China

Roman-Parthian Wars – a Repeat

The Roman-Parthian Wars were a series of wars that took place between the years 54 BC and 217 AD. The Parthian Empire covered a large area, among others of today’s Iran and Iraq. Sometimes the Romans were victorious, sometimes the Parthians. It was a clash of civilisations, a clash between occidental Rome and oriental Parthia. Today’s war between the United States and Iran appears to be a continuation of that old conflict that extended over centuries. The United States is a descendant of ancient Rome. The names of state institutions like Senate, the names of certain buildings like the Capital, the architectural style – all testify to it. Also, the English language whose vocabulary is almost 80% ultimately of Latin origin (including such common words like money, tender, nice, car, train, pay, peace, pound, face, battle, soldier, navy, missile, message, digital, computer, autumn, dinner, office…) shows in no uncertain terms (with the two last words also being of Latin origin) that the American-Iranian hostilities are a prolongation of that ancient feud.

The American-Israeli Operation Epic Fury, which began on 28 of February 2026 with a launch of 900 strikes within the first 24 hours marked the beginning of something that we do not yet know how it will develop. The United States had hoped for a quick and spectacular victory, a victory guaranteed by the decapitation operation in which Iran’s highest religious leader Ali Khamenei (and his daughter, and his son-in-law, and his granddaughter) was killed. But Iran rather than surrender has struck back and has struck back successfully. Sure, the Persian state cannot stand up to the American might in an old-fashioned duel. It can, however, bite back where it hurts most, and compel Washington to reconsider its policy. Iran is smaller than the United States, both in terms of population and territory, but – as unforgettable Aesop wrote in many of his fables – even a mouse can have its revenge on a lion.

So, Iran struck where it is most painful: Iran struck at the oil refineries, and effectively blocked the Straight of Hormuz. The Strait of Hormuz is the world’s most important choke point through which more than 20% of the global oil trade passes. The incapacitation of oil supply translates into higher prices of anything that is connected with oil, which in turn triggers a chain reaction of price rises, which is actually happening around the globe.

Washington appears to be surprised by Iranian resilience and Iranian defiance. The Americans had hoped for Iran to capitulate within days. Washington had hoped for a repeat of the 12-day war that took place in June last year. Nothing like that is anywhere in sight. Iran is launching missiles against American and non-American targets in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordania, and Israel. The targets are American military bases and the important infrastructure of those countries which host American bases. The oil refinery in Haifa, Israel, that is said to be hit processed 40% of Israel’s oil.

Two facts testify to America’s miscalculation and America’s second thoughts. First, Americans – Americans! – have proposed to Iran a ceasefire through a third party; second, President Donald Trump has called President Vladimir Putin to talk about… the war against Iran. What they discussed is not known: we can only guess that Washington is looking for off-ramps from the conflict.

Now, Iran seems to be to the United States what Ukraine has been to Russia for the last four years. For years the West has been sending munitions of war to Kiev; now it is Russia which is sending munitions of war to Tehran. The deal about selling Iran the advanced Russian S-400 antiaircraft and anti-missile complex has just sent shockwaves around the globe. The United States is about to taste its own medicine.

It is popular in the West to assume or even believe that Iranian people are against the religious ‘regime’ as the Western journalists are used to saying. Let us assume that it is true. If so, then the savage attack on Iran and the murder of 170 girls by the American Tomahawk missile compelled Iranians of all political persuasions to rally around the same ‘regime’. A historical repeat, again, just like it was in the thirties of the previous century in the Soviet Union. At that time there were many Soviet citizens who hated the Stalinist regime till… till the same regime was brutally attacked by the armies of the Third Reich. Precisely the same phenomenon was triggered in the Soviet Union which has been just triggered in Iran: those people who disliked communism and communist regime rallied around the communists and their leader.

The current Roman-Parthian war is going on. It is not merely a war between present-day Rome and the present-day Parthian Empire; rather, it is a war whose economic and political repercussions afflict the whole globe. India, China, South Korea, and Japan – they all depended very much on the oil supplies from the Persian Gulf. The said countries may wish to remain neutral in the ongoing hostilities, but if push comes to shove, if their economies become strangled by inadequate supplies, they may reconsider their policies and exert pressure on the participants. When Romans and Parthians fought against each other, either side would have looked for allies. Much the same is true of the present conflict. The American-Israeli alliance is facing the solidification of the political, economic, and military cooperation between Russia, Iran, and China. How long will the other countries watch from the sidelines?

The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Gone are the days when the world watched, with bated breath, the many talks between the United States and the Soviet Union on reduction and control of nuclear arms development. Gone are the headlines announcing the beginning, continuation and completion of the SALT or START talks. The world has changed.

Now it is the United States – as before – Russia – a replacement for the Soviet Union – and… China! When the SALT and START talks were conducted, no one paid any attention to the Middle Kingdom. Now China is a power to reckon with, not merely economically but also militarily. China is estimated to have some 350 strategic missile launching pads as opposed to some 480 American. That’s hard on America’s heels. Now what negotiations on nuclear arms control and arms limitation can be conducted between the United States and the Russian Federation without taking into the equation the Middle Kingdom?

The problem is that Moscow says it has nothing to do with China: China is not Russia’s military ally, though Washington perceives it as such. Contrarily, Russia views France and the United Kingdom as America’s closest allies, and rightly so: all the three countries belong to NATO. Hence, Russia’s demand that both France and Great Britain be included in the talks is legitimate.

On the other hand, Washington is legitimately concerned about China: under the current circumstances Beijing can certainly be viewed as Russia’s ally rather than that of America. (Just to think of it: China’s might have been created by the United States of which we’ll make a reminder later in the text.) Neither does the Middle Kingdom want to be included in the trilateral talks with the Russian Federation: why should it? It is an independent power – superpower – and it can act at the negotiating table on its own. So much so that Beijing has something to win from Washington: ok, the Chinese may say, we could reduce our military development if you lift the sanctions on China and the countries that wish to trade with the Middle Kingdom. How about that? Nuclear might is always a fine bargaining chip, is it not?

It is even true of tiny North Korea as well: not that North Korea is so powerful as to be considered for joint talks. No. But Korean nuclear potential is a sufficient deterrent even for such a superpower as the United States. And there is something more to the nuclear potential: it is the determination of the Korean leadership to actually use the missiles if push comes to shove. It is not Venezuela, whose president can be adducted in broad daylight without the perpetrator of the abduction fearing any retaliation, but we are digressing.

The balance of forces has changed since the year in which the Soviet Union disintegrated. For maybe as many as two decades the United States dominated the globe and felt so self-assured that Washington began to dictate to the whole globe. This, however, has changed. Russia has reasserted herself while China has risen to the status of a(n almost) superpower.

Which by the way is good for humanity. One superpower with no rival to fear would soon become corrupted and degenerated. All the other countries would have felt intimidated with no alternative anywhere in sight. Fortunately, a world emerges where there are three or maybe four (if we include India) big players, which allows for the smaller entities to have a political alternative, and which keeps each superpower in check.

A new arrangement needs to be made – no one power wants the prospect of a nuclear shootout. Talks are not going to be easy, because it is now three big entities, not two.

Political persistent rumour has it that Adolf Hitler was the creation of the Western elites who wished to rebuild Germany and direct its power against the Bolshevik Soviet Union. That is why London and Paris did not react when Germany began to arm itself, when Germany incorporated Austria and annexed Czechia; that explains why they did not react when Poland was attacked. The Western elites wanted Germany to expand, grow stronger, and come into physical contact with the Soviet Union. Now Adolf Hitler – assuming he was the darling of the Western elites – stopped playing by their script and turned against them when he attacked Denmark and Norway, the Low Countries and eventually France. It came as a shock: he was supposed to attack the Soviet Union!

Isn’t history repeating itself? The Middle Kingdom was supported by the United States for the express purpose to turn it against the Soviet Union. Washington would have rubbed its hands in glee if Beijing and Moscow started a real hot war! Decades have passed and – due to clumsy American policy-making – Moscow was pushed into Beijing’s embrace while Beijing was pushed in Moscow’s. Now they are – though not formally – economic and military allies. But again, the Kremlin may repeat: we have nothing to do with it. Had not Washington acted the way it did, there would have been no war in Ukraine, no sanctions on Russia and China, and consequently no Russo-Chinese cooperation.

The three gunslingers have a hard nut to crack. Certainly, none wants a nuclear exchange, yet each wants to get the upper hand. They are observing each other attentively, not knowing in which direction to level their guns. It reminds one of the cultic cemetery scene from the 1966 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly classic movie. Do you recall it? Good Blondie (Clint Eastwood), bad Angel Eyes (Lee Van Cleef), and ugly Tuco (Eli Wallach) are facing each other – graves and crosses around them, their hands over their holsters, their eyes darting from face to face, their minds calculating. That’s the United States, that’s the Russian Federation, and that’s the People’s Republic of China facing each other (who is the good, the bad or the ugly is a matter of your political persuasion). In the graveyard scene only one emerges victorious. How will things play out in political reality at beginning of the 21 century?

China’s economy is faltering

In recent decades, economic growth in China has been largely driven by real estate. This sector accounted for up to 30% of the country’s GDP in 2020. The Chinese people’s low confidence in the stock market, coupled with the fact that local governments’ source of income was the sale of land to developers, meant that up to 60% of the country’s citizens’ assets were tied up in real estate. When companies such as Evergrande, which operate on a pyramid model (the money from pre-orders went to repay past obligations), went bankrupt, millions of people were left with mortgages on homes whose construction had been halted or which had largely become vacant. The result is a sharp decline in real estate investment, as shown in the chart below. As you can see, the decline in investment in November 2025 compared to November 2024 was more than 15%, and this trend appears to be deepening month by month. This confirms the capital flight from Chinese real estate.

Source: Chinese Statistics Bureau. Figures for fixed asset investment and real estate investment are given as cumulative change from the previous year. Data for January and February have been combined.

The chart above contains some other important data from the Chinese economy, such as investment in fixed assets like factories, bridges, roads, i.e., infrastructure in general. Such spending has artificially improved economic performance while simultaneously indebting local governments. Within three months, we are facing a decline in this type of investment, which means that another engine of China’s economic development is beginning to collapse.

The Chinese people’s dependence on real estate confirms the sharp decline in retail sales momentum, which rose by only 1% in November compared to the previous year. As the housing market crisis depleted citizens’ savings, they feel less secure and prefer to spend less money. The result is deflation, because people prefer to postpone purchases, knowing that after a while it will become even cheaper.

Unemployment has also risen. When more than 20% of 18- to 24-year-olds were out of work in 2023, the government decided to suspend publication of the results for six months in order to “optimize” the methodology. And lo and behold: unemployment suddenly fell by more than 6% in six months! Despite all such government manipulations, nearly 17% of young people are out of work—that’s not good news.

The response of the comrades in Beijing to the economic crisis is to focus even more on exports. This is confirmed by the maintenance of stable growth momentum in industrial production (see chart). China’s aggressive expansion into foreign markets is therefore directly linked to a difficult domestic situation. If the outlook at home does not improve, the central government will flood the entire world even more with its cheap products (as can already be seen in the European car market).

Afghanistan

When Joe Biden initiated the chaotic withdrawal of the US army, he may not have been in his right mind. Kabul witnessed Dantesque scenes at its airport while 70,000 Afghan US army personnel who could not be evacuated, and 7 billion dollars worth of military equipment was handed over to the Taliban. That alone merits the name of treason, or at least – disgrace. Still, Joe remained politically unscathed and continued to hold office.

Now Trump says the airfield in Bagram should be recaptured. Why? Because the Taliban should be combated again? Not at all. It’s about big geopolitical plans.

The simple answer is that the airfield is only an hour’s drive from the Chinese factories that manufacture nuclear weapons.

In a broader context, it is also about raw materials. The withdrawal of the USA has opened up space for China, which although not officially recognizing the Taliban government, is conducting intensive economic negotiations with it. Afghanistan has huge reserves of copper, lithium, cobalt, gold, uranium and rare earths – estimated to be worth up to 3 trillion dollars. It is precisely these raw materials that are crucial for the production of batteries, electronics and the development of green energy technology, which is exactly what China needs. One of the Middle Kingdom’s biggest projects in Afghanistan is Mes Aynak – a huge copper mine. But that’s not all. Afghanistan could be a land corridor connecting China with Iran, the Middle East and Europe. That’s why China is investing in roads, railroads and the energy sector there as part of the New Silk Road.

The Taliban are not stupid either and invest in their own country. The most blatant example of this is a huge Taliban project – the Kosh Tepa Canal. Its aim is to transform desert land into fertile agricultural land by diverting water from the Amu Darya River. It is an investment of enormous economic, but also political importance – it shows that the Taliban want to build a state despite the lack of international recognition.

A possible US intervention in Afghanistan would be met with a reaction from China and escalate tensions between Washington and Beijing, which could end in new tariffs and trade wars. China is already limiting the export of rare earths from its own country, for example, which is perhaps why Trump is looking to other countries.

A three-headed dragon looms large

The world is undergoing an epic change. The European Union is about to be dimmed by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), so much so that the American tariff policy has just pushed India into Russia’s – which is not all that surprising – and China’s embraces. The last mentioned is a big event. India and China have been at loggerheads for decades, and now they are reconciling themselves against the pressure from the United States and their West in general. India and China means putting together almost three billion people. India, China and Russia have more nuclear warheads and missiles than the collective West. Why, even small North Korea has some and the nukes. The cooperation between the three main states – Russia, China and India – occupying the bulk of what is referred to as Asia along with the many smaller states that are members of the SCO is a huge political, economic and military challenge to the collective West. Washington, Paris, London and Berlin must have miscalculated heavily and overlooked what has been looming large on the political horizon for a long time. While they thought Russia would be an easy prey to be destroyed in the proxy war, they ended up facing a three-headed dragon emerging from Asia.

To think of it: China’s might has been created by the United States of America! What of the outsourcing, what of all the support that Washington would provide Beijing with just to spite the Soviet Union, the Middle Kingdom has become a superpower to be reckoned with. During the military parade occasioned by the 80th anniversary of the end of the Second World War in the Far East and the liberation of the Middle Kingdom from the Japanese occupation, China rolled out various kinds of armament, including drones and long-range missiles. China’s President Xi Jinping emerged in a limousine from the Tiananmen – the entrance to Beijing’s Forbidden City in a uniform habitually worn by Mao Zedong, a uniform resembling the one Joseph Stalin used to wear. Thus the Chinese leader stressed the connection with the recent past, although Chairman Mao was not the one who rendered positive services to the Chinese people. Russia does not preserve the continuity with its Soviet period of the past to that extent: true, the military parades in Moscow feature soldiers in uniforms and with military standards from the Second World War, but the tomb where mummified Lenin is till kept is shielded from public view; nor does Putin or the other members of the authorities climb the tomb as was the custom in the Soviet Union from where Soviet leaders would deliver their speeches and watch the marching soldiers.

Military parades in Moscow are compelling, yet the one in Beijing trumped Moscow’s parades. The parade held in Washington to mark the U.S. Army’s 250th birthday just cannot compare to either of the aforementioned: look for yourself. (Notice the rock music accompanying the American show; also, compare the Chinese vigorous march with the American languid walk.) China showed its military might also in equipment.

Within the framework of SCO the three leaders – Putin, Modi and Xi Jinping – conferred about political and economic topics. SCO conferences were also attended by Turkey’s President Erdoğan, while the military march was watched by Slovakia’s leader Robert Fico and Hungary’s minister for foreign affairs. So, Europe was ultimately somehow present, though not Western Europe, apart from a minor representative from Belgium. Were the representatives from the EU absent because of Putin’s presence there?

Well, Europe is crusading against Russia, and has grandiose plans of conquering China. Kaja Kallas, one-time Estonia’s prime minister, now the face of European diplomacy made no bones about it: “If you are saying that you are not able to beat, that we collectively are not able to really pressure Russia so much that it would have an effect because… then how do you say that you’re able to take on China risk. (…) My point is that if we don’t get Russia right, we don’t get China right, either.” (The interviewer tries to tone her statement down, to little effect.)

Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, Kim Jong Un

Strange that President Donald Trump failed to seize the opportunity to attend the anniversary of China’s liberation from Japan’s yoke. Just as Washington once pushed China and Russia into each other’s embraces, such a gesture on the part of the American president might have more favourably disposed the Middle Kingdom to the United States. Either Donald Trump didn’t want to go to Beijing of his own accord or he has bad advisors. The same is true of the European Union. Sadly, they could not be bothered to take part in China’s celebration. How can they then hope to develop friendly relations with the Middle Kingdom? How can then they hope to drive a wedge between China and Russia?

SCO’s membership includes India, Iran, Pakistan, Kazakhstan, China, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Belarus and Russia. It was established in 2001. SCO’s member states cumulatively make up 24% of the world’s area and 42% of the world’s population. (The European Union makes up less than 2% of the world’s area, and 5.5% of the world’s population.) Russia, China, India, and Iran are concurrently members of BRICS.

A third of all goods are manufactured in China

So who would dare to go to war with China? It would be a shot in the West’s own knee. War with China would mean the introduction of numerous sanctions/lockdowns and, as a result:
① enormous inflation in the West (caused by shortages of goods);
② enormous unemployment in China (caused by the closure of many factories due to a lack of orders from the West);
③ an enormous strengthening of Russia and Iran through direct, massive arms supplies from China;
④ Emergence of new frontlines (possibly: Strait of Hormuz, the Baltic States, Taiwan, North Korea, islands in the South China Sea);
⑤ Conversion of the world economies to war production;
⑥ Social unrest;
⑦ Rise of the South American countries that would serve as “reservoirs”.

Who would dare? Perhaps Trump, as it is reported that he is keen on war against Iran. Beijing, however, proudly sides with the Persians and condemns Israel’s latest attacks. And rightly so, as they violate international rules. This could easily lead to a clash between the world powers.

Perhaps Trump wants war to cause hyperinflation, to weaken the dollar, to cure American companies of the sin of outsourcing and to bring all production back to America? Yes, and Europe would also become totally weak this way… Two birds with one stone. And he probably wouldn’t care that thousands of young Americans would die in the process, just as Zelenskyy and Putin don’t care that their youth are dying senselessly.