The current ‘red-herring’ sliding around the fish monger’s slab of international politics at the moment, is ‘war in Ukraine’.

Why so? Well, focus is slowly moving away from the ‘pandemic’ and Russia is seizing the moment to fill the vacuum of global politics. Moving troops from here to there and parking them in a notionally strategic position has been a war of nerves since the beginning of time. The fact that the current Russian force is roughly 120,000 troops with air support, tanks, artillery and mechanized infantry including specialised support does not mean the Russians will attack.

Ukraine has a far larger opposing Army some of which will have had recent experience of fighting in the East of the country. It also has the important advantage of being in ‘defence of the homeland’ – a double win strategically.

Russia is probably still be wiping it’s bloody nose after invading Afghanistan between 1979-89 and having to withdraw humiliated; a mistake curiously repeated in the previous twenty years by Western countries and the USA.

Russia will be aware of the domestic problems associated with fighting a war in Ukraine. When body bags start arriving back in the homeland military airfields, people and politicians become disheartened; which leads to social unrest.

President Putin is like the grinning fox in the tale of Little Red Riding Hood. He is nobody’s granny and hides his real agenda under a red cloak. So what is the fox up to?

Strategically, he wishes to rebuild the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The vulnerability of the Baltic States and Finland and the current moves by NATO to bolster forces in these countries, evidences a very real perceived vulnerability. In the south of Ukraine, Putin intends to encircle the southern states using the Crimea and it’s ports, and then head for Kiev. He might go around the Chernobyl exclusion zone or straight through it. It will not affect his mobile troops whose vehicles are protected from high dose radiation.

But in my view he does not need to do any of this. The implied threat is enough to rattle the Ukraine politician’s cages and create division amongst it’s allies. At some point he will move in a pro-Russian Ukrainian leader and the country will be in his control without a drop of Russian blood staining the Dnieper River.

No, using the distraction techniques of a deceiver, Putin is hiding his real intentions. In a grand way, Russia whips up fear in it’s citizens concerning the spreading presence of NATO in Eastern Europe. Strategically he is right to do so, for everything that NATO does to creep into countries sharing borders with Russia, arms Russia with this accusation. Even if such a country is pleading to join NATO, this is not a reason for NATO to accede to the request. It is wiser to maintain ‘buffer’ states that are neutral to both sides. ‘No-man’s land’ may not make a country feel particularly safe, but strategically it is less likely to become a place for battle.

If NATO agrees to expand for no better reason than being asked, it plays into the Russian politician’s political argument that it feels threatened.

Bear in mind that a wise general will be ‘pre-emptive’ just as will a street fighter in a back alley. Hit before you are hit, particularly if tactical nuclear weapons are in the mix, is a sound strategy because it gives the element of surprise to the attacker whilst giving the attacker the ability to describe the action as ‘defence’.

We know that ‘attack’ is the best form of defence from watching sports on TV. In the heat of war, who is defending and who is attacking becomes blurred. This means who is ‘at fault for starting it’, will be unclear.

So NATO’s growth towards the East into countries previously part of the Soviet Union or USSR, needs very sensitive consideration. Moscow argues that Russian speaking populations have a right to it s protection. English speaking countries, such as the Falkland Islands, do the same.

NATO is astonishingly powerful, especially with the mighty presence of the USA over it s shoulders. It is probably the most militarily powerful country in the world, even on it’s own. The NATO alliance has created peace through strength since the second world war and needs to keep it that way because not only Russia is rattled.

China is too, not least because of the powerful US naval presence in the South China sea.

Enter the Mexican Standoff. Three notional adversaries; three fingers on triggers. The triggers have become increasingly light to the touch with the appearance of powerful artificial intelligently controlled land, sea and air craft of all descriptions. No more dead soldiers and sailors for the folks to see at home; just heaped up robots.

A three sided standoff is presently occurring between NATO, Russia and China; forget Ukraine and terrorism and whatever other threat, for they are real but lesser evils.

Look down the barrel of the gun you are holding as two equally skilled marksmen look down theirs at you. You pause. If you drop your aim or so much as blink, you will be shot dead from two directions. If you shoot first, that might be the last thing you do. As you shoot one of your adversaries, the bullet from the third has already passed through your heart and embedded itself in the wall behind you.

A Mexican standoff breaks when one side becomes weaker than the other two. Then it is two onto one, although your next fight is with the second strongest, not the weakest.

Skilled fighters need to assess their opponents accurately and win the fight by patience not pride. Two Samurai in ancient Japan might face each other for minutes even hours, before replacing their swords, bowing and walking away. A fight is not worth starting if you are not going to win.

Armies deploy in the same way. At present, Russia and China are glancing at each other and moving, imperceptibly, closer together. That’s the movement that the false Ukraine ‘threat’ is hiding.

But in world politics, something else is happening. The Winter Olympics 2020 is all flags, bunting and lateral flow tests in Beijing. Traditionally a political truce is called for all participating countries. That’s what the five rings intertwined represent.

‘Please leave your armour and swords at the entrance to the stadium, proud warriors from all Greek city states.’

But most Western leaders have refused to attend for reasons that are not hard to find but should they not respect for the International Olympic Committee’s decision, and override your politics? Why was China ever permitted to bid for the Olympics if human rights is an glaring issue for so many?

One world leader had no trouble making the decision to attend; Vladimir Putin. Red carpets (and red flags) were rolled out for him as a line of black limousines slid up to the Birdsnest Stadium VIP entrance. The Olympic opening ceremony was about to begin.

Even before this moment President Putin and President Xi Jinping had already met. In a long statement they expressed their mutual intentions through cooperation as;

“Russia and China stand against attempts by external forces to undermine security and stability in their common adjacent regions, intend to counter interference by outside forces in the internal affairs of sovereign countries under any pretext, oppose colour revolutions, and will increase cooperation in the aforementioned areas,”

The ‘adjacent regions’ includes Ukraine, no doubt, and interestingly the sovereignty of such regions is vowed to be mutually respected and defended. Even Putin could never honourably, invade Ukraine after such a statement. And if you are thinking that he is quite capable of lying, do not ignore the single, no-bluff. Putin could choose the ‘honourable path’ and ‘moral high ground’ because he has no intention of invading Ukraine and has nothing to lose by not doing so.

As China and Russia creep closer together the stakes in the poker game change and the facial expressions need to remain unreadable. But two guns versus one gun is dangerous for the one gun.

China and Russia versus NATO (and any countries insane enough to join NATO at this time), is one street fight nobody will ever win.

Perhaps this is the only glimmer of sunshine in a world crisis presently being ignored or unseen by Western media. If anyone shoots, all three will die, so they just continue to face each other down. But every moment focused on the ‘Ukraine Crisis’ is, in my opinion, the sight of NATO blinking and Russia and China seizing the advantage. Bang!