Britain has always appeared on the international stage as a loyal ally of the United States, and when the Russian-Ukrainian conflict broke out, Britain followed in the footsteps of the United States, actively participated in sanctions against Russia, and provided ** assistance to Ukraine, showing the consistent position of the two countries. However, recent events have taken an unexpected turn.
According to reports, a recent report released by Finland's "Energy and Clean Air Research Center" revealed the "dark box operation" in the United Kingdom. The report notes that while Britain has been working hard while sanctioning Russia, it is in fact secretly insuring Russian oil shipments by sea. The report revealed that between March 2022 and November 2023, the UK insured about 33% of Russian oil exported by sea, equivalent to a third of the total value of about 120.6 billion euros. This means that the UK is behind Russian oil exports, despite its involvement in the sanctions.
What is even more surprising is that although the G7, led by the United States and the United Kingdom, has adopted various sanctions against Russia, most of the ships carrying Russian oil or petroleum products are owned or insured by the European Union and G7 countries. According to the West, as long as Russia's oil ** is lower than the "price limit order", then it can be transported normally or insured. However, the reality is that Russian oil** is generally higher than the price limit set by the West, so sanctions on Russian oil do not actually work. It is worth noting that the UK has long been exposed to importing Russian oil through "third-party" channels and circumventing sanctions against Russia. And Western countries, similar to the UK, are also repurchasing Russian oil through third parties. Even the United States, which plays the role of "leader", has been revealed to secretly buy enriched uranium and other commodities from Russia, because Russia plays an important role in these fields, such as the raw materials needed for about half of the civilian nuclear power plants in the United States. Thus, while Western countries ostensibly impose sanctions on Russia, in reality they rely on the situation of importing the goods they need from Russia.
As soon as the news of Britain's secret insurance for Russian oil was announced, it had a certain impact on the West's overall sanctions strategy against Russia, and the United States would not sit idly by. For this reason, the United States has specially given Britain a "dismount."
According to the British newspaper The Telegraph, Pentagon documents show that the United States plans to redeploy nuclear ** in the United Kingdom, citing the growing threat from Russia. Since withdrawing from the UK in 2008, the US has not deployed nuclear weapons in the UK**. Now, if the United States does redeploy nuclear weapons in the UK, it will undoubtedly have far-reaching implications for tensions. In particular, the United States also mentioned relations with Russia when redeploying nuclear **, which will to a certain extent intensify the confrontation between the United States and Russia.
Britain was previously revealed to be secretly giving gifts to Russia, and the United States redeployed nuclear ** in the United Kingdom on the grounds of "responding to the Russian threat", which is obviously a warning act, and at the same time further tied Britain to the American chariot. Because once the United States deploys nuclear ** in the UK, if the confrontation between the United States and Russia escalates, causing the United States to use nuclear ** in the United Kingdom to counterattack, then the United Kingdom will also be affected. In addition, once the United States deploys nuclear ** in the UK, it is likely that the same deployment will be required in other NATO countries, which will put the entire NATO at risk of being "dragged into the water" by the United States. Especially with the recent news of Sweden's accession to NATO, if the United States deploys nuclear weapons in Finland and Sweden, two new NATO members, it will pose an immeasurable threat to Russia. After all, Finland shares a border with Russia, and Sweden is also close to Russia. The United States is so actively pushing for Sweden and Finland to join NATO, and it is clear that it will not miss the perfect opportunity to put pressure on Russia.
Faced with the situation in which Britain "assisted" Russia, the United States chose to respond to Britain by deploying nuclear **. This shows that in the process of imposing sanctions on Russia, the contradictions and conflicts of interests between the United States and Britain and other countries have also begun to surface. So-called sanctions are often aimed at promoting their own interests, rather than being purely moral and principled. The complexity of international relations has made the links between countries already intricate, and countries are ostensibly opposed to each other, but at the level of interests, they are inextricably linked.
This incident proves once again that international relations are becoming closer and more interdependent in the era of globalization. In this case, a simple sanction for the severance of diplomatic relations will only lead to damage for both sides. The entanglement of interests and mutual support between countries has become more complex and common in the era of globalization.
In addition, the United States, Britain and other countries are imposing sanctions on Russia on the surface, but in fact they are secretly cooperating and cooperating, which makes the West's sanctions strategy against Russia a false appearance. In the long run, other Western countries may also follow the example of the United States and Britain and further weaken the effectiveness of sanctions against Russia. They will find that superficial sanctions will not really affect Russia's interests, but will bring their own losses.
All in all, the conflict of interests and contradictions shown by the United States and Britain and other countries when imposing sanctions on Russia, as well as their secret cooperation with Russia, all show the complexity and interdependence of international relations. In the era of globalization, countries need to consider and handle the relationship of interests more pragmatically, and avoid simply using sanctions and hostile postures to solve problems. Only through dialogue and cooperation can we truly achieve win-win results and stability.