The Qur’anic Chronology of Creation
The Moscow Meeting of Putin, Xi, and North Korean Military: A Signal Beyond Ceremony
On a stage steeped in Soviet legacy and imperial memory, Red Square once again became the theatre of global messaging. The recent appearance of Vladimir Putin, Xi Jinping, and North Korean military personnel together at the heart of Moscow wasn’t just a ceremonial nod to history — it was a calculated display of geopolitical symbolism, crafted to send a message not only to domestic audiences but more crucially to the West.
This tableau, occurring on the sidelines of Russia’s 80th annual Victory Day Parade, blends commemoration with confrontation — a showcase of mutual defiance against the liberal world order spearheaded by Washington and its allies.
Each actor in this triad represents a node in what could be described as a loose but deliberate anti-Western axis. While not a formal alliance, the meeting signals an ideological and strategic convergence:
The imagery of North Korean soldiers marching under the gaze of Putin and Xi in Red Square — once the stronghold of the Soviet empire — evokes Cold War memories, but this time the intention is subtler: this is not about recreating the past, but rewriting the present power structure.
Several trends converge to make this event particularly alarming to the West:
It is tempting to see this gathering as merely symbolic — after all, no treaties were signed, no war declared. But symbols in geopolitics matter, especially when choreographed with military overtones.
Red Square, long associated with the triumph of Soviet arms, is now used to:
The event also signals a challenge to the U.S.-led rules-based order. The parade was not just about remembering World War II; it was about posturing for what these regimes see as World Order 2.0 — one in which Western influence is no longer unquestioned.
For NATO and its allies, the image of Putin, Xi, and North Korean officers side by side poses difficult questions:
The optics of unity may not yet translate into institutional or operational unity, but the psychological and diplomatic impact is already real. For many watching around the world — particularly in non-aligned or post-colonial states — the Red Square meeting is a reminder that global power is not binary, and that alternative partnerships are not only possible but increasingly attractive.
The title “Red Square Flags Red for the West” encapsulates this moment with layered irony and foresight. This was not just a parade; it was a strategic semaphore.
The gathering didn’t create a new axis — but it reaffirmed a shared worldview: one in which Western liberalism is not the endpoint of history, and military strength, sovereignty, and national pride are not to be subordinated to global norms dictated by others.
The West would be unwise to dismiss this meeting as theatrical. In a world increasingly defined by fractured globalism, what happens in Red Square no longer stays in Red Square.