China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea Will Save Us, Here’s Why!
In the West, there is a well-worn narrative: China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea are a dangerous quartet — the so-called “Axis of Evil,” or worse, an “Unholy Alliance” bent on chaos and disruption. This group, according to mainstream Western media and policymakers, represents the darkest forces of international diplomacy. The language used to describe them? Stark. The “Quartet of Chaos,” some have called them. As for the West, it often portrays itself as the beacon of freedom and justice — the “holy saviors” of the world, armed with the righteous sword of democracy and human rights. But is this really the full picture? Is the West’s caricature of these countries a fair representation, or is there more going on beneath the surface? We need to pause and ask ourselves: Why is it that these nations are painted with such a broad brush of evil, while Western-led groups like the Quad (United States, Japan, Australia, and India) and G7 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States) are hailed as the “guardians of the free world”? Thucydides, the ancient historian, offers a pertinent insight here. In his History of the Peloponnesian War, he famously noted that “the strong do what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.” This concept of power dynamics is as relevant today as it was in ancient Greece, and it can help us understand the realpolitik motivations behind the cooperation of China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea. The West, as the dominant global power, tends to dismiss these countries as “evil,” simply because their geopolitical actions do not align with Western interests. But this assumption masks a more complex and nuanced reality.
Clearly, the “Axis of Evil” term is a political tool, not an accurate depiction of these nations. The West’s obsession with labeling adversaries as inherently “evil” stems from a long history of ideological rivalry, colonialism, and imperialism. After the Cold War, when the Soviet Union fell and America was left as the undisputed global leader, the West started casting any opposition as the forces of darkness. This was particularly true in the case of Russia, a former superpower trying to reassert itself on the global stage. For China, the rise of a geopolitical rival has spooked the West. After decades of aligning itself with Western economic and political norms, China’s rise is being framed by the West not as a natural progression of a nation emerging from poverty, but as a direct threat to the “liberal world order.” The West’s portrayal of China as an expansionist, authoritarian regime follows a well-worn playbook of demonization. The same goes for Iran, whose anti-Western stance is now seen as synonymous with aggression, chaos, war, and instability. North Korea? A hermit state, its nuclear ambitions are often portrayed as reckless and irrational. The narrative works because it frames any opposition to the West as inherently threatening. The West’s values — democracy, free markets, and individual rights — are idealized as the global standard. And when other countries do not conform to that mold, they are labeled as rogue, dangerous, and evil. This is not just a strategic narrative, right? Indeed, it is a psychological tool used to maintain dominance.
But let us strip away the rhetoric and look at the cooperation between China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea from a more critical perspective. These countries, though ideologically different, share a common interest in resisting Western hegemony. Their cooperation is built on mutual respect for sovereignty, non-interference, and an acknowledgment of the shifting balance of global power. They are not an “Axis of Evil,” but rather a coalition that reflects the changing dynamics of international relations. Take, for example, the strategic alignment between China and Russia. These two countries share an economic and security partnership that has grown stronger in recent years, particularly in response to NATO’s expansion and U.S. global dominance. China needs Russia’s energy resources, while Russia sees China as a vital partner in resisting Western sanctions and influence. This cooperation is pragmatic, not born of a desire to spread chaos. It is a counterbalance to what they perceive as an overly intrusive West. Iran’s cooperation with this group, particularly in Syria and in opposition to U.S. sanctions, is also rooted in realpolitik. Tehran has long been a target of Western intervention and isolation, and its relationship with Beijing and Moscow offers a degree of protection and leverage on the global stage. Similarly, North Korea’s participation in this loose coalition reflects its strategic goal of pushing back against the United States and securing its regime’s survival. This is not some malevolent conspiracy aimed at undermining global order — it is a tactical alliance based on mutual benefit and survival in an increasingly multipolar world. When viewed through the lens of Thucydides’ power dynamics, it is clear that these countries are merely doing what any state would do when faced with external pressure: they are asserting their sovereignty and forming alliances that serve their national interests.
On the flip side, the West’s portrayal of itself as the defender of democracy and peace is just as flawed. The Quad and G7, as groups of democratic nations, are often hailed as the antidote to the so-called “evil” axis. But are they truly forces for good? Or are they simply self-interested coalitions aimed at containing their so-called “enemies” and protecting the geopolitical status quo that favors Western dominance? The Quad’s members are not immune to accusations of imperialism and interference. From the U.S.’s military presence around the world to Japan’s historical actions during World War II, there is a long history of Western-led powers exerting influence through force, economic leverage, and covert operations. What is conveniently overlooked in this narrative is the West’s role in destabilizing regions across the Middle East, Asia, and Latin America, often to safeguard its own strategic interests. The Western democratic model is not universally embraced. The West’s tendency to impose its own political system on others, while labeling any alternative as authoritarian, reveals a deep-seated cultural arrogance. Just because China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea do not adhere to Western democratic ideals does not mean they are inherently “evil” — it simply means they operate under different systems that reflect their unique histories, cultures, and challenges.
Despite the West’s relentless demonization, these nations represent a much-needed counterbalance to a global order that has long been skewed in favor of Western interests. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a prime example of a vision that challenges the exploitative legacy of Western colonialism. By investing in infrastructure and fostering connectivity across Asia, Africa, and Europe, China offers a model of partnership that prioritizes development over domination. For many developing nations, especially the Global South, this is not the work of an “evil empire” but a lifeline to economic progress, delivered without the usual strings of Western debt diplomacy. Iran, similarly, has demonstrated resilience in the face of relentless Western sanctions and interventions. It champions a multipolar world where regional autonomy trumps external interference. Through its partnerships with China and Russia, Iran not only resists Western imperialism but also promotes regional stability by opposing West-backed extremist movements in the Middle East and fostering dialogue in its sphere of influence. For countries in the Middle East weary of Western meddling, Iran is not a pariah but a counterforce to the chaos that Western interventions often leave in their wake. North Korea, for all its reputation as a hermit state, serves as a reminder that sovereignty and self-determination are non-negotiable principles. Its defiance of U.S.-led sanctions and military intimidation symbolizes the struggle of smaller nations to assert their rights on the global stage. And Russia? Beyond the Western caricature of aggression, Russia provides an alternative to the NATO-centric security paradigm, offering countries a choice that is not bound by Western geopolitical dictates. Together, these nations are crafting a global order where might does not always make right, and where the priorities of the many outweigh the privileges of the few.
In the grand scheme of international relations, the framing of countries as “good” or “evil” is not only oversimplified — it is dangerous. It leads to polarization and conflict, preventing real dialogue and cooperation. The cooperation between China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea should not be dismissed as the work of a nefarious “Axis of Evil.” Instead, we should understand it as part of a larger geopolitical shift, one that reflects the changing balance of power in the world. These countries are not the villains of the global stage; they are simply responding to the same power dynamics that the West has long used to its advantage. As Thucydides might suggest, the real lesson is that power relations are cyclical. What goes around comes around. The West’s dominance is being challenged — and instead of demonizing those who oppose it, we should embrace the opportunity for a more multipolar world, where cooperation is based on mutual respect, not ideological supremacy. The West may call them the “Quartet of Chaos,” but for much of the world, they are the architects of a fairer, more inclusive international system. The time has come to reject the simplistic narratives of “good” and “evil” and recognize these nations for what they truly are: indispensable players in the creation of a balanced and cooperative global order. The next time you hear the term “Axis of Evil,” ask yourself: Who benefits from that narrative, and what is the real story behind these nations’ actions on the world stage?