There are all kinds of signs that the two camps seem to have formed, and even gradually become clear. The United States and the West, on the other hand, have begun to label their strategic opponents as "Axis powers" in order to occupy the commanding heights of law and create an international public opinion environment favorable to them for the next "decisive battle." This article explores whether the situation is really irreversible.
In the Middle East, Iran and Israel are already directly at odds. And under the game of the forces behind each other, whether it will lead to a war in the Middle East will be full of uncertainty.
In the Eastern European battlefield, with the passage of the "Ukraine Aid Act" that has been shelved by the US House of Representatives for half a year, Ukraine will change the passive battlefield situation, and even a decisive battle is about to start in May.
To put it bluntly, these two wars in the Middle East and Eastern Europe are no longer regional conflicts in the pure sense of the word, and their spillover has had a profound impact on the current international situation, and will certainly profoundly affect the reshaping of the world pattern, and even determine the fate of human society in the next few decades.
It is precisely because of the strategic demand of reshaping the "world pattern" that two camps have been vaguely formed, and it seems that a decisive battle is inevitable. Marked by the passage of the "Foreign Appropriations Package" by the US Congress, the United States and the West seem to have once again reached a consensus that they want to win the battle to defend the "world order."
In the U.S. bill, called "Peace by Force in the 21st Century," there are $60.8 billion in aid to Ukraine, $26 billion in aid to Israel, and allocations that can affect other hot spots. And judging from the name of this appropriation program, it is clear that it is of global strategic significance.
The shelving of the "Ukraine Aid Act" cannot only be regarded as an obstruction by the "Trump faction", but also a hesitation before Americans make up their minds. With the passage of this package of foreign appropriation bills, it can be said that after thinking about it for several months, the Americans have made up their minds to win this game of "control" of the future international order.
Now that the United States and the West have made up their minds and reached a consensus, there will inevitably be corresponding countermeasures and demands. For example, the purpose of aiding Israel is to ensure the dominant position of this "bridgehead" in the Middle East, and the appeal is to deter relevant countries from allowing the Middle East to fight a big war, let alone disrupt it, because that will lead to the loosening of the "camp".
Regarding the war in Ukraine, judging from the reaction of European and American politicians after the passage of the "Ukraine Aid Act", their appeal is no longer to ensure that Ukraine is undefeated, but to defeat Russia, or force the Putin regime to fall. Because, if Russia wins, it will also mean the collapse of the post-World War II international order dominated by the United States and the West.
As the saying goes, in all strategic games, public opinion must go first. So, the West has already begun to "label" specific countries. For example, British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak claimed in a statement a few days ago that Russia, Iran, North Korea and a certain country form an authoritarian "axis" and are becoming more and more "aggressive" due to different values.
Sunak also claimed that in response to the obvious future situation, the UK decided to put the defence industry into "wartime mode" and increase military spending to 2.5% of GDP. It is obvious that this is a preparation for a "decisive battle". Almost at the same time, the American media gave an alternative interpretation of Blinken's "eastward journey".
Regarding Blinken's "eastward trip", some US media interpreted that it was to completely cut off Russia's foreign aid channels, and it was also to make a final effort to win over a certain country. If it still "doesn't work", it will be followed by sanctions, including financial institutions.
In fact, with the development of science and technology and the changes of the times, the control of the economy, trade, resources and technology has long been part of the war. Therefore, there is even an opinion that the world war has actually broken out, but it is only "untraditional" in form.
Historically, when one camp "demonizes" and "labels" another, it is not far from a "complete showdown". And the US and Western camps are doing just that.
Previously, some Western politicians called Russia, Iran, and Hamas the "axis of evil". And now, because of the position of the Russian-Ukrainian war and the Iran-Israel conflict, the Western camp has begun to deepen the "axis theory". To put it bluntly, just from the title, it is also worth "being vigilant". After all, the "Axis Theory" originated in World War II and will inevitably be interpreted infinitely in public opinion.
Objectively speaking, no one wants to be labeled an "Axis power". However, someone has discovered a rather strange phenomenon. That is, the Russian side does not seem to care about being "labeled", and even has a "happy to see it" mentality. In this regard, some analysts believe that it may be because someone is "tied" with themselves to show that "not alone".
It is often said that the past does not forget the teacher of the future. Judging from the history of the past 100 years, it should not be good to be labeled as a specific one. Therefore, as long as there is a glimmer of hope, efforts should be made to salvage the situation. At the very least, it must not be labeled as an anachronism. As for whether the situation can be salvaged, my personal opinion is that, to some extent, choice may be more important than effort, even if it is only "expedient".