Russia and china are back to the global political arena, once again, to play a role that may lead to the birth of a new multi-polar force, after it was ruled by USA, alone, since the fall of Berlin wall and until our days.
The image of the return of this new old alliance has been shown, lately, at the Security Council, where Pekin and Russia used their right of veto to stop any decision that may condemn Syrian regime, and to claim a solution for the Syrian crisis, through a dialogue between the authority and the opposing parties.
Thus, this bilateral awakening of Russian Bear and Chinese Dragon represents the elevation of a major military force held by Moscow, and a sublime economic force held by Pekin so they can impose their role together and formulates a new international strategy against the Western strategy.
But what are the reasons that have left Pekin abandoned its positions in international crises, and returning Moscow to stir with an iron fist after choosing for previous periods to use the velvet fist by a soft diplomacy that buys and sells in the international market positions?
Regarding Moscow, he fears that the contagion of the Muslim regimes is spreading in the Arab world to arrive in Chechnya, for example, that threatens the Russian national security, not only in those territories away, but also within the Russian entity itself, in light of talking about studies that expect an incredible increase of the Russian Muslim population compared to the Orthodox population.
In addition, Moscow will not easily abandon its presence in tropical seas, by the establishment of military bases on Syrian seas, which left it to have a deterrent force against the network of U.S. missiles on Turkish territory, and are governed by a paper redeemable in any project of peace in the Middle East. Without ignoring the possibility of the birth of a new alliance that extends from Iran, through Iraq and Syria, arrived in Lebanon, and that Russia can play a role as gatekeeper for such an alliance.
About Pekin, it no longer fears the economic boycott by the West because it has become indispensable in the Global Economy and because today China is the savior of America and the countries of the euro area in their financial crises through hundreds of billions of dollars that has invested treasuries of those countries.
Since the fear factor has disappeared, so it is natural that China is beginning to reveal the truth of its international ambitions, and it saw that the revelation is to establish a kind of strategic alliance with Russia to face any Islamic invasion, or any Indian attack, where the threat of petroleum is a danger to the petroleum industry, especially now that China is becoming one of the largest consumer country of petroleum, and the biggest investor in this area.
In this way, China progressively activated the right of "veto" that it has to give an impression of the early appearance of an increasing multipolarity, established with the passage of time what appears the atmosphere of a cold war.
It was pointed that China was usually absent from voting on issues that don`t interest it directly, so it`s among the five permanent members of the Security Council that have the veto power, and up to now, it`s use it the least, where it has used since 1971, only 8 times, but France has used it 20 times during the same period.
In addition to that, there is the question of Washington and the European Union countries that are embroiled in social, financial, economic crises that we can`t underestimated, which was reflected negatively on their policy position on the world stage in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to face the Iranian nuclear issue and the issue of peace in the Middle East, which means that the opportunity is now available in Pekin and Russia to exploit the weakness of the West and impose a sort of partnership in international crisis management.
And the Syrian crisis is now an experience for an emerging multipolarity, where there is a chance in this matter without the incentive is the legitimacy or illegitimacy of the Syrian regime, the continuity or non-continuity of President Bashar Al-Assad.