By Nirmal P. Acharya

The US and Russia recently held separate talks in Saudi Arabia on the future of the Russian-Ukrainian war. This was seen by the mainstream media as a new Yalta conference.

Ukraine, a party to the war between Russia and Ukraine, was excluded from the talks, as was Europe, an important related party.

Europe, politically disintegrated and militarily dependent on the US, has been marginalized on the international stage. The outcome of the war between Russia and Ukraine was determined by the US and Russia, while, China held a neutral position. According to this opinion, a new world pattern has been formed: the US, China and Russia are tripartite.

Personally, I am inclined to support this view for the following reasons:

Military and Geopolitical checks and balances

The US: The global military hegemon, with the most advanced military technology and military bases all over the world, and the NATO alliance system as its strategic pillar.

Russia: The size of its nuclear Arsenal is comparable to that of the United States, and its assertive posture in energy and geopolitical games (such as Ukraine and Syria) has a direct impact on European security.

China: Its military modernization is progressing rapidly, and its regional denial/anti-access capabilities (e.g., South China Sea, Taiwan Strait) have been significantly enhanced, becoming a force to be reckoned with in the Asia-Pacific region.

The interaction of the three: the intensifying competition between China and the US in the Indo-Pacific, the confrontation between Russia and the US in Eastern Europe and the Middle East, and the hedging of pressure from the US through strategic cooperation (such as joint military exercises and energy cooperation) between China and Russia, forming a triangular balance to a certain extent.

Divergence of economic and technological influence

The US: Dominates the global financial system (dollar hegemony, tech giants), but faces China's catch-up in 5G, artificial intelligence and other fields.

China: The world's second largest economy, expanding its global influence through the Belt and Road Initiative, holds a key position in supply chains and new energy technologies.

Russia: A small economy with a "strategic weapon" of energy (gas, oil) and food exports that can leverage specific areas (such as European energy security).

Competition between ideology and institutional models

The "liberal international order" advocated by the US is challenged by China and Russia: China proposes a "community of human destiny" and a multilateralism narrative, while Russia emphasizes "sovereign democracy" and anti-Western intervention.

The game between the three parties on international platforms such as the United Nations and the G20 reflects the competition for values and the right to make rules.

However, in this "three-pillar" pattern, I think China is the most promising side. The Russian economy is too weak, and the US has been "deindustrializing" for too long. Only China, politics, military, economy, culture, science and technology in all aspects, the future is limitless.

As a neighbor of China, with which we share a 1,300km border, we must try to get on the fast train of China.

Yes, only by building the China-Nepal Railway can Nepal catch the train of China, transform from a landlocked country to a land-linked, and occupy a favorable position in the new world pattern.