(Published on 1 November 2024)
This study develops a comprehensive model of the potential transformation of the international system through the gradual consolidation of authoritarian regimes; however, the key conclusion is that this process is currently at an early, fragmented stage, rather than taking the form of a cohesive bloc. In fact, bilateral ties between ‘Russia–Iran’ and ‘Russia–North Korea’ with a direct military and technological dimension already exist, but there is no integrating structure that would transform them into a single coalition with centralised management. This means that the risk of a bloc forming is real, but its realisation depends on the creation of a common toolkit — primarily a sanctions evasion system (SES), which could serve as the basis for further institutionalisation.
China is the key turning point in this configuration. At the current stage, it is operating within a logic of cautious competition with the West, supporting Russia politically and economically, but avoiding steps that could destabilise the global economy on which its own development depends. At the same time, the text clearly outlines a scenario in which China could shift to a more hardline model — in the event of an escalation over Taiwan or a US shift to a strategy of full containment of the PRC. In such a case, it is China that could become the system-defining centre of an autocratic bloc, radically altering the balance of power and increasing the level of threat to Ukraine.
The role of the Global South stands out as an uncertain but critical sphere of influence. These countries are not ideological allies of either bloc and operate according to the logic of economic pragmatism: their priority is the stabilisation of the global economy. This is precisely why they can both strengthen Russia (through economic interaction) and exert pressure on it. This makes them a key battleground between the West and a potential autocratic bloc.
Key conclusion: the threat to Ukraine lies not so much in the already formed anti-Western bloc, but in the process of its gradual formation through various instruments (SCO, military cooperation, regional ‘assets’). The inclusion of China will be the critical trigger for the transition to a qualitatively new level. Until then, the system remains unstable and open to influence, creating a window of opportunity for Ukraine to work precisely on the rifts between these actors and with the countries of the Global South that have not yet made a final decision.
RESEARCH.
International bloc — The threat of autocratic consolidation
Monitoring and highlighting key signals in these areas can help identify potential issues in advance, enabling an assessment and prevention of negative scenarios for Ukraine in the war with Russia and the country’s future development.
Regarding the possibility of the consolidation of the autocracies of the Russian Federation, Iran and the DPRK into a single bloc — ‘RF/Iran/DPRK’ — at the political, economic and military levels, with Russia likely to emerge as the leader. Note: Russia and North Korea possess nuclear weapons; Iran does not yet, but is close to developing them.
-
At present, consolidation is evident between individual partners in the ‘Russia/Iran’ and ‘Russia/DPRK’ pairs, rather than consolidation into a single bloc such as ‘Russia/Iran/DPRK’, where Russia would be the leader and would shape the overall structure of the prospective bloc with a pronounced anti-Western orientation, but the situation may change.
-
Signals of cooperation/rapprochement between Iran and the DPRK — ‘Iran/DPRK’ (trade and economic relations, exchange of technologies, including nuclear and military ones) — are also significant.
-
All three countries (Russia, Iran, North Korea) are subject to systematic Western sanctions, which have negative consequences for their economies; therefore, the likelihood of a sanctions-evasion system being established between these countries is very high.
-
Initially, separate and independent sanctions-evasion systems are likely to be established and tested with each country individually; subsequently, if such implementation yields positive results, they will be merged into a single comprehensive sanctions-evasion system (SES).
-
It can further be assumed that other partners of the Russian Federation subject to Western sanctions (such as, for example, Venezuela, Syria, Afghanistan, and others) will gradually join this sanctions circumvention system (SCS) — a continuation of the formation of an anti-Western bloc under Russian leadership.
• It can also be assumed that the SSS may be proposed to a broader group of countries — the Global South nations not subject to systematic Western sanctions — to form a wider anti-Western bloc. The platforms for implementing such plans are the SCO and BRICS. -
Consequently, the creation of the SCO will lead not only to political bloc confrontation in the world (bipolarity or multipolarity à la Russian + the confrontation of the nuclear arsenals of autocracies and democracies), but also to the destruction of the global economy and its fragmentation into separate parts/blocs (both legal and shadow), which will significantly impact the economic development of all countries, including Western nations, and their aid and support for Ukraine.
Regarding the possibility of the consolidation of the autocracies of the PRC, the Russian Federation, Iran and the DPRK into a single bloc — ‘China/Russian Federation/Iran/DPRK’ — at the political, economic and military levels, with China likely to emerge as the leader. China possesses nuclear weapons and is not subject to systematic Western sanctions.
-
At present, China maintains bilateral relations with these countries — ‘PRC/Russia’, ‘PRC/Iran’ and ‘PRC/DPRK’ — but the situation may change.
-
At this stage, China is not interested in destroying the global economy, on which the PRC’s prosperity depends, but may eventually support and join the SCO if its strategy of competition with the West is exhausted and shifts to a strategy of containment (partial or complete isolation of China). Such a turn of events could occur if or when China does decide to take direct military action against Taiwan and launches an operation to forcibly/militarily annex the island to China, thereby violating the status quo that currently exists.
-
In such a case, the threats to Ukraine would increase exponentially. China would be able to provide direct military assistance to Russia in the war against Ukraine, whilst simultaneously launching an aggression against Taiwan, thereby breaching the balance of red lines. Consequently, the West would be drawn into a ‘scenario of overstretch’ against the backdrop of the negative consequences of the global economic collapse. For Ukraine, such a turn of events could prove fatal.
Signals regarding Russia’s partners.
Competition strategy: China — political and economic support for the Russian Federation. Analysis of signals:
• on economic ties: circumvention of sanctions, features of trade and economic agreements, joint projects, including logistics, etc.
• regarding military and political support: the provision of weapons and technology (including nuclear and cutting-edge technology), the exchange or training of military specialists, joint military developments, etc.
• on the West’s efforts to deter China from becoming involved in the Ukrainian conflict or providing assistance to Russia in the war against Ukraine.
• China’s statements regarding Ukraine and its peace initiatives concerning the war in Ukraine (unilateral and multilateral).
Direct influence (military support) — North Korea and Iran.
Signals to watch:
• Economic ties: circumvention of sanctions, trade and economic agreements, joint projects, particularly logistical ones, etc.
• on military and political support (supply of weapons and technology (including nuclear and cutting-edge technology), exchange or training of military specialists, joint military developments, etc.)
• on the West’s efforts to deter Iran and North Korea from becoming involved in the Ukrainian conflict or providing assistance to Russia in the war against Ukraine.
Indirect influence.
Russia’s partners in the regions (‘Russia’s assets’). Such partners influence regional stability and can serve as a tool for destabilising the situation in regions, which the Russian Federation uses both to exert pressure on the West (in particular, regarding decisions on Ukraine) and to exert pressure on its other partners (to prevent them from taking certain decisions regarding Ukraine): for example, Syria (the Middle East), Venezuela (Latin America), Afghanistan (Central Asia), Africa (Libya and the Sahel region: Niger, Mali, Burkina Faso).
The countries of the Global South that are actively involved in the development of the global economy and have the highest economic indicators of this development are Argentina, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa and Turkey. These countries are capable of both exerting significant economic pressure on Russia and, conversely, helping it.
On the one hand, these countries are drivers of the global economy’s development; on the other, they are experiencing significant negative economic consequences due to Russia’s war with Ukraine. These countries are primarily interested in restoring the balance of the global economy’s development — this is their priority. Therefore, under certain circumstances, these countries may be interested in resolving the conflict in Ukraine on fair terms, whilst under other circumstances they may be interested in minimising the negative consequences of the conflict for their own economies by deeply freezing the conflict on any terms. For them, the main thing is the result — that is, restoring balance — and the method by which this can be achieved is not of fundamental importance. It is therefore important to monitor signals from these countries regarding their relations with both the Russian Federation and the PRC and the West, in order to be able to rule out scenarios that are negative for Ukraine.
First and foremost, these are the countries that are members of the G20 and BRICS:
• India (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• Brazil (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• Saudi Arabia (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• South Africa (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
Countries and alliances currently only part of the G-20:
• Argentina (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• Mexico (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• Indonesia (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• Turkey (ties with Russia/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);
• African Union (ties with the Russian Federation/ties with the West/relations with Ukraine);