If you’ve ever listened to a middle school band concert, you know the truth: the players don’t have to be in perfect harmony to rattle your nerves. One clarinet squeaking in sync with the trombones is enough to set the tone (By the way, in high school that squeaky clarinet was probably me!). That’s how I’d describe the “group photo” we saw this month—Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, and Kim Jong Un standing shoulder to shoulder in Beijing, with India’s Narendra Modi making his own cameo at the SCO summit.
No alliance treaty was signed. No “new Warsaw Pact.” Yet the world doesn’t need synchronized watches to feel the tremors. Sometimes, just marching in step—even off-key—shifts the balance.
The Optics of Convergence
The Beijing parade marking Japan’s WWII surrender anniversary was more than pageantry. China unveiled new military kit, Putin basked in legitimacy, Kim got global airtime, and Xi framed the narrative as a choice between “peace or war” in the international order. The symbolism was blunt: three leaders at odds with Washington and Brussels found comfort together.
It was, as one European diplomat muttered, “a photo worth more than a treaty.” In today’s media ecosystem, that image will replay endlessly on state TV in Moscow, Beijing, and Pyongyang—proof to domestic audiences that the West isn’t the only show in town.
History’s Rhymes (and Wrong Notes)
We’ve seen versions of this before. In the early 1930s, Italy, Germany, and Japan weren’t bound by airtight treaties at first—they simply tested the waters by coordinating optics and goals. The “Axis” only hardened later. Likewise, the Non-Aligned Movement in the 1960s wasn’t cohesive, but its members collectively shaped the Cold War dynamic.
The point: loose alignments matter. Even when interests diverge (China doesn’t love Russia’s nuclear saber-rattling; North Korea isn’t a fan of playing second fiddle), coordination on just a few fronts can still complicate Western strategy.
What They Really Share
So what unites Xi, Putin, and Kim? Three main ingredients:
A grievance with the Western-led order. From NATO expansion to sanctions to human rights criticisms, each sees Washington and Brussels as meddlers.
A hunger for alternatives. Russia wants markets for oil and gas, China wants military and tech partners, North Korea wants legitimacy and food aid.
A playbook for hybrid disruption. Coordinated cyber ops, arms trades, and sanctions-evading logistics networks don’t need a NATO-style charter. They just need a nod and a wink.
Even a little cooperation—a shared exercise here, an arms shipment there—multiplies the strain on Western planners.
A Pause for Remembrance
Today’s date, September 11, is a reminder of what happens when the world underestimates loose alignments. Twenty-four years ago, a small group of extremists managed to coordinate just enough—financially, logistically, and ideologically—to carry out the deadliest attack on American soil.
They weren’t a formal army. They didn’t have an industrial base or a clear chain of command. But their ability to “march in step” at the margins created an asymmetric shock with consequences that reshaped global policy for decades.
The lesson isn’t that today’s trio—Xi, Putin, Kim—is plotting something identical. It’s that coordination below the level of alliance can still upend stability. We remember 9/11 not only for the lives lost but also for what it taught: complacency in the face of loosely connected threats carries its own risks.
For Europe and the U.S., the somber anniversary should sharpen focus. Hybrid disruptions, energy re-alignments, and cyber sabotage may not look like airliners crashing into towers, but they carry the same principle: small, coordinated actions can have oversized consequences if ignored.
Europe’s Concern
For Europe, this “marching in step” dynamic is unnerving. It means:
Longer war pressure. If North Korean shells and drones continue flowing to Russia, Ukraine’s battlefield calculus shifts.
Energy headaches. China providing a gas lifeline via future pipelines reduces European leverage.
Hybrid risks. Europe already suffers undersea cable sabotage and GPS jamming—add a coordinated adversary bloc, and the headaches multiply.
No wonder EU officials are openly debating whether to adopt U.S.-style secondary sanctions on Chinese entities helping Moscow. That’s a big leap—and a risky one, given Europe’s deep trade ties with Beijing.
Washington’s Dilemma
For the U.S., the concern is a two-theater squeeze. Imagine Russia bogging down NATO in Ukraine while China ratchets up pressure in the Taiwan Strait—and North Korea sparks another crisis on the peninsula. Each on its own is manageable; together, they’re a stretch.
It’s why U.S. officials keep emphasizing industrial base capacity—ramping up shell production, building submarine partnerships with Australia, stockpiling Javelins. The goal: prove that America can “walk and chew gum” in two theaters. But even gum loses flavor if you chew too long.
Enter India: The Swing Guest at the Buffet
Then there’s India—showing up at the SCO in Tianjin, smiling at Xi and Putin even as Washington courts it through the Quad. Modi’s presence was a reminder: Delhi won’t be boxed in. Strategic autonomy means keeping two plates, thank you very much.
For the West, that’s both a frustration and an opportunity. Frustration because India won’t automatically side with Washington on sanctions or China containment. Opportunity because tangible partnerships—semiconductor fabs, defense co-production—can keep Delhi closer without forcing a pledge of allegiance.
Why Loose Alignments Still Bite
Here’s the bottom line: they don’t need a formal pact. They don’t need to agree on every issue. Just marching in step on three or four shared goals—like undermining sanctions, running hybrid disruptions, or showing solidarity at summits—forces the U.S. and Europe to play defense on more fronts.
Think of it like golf: you don’t need every shot perfect. You just need enough bogeys avoided to beat the field. Xi, Putin, and Kim are stringing together bogey-free rounds, and the West is left scrambling to match pace.
What To Watch Next
Exercises. If Russia, China, and North Korea announce trilateral drills, take note. That’s a step beyond optics.
Pipelines and ports. Any binding progress on Power of Siberia 2, or Chinese investment in Russian logistics hubs, signals tighter bonds.
Information ops. Watch for shared narratives amplified across state media—especially around Ukraine aid or Taiwan tensions.
India’s choices. Concrete U.S.–India deliverables (tech transfers, energy projects) are the real test of whether Delhi stays balanced or leans East.
Loose alliances don’t need sheet music—they just need to hum the same off-key tune to rattle the concert. Europe and the U.S. are learning that the hard way.
So yes, the Xi-Putin-Kim group photo was just that: a photo. But in geopolitics, pictures don’t just say a thousand words—they can cost billions in defense budgets.
Marching in step is already enough to keep Western planners awake at night. And unlike your middle school band concert, nobody gets to leave early. At my school the marching band always started with 1-2-3-kick, we just need to be sure who we kick and how hard.