The time of the "Big Three"

The American side took into consideration the proposal of Vladimir Putin to meet with the leaders of the permanent members of the UN Security Council, said Russian Ambassador to the United States Anatoly Antonov. Earlier, the Russian president proposed holding a meeting of the heads of state - permanent members of the UN Security Council - Russia, China, the United States, France and Great Britain.

Surely you can interpret this proposal from different points of view - the economy, security, stability in Europe, but we will try to consider the situation from the point of view of geopolitics and a changing picture of the world. To do this, it should be noted that the Security Council, like the UN itself, developed on the basis of the end of World War II and reflected a new picture of the world, the so-called Yalta model, the contours of which were determined at the famous Yalta conference of winners at the very end of the war.

The essence of the Yalta model is the formation of a bipolar world, where the Soviet and Western blocs formally separated then by the ideological principle, but actually reflecting the classical, geopolitically determined picture of the world in which the marine civilization - the Western bloc - opposed the land civilization - the Soviet bloc, became the main active forces. dividing the world in half.

The trick of the collapse of the Soviet bloc was that, removing, as it seemed then, the ideological confrontation, the Soviet leadership in the person of Mikhail Gorbachev eliminated the geopolitical land bloc that was developing around the USSR after the end of World War II.

It was the fall of the second geopolitical - the Eurasian, in terms of geopolitics, the pole - that became the greatest geopolitical catastrophe, as President Vladimir Putin later put it, and not the liquidation of Soviet Marxist ideology. Although ideological retreat also played a colossal destructive role in eliminating the alternative geopolitical influence of the ideological and geopolitical bloc opposing the West.

At one point, the geopolitical picture of the world changed: the atlantist geopolitics won, the United States was the main driving force at that time, and Eurasian geopolitics was defeated, since its source - the Soviet bloc centered in the USSR, which was based on continental land Russia - was defeated self-destructing.

The second pole of the geopolitical balance of the bipolar Yalta world has disappeared, and the so-called unipolar moment has come in the world, as the American political scientist Charles Krauthammer determined the situation after the collapse of the USSR. The story ended - as it seemed then to another American political scientist Francis Fukuyama. But at the same time, the United Nations, which was built specifically as an institution for fixing a bipolar model, also lost its significance.

From that moment on, the USA became the main source of strength, sovereignty and meanings. The UN in this new, American-centered world has acquired the role of a certain American office, endorsing the decisions made in Washington. In the event that there was some kind of malfunction in the office, as in the situation with Yugoslavia or Iraq, Washington simply did not spit on the visa and acted independently as the actual, new and unique, without any competition or alternative, master of the world.

In fact, the United States was a hyperpower - the only geopolitical entity (the second self-withdrawing), the number one in the military field (the second - the Warsaw Pact - self-dissolving) and the number one in the economy (the second collapsed, but the new one has not yet matured).

In this US-centric picture of the world, the UN Security Council has ceased to reflect any relevance.

Russia has lost all its qualities - both geopolitical and military and economic, including any kind of sovereignty, which means that reckoning with it has ceased to be necessary. Britain and France (generally accidentally falling there as part of trade for the division of Europe between Stalin, Roosevelt and Churchill) turned into absolute and obedient apologists for Washington’s will in Europe, deprived of sovereignty back in 1945. And China, whose main strength for today is the economy, had not yet grown.

In fact, the UN Security Council for a long time represented a sandbox for Washington, in which it was concentrated sniffles and unsuccessfully crawled with its scoops, diligently filling molds with sand, awkward babies under the supervision of a mature American teenager who, if desired, had the opportunity to put on the presumptuous babies of slits and slaps.

In such a situation, no multilateral meeting made sense. Washington talked to everyone separately, seated on the throne, while all the other slaves crawled into the audience, each in his own way and each with his own petty question.

Everything changed as quickly, on a historical scale, as it happened at the time of the collapse of the Soviet - Eurasian, land - geopolitical bloc. In Russia, Vladimir Putin came to power, as a result of which relative sovereignty, a minimal economic base and significant military potential were, to varying degrees, but nevertheless restored. At this point, China has become the number one economy, if you measure it not by the numbers running on the screen, but by the volume of the real sector. And everything began to look different again.

Returning to the current proposal of Vladimir Putin after the brief geopolitical indoctrination given above, it is now not difficult to understand its geopolitical meaning.

While Russia was weak, and China was still growing (economically), an appeal to the UN and its Security Council, any appeal to them, like any proposals on this subject, made no sense at all. If they were contrary to US interests, this ended at best with a homeric laughter from Washington. If you didn’t contradict, then we’ll figure it out without you, sign here.

Today the world has changed. Russia has become a geopolitical player on a par with the United States, and if judged by its effectiveness, it is significantly superior to the United States, solving global and regional security problems, completing the awkward military adventures begun by the Americans, pacifying hotbeds of tension, actively building multilateral geopolitical axes, acting decisively, firmly and firmly subjectively.

This may not be so noticeable at the philistine level, but it is clearly fixed at the strategic level, which causes panic and commotion in the American elites. China also does not lag behind, increasing its economic influence through an investment presence literally around the world.

The call to revert to the UN Security Council format is clearly not an attempt to restore the bipolar Yalta world. The appeal to the Security Council is actually a call to gather in the format of the so-called “Big Three,” as the triumvirate of Russia, China and the United States more and more often call, to capture a new picture of the world that is replacing American unipolarity, the short historical moment of which has obviously come to an end .

Of course, Putin, as the world's main legalist - the last one who still complies with the law and international law - cannot but invite Britain and France formally and legally enshrined in the UN charter.

But in fact, it is a call to fix a new picture of the now multi-polar world in the format of the "Big Three".

And here another factor contributing to this appears - the Trump factor, which has very successfully and just as well been deflected from impeachment. In fact, the so-called American Democrats - the main enemies of Trump, remain the last source of the dying, but still not surrendering unipolar American globalization. A handful of American globalists who have lost their minds under the leadership of insane Hillary and cooling Obama, whose agents in the American elites have bitten a bit, unrestrained and frenziedly continuing to accuse Russia and Trump of curtailing the global project. And in this they are, oddly enough, right.

The globalist project really came to an end, and this, indeed, was facilitated by Russia and (that's where the luck was) the coming of Donald Trump to America. Although not agreeing on what the democrats continue to insist on, but together these two factors gave mankind a chance - at multipolarity as an alternative to globalist madness, plunging the world into chaos and self-destruction.

As Leonid Slutsky, head of the State Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs, quite rightly noted, an attempt to impeach did not lead to a decrease in the popularity of US President Donald Trump, but only strengthened it. That opened a new page to the restoration of normal relations within the framework of the "Big Three": Russia, China and the United States. It’s time to get together and, even under the bark of the globalists outside the window, to plan the contours of the future, more just, multipolar world, where not one, but several civilizations based on consensus will determine the fate of mankind.

The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.