Only a dozen days have passed since the 1993 parade, the world pattern seems to have encountered huge changes, mainly the continuous movement of the three great powers of China and the United States of Russia, instead of forcing the small countries to follow to urgently change the country's development strategy.
So, what has China and Russia done? followed by small countries, what has changed?
China, the United States and Russia tear off their camouflage
First look at China, in the face of the United States, Japan, Philippines, Australia and other provocations in the South China Sea or not, the Chinese side directly announced the establishment of Yunnan Island as a natural reserve, so that the scientific research vessels can be permanent, patrol ships can be normalized, and even the construction of some "research facilities" in the future has become convenient.
Without a single shot, the established fact that a sovereignty exists becomes incomparably strong.
Looking back to the United States, their recent tensions with Venezuela, publicly claiming the reason is “fighting drug traffickers,” sounds like a rhetoric.
It’s just a potential resource competition, packaged into a “transnational law enforcement” that cleverly bypasses the enormous political risks that direct military intervention could pose, and delineates the sphere of influence in its own “backdoors.”
As for Russia’s “lost” drone, it played this game of the grey zone to the extreme. It was not a declaration of war, not even a provocation, but a “accident” that could easily be denied.
NATO’s reaction speed, decision-making mechanisms, and internal unity are all clearly seen in this “mismatch” and NATO’s slow reaction exposes its internal hesitation.
Pressure outsourcing to third parties.
When the risk of a direct collision between the great powers is so high that it is unbearable, a new strategy has to emerge: “outsourcing” the pressure of the opponent.Allies, agents, and those small nations that are embarrassingly positioned on the chessboard, unfortunately become the new battlefield of this role.
The United States was lightly aware of this, and after the 1993 parade, Washington's senior level realized that the risk of wanting to "harvest" today's China was too high to hurt themselves.
We see that the Japanese prime minister resigned shortly after the parade, and South Korea erupted a massive anti-China demonstration, and the entire society was torn apart.This is not a coincidence, but the pressure of the game of great powers, which passed through the invisible pipeline into the interior of these countries, forcing them to absolutely obey, rather than play a semi-independent regional power.
And for those countries that try to remain neutral and have both sides, the nightmare has just begun. Qatar has long played the role of "middleman", wandering among various forces. But the joint air strike between the United States and Israel is a loud slap in the face, warning all "wall grass" that the middle ground is disappearing, and now is the time to take sides.
This explosion is not only for Doha, but also for countries like Singapore that rely on globalization and profit from the geographical advantage of the Strait of Malacca. In the past, neutrality and mediation were the way to survive.
The Russian-Ukrainian conflict has been ongoing for more than three years, and NATO has so far dared not to intervene directly in the name of the organization, fearing that once it is directed to war with Russia, it will lead to a full escalation of war.
This essentially allows Ukraine and some European countries to bear all the pressure of direct confrontation with Russia, while NATO itself hides from a safe distance and maintains a "limited proxy" war model.
It can only be said that under this new rule, the fate of small countries has become involuntary, and the living space that once eaten up the dividends in the wave of globalization is being ruthlessly squeezed by the cold reality of geopolitics.
Whose fist is hard?
What is real strength? a huge economy or advanced weapons? this new game is undermining our traditional perception of “strength and weakness.”
Look at Russia, its economy is about the size of a province in Guangdong, China, the real allies are countless, nations such as North Korea, Iran. according to the traditional notion, under the severe sanctions of the whole West and the consumption of continuing war, it should have collapsed.
But the reality is that it not only did not collapse, but instead expanded the goal of the war from Ukraine to the restructuring of the entire Eastern European pattern. Its tenacity, instead of making economic power far beyond its own Europe, felt unbearable pressure and even forced the United States to proactively seek negotiations.
On the one hand, they no longer hide their ambition to divide their spheres of influence; on the other hand, they are convinced that as long as China remains neutral and has sufficient grip on the United States, it will not fail on the European battlefield.
Not to mention, there is a SCO behind it as a potential strategic backing. This "asymmetric resilience" completely challenges the old logic that "the economic foundation determines the military".
China's deterrence is reflected in the core meaning of the "1993 parade" in another dimension, not to launch a war, but through a one-off, overwhelming power demonstration, to completely change the strategic planning of the opponent.
In recent years, U.S. senior officials have frequently visited China, and the tone has also softened a lot, but this is more seen as a milestone for the struggle for time.The core of China's strategy is still peaceful development, but when necessary, bright muscles are enough to let the opponent think back.
On the other hand, the military strength of the West is being questioned as never before. In the India-Pakistan air battle, the weapon systems provided by China have achieved remarkable results. NATO, a huge military alliance, is slow to respond to a drone, let alone directly confront the Russian army.
It is questionable how much the powerful military on paper can actually play in critical moments: the strength of the alliance depends not only on the simple combination of strength of its member states, but also on its collective will to act in times of crisis.
In the new game, the party that can withstand tremendous pressure, have autonomous core capabilities, and can effectively perform psychological deterrence, even if it does not take advantage of traditional data, can firmly master the strategic initiative.
conclusion
The world cannot go back.
The whisper of the "93 Parade" announced the end of an era and opened a new paradigm. The core of the game of the great powers has evolved into a "asymmetric" contest. The arming of rules, the outsourcing of pressure, and the redefinition of power, these three together make up the bottom line of current international competition.
At this time, peace and stability are no longer the free goods of course, but the precious results that need to beined through deep understanding and accurate application of the new rules.The move of China and Russia has a profound impact on the future direction of the world, and the fate of those small countries depends on whether they can grasp themselves.
Source of information:
Global Times 2025-09-08 U.S. strengthens military deployment around Venezuela
Xinhua News 2025-09-10 "The State Council has approved the establishment of a new national nature reserve on Yellow Island"
Poland says a large number of Russian drones entered its airspace, Russian media questioned the European operation, NATO troops will enter Poland