongyang's actions. At least it's official. Hence China has late demonstrated a cool attitude towards Kim Jong Un's actions.

No wonder their economy depends on oil and gas supply – including US allies – as well as exports to the European Union and the United States. Both natural materials and goods are imported mostly by sea. Any economical sanctions against China would reduce their profits from the sale of products and the interruption of supplies of oil from the mediate East and LNG would deprive the Chinese economy of the fuel needed to operate.

For these reasons, the customs war between the U.S. and China has so far looked like Americans were making painful blows, whereas the Chinese responded in a limited way. No wonder. Since the Chinese make immense profits from trade with the US and the EU, and the West has a powerful trade deficit with China, Western customs will necessarily be much more costly to the mediate State than possible symmetrical retaliation.

However, despite the customs fight against the US, which has besides turned into a technological fight (vide chips), The Chinese continued to hope for economical and trade cooperation with the European Union. However, the decision to impose duties on Chinese electrical cars of October 2024 dictates that Europeans besides want to defend themselves against Chinese expansion. The second is carried out by utilizing a globalised marketplace to conquer further economical sectors by subsidising its own production companies by the Chinese government. This allows these companies to sale at low prices, eliminating Western competition. Finally, the European Union has responded to the threat, and the mark is besides the supply of Chinese windmills and photovoltaic panels. Thus, it is not excluded that this is only the beginning of EU duties on Chinese goods.

It is besides worth remembering that the balance sheet of abroad investments in the Central State It's been falling for 2 years. (i.e. from February 2022). inactive in 2021 it was almost $350 billion, while the year 2023 closed with the consequence Only 33 billion UAH. For comparison, abroad direct investment in Poland then reached a affirmative balance sheet of close value 29 billion UAH. As if it wasn't enough, the Chinese haven't dealt with it yet. real property crisis. So, the increasing interior problems in the mediate State increase its sensitivity to external factors. The deficiency of adequate external capital can drive China into a spiral of economical crisis.

Meanwhile, the European Union's trade deficit with China over the years 2022-2023 reduced by $ 106 billion. The fact that the year 2022 ended with a evidence deficit of 397 billion UAH, however, a decrease in Chinese profits by 27% a year later was surely very felt. Trend maintained at least by the mediate of 2024 where Chinese imports from the EU increased and exports to the Community decreased by 2023.

China – unlike Russia – is 1 of the most dependent external factors in the world. Meanwhile, interior and external pressures can destruct Chinese dreams of socio-economic transformation. Taking a comparatively subdued and defensive attitude – as yet – the Chinese hazard that the West will proceed to screw the cock with capital. Which will only exacerbate the consequences of interior problems in China. For this reason The Chinese authorities may have already decided that an aggressive economical and commercial expansion should be moved to the political offensive. Using force instruments.

The provocations against Taiwan have been observed for respective years (airspace breach). besides Chinese military exercises regularly take place close Formozy and carry out rather suggestive scenarios. The Chinese began to put down artificial islands in the South China Sea a decade ago. So aggressive politics is not a novelty of Beijing. However, while this was all a kind of investigating of the United States and the West earlier, it seems that China now wants to show its readiness to take a direct confrontation. Although there are many indications that their armed forces may not be prepared for specified a confrontation. However, it may be about making the right impression.

Time is not accidental due to the fact that in the face of interior problems the Beijing government would like to divert public attention to external threats. At the same time, the policy of weak responses to subsequent duties imposed by the West has no effect. On the contrary, the process is developing. Therefore, a change of approach may seem to the Beijing authorities the only option giving hope of supporting the West—especially the United States—to the wall. And to negociate specified conditions that will warrant China – at least for a time – further access to Western markets. Furthermore, regaining control of Taiwan would give Beijing an advantage in the chip-making market, which would in turn enable the West to chess and possibly force it to lift duties on Chinese products.

The minute for this kind of courageous action besides seems appropriate. There's a war in Ukraine. Western aid for Ukraine is weakening, as resources are moving out, and at the same time it is increasingly hard to make adequate finances for this purpose. In the mediate East, events have besides accelerated. Which forces the United States to pay attention, as well as another resource management. The supply of equipment and ammunition to the fighting parties as well as the engagement of their own military forces in the stabilisation of regions (vide troops on the east flank of NATO and deploy part of the fleet close Israel).

At the same time, the U.S. presidential elections are approaching. The outgoing president is not in the best shape. He besides needs to support the vice president in the presidential campaign. Society and American political elites are focused on interior politics. Whoever doesn't win the election will have power only from January 2025. Until then, the current president will rule. This usually tries not to make large decisions and postpones them for the successor. specified a situation can be seen by 3rd countries as a kind of gap that can be utilized for more decisive actions that would, in the average time, meet the immediate consequence of the US.

All these circumstances mean that the Beijing authorities can actually start acting in a much more harsh and decisive way. Despite the fact that China's energy and capital sensitivity is inactive considerable. The energy transition process, despite awesome advancement in the improvement of RES, is far from complete. Building an interior outlet marketplace that could fill the gap after external customers too. At the end of 2023, Chinese GDP per capita, taking into account the parity of the purchasing power of money, amounted to just over $22,000. In Poland it was twice as much... Average yearly Polish wage is about 1/3 bigger than Chinese. However, Poles are not among the best earners not only in the world, but besides in Europe alone.

However, the possible of utilizing the US's weaker access internationally as well as the fresh geopolitical situation (opening the front in the mediate East) may prove besides tempting for Chinese. Encouraging a high-risk political game to bring political and economical benefits. The threat of resumption of the war in the Far East – for example in the Korean Peninsula – may seem a good tool to force Americans to retreat from anti-Chinese politics. The Chinese may want to force themselves – by exerting force on Taiwan, as well as the North Korean threat of attack on Seoul – to convince Americans They're not capable of dealing with all the problems at once. So they should let individual go. It's best for China. These are the largest and theoretically the most hard opponent who could lead to the collapse of American hegemony. At least this kind of communicative can be powerfully emphasized by Beijing.

While the temptation to conduct the policy described involves the hazard of expanding the duties on Chinese products – or possibly besides imposing sanctions – it can bring concrete benefits if successful. And extend to the Chinese the period during which they could complete the planned transformation. Then China, after expanding its independency from the West, could begin to dictate conditions at least in the Far East region.

At the same time, the Beijing authorities do not gotta hazard their own skin. China may effort to avoid negative consequences for itself by acting through an intermediary. Kim Jong Un is perfect for that. Especially now that he has Russia's support. So, China can supportNorth Korea's aggressive policy, hoping that the consequences of this may fall on Kim Jong Un himself, and the blame for the expanding tension can besides be borne by Vladimir Putin. This is an perfect arrangement for China in which the cost of action against the US and their allies could fall on North Korea and Russia, while the profits from this must go to China. Because without talks and settlements with the People's Republic of China, the issue of safety in the Korean Peninsula cannot be resolved.

Our Kim

The evidence for this thesis is the earlier attempts by Donald Trump to bring the relation between the US and North Korea closer, whose goal was to drag Kim Jong Un to the American side. Trump – after utilizing Kiev in the form of powerful military maneuvers from the turn of 2017/2018 – wanted to tempt the North Korean dictator with a imagination of North Korea developing as its confederate neighbour. Thanks to the United States. However, this kind of maneuver could not be carried out, due to the fact that talks on the Washington-Pjongjang line were conducted in isolation from Beijing's will and participation. Meanwhile, it was the Chinese that guaranteed North Korea safety and would be ready to usage military force to defend it, as in the past.

Just as Donald Trump was incapable to deliver a bilateral deal with Kim Jong Un between 2018 and 2019, so now the Washington administration will not be able to make a bilateral deal with North Korea. Not in a situation where not only China is behind Kim's back, but besides in a situation where a Russian bear took the place. For this reason, any negotiations on the situation on the Korean peninsula must be conducted at least in the presence of 1 east power. And, as has already been mentioned, the Russians would have preferred to have another war than to have any kind of agreement in the Far East. For these reasons, Without China's consent, participation and warrant to implement a possible agreement, there is no request to think of a peaceful solution to North Korea. The Chinese may be aware of their function in this arrangement. Roli, who could let them to negociate favorable terms for themselves in exchange for the definitive and permanent subjugation of Kim Dón Un and his dangerous policy for South Korea, Japan and the US.

However, before there can be a discussion of the Chinese's waiting measure, the Americans must first be forced to negotiate. This can be achieved by launching "crazy" Kim, whose threats of conventional and atomic weapons could not be ignored. While the North Korean dictator has returned to force demonstration policy for respective years, he has importantly strengthened the level of strategical signaling in fresh weeks and days. The deployment of artillery units within Seoul's scope and the launch of circumstantial preparatory actions at the border with South Korea is – and is likely to be – very suggestive. And he can't stay without Seoul's reaction. The South Korean authorities already propose that they could carry out symmetrical actions by sending South Korean troops to support Ukraine. At the same time, president Yoon Suk Yeol threatened to destruct Kim Jong Un's government if he attempted to attack his country. I don't think anyone should uncertainty that this kind of communicative consequence will be utilized by North Korea to further escalate tension. This kind of process is not generated without purpose. That's what we can only guess. It can only be about batting a hornet's nest in the American hornet's nest – as has happened many times – to test the reaction. But it can be more than that. An component of a wider puzzle in which both Russia and China are counting on another effects with the same tool (Kim Jong Una).

Given the circumstances, the political and military situation in Ukraine, as well as the economical loop tightening around the Chinese neck, it can be concluded that this time east authoritarianism intends to accomplish concrete results.

Americans and the Preventive War

From a U.S. perspective, submission to Kim Jong Un's blackmail is not an acceptable option. Both in the context of interior policy – due to the fact that it would be political suicide – and in view of the strategical interests of the United States (maintaining alliances with South Korea and Japan). So Kim Jong Un's force on Seoul will gotta face a very strong U.S. reaction. Just like it utilized to be in the past. To this end, Americans will gotta mobilise and concentrate their military resources in the Korean Peninsula area. For another kind of force will not work on Kim Jong Un (greater sanctions can no longer be imposed).

In turn, Chinese pressures on Taiwan will be mitigated or neutralised by threats of retaliatory economical and trade sanctions. For this reason, Americans will not gotta prepare military forces against both North Korea and Taiwan. The U.S. will focus on trying to pacify Kim Jong Un. Threatening him with a preventive attack. Why does Washington not limit itself to demonstrations of readiness to defend South Korea, but can he be more offensive? due to the fact that possible defensive actions would not be able to defend an ally.

Let us remind you that Seoul is not only within the scope of rocket artillery, but besides of North Korea's barrel artillery. So Kim Jong Un has the chance to endanger the neighbours of the peninsula with specified a atomic strike – especially since South Korea does not have weapons of mass demolition – as well as conventional attacks. Kim Jong Un does not gotta prepare for a land invasion that would be highly difficult. The script of filling the South Korean capital with hail of artillery and rocket missiles is scary adequate for a possible victim. In this scenario, North Korean forces could fundamentally take a defensive stance and limit themselves to the equation of Seoul and surrounding densely populated cities of South Korea. This is an perfect situation for blackmailing a confederate neighbor.

With this kind of war scenario, Americans have only 2 options to react. Either they hit North Korea in consequence to the attack on Seoul – which would let the anticipation of destroying this city – or the U.S. would origin a preventive impact. Trying to destruct as many enemy systems as possible, to minimize losses on the South Korean side at the time of receiving an attack aimed at by the North. In all this, it is worth noting the words of the South Korean President, who did not endanger to destruct the Kim Jong Un government in consequence to the attack. The threat active trying to make specified an impact... Thus, the Seoul authorities are besides aware of the situation and propose that they are ready to take preventive action.

Let us besides remember that after erstwhile demonstrations of American forces in the Korean Peninsula, Kim Jong Un's threat did not stop. There were no permanent arrangements. Nor did Donald Trump's negotiations help. In another words, if the Americans again gather large military forces in the region and do not usage them to establish a fresh order, they will not accomplish any goals. The threat to US regional allies will stay or even grow. In a situation where the war in Ukraine can enter a decisive phase in 2025.

Fortunately for Americans, challenges in the Far East require the usage of the US Navy as a bogeyman. Meanwhile, the war in Ukraine is mainly in the land domain. So it is not that the United States is incapable to simultaneously show its presence on the alleged east France of NATO and to task force in the Far East. It is the other due to the fact that both theatres require the usage of different types of forces and means. So the U.S. can service their interests in both of these places. While at the same time controlling the situation in the mediate East, where Israel has considerable self-defense possible from outside attacks. In addition, it should be remembered that, in support of Israel's rocket defense, Americans do not gotta affect carriers and full combat groups. For the capabilities of the U.S. Navy, tiny resources in the form of respective ships and a component of the air force that could usage at least the British Akrotiri Air Base located in Cyprus, airports in the allied mediate East countries or yet from the Wasp-type landing ships. The United States has already decided to strengthen Israel with its own TAAD anti-balistic strategy battery.

So it is not actual that American forces can be easy stretched. The United States inactive has the possible to concentrate it in 2 or 3 places in the planet and put force on it. Especially if North Korea or Iran are under pressure, not China.

The U.S. Navy has eleven super-aircrafts, of which at least 5 are escorted by peculiar naval combat groups and are in combat readiness. So even with the presumption of reassigning 3 aircraft carriers close Japan and South Korea, the American fleet will inactive be able to show its presence in the Gulf region as well as Europe. Especially with the support of smaller Wasp-type landing ships, which can besides service as light carriers.

However, it should besides be remembered that concentration is simply expensive. It binds forces in a peculiar area, which narrows down the maneuvering field. Focusing only and exclusively on defensive actions, without trying to resolve circumstantial safety dilemmas, is not the best strategy in the long term. A much more pragmatic approach is to solve problems 1 by one. Systematic – and preferably preventive – extinguishing the fires so that 1 large fire does not break out.

From the U.S. point of view, Iran is not yet an unacceptable threat (no atomic weapons and no anticipation of impact in US territory). In turn, exerting military force straight on Russia or China – in the absence of solving many smaller problems – would be a very risky idea. Meanwhile, the question of North Korea has matured into the fact that Kim Jong Un, who has a atomic arsenal, cannot be ignored. Moreover, the government claims to be able to scope American territory. This does not should be true, especially in the context of US rocket defence in Alaska. However, this may seem to be the last minute to neutralize the North Korean threat before it grows to sizes that prevent any action. due to the fact that further ignoring the problem can have disastrous consequences. The time window for its resolution narrows down clearly.

The acquisition of the book, in which 3 wars were planned (Invasions on: Ukraine, Mountain Karabach and Lebanon), as well as an analysis of why there would not be a conflict between the US and China, and Russia would neglect and fall apart. [Autopromotion]

For all these reasons, it is highly likely that shortly American hornets will not just fly out and only to pursuit the intruder distant from the nest, but will do so with the intention of eliminating the threat. It seems that this minute is very close, so in the next months or the next 2 years a script will begin to be implemented. I wrote it on the blog. inactive in 2018-2019.

World War III?

In the above arrangement between Russia, China and the United States, in which Kim Dzon Un is simply a tool and the Korean Peninsula is simply a game board, we have a possibly very developmental situation where:

1. The Russians are trying to wage war in the Far East, with China, both Korea and the US,
2. Kim Jong Un wants to put Seoul and Washington up against the wall intending to take Seoul's jasy and negociate a advanced ransom condition,
3. The Chinese intend to exploit the U.S.'s interior weakness and global circumstances to regain Taiwan and warrant themselves peace and access to the Western markets until they feel not strong enough,
4. Americans are forced to neutralize/eliminate the threat from North Korea.

This kind of confusion of interests is undoubtedly highly dangerous in the context of the anticipation of war, even of a global scope and character. besides atomic warfare, having noted Kim Jong Un's possession of atomic weapons and the possible U.S. efforts to overthrow his regime. Which could be the basis for Pyongyang's usage of BMR. For these reasons, many worrying – and generating considerable interest and a large number of views – headlines about the coming planet War III are expected in the coming weeks and months. Heating the atmosphere will be in the interests of both China, Russia and the USA, as well as of the media, commentators and journalists. The powers will effort to convince the Adversaries that they have stronger military cards and that their conditions should be on top. In turn, the press and profit - oriented commentators will want to monotize fear, in addition to turning it on.

However, it should be pointed out, that there are besides very crucial arguments for the fact that, in the end – despite demonstration of all parties to the conflict – there will be no war. I dedicated this full chapter in the 2021 book entitled ‘Third Decada. planet present and in 10 years’in which the above described escalation script on the Korean Peninsula was besides written. There I besides described the form of a possible agreement between China and the United States, after which Russia would be alone.

The arguments behind the fact that no hot war in the Far East should happen should in short look as follows:

1. The war would mean an immediate economical collapse in China due to a deficiency of energy resources and a cut off from western export capital. However, all day of war would prevent the Chinese from pursuing a long-term strategy aimed at mitigating the effects of China's demographic problems, bringing society to a higher level of prosperity and technological victory. China would come out of the war very weakened, and not even with the US – whose territory would most likely stay safe – but besides in the context of rivalry with India, Russia or even Japan. Getting into a war with the most powerful opponent is simply a strategical failure.
2. The war on China is simply a planet fire script that would be unsustainable for the US. in the context of defeating your opponent. Although neutralizing North Korea and defending Taiwan would be possible. South Korea would surely not have emerged from the conflict unharmed. However, there would be problems in breaking supply chains and the US economy, or even more so, the EU, is not ready for this. The conflict with China would be very costly and possibly long-term. It would open up options for Russia, make it impossible to control the situation in the mediate East.
3. The war for South Korea is simply a possible suicide, on the another hand, not to destruct the threat, but to hold the defeat.
4. Japan could besides endure a conflict without writing about Taiwan.

So, The conflict would be a disaster for all the fighting parties and could besides trigger a chain reaction in the form of the outbreak of further local wars in Europe, the Caucasus, the mediate East, Africa or the Indian Subcontinent. Only the Russians, who are fighting now, would be satisfied with specified events, are economically and politically isolated, which causes them to bleed out erstwhile everyone around them grows stronger.

For all these reasons, I believe that no Chinese-American war will happen in the coming years. Especially since there is simply a solution that leads to an agreement acceptable to all.

Nixon for the second time

W ‘Third Decade’ I tried to re-create the priorities of each side and find what they wanted, and what it might look like. deal between Beijing and Washington. The main assumptions are summarised below.

US priorities:

1. Neutralisation of military threat from North Korea and China (short-term target).
2. Neutralisation of Russian military threat in Europe (short-term target).
3. Defense of allies (South Korea, Japan), as well as maintaining NATO (short-term goals).
4. Victory in rivalry with China and maintaining hegemony (strategic, long-term objective).

Priorities of China:

1. Buying time, maintaining access to Western capital (short-term target).
2. Retrieving Taiwan and pushing Americans from South Korea (mid-term target).
3. Building greater independency from the West, socio-energy-economic transformation, maintaining Western dependence on Chinese production. triumph in the Technology Race. Creating a strong geopolitical pole dominant at least in the region (strategic, long-term objective).

Russia's priorities:

1. Encouraging as many conflicts in the planet as possible and winning Ukraine (short-term target).
2. blackmailing the West, breaking up NATO and obtaining conditions from the EU promoting Russia, including access to capital and technology (Middle target).
3. Acquiring the geopolitical pole position in the fresh layout, which would be able to dictate the conditions of the European Union and negociate on equal terms with the US and China, balancing between them as a "turnover" force (strategic, long-term objective).

It follows from the above that Russian short-term targets cannot be reconciled with US interests or even China!Calling for a war chain reaction would destruct both Americans and Chinese.And in the long term. The implementation of the “Russian” war script in the coming years would put an end to all Chinese hopes of achieving their goals and to the American ambition to keep hegemony. In addition, the implementation of the Russian targets to break up NATO unity and subjugate the European Union would require Europeans to become dependent on safety from the US, and would so gotta agree, in return for their aid against Russia, to enter into an economical fight with China. Which would cut Beijing from the precious EU marketplace (which is slow beginning to happen).

However, it should besides be stressed that The priorities of the US and China can be reconciled on the grounds that the submission of 1 organization in the short word would not put her hopes of achieving the final strategical objectives in the long term. For example, if the Chinese had agreed to disarm Kim Jong Un and obtained guarantees in return for the complete demilitarisation of the Korean Peninsula, both sides could accomplish short-term targets. Americans would neutralize the threat and defend allies. They could besides focus on Russia. In turn, the Chinese would dispel American military forces from close proximity to Beijing. All of this could work under the conditions of the start of the Korean unification process. Which has already been suggested – even by the stakeholders themselves – during the 2018 Winter Olympics. The merger of the administration with Pjongjangu and Seoul could give guarantees that the agreements on full demilitarisation (and denucleation) of the Korean peninsula would be implemented.

This script would not have crossed the long-term objectives of China or the USA. This is not adequate for both countries to accomplish short-term objectives. Americans could besides request a complete cut-off of China from Russia in order to neutralise the latter. The Chinese in turn would fear that if the United States did not gotta engage the fleet against Kim Jong Un, then they could completely block the issue of Taiwan's recovery by China. So the price for selling Russia could be Formoza.

Of this kind deal It would completely free American forces from the Far East region, which would increase the chance to rapidly deal with smaller problems and weaker opponents than China. The U.S. could then press both Moscow and Tehran.

Alliances with Europeans, Saudis and Jews could be maintained (like the 1 with Japan). This would service as a medium-term goal for the United States and give emergence to a return to competition with China after all the outbreaks have calmed down. In which the provisions on Taiwan could be revised, acting as a force.

This would, of course, be detrimental to China, but the Chinese will not be able to carry out their far-reaching plans without obtaining time and opportunities in the short term. But if they sacrificed Kim Jong Una and Russia – hoping that the Americans would wipe out long years to put out smaller fires – then they would have the chance to build a force that would be adequate to balance the Americans if they wanted to return to the Far East.

Consequently, Although the long-term strategical objectives of the US and China are diverging, there are decisions that consequence in shorter periods that give both sides the hope of eventual success. While the Chinese would like to strengthen themselves with the hope of American stumbling, the others would search to pacify Russia and Iran as shortly as possible.

Such calculations lead to the conclusion that the more likely script – than this war – is to repeat Richard Nixon's maneuver, which in 1972 led to an agreement with the People's Republic of China and to isolate the political russian Union.

Before that happens, however, there may be any kind of upsizing in ongoing negotiations. Events around the Korean Peninsula may begin to accelerate at the turn of 2024 and 2025. For a minute – for Russia, China and North Korea – seems appropriate. On the another hand: Americans, South Koreans and nipponese can see that the window of anticipation to neutralize Kim Jong Una is beginning to close.

If the Russians are planning – according to S. Szojgu's suggestions – to win in Ukraine by 2026, this may mean that they will be exerting a large deal of force on North Korea and China to make the right tension in the Far East at the moment. To distract American attention from Ukraine. This may lead to the conclusion that The year 2025 (and no later than 26′) can be both highest – erstwhile it comes to tension in American-Chinese relations – as well as a breakthrough in which both sides decide circumstantial actions or solutions.

All of this will not be without impact on the war on Ukraine, although this is already a subject for a separate analysis.

Krzysztof Wojchal

Geopolitics, strategy, politics, economy, taxes – blog

P.S. I think the permanent readers will forgive the alternatively glaring title of the article, but it is essential to speech the artificially raging panic to encourage those who click on the "war titles" to read the above text, and not just those seeking factual analyses not based on emotion and fear.