A Growing Alliance Against US Influence

The ISW assessment highlights a concerning trend: the growing alignment between Russia, iran, North Korea, and the peopel’s Republic of China (PRC). According to the institute, these nations are actively testing the limits of Washington’s commitment to its allies across europe, the Middle East, and the Asia-Pacific region. This coordinated effort aims to diminish U.S. influence and create opportunities for these nations to exert greater control on the international stage. The implications of this alignment are important, potentially reshaping the geopolitical landscape and challenging the existing world order.

Evidence of this strengthening alliance can be seen in a telephone conversation between China President Xi jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the end of February 2025. During the call, Xi Jinping reportedly stated that the PRC and Russia are “real friends” who “cannot be pushed away” from each other, signaling a deepening strategic partnership impervious to external influence.This declaration underscores the commitment of both nations to stand together in the face of external pressures and to pursue their shared interests on the global stage.

Further solidifying this bloc, Russia has entered into bilateral agreements on complete strategic partnerships with China in May 2023, North Korea in October 2024, and Iran in January 2025. These agreements likely encompass economic, military, and political cooperation, providing Russia with crucial support in its ongoing conflict with Ukraine and bolstering the capabilities of its allies. The multifaceted nature of these partnerships suggests a long-term strategy to counter U.S. influence and establish a multipolar world order.

Ukraine Aid as a Bulwark Against Aggression

The ISW emphasizes the critical role of U.S. assistance to Ukraine in deterring further Russian aggression. Analysts note that Putin continues to rely on iranian drones and North Korean ballistic missiles and troops in his war against Ukraine. They argue that continued U.S.support serves as a vital presentation of commitment to protecting democracies from current and future aggression worldwide, extending beyond Ukraine to include allies such as Israel, South Korea, and Taiwan. The message is clear: U.S. support for Ukraine is not just about Ukraine; it’s about upholding the principles of democracy and deterring aggression globally.

The institute believes that a rejection of Ukraine would be interpreted by the Russia-led bloc as a sign that the united States is willing to abandon its other allies. This could embolden these nations to test the boundaries of American obligations around the world, potentially leading to increased instability and conflict. The potential consequences of such a miscalculation could be far-reaching, undermining U.S. credibility and emboldening adversaries to pursue their own agendas with greater impunity.

The block led by Russia is looking for disagreements between the United States and its allies,which are easy to use to weaken and isolate America on the world arena. This will allow opponents to rise and dictate, where and how the United States can interact with the world. The reduction of American assistance to Ukraine directly corresponds to the goals of these opponents and is a step towards limiting the influence of the United States in the world.

Institute for the Study of War

Key Conclusions from the ISW Analysis

The Institute for the Study of War outlined several key conclusions based on the current political and military landscape:

• A reduction in aid to ukraine would directly undermine the goal of achieving a sustainable world.
• Ukrainian forces, supported by significant U.S. military assistance, are inflicting considerable losses on Russian troops, limiting their territorial gains. This, coupled with challenges Russia will face in 2025, provides the U.S. with leverage for peaceful negotiations. Suspending aid would allow Putin to escalate his demands and pursue a complete victory through war.
• The primary obstacle to a lasting peace agreement in Ukraine is Putin, not Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.
• The Kremlin has launched an facts campaign to obstruct additional military assistance to Ukraine from the U.S. and Europe,falsely claiming that Russia has already won the war.

Zelensky’s Visit to Washington and Tensions with US leaders

On Friday, February 28, President Volodymyr Zelensky traveled to Washington, D.C., with the intention of signing an agreement on minerals between Ukraine and the United States. However, the visit was marked by tension and disagreement. The backdrop of this visit was the ongoing debate in the U.S. regarding the level of support for Ukraine, adding further complexity to the discussions.

During a meeting in the Oval office of the White House, in the presence of the media, a heated exchange reportedly occurred between Zelensky, U.S. President Donald Trump, and Vice President Jay di Wans. American leaders allegedly accused Zelensky of being unprepared for peaceful negotiations and demanded that he “thank the United States” for three years of financial and military support. The reported tension highlights the challenges in maintaining a strong alliance amidst differing perspectives and priorities.

Following these contentious negotiations, Zelensky reportedly departed the White House ahead of schedule, and the agreement on natural fossils was not signed. The fallout from the visit has raised concerns about the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations.The failure to finalize the agreement underscores the complexities and potential strains in the relationship between the two nations.

on March 1, American media outlets reported that the White House is considering the possibility of a complete cessation of U.S. aid to Ukraine.This could include halting all types of funding for military needs, intelligence sharing, training of Ukrainian military personnel and pilots, and the activities of the Center for Management of International assistance at the American base “Ramstein” in Germany. The potential implications of such a decision would be significant, potentially altering the course of the conflict and impacting the broader geopolitical landscape.

Though, CNN has reported that the United States is not at risk of total assistance to Ukraine, suggesting that while cuts might potentially be considered, a complete withdrawal of support is unlikely. This nuanced viewpoint suggests that while the level of support may be subject to change,a complete abandonment of Ukraine is not the most probable outcome.