Time for a Triumvirate?

Watching the Hu/Obama press conference it occurred to me just how much could be accomplished by these two powers. Throw in a third - Russia - and we could effectively "rule the world" for a generation, damaging only the interests of the rogue states. Is it time for a T3?

It is obvious that North Korea survives only at the pleasure of Beijing. Iran's nuclear ambitions could be ended peacefully by only one power - Russia. If the three of us could agree on a few primary goals - big ones - I don't see how anyone could stop us.

Our non-negotiable objective would concern nuclear non-proliferation. Specifically, Iran and North Korean gains would need to be rolled back and both states would need to be verifiably nuclear materials and enrichment free. With the Triumvirate united, we can give each rogue state the opportunity to do this the easy way, or the hard way band back it up without a lot of handwringing. Further, the legitimate nuclear club would remain at 5, with India, Pakistan and Israel stuck in nuclear limbo. Any other nations attempting to join the club would see their efforts promptly shut down through peaceful or military means, as needed. This, in my opinion, is the one sure way to assure that civilization is not brought down through proliferation in the 21st century.

What will the Russians want? No more NATO expansion. Respected sphere of influence in the former Soviet states (except the Baltic provinces, which are now comfortably in the west). A roadmap to eventual full membership in "western civilization" with American support regarding the EU and perhaps even NATO if they meet specific, objective tests concerning democracy and other western institutions. Simply being one of such an exclusive group would probably get the Kremlin's attention. I believe that Russia can be brought into the west and such a power trio would be useful to that end.

What will China want? I think a complete American exit from South Korea if/when North Korea collapses and is reunited with the South. Pyongyang is being propped up by China, as they have their own bellicose right wingers that can't stand the thought of "losing" the Korean War 60+/- years after the last shot was fired. If there were overt assurances of an American exit, Beijing may find a way to accept the collapse of the Kim regime. They could certainly call it a victory domestically if we are packing up and leaving. Hu would not face the same western gloating that Gorbachev did. Meanwhile - Korea would be a stronger bastion of democracy and capitalism (half the country wants us gone now, even with Kim Jong-Il running things up north) and our expensive presence there would no longer be necessary.

China may want a larger piece of the world stage, something that they will be getting anyway due to their relative waxing influence. I think we would need to soften, but not eliminate, the human rights rhetoric (just as Nixon, Reagan and Bush would do when convenient for our interests).

What would Latin America and Africa think? Not much, really. India and Japan would be jealous, but not such that it would have any meaningful consequences. The Middle East would respect the accumulation of power. The Islamofascists would hate such a unified front. The three countries interests are already aligned with respect to terrorism, though petty posturing has prevented more effective unified action. How about those Europeans that drive Hags crazy? I think they too would be jealous, like the Indians and Japanese, but it would amount to no more than Delhi and Toyko's pique. They will still be spending a lot of time consolidating their union and the Euro. I can't think of any Triumvirate policies mentioned above that would upset any continental apple carts. The UN, as an institution, may not be happy but that will only be icing on the cake for Hags.

Whaddaya think?