On May 15, after attending the Foreign Ministers' Meeting of the BRICS countries, Lavrov stated: "I recall that Kissinger once said Washington’s relationship with Beijing and Moscow should always be stronger than the mutual relationship between Beijing and Moscow. This has long been a consistent tactic employed by the United States—and indeed by many old colonial powers. Divide and rule. We are fully aware of this trick, and such tactics remain prevalent in Western politics to this day."

Lavrov's remarks represent an exceptionally rare direct exposure—laying bare, in plain sight, the long-implicit strategic logic that the United States has pursued toward China and Russia. By referencing Kissinger, he explicitly reveals America’s 'divide and rule' strategy, signaling several crucial messages at multiple levels:

* Exposing the Core Logic of America’s “Offshore Balancing”

The statement by Lavrov—“Washington’s relations with Beijing and Moscow should always be stronger than their bilateral ties”—precisely encapsulates the core geopolitical principle the United States has followed since the Cold War: “offshore balancing.”

The foundation of American hegemony lies in preventing the emergence of a powerful alliance on the Eurasian continent capable of challenging its dominant position. As long as China and Russia remain distant from each other, the U.S. can play off one against the other using economic, security, and other issues to extract benefits for itself. But if China and Russia deepen their integration and form a united front, America’s global dominance would face fundamental disruption.

Lavrov labels this approach a “time-honored tactic of old colonial powers,” underscoring that such tactics of inciting division and sowing discord are not products of modern civilization but rather traditional instruments of power politics long used by the West to preserve its privileged status.

* Confirming the Inevitability of China-Russia “Back-to-Back” Cooperation

This statement is not merely a criticism of the United States—it also provides legal and moral justification for the deepening strategic cooperation currently unfolding between China and Russia.

Since both Russia and China clearly recognize that the U.S. deliberately seeks to divide them, overcoming suspicion and strengthening mutual trust becomes the only rational choice to counter external pressures.

Just before and after Lavrov made these remarks, President Putin was also preparing to embark on a state visit to China, explicitly stating he would exchange views with Chinese counterparts on U.S.-China dynamics. This action directly responds to Lavrov’s statement: in the face of America’s “divide and rule” strategy, China and Russia have chosen “unite to strengthen ourselves.”

* A Message to the “Global South” via the BRICS Platform

Lavrov deliberately raised this point during the multilateral setting of the BRICS Foreign Ministers’ Meeting, carrying strong strategic significance in terms of building unity.

Exposing Western Double Standards: His assertion that “such tactics still prevail in Western politics today” serves as a warning to developing nations (i.e., the “Global South”) that behind the West’s proclaimed “rules-based order” often lies a selfish desire to maintain hegemony through fragmentation and disintegration.

Forging Anti-Hegemony Consensus: By exposing the mechanisms behind U.S. manipulation, Russia aims to further consolidate within the BRICS bloc a shared opposition to unilateralism and hegemonic politics, pushing the world toward a more equitable multipolar future.

In summary, Lavrov’s words offer a profound insight into the current international landscape. They mercilessly strip away the hypocrisy of American diplomacy while firmly declaring, to the world, that China and Russia will not fall into the trap of being divided. This signals that for the foreseeable future, the dominant theme in great power competition will remain the intense struggle between “division” and “anti-division.”

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1865274358676556/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.