# ANALYSIS: The axis of aggressors: a single front against the West?

> The expression «axis of aggressors» is not rhetorical metaphor. It is a documented geopolitical reality, identified by analysts at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD), Western intelligence services, and academic researchers specializing in contemporary armed conflicts. Four states — Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea — are coordinating their actions, weapons deliv

- Author: Maxime Marquette
- Publisher: MadMax (https://mad-max.co)
- Section: Analysis
- Published: 2026-06-28
- Canonical URL: https://mad-max.co/en/article/analyse-l-axe-des-agresseurs-un-seul-front-contre-l-occident

## Introduction: When the West's enemies converge

### The concept of the «axis of aggressors»

The expression «**axis of aggressors**» is not rhetorical metaphor. It is a documented geopolitical reality, identified by analysts at the **Foundation for Defense of Democracies** (**FDD**), Western intelligence services, and academic researchers specializing in contemporary armed conflicts. Four states — **Russia**, **China**, **Iran**, and **North Korea** — are coordinating their actions, weapons deliveries, and destabilization strategies in a manner unprecedented since the **Cold War**.

This is not a formal alliance with a signed treaty and a common general staff. It is something more dangerous: a partnership of convergent interests, flexible enough to withstand external pressure and coherent enough to confront **the West** with simultaneous challenges across multiple theaters. Understanding this convergence is the first condition for responding to it effectively.

### North Korea at the heart of the axis

In **June 2026**, North Korean leader **Kim Jong-un** urged his armed forces to adopt a «**destructive military posture**» toward **South Korea** and its allies, while deepening military cooperation with **Russia**. According to the **FDD**, **Pyongyang** has delivered millions of artillery shells and dozens of short-range ballistic missiles to the Russian army — munitions that have been fired on Ukrainian cities.

In exchange, **Russia** has supplied **North Korea** with advanced military technologies, notably in the fields of drones, missiles, and navigation systems. This transaction creates direct security problems for the **Korean Peninsula** — a side effect that **Moscow**'s strategists appear to accept willingly, as long as it weakens **the West**.

*I find it troubling that the world still speaks of «axes» as abstract analytical constructs when North Korean shells are falling on apartment buildings in Kharkiv. This is not a theoretical axis — it is a murderous supply chain operating in real time.*

## Russia: the operational brain of the axis

### The engine of global destabilization

**Vladimir Putin** has transformed **Russia** into a revisionist power determined to dismantle the rules-based international order. His invasion of **Ukraine** in **February 2022** is not a strategic accident — it is the expression of a worldview in which great powers hold «**spheres of influence**» where they can exercise domination without international constraint. For **Putin**, that means **Eastern Europe** and the post-Soviet space.

But **Russia** is no longer content to be merely an aggressive regional power. It plays the role of **strategic intermediary** for the other axis members — providing **Iran** with missile technologies in exchange for drones, **North Korea** with advanced military systems in exchange for ammunition, and receiving from **China** critical electronic components in exchange for diplomatic backing on **Taiwan** and in the **South China Sea**.

### The sanctions-circumvention infrastructure

One of the most formidable achievements of this axis is the construction of an **infrastructure for circumventing Western sanctions**. Intermediary banks, shell companies, and alternative trade routes via **Turkey**, the **United Arab Emirates**, and **Central Asia** allow **Russia** to import the components its war industry needs. This financial and logistical architecture is sophisticated, resilient, and difficult to dismantle.

The **United States** and the **European Union** have intensified their secondary sanctions — targeting companies in third countries that facilitate these exchanges. But the effectiveness of these sanctions is limited by the reluctance of certain partners to prioritize their relationship with **Washington** over their short-term economic interests. **China**, in particular, refuses any measure that would constrain its own companies.

*The sanctions-circumvention infrastructure is one of Putin's great strategic successes — and one of the West's great collective failures. We believed that sanctions would be enough to strangle the Russian war machine. We had underestimated the creativity of those determined to keep feeding it.*

## China: discreet financier and accomplice

### Beijing's indirect but decisive support

**China** has not sent soldiers to **Ukraine**. It has not directly supplied identifiable lethal weapons to the Russian army. But its role in sustaining the Russian war economy is documented and significant. Chinese exports to **Russia** of electronic components, machine tools, semiconductors, and dual-use equipment have increased substantially since **2022**.

This calculated complicity allows **Beijing** to maintain a facade of neutrality while reaping the strategic benefits of a weakened **West**. While **Europe** spends hundreds of billions to support **Ukraine** and strengthen its defenses, **China** consolidates its global economic position and advances on the **Taiwan** dossier. It is a brilliant long-term strategy — and a deeply cynical one.

### Beijing and Taiwan: the shadow over the Indo-Pacific

The war in **Ukraine** also serves as a real-world test for **Beijing**'s military planners. They are studying Ukrainian and Russian tactics, the effectiveness of drones, the vulnerabilities of air defense systems, and the lessons of urban warfare. All of this informs planning for a potential operation against **Taiwan** — which **Beijing** considers a renegade province destined for reunification, by persuasion or by force.

**NATO** has begun formally integrating the **Indo-Pacific** dimension into its strategic thinking. Partners like **Japan** and **Australia** are participating in Alliance summits. This is a belated but necessary recognition that the security of **Europe** and that of the **Asia-Pacific** are now inseparable.

*China plays a game of Go while the West plays chess. Beijing thinks in decades, not in four-year electoral cycles. This temporal asymmetry may be the most profound strategic challenge the West faces — and it is not yet responding to it adequately.*

## Iran: drone supplier and regional destabilizer

### The Shaheds and their devastating effects

**Iran** has supplied **Russia** with hundreds of **Shahed-136** kamikaze drones, rebranded «**Geraniums**» by the Russian military. These low-cost weapons have been used massively to target Ukrainian energy infrastructure — power plants, distribution networks, urban heating systems. The goal is to break the morale of the Ukrainian civilian population by depriving it of electricity and heat during harsh winters.

This Russian-Iranian collaboration is deep and multidimensional. In exchange for the drones, **Russia** has provided **Iran** with advanced military technologies, notably **S-400** surface-to-air missile systems and components for its ballistic missile program. This partnership simultaneously strengthens **Moscow**'s destructive capacity in **Ukraine** and **Tehran**'s destabilization potential in the **Middle East**.

### Tehran and its regional proxies

**Iran** is not content merely to supply weapons to **Russia**. It maintains a network of military proxies — **Hezbollah** in **Lebanon**, the **Houthis** in **Yemen**, militias in **Iraq** and **Syria** — that exert constant pressure on Western and Israeli interests in the region. This strategy of «**resistance by proxy**» allows **Tehran** to wage asymmetric warfare at a lower direct political cost.

The coordination between these proxy operations and Russian military operations is not always direct or explicit — but it exists. Researchers at the **Institute for the Study of War** (**ISW**) have documented cases of intelligence sharing and tactical coordination between Moscow and Tehran across several theaters of operation.

*Iran is often underestimated in analyses of this axis. We think of Russia, China, North Korea — and Iran appears as a secondary actor. But its drones are falling on the children of Kyiv. It is not a secondary actor. It is an active partner in mass killing.*

## North Korea: Putin's arsenal

### Millions of shells in exchange for technology transfers

According to estimates published by the **FDD** and confirmed by Western government sources, **North Korea** has delivered between **3 and 4 million artillery shells** to **Russia** since the start of the Ukrainian conflict. These munitions, produced in North Korean factories running at full capacity, have allowed the Russian artillery to maintain a rate of fire that the Russian defense industry alone could not sustain.

In return, **Kim Jong-un** has obtained significant military technology transfers — spy satellites, drone technologies, missile guidance systems, possibly submarine technologies. This transaction is transforming **North Korea** into a technologically more advanced military power, with direct consequences for the security of **South Korea**, **Japan**, and the **United States** in the region.

### North Korean soldiers in Russia

Beyond ammunition, South Korean and American intelligence reports have documented the deployment of thousands of North Korean soldiers to **Russia** — some estimates citing **10,000 to 12,000 soldiers** sent for advanced training and potentially combat in the **Kursk** and **Belgorod** regions. This deployment constitutes a flagrant violation of **UN Security Council** resolutions on North Korean sanctions.

**Kim Jong-un** is drawing an additional strategic lesson from this arrangement: by obtaining real combat experience for his soldiers and testing his weapons under modern warfare conditions, he is preparing his armed forces for future conflicts. It is an investment in human and technological military capital — funded with Ukrainian blood.

*North Korean soldiers fighting in Europe to allow Russia to keep killing Ukrainians — that is where we are in 2026. If anyone had predicted this in 2020, they would have been called paranoid. And yet it is the documented reality on the ground.*

## Western responses: sufficient or too late?

### Sanctions and their limits

**The West** has responded to this axis of aggressors with successive rounds of sanctions — on **Russia**, on Iranian and North Korean entities linked to weapons deliveries, on Chinese companies supplying dual-use components. These sanctions have had real effects: they have raised **Russia**'s operational costs, complicated its procurement, and weakened certain industrial sectors.

But sanctions alone cannot stop a war. They can make it heavier, more complicated, more costly — they cannot end it if the political will to continue remains intact. And **Putin** has demonstrated that his political will is extraordinarily resistant to economic pressure. The Russian population is suffering — but continues to massively support the war, according to available polls.

### Military support for Ukraine: the direct response

The most effective response to this axis is direct military support for **Ukraine**. Every weapons system delivered, every round of ammunition supplied, every training program conducted is a concrete response to the axis's military cooperation. **Ukraine** holds not because of its size or economic power — but because of **Western** support, combined with exceptional Ukrainian resilience.

The delivery of **ATACMS** systems, **Storm Shadow** missiles, long-range drones, and **Patriot** air defense systems has transformed **Ukraine**'s capacity to strike Russian military infrastructure in depth. This **deep strike** capability is directly linked to the new weapons systems provided by Western partners.

*I deeply believe that supporting Ukraine is not charity — it is a strategic investment in the collective security of the West. Every dollar, every euro, every missile sent to Kyiv is an investment in the fundamental principle that borders are not changed by force. That principle is the foundation of everything.*

## The future of the axis: consolidation or fragility?

### The internal fault lines of the coalition

This axis of aggressors is not without internal fault lines. **China** and **Russia** have interests that diverge on several points — notably in **Central Asia**, where **Beijing** seeks to expand its economic and political influence in regions **Moscow** considers its exclusive domain. The **Russia-North Korea** relationship is grounded in a transactional exchange, not deep ideological solidarity.

**Iran**, for its part, plays a double game: it supports **Russia** militarily while maintaining communication channels with **the West** on the nuclear dossier. These contradictions could intensify if one party to the axis perceived its own interests diverging from the group's. But in the current context of open war in **Europe**, these internal fault lines remain secondary against the common adversary.

### The scenario of coordinated escalation

The most troubling scenario — discussed in intelligence and foreign policy circles — is that of **coordinated escalation**: Chinese military action against **Taiwan**, North Korean escalation on the **Korean Peninsula**, and intensified Russian aggression in **Europe** — simultaneously. Such a scenario would test Western military capabilities in a way unprecedented since **World War II**.

Strategists like **Elbridge Colby** in the **United States** and several European analysts have warned that the **United States** could not simultaneously respond to three major crises. That is precisely why NATO members must strengthen their strategic autonomy — being capable of defending **Europe** without depending exclusively on **Washington**.

*The coordinated escalation scenario haunts me. Not because I am alarmist — but because the warning signs are there, documented, visible to anyone willing to see them. Is the West preparing its response to this scenario? I doubt it. And that is the real problem.*

## The ideological response: defending democratic values

### The battle of narratives

Beyond weapons and sanctions, there is a war of narratives that **the West** cannot afford to lose. The axis of aggressors is investing massively in **disinformation**, **propaganda**, and the manipulation of Western public opinion. Russian and Chinese influence operations target democratic societies to sow doubt, amplify divisions, and weaken the collective will to resist.

The response must be widespread **media literacy** education, support for independent and free media, and transparency about the mechanisms of disinformation. Institutions like the **East StratCom Task Force** of the **European Union** are doing valuable work — but their resources remain derisory compared to the scale of the adversary's propaganda machine.

### The appeal of the democratic model

**The West** possesses an advantage the axis of aggressors cannot replicate: the democratic model remains attractive to entire populations living under authoritarian regimes. Russian dissidents, pro-democracy activists in **Iran**, North Korean refugees — all testify that the aspiration for freedom is universal and indestructible.

Supporting these voices, funding free media that speak to populations living under dictatorship, maintaining programs that welcome refugees and dissidents — these are strategic investments in the long-term weakening of the regimes composing the axis. It is a war of values as much as a war of armaments.

*I deeply believe that democracy is the best political system humanity has produced — imperfect, noisy, sometimes slow — but fundamentally superior to any form of autocracy. Defending this model is not Western arrogance: it is a conviction grounded in centuries of history and millions of lives saved by liberal institutions.*

## Conclusion: A global front demanding a global response

### Naming reality to better respond to it

Calling this group of regimes an «**axis of aggressors**» is not hyperbole — it is an analytical necessity. These four powers — **Russia**, **China**, **Iran**, **North Korea** — share interests convergent enough and cooperation structured enough to constitute a systemic threat to the international order **the West** has built since **1945**. Refusing to name this reality, out of fear of «**Cold War**» rhetoric, is to deprive oneself of the conceptual tools needed to respond.

The response must be commensurate with the threat — global, coordinated, durable. It cannot be solely military: it must be economic, technological, diplomatic, and ideological. **The West** must demonstrate that its model of liberal democracies is superior to that of the autocracies forming this axis — and prove it through actions, not just words.

### Ukraine: the first front of a larger conflict

**Ukraine** is not simply defending its national territory. It is the first front of a broader conflict between a rules-based world order and a coalition of revisionist powers determined to dismantle it. Every Ukrainian city that holds out, every successful counteroffensive, every drone that destroys a Russian ammunition depot is a signal sent not only to **Moscow** — but also to **Beijing**, **Tehran**, and **Pyongyang**.

That signal is simple: **the West does not yield**. Democracy does not allow itself to be crushed by authoritarian regimes that believe force supersedes law. And as long as **Ukraine** holds, that signal remains strong. That is why support for **Zelensky** and his people is not an option — it is a strategic and moral obligation.

*I remember a time when people believed that globalization would make war obsolete — that economic interdependence would create lasting peace. The reality of 2026 has shattered that illusion. The West must now build a response commensurate with a threat that did not wait for it to be ready.*

**By Maxime Marquette, columnist**

## Columnist's transparency note

### Editorial stance

I am not a journalist but a **columnist and analyst**. My expertise lies in observing and analysing the geopolitical, economic and strategic dynamics that shape our world. My work is to take political strategies apart, to understand global economic movements, to put the decisions of international actors in context and to offer analytical perspectives on the changes that are redefining our societies.

I do not claim the cold objectivity of traditional journalism, which stops at reporting facts. **I claim analytical clarity**, rigorous interpretation and a deep understanding of the complex issues that concern us all. My role is to give meaning to the facts, to place them in their historical and strategic context, and to offer a critical reading of events.

### Method and sources

This text keeps the basic distinction between **verified facts and interpretive analysis**. The rule never changes: a factual claim is published only when a verifiable source supports it, and the sources this article actually used are listed under **Sources**, never here.

**Primary source families** used by the publication, when the story has them: official statements from governments and international institutions, public statements by political leaders, reports from intergovernmental organisations, dispatches from recognised international news agencies.

**Secondary source families**: specialised publications, internationally recognised news media, analyses from established research institutions, reports from industry organisations.

When an article cites statistical, economic or geopolitical data, it comes from the institutions that produce it (intergovernmental organisations, central banks, national statistics offices), and the exact institution is named under **Sources**.

### Nature of the analysis

The analyses, interpretations and perspectives in the analytical sections of this article are a **critical, contextual synthesis** based on the information available, the trends observed and the expert comments cited in the sources consulted.

My role is to interpret these facts, to set them in the context of today's geopolitical and economic dynamics, and to give them a coherent meaning within the larger story of the changes shaping our time. These analyses reflect expertise built through continuous observation of international affairs and an understanding of the strategic mechanisms that drive global actors.

This article describes a documented state of affairs on its publication date, not a prediction: later developments may shift its outlook. No update is promised in advance; when an article is corrected or completed, the change is dated in the text.

## Sources

### Primary sources

- [Foundation for Defense of Democracies — Axis of Aggressors — June 26, 2026](https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2026/06/26/axis-of-aggressors/)

- [FDD — Kim pushes for faster North Korean defense buildup with Russia's help — June 25, 2026](https://www.fdd.org/analysis/2026/06/25/kim-pushes-for-faster-north-korean-defense-buildup-with-russias-help/)

- [Washington Times — Kim calls for a destructive military posture — June 26, 2026](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2026/jun/26/north-koreas-kim-calls-destructive-military-posture-south-korea-vows/)

### Secondary sources

- [Long War Journal — Russian security assistance is creating problems on the Korean Peninsula — May 2026](https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2026/05/analysis-russian-security-assistance-is-creating-problems-on-the-korean-peninsula.php)

- [ISW — Russian offensive campaign assessment — June 26, 2026](https://understandingwar.org/research/russia-ukraine/russian-offensive-campaign-assessment-june-26-2026/)

- Foreign Policy — The alignment of the Russian-Chinese-Iranian-North Korean axis — June 24, 2026

---

Source: Maxime Marquette, MadMax. When citing, name the author and link https://mad-max.co/en/article/analyse-l-axe-des-agresseurs-un-seul-front-contre-l-occident