Understanding the world around us is very important, and it will help us prepare for the future. Investing in agriculture in a battlefield zone is inappropriate, and the outcome for investors is miserable. Investing in education in a world that prepares soldiers is useless. Promoting the use of a human workforce in an automated world is undesirable, and planning to establish pad farms in desert areas is insanity.
As climatic conditions can be predicted by both traditional measures, such as residents’ observations and experiences, and modern tools, such as wind gauges and barometers, international politics can be predicted, too.
Through history and paying close attention to details observed, Africa should have made important decisions and positioned itself prior to its former state on non-alignment that heavily depended on Western financial assistance.
In this piece, I intend to discuss the question: Is the Russian government preparing for the Third World War? Now, let’s pay attention to the details.
Recently, the Russian government has been busy building, revitalizing, and establishing closer partnerships with African and Asian countries.
Also, read Should Tanzania Join BRICS? The Case for Saying “YES!”
This relationship mostly found on objectives that aim to ensure military-technical and material support, food and energy security, space exploration, nuclear power and a new international order that is non-exploitative to the poor countries, especially African countries, therefore, through such objectives, Russia has won a big deal of trust and support in numerous of governments and regional authorities in Africa and Asia.
Russia can be in preparation for the war or might be preparing to counter military threats from NATO due to its shaken military capability after a long run of war in Ukraine and being disadvantaged by sanctions of oil and gas from Russia to Europe.
Moscow and the Alliance of Sahel States (ASS) relationship has been closer and more positive; countries that formed ASS, including Burkina Faso, Guinea, Mali and Niger, determined to support Moscow’s objectives of creating new international order by eliminating all forms of exploration and oppression, Moscow anticipated supporting these countries.
Devoid of the neo-colonial influence of France’s government in ASS member states indicates the unshakeable confidence toward Moscow.
Through provision of military technical and materials support via independent agent such as Wagner and direct support from Moscow, member of ASS vow to support Russia government to counter Europe sanctions on Russian’s productions.
Economic and social ties established between these entities attract other countries to forge relationships with Moscow to enjoy the support that military juntas of West Africa receive. Therefore, this results in increased support of undemocratic practices in African governments and fertilizes the possibility of more military coups in Africa.
Don’t miss BRICS Nightmare Could Be Regional Economic Disparity!
Moscow’s influence in BRICS is pivotal for determining its organizational functions and objectives. Even though the BRICS structure and function are not comparable to military organizations like NATO, that does not undermine Moscow’s manipulative role in obtaining military support from its members.
Considering the Mutual partnership that Beijing and Moscow have created over time, their political objectives to take Washington out of the rule and exclusive Beijing’s determination to climb the peak of economic superiority of the global, and their unique position in BRICS that is almost invisible, it indicates that the nature of this organization objectives is not steady not to deviate significantly when Moscow or Beijing need military support.
BRICS almost neutralizes economic sanctions on Moscow, so their impacts are not as undesirable as Western governments expect. Moscow’s industry enjoys profits through trading and exchange relationships within BRICS member states. Following its populous support in Africa, markets for oil and gas that ban Russia’s European exports have technically replaced.
Financial, economic, political, technological and military support that the “Alliance of Evil” guarantees to Moscow is dreadful to international order. Russia received military support directly from the Iranian, Chinese, and North Korean governments; they also served as a significant market bloc for Russia’s oil and gas.
In return, Moscow vetoed the sanctioning of the Pyongyang missile and nuclear project and proposed that an independent expert investigate it. In case Russia needs to continue the war against her neighbouring states, she has fallen back on entities to support stabilisation.
This alliance destabilised the order since the Moscow – Tehran partnership would cause perpetual instability in the Middle East, where the dice had been cast; however, in vain, destabilised Palestine suffered the consequences. More conflicts are expected to happen between Israel and Lebanon.
The Moscow—Pyongyang partnership is anticipated to cause trouble in the Korean peninsula, and the Moscow—Beijing relationship is expected to raise tension in Taiwan. Russia’s advantage in the Ukraine war is due to such relationships.
Security pact between Moscow and Pyongyang (2024) “Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership” rise concerns among developed democratic countries of the world.
Also, read The East African Community: The Sleeping Economic and Energy Giant in the Making
The pact ambiguity is challenging NATO member States to interpret the text such as ” state of war”, “military invasion”, and ” military and other assistance with all means in its possession without delay” to the extent that the only way to know when Pyongyang will intervene to support Moscow when NATO or member state of NATO enter into war with Moscow is unpredictable but also the term “other assistance” which may include intelligence information exchange and troops pose challenges to Comprehend the limits of the act.
Some Western writers may think that Pyongyang and Moscow will have different viewpoints in interpreting the Treaty to the extent that Russia will not support the North Korean government and vice versa.
However, that is not the case. These countries share enemies and objectives. This Treaty will not decrease Pyongyang’s support for Russian aggression but rather multiply it, and in return, Moscow is anticipated to do the same.
Japan, New Zealand, and Australia engaged with NATO through invitations and attendance at summits and conferences anticipated to contain Moscow’s expansion of aggressiveness.
The current position of Africa, specifically Tanzania, is desperate for financial assistance and seeking a partner who will guarantee an unconditional flow of resources without intervention to restructure or reform its facade systems. This stance has made Africa vulnerable and a weak entity to manipulate in the global arena.
African governments and Tanzania, in particular, must cast the dice in bilateral and multilateral treaties that, on the surface, presented as liberating pacts against underdevelopment and poverty. We must clear the vagueness and ambiguity of institutional treaties to avoid dragging the country into more trouble with the world.
It’s my wish that Tanzania never shows an intention to join a hostile bloc just because of the unrepresentative nature of the United Nations (UN). At the same time, domestic politics is pure partisanship and perpetuates unproportionality.
I was just as enthralled by your work as you were. Your sketch is elegant, and your written content is sophisticated. However, you seem concerned about potentially delivering something questionable soon. I’m confident you’ll resolve this issue quickly and return to your usual high standards.