In the contemporary era, the international geopolitical chess indicates the existence of three major players: the United States, China and Russia. From confrontation between these three major military powers may result alternative scenarios to the current that is characterized at the time by the US hegemony on the world stage since the end of the bipolar world that confronted the United States and the Soviet Union.

1. 1
THE GEOPOLITICAL TRENDS OF CONTEMPORARY ERA
Fernando Alcoforado *
In the contemporary era, the international geopolitical chess indicates the existence of
three major players: the United States, China and Russia. From confrontation between
these three major military powers may result alternative scenarios to the current that is
characterized at the time by the US hegemony on the world stage since the end of the
bipolar world that confronted the United States and the Soviet Union. Based on the
three great protagonists of contemporary international geopolitical chess, it can be said
that the United States aim to maintain its world hegemony in economic and military
plans. To accomplish this, the the US government strategies consist primarily of: 1) stop
the rise of China as a hegemonic power in the world; and, 2) prevent Russia could rise
to the status of global power or even regional power. In practice, the US government
wants to avoid facing the future of two giants: China as a hegemonic power and
reinvigorated Russia.
To stop the rise of China as a hegemonic power in the world, the US military strategy is
focused on the Asia-Pacific region, without neglecting the Middle East to fight against
terrorism, defend Israel, protect its oil interests and deal with the threat of Iran. As a US
ally, Japan cooperates with the US strategy of "encirclement" of China strengthening its
military power by 2020 [See the article Japão reforça estratégia militar para reagir à
China (Japan reinforces military strategy to respond to China) published at <http: //
www. portugues.rfi.fr/geral/20101217-japao-reforca-estrategia-militar-para-reagir-
china>]. Another goal of the US military strategy is also pressing the alliance between
Russia and China developing the NATO actions in Europe and the strengthening of its
military bases in Japan, South Korea and Diego Garcia and the Pacific Fleet [See the
article under the title Nueva estrategia militar global de Estados Unidos (New US
global military strategy) by Ruiz Pereyra Faget published at
<http://port.pravda.ru/mundo/11-01-2012/32735-estrategia_eua-0/>].
The XXI century is marking a qualitative change in the international system and the
position occupied in it by the United States. No doubt that this change is closely
associated with the emergence of China. To ascend to the hegemonic power condition
of the planet, China will have to adopt 6 strategies: 1) to achieve high economic growth
to overtake the United States; 2) to increase continuously its participation in
international trade to lead it; 3) to remove the economic and military leadership of the
United States in Asia, which means reaching the heart of US power in the region; 4) to
prevent India become an autonomous pole of economic attraction in Asia, possibly in
alignment with the United States; 5) to become essential power for peace in the Persian
Gulf between Persians (Iran) and Arab (particularly Saudi Arabia) with the decline of
US influence in the region; and 6) to strength economic and military alliance with
Russia.
China is building a large naval force to control the Pacific Ocean with the immediate
goal to halt the US military power in the Western Pacific. The Chinese are building a
defensive force, including weapons that can reach US military targets. Chinese military
spending will exceed the combined budgets of the twelve other major powers in Asia-
Pacific [See the article by Michael Wines of the New York Times in Beijing under the
title EUA e China procuram acordar estratégia militar (US and China seek to agree
military strategy) published at <http: // www1 .folha.uol.com.br / world / 944,409-usa-
and-china-looking strategy wake-militar.shtml>]. According to The Economist, China

2. 2
will surpass the military spending of the United States by 2025 [See the article by José
Eustaquio Diniz Alves entitled EUA, China e Índia: disputa de hegemonia e destruição
do meio ambiente (US, China and India: hegemony dispute and destruction of the
environment) published on the site <http://www.ecodebate.com.br/2012/01/13/eua-
china-e-india-disputa-de-hegemonia-e-destruicao-do-meio-ambiente-artigo-de-jose-
eustaquio-diniz-alves/>].
Two great nuclear powers, Russia and India, may act to strengthen the position of China
and the United States respectively. The military strategy of Russia provides for the
resetting of the Army and Navy with the use of conventional and nuclear weapons in
response to an attack on the country [See the article by Bruno Quadros e Quadros under
the title A nova doutrina militar da Rússia: mais do mesmo? (The new military doctrine
of Russia: more it?) published at
<http://www.enciclopedia.com.pt/news.php?readmore=181>]. NATO expansion
towards the Russian borders is the main danger outside the country. Russia would tend
to support China in a conflict with the United States. India invests in the military to deal
with their powerful neighbors, China and Pakistan, and internal security issues [See
Article Índia é o maior importador de armas do mundo (India is the world's largest
arms importer) published at <http://www.forte.jor.br/2011/03/24/india-eo-maior-
importador-de-armas-do-mundo />]. India could come to support the US intervention in
the region in confrontation with China.
On Russia, it is important to note that its strategic objectives are: 1) to defend itself from
the threat to their territory represented by the United States and with NATO forces; 2) to
strengthen its position as a supplier of natural gas to European Union countries; and 3)
to achieve world power status lost with the demise of the Soviet Union. It is important
to note that after the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the Eastern European socialist
system, the US project was the occupation of the border territories of Russia, which had
been under Soviet influence until 1991 [See the article by Numa Mazat and Franklin
Serrano under the title A Geopolítica das Relações entre a Federação Russa e os EUA:
da “Cooperação” ao Conflito (The Geopolitics of relations between the Russian
Federation and the US: "Cooperation" to a conflict) posted on the website
<http://www.revistaoikos.org/seer/index.php/oikos/article/view/293>]. According
Mazat and Serrano, the occupation movement started by the Baltic, crossed Central
Europe, Ukraine and Belarus, went through intervention in the Balkans (former
Yugoslavia) and came to Central Asia and Pakistan, expanding NATO's borders. When
finished the 1990s, the geopolitical distribution of new US military bases leaves no
doubt about the existence of a new "sanitary belt", separating Germany from Russia and
Russia from China. The arrival of Vladimir Putin to power would radically change this
geopolitical framework, until then very unfavorable for Russia.
Mazat and Serrano also claim that the NATO intervention in Serbia in 1999, despite
strong opposition from Russia, was perceived by the Russian people and their leaders as
a threat to the security of the country. The bombing of Serbia showed clearly how the
siege strategy organized by the United States and its allies, through the programmed
feed NATO and the European Union in areas formerly controlled by the Soviet Union,
could pose a danger to the sovereignty of Russia. The arrival of Vladimir Putin to power
in Russia in 2000, marked the beginning of geopolitical recovery of Russia, whose
position had been greatly weakened during the Yeltsin government in the 1990s. Putin
is the rise to power of a solid and broad coalition of economic and political interests
who united on the need to restore the operation of basic foundations of a modern

3. 3
capitalist state that surpass the wild and predatory phase of "primitive accumulation" in
the Russian Federation.
The geopolitical recovery of Russia was made possible by the affirmation of a
nationalist project of recovery of the Russian state by Putin, according Mazat and
Serrano. The Russian leadership over the past decade, decided to concentrate their
efforts on regaining a geopolitical dominion over the area of the former Soviet Union.
They intended to make the old boundaries of the Soviet Union were respected, except
for the Baltic countries. But the biggest concern of the Russians in terms of security
comes from NATO's operations in the former Soviet bloc. Thus, Russia opposed
vigorously in 2007 the anti-missile shield project that the Americans wanted to install in
Central Europe (Poland, Czech Republic), through NATO. This missile shield supposed
to protect European members of NATO against the Iranian threat [See the article by
Numa Mazat and Franklin Serrano under the title A Geopolítica das Relações entre a
Federação Russa e os EUA: da “Cooperação” ao Conflito (The Geopolitics of
relations between the Russian Federation and the US: "Cooperation" to a conflict)
posted on the website
<http://www.revistaoikos.org/seer/index.php/oikos/article/view/293>].
Numa Mazat and Franklin Serrano claim that the Russian leadership, in the 2000s,
returned to give priority to the issue of the armed forces aimed at reversing the rapid
decline of the military potential of the country during the 1990s. The purpose of this
partial reconstitution of military power Russian was to provide a material base stronger
to diplomatic strategy and geopolitics of Russia address the ongoing attempts to weaken
the country by the United States and its European allies. In 2000, for the first time since
1992, the Russian Federation has increased its defense budget. In 2003, were delivered
to the Russian Air Force the first fighter since 1992, as well as attack helicopters in
2004. In 2006, it began also to provide the Air Force's Sukhoi 34, new aircraft returned
to long-distance attack. In an article published in February 2012, Vladimir Putin
announced that Russia would spend 580 billion Euros in arms over the next ten years to
modernize its army.
It was from 2000 that Russia decided to develop a strategic partnership with China.
Russia considered that China could help her in her resistance to geopolitical ambitions
of the United States both in Eastern Europe, the Caucasus or Central Asia. The
Shanghai Cooperation Organization (Shanghai Cooperation Organization - SCO) was
established in 2001 to establish an alliance between Russia and China militarily and to
combat terrorism, religious fundamentalism and separatism in the Asian region. The
SCO is a political cooperation and military organization that explicitly proposes to be a
counterweight to the United States and NATO military forces. Putin decided the last
territorial disputes with China in 2004, making secure its eastern border. The two
countries maintain generally converging positions in the UN and other international
forums, such as the G20 [See the article by Numa Mazat and Franklin Serrano under the
title A Geopolítica das Relações entre a Federação Russa e os EUA: da “Cooperação”
ao Conflito (The Geopolitics of relations between the Russian Federation and the US:
"Cooperation" to a conflict) posted on the website
<http://www.revistaoikos.org/seer/index.php/oikos/article/view/293>].
Numa Mazat and Franklin Serrano say that the partnership between China and Russia
there is also in the armaments industry. Throughout the 1990s, arms sales to China were
essential to the survival of the Russian military-industrial complex. Russia remained the

4. 4
largest supplier of China's modern weapons in 2000 and was most recently Russian
military technology transfer to the production of new Chinese weapons. In addition, the
Chinese remain large customers Russian hydrocarbons. Finally, the strategic partnership
between China and Russia is so fundamental to the two countries that differences about
the energy issue, or other differences of interest, natural between two powers, however
important they may be, have not been able to threaten the collaboration between two
countries with respect to an attempt to limit the power of the United States.
In addition, Russia is today a major supplier of weapons to countries that want to
maintain their independence from the United States, such as India. Similarly, nations
suffering embargo on weapons by the United States as China, Venezuela or Iran make
military purchases with Russia. Moreover, Russia remains a major global nuclear power
alongside the United States. Unilateral sanctions that the United States has imposed on
Russia due to their behavior in Ukraine and the threat of impose still more sanctions
urged Russia's desire to find new markets for its gas and oil. and the threat of. On May
16, 2014, Russia and China announced the signing of a "treaty of friendship"
contemplating an agreement on the gas, by which the two countries will build a pipeline
to export Russian gas to China. China will lend money to Russia with which it will
build its part of the pipeline. Gazprom (Russia's largest producer of gas and oil) made
some price concessions to China [See the article by Immanuel Wallerstein O jogo
geopolíticoda Rússia eda China (The geopolitical game in Russia and China) published on
the website <http://outraspalavras.net/posts/o- game-geopolitical-of-moscow-and-
beijing />].
It should be noted that the gradual decline in oil prices since last June, accelerated in
recent weeks to reach US$ 69 per barrel of Brent raises questions about the economy of
Russia and other oil producing countries that are dependent on its export earnings.
OPEC countries, which spent more than two years decreasing its production, thereby
offsetting the increases in crude oil production by countries outside OPEC, changed
their strategy since September and are increasing their production contributing to the
fall in the price of oil in order to derail the oil substitutes such as shale. To this is added
the US interest to achieve energy self-sufficiency with the shale through the application
of fracking technology and the fall in world oil demand.
One hypothesis that has been considered is that the United States is behind the drop in
oil prices to affect the economies of its enemy such as Russia, Iran and Venezuela.
Because of the fall in oil prices, Russia is facing at the moment a violent speculative
attack on the country with capital outflow which is resulting in a sharp drop in the
purchasing power of the Ruble. It can be said that, from a geopolitical point of view,
most likely, the United States put pressure not to increase the supply of oil. To make
matters worse the situation, the epicenter of the global economic crisis, which first
occurred in 2008 in the United States and moved to Europe between 2010 and 2013, is
now focusing on emerging market economies, including China, which is slowing their
economy, can lead to depression the world capitalist system depression. We hope that
the confrontation between the US, China and Russia in the international geopolitical
chess does not happen the exacerbation of conflicts leading to a new world fratricidal
war.
*Fernando Alcoforado , member of the Bahia Academy of Education, engineer and doctor of Territorial
Planning and Regional Development from the University of Barcelona, a university professor and
consultant in strategic planning, business planning, regional planning and planning of energy systems, is
the author of Globalização (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1997), De Collor a FHC- O Brasil e a Nova

5. 5
(Des)ordem Mundial (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 1998), Um Projeto para o Brasil (Editora Nobel, São
Paulo, 2000), Os condicionantes do desenvolvimento do Estado da Bahia (Tese de doutorado.
Universidade de Barcelona, http://www.tesisenred.net/handle/10803/1944, 2003), Globalização e
Desenvolvimento (Editora Nobel, São Paulo, 2006), Bahia- Desenvolvimento do Século XVI ao Século XX
e Objetivos Estratégicos na Era Contemporânea (EGBA, Salvador, 2008), The Necessary Conditions of
the Economic and Social Development-The Case of the State of Bahia (VDM Verlag Dr. Muller
Aktiengesellschaft & Co. KG, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2010), Aquecimento Global e Catástrofe
Planetária (P&A Gráfica e Editora, Salvador, 2010), Amazônia Sustentável- Para o progresso do Brasil e
combate ao aquecimento global (Viena- Editora e Gráfica, Santa Cruz do Rio Pardo, São Paulo, 2011)
and Os Fatores Condicionantes do Desenvolvimento Econômico e Social (Editora CRV, Curitiba, 2012),
among others.