​Did Russian President Vladimir Putin just endorse US President Donald Trump’s plan to annex Greenland? And what exactly is Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s vision for a multipolar world?

Last week, Putin apparently endorsed Trump’s call for the US to take over Greenland, following a short trip there by the Vice-President, which was widely interpreted an endorsement of Russia’s imperialist policies.

“As JD Vance touched down in Greenland, the Trump administration received an unlikely endorsement for the US’s first potential territorial expansion since 1947: Vladimir Putin,” The Guardian wrote.

Vance’s call for a US take-over of Greenland “may surprise someone only at first glance, and it is a deep mistake to believe that this is some kind of extravagant talk by the new American administration,” Putin began. “Nothing of the sort.” Putin also mentioned the US purchase of Alaska from Tsarist Russia in 1867. In short, big countries have territorial ambitions and occasionally ignore the UN Charter that guarantees territorial integrity – something that the annexation of Greenland would violate in the same way as Putin’s invasion of Ukraine violated Ukraine’s territorial integrity.

The call for the takeover of Greenland is confusing as Vance also released a draft of America’s new foreign policy strategy that calls for the US to disengage from all international hot spots and leave them to its international allies, including the Ukraine conflict, but except Taiwan, where the US should prepare for war. But at the same time, Trump is picking fights, has already stared a major bombing campaign of the Houthi in Yemen and appears to be preparing for another bombing campaign against Iran.

Both Xi and Putin have railed against the unipolar world order that has been led by a US hegemony for years, but their preferred multipolar version remains little discussed. The Global South is largely in agreement with the two strong men, but as bne IntelliNews has reported, divisions within the alternative non-Western groups like the G20 and BRICS+ over the purposes of these groups, and others, only highlight there is still no consensus of the up and coming Emerged Markets, as opposed to the Emerging Markets.

Putin’s vision has been widely misunderstood thanks to his notorious quote that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the “geopolitical disaster of the [20^th] century,” in his 2005 state of the nation speech, widely taken to mean that he would like to recreate the Soviet Union, most recently by former Deputy Secretary of the State Department Victoria Nuland in an interview this month.

But few bother to complete the quote: “… tens of millions of our co-citizens and compatriots found themselves outside Russian territory,” referring to the break-up of the USSR into 15 republics, trapping ethnic Russians in new countries like Kazakhstan or Estonia where they faced hardships and discrimination. For all its faults, the new post-1991 Russia remains by far the most prosperous of all the new 15 states with adjusted incomes on a par with the EU average, as described in bne IntelliNews’ despair index.

Also, few bother to repeat Putin’s explicit comment on remaking the Soviet Union: “Those who don’t miss the Soviet Union have no heart. Those that want to recreate it have no brain,” referring to the contrast between the many certainties of life for Soviet citizens such as pensioners, and its catastrophic failures as a system.

A debate has been raging for three years. On the one hand, many of Kyiv’s supporters argue that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is part of Putin’s imperialistic ambitions and that he would like to occupy and control all of Ukraine. Others, however, believe it’s all a question of Putin’s paranoia and his desire to make sure that Ukraine never joins Nato so as to prevent Western troops and missiles from every appearing on Russia's border.

As bne IntelliNews has discussed, in keeping with Russia’s transactional multipolar world model, Putin made it clear that US plans to annex Greenland, or any other country, are none of Russia’s business. One of Putin and Xi’s complaints about the unipolar world view is that rich countries of the G7 take it on themselves to criticise, sanction and even bomb, countries that don’t subscribe to their world view. A key element of the transactional world view is that countries never comment on other countries’ internal affairs. You just do business with them.

“As for Greenland, this is an issue that concerns two specific states and has nothing to do with us,” Putin said during a meeting with his navy in the northern port city of Murmansk.

Ironically, as bne IntelliNews reported, this hands-off view dovetails with the transactional Trump. As the Financial Times reported recently, Trump’s leadership style is now seen as closer to that of Xi and Putin than any country in the rest of the West. The US has become an illiberal country. “The postwar global order is not just obsolete, it is now a weapon being used against us,” said Marco Rubio during his Senate confirmation hearing in January, the Guardian reported. Trump is abandoning the rules-based international order the US has been championing during the last 70 years.

Hands off, except when there’s national interests in play

Putin didn't "endorse Trump’s Greenland takeover." He called it "concerning." Despite the disinterest multipolar countries are supposed to maintain concerning other people’s countries, that does not extend to foreign relations, especially to expansionist imperial tendencies, as these threaten to upset the international order and impact on someone like Russia's overseas interests.

Putin said Trump’s ambitions in Greenland shows that Nato countries intend to use the Far North as a “springboard for possible conflicts" and he specifically names Finland and Sweden as “dangerous countries,” in the region, where Russia has the bulk of its oil and gas reserves. “We will not tolerate any encroachments on our country’s sovereignty and will steadfastly safeguard our national interests,” Putin said to naval officers in Murmansk.

“We are concerned about the fact that Nato countries are increasingly often designating the Far North as a springboard for possible conflicts and are practising the use of troops in these conditions, including by their “new recruits” – Finland and Sweden, with whom, incidentally, until recently we had no problems at all. They are creating problems with their own hands for some reason. Why? It is impossible to understand. But nevertheless, we will proceed from current realities and will respond to all this,” Putin said. Russia would see Trump’s encroachment into the Arctic as another national security threat, like Nato’s expansion into Ukraine.

UN global government

In the expiring liberal order the US has taken on itself the right to judge what is right and wrong, but who makes these decisions in multipolar order? Advocates have long said that the UN is the most obviously appropriate body to run the world.

In his last address to the UN in 2015, Putin called on a global coalition to counter global terrorism and highlighted that it was a problem that affected Russia as much as the Western powers. He called on a global coalition to counter terrorism in the same way as the world powers – including an alliance between the Soviet Union and America – countered Nazi Germany.

"On the basis of international law, the international community should create a general, broad-based coalition against terrorism, and Muslim countries should play a key role in such a coalition," he said, adding the UN should lead this coalition, in which Russia would be a willing participant. His call to action was completely ignored.

More recently both Russia and China have suggested that the Ukraine conflict could be resolved at the UN. A joint statement issued last year said: "Russia positively evaluates China's objective and fair position on the Ukraine issue and agrees with the view that the crisis must be resolved on the basis of full compliance with the UN Charter." Preceding that, in 2008 Russia suggested a draft plan for a new pan-European security deal that would have also headed off the Ukraine conflict before it began that is also grounded on the UN Charter.

Putin is not alone in seeing the UN as the most appropriate venue to run global affairs. China and the Global South countries in general keep saying that they actually want a much bigger role for the UN in a future multipolar world order. The Ukraine conflict and the UN votes to condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine have reignited the calls for the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to be reformed to better represent the distribution of the world’s population by including more of the Global South. Specifically, there have been calls to add India and Brazil to the UNSC. There are three European countries on the UNSC, the Americans and one Asian country, China. There are no representatives from Africa or Latin America as permanent members, despite accounting for a quarter of the world’s population, or some 2bn people.

Demands for reform of the UNSC have intensified and will only grow stronger now the Emerging Markets are starting to emerge.  

The Global South seeks permanent representation and a greater role in shaping global security governance. The current composition – established in the aftermath of the Second World War – has come under increasing criticism for failing to reflect the geopolitical realities of the 21st century.

This process will probably only accelerate under Trump, who is withdrawing the US from the international order with the a new US foreign policy floated by Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth in mid-March and the implosion of EU unity since Trump took office.  The old-world powers are increasingly giving way to the new.

Russo-Chinese detailed plan

Last year Beijing and Moscow spelled out in great detail their joint vision of what a multipolar world should look like in an 8,000-word statement.

This order is founded on: "The achievements of World War II and the post-war world order established by the UN Charter."

“In Russia and China's view THEY are the true guarantors of the post-WW2 order, when the West – the US very much included – has completely betrayed its spirit and principles,” said political commentator Arnaud Bertrand, a well-known China-watcher, in a post on social media.

The joint statement was particularly critical of the United States, writing that its adherence "to hegemonism and power politics" was contrary to the trend towards a “multipolar world order,” and that the "US, with its Cold War mentality and camp confrontation model, puts “small group” security above regional security and stability." They also wrote that they have "serious concern about the United States' attempts to undermine strategic stability to maintain its absolute military superiority."

Other have suggested that Trump is trying to pull off a “reverse Nixon” by flirting with Putin, offering to do business with Russia and give him limited sanctions relief in an attempt to drive a wedge between Beijing and Moscow. Putin has played to Trump’s ego, saying that the 2021 election was “stolen” from him, that he “prayed for Trump after a sniper tried to kill him” and is now apparently throwing his weight behind Trump’s claims on Greenland.

“The notion that Putin would now be an "enthusiastic ally" of Trump as he doubles down on power politics further undermines the post-WW2 order and makes a complete mockery of the UN Charter is laughable at best,” says Bertrand. Most analyst concur, saying that Putin is engaging with Trump to see what advantage he can win in the ceasefire talks, but is more than conscious that a new president could be elected in four years time and the US foreign policy might take another violent lurch in another direction. Putin is not about to abandon his close ties with Xi, who is likely to stay in office as long as the Russian president.

The 8,000-word joint statement goes well beyond the February 2022 no limits partnership and consists of three main points: building a new multipolar world order; lambasting the US’ attempts to maintain its hegemonistic monopoly on global power; and a radically deepening of Sino-Russian cooperation both militarily and economically.

The statement says that it is an "objective factor" that "the status and strength of emerging major countries and regions in the 'Global South' [are] continuously increasing", and that "the trend of world multipolarity [is] accelerating", and no country should “seek its own security at the expense of others' security.”

Two principles are paramount in building this new multipolar word:

- An order with no "neo-colonialism and hegemonism" of any kind; and

- An order based on the UN Charter.

"Both sides will continue to firmly defend the achievements of World War II and the post-war world order established by the UN Charter," the statement says. “"All countries have the right to independently choose their development models and political, economic and social systems based on their national conditions and people's will, oppose interference in the internal affairs of sovereign countries, oppose unilateral sanctions and 'long-arm jurisdiction' without international law basis or UN Security Council authorisation.”

Russia's critics have called the Sino-Russia relationship a one-way street and Russia a junior partner as the “commodities warehouse for Beijing.”  But the joint statement testifies to a much deeper evolving relationship between the two, spelling out the areas of cooperation in detail:

• Military cooperation: Deepen mutual trust and military collaboration, expand joint training, conduct regular maritime and air patrols, enhance coordination in bilateral and multilateral frameworks, and improve joint risk response capabilities.
• Trade and economic development: Expand bilateral trade and investment, develop advanced industries together, and strengthen cooperation in sectors including civil aviation, shipbuilding, automotive, equipment manufacturing, electronics, metallurgy, mining, chemicals and forestry.
• Energy cooperation: Consolidate strategic energy ties to ensure mutual economic and energy security, promote stability in international energy markets and supply chains, and deepen collaboration in civilian nuclear energy, including fusion, fast reactors and closed fuel cycles.
• Financial integration and currency use: Increase use of local currencies in trade and finance, improve financial infrastructure, facilitate cross-border settlements, strengthen banking and insurance regulatory cooperation, support institutions operating in both countries, encourage mutual bond issuance and investment.
• Educational and scientific exchange: Expand and improve study abroad programmes, promote language education, support institutional exchanges and joint degrees, boost basic and vocational research cooperation and develop digital and high-tech education links.
• Media and public opinion: Strengthen media cooperation, facilitate professional exchanges, collaborate on high-quality content, leverage new media technologies and promote accurate and comprehensive international news reporting.
• Global governance and multilateralism: Deepen cooperation at the UN and Security Council, support the WHO and WTO frameworks, enhance coordination within the SCO, and increase the BRICS mechanism's global influence.