Defense Priorities Defense Priorities
  • Policy Topics
    • US-Israel-Iran
    • Ukraine-Russia
    • Western Hemisphere
    • NATO
    • China
    • Syria
  • Analysis
    • Research
    • Q&A
  • Programs
    • Grand Strategy Program
    • Military Analysis Program
    • Asia Program
    • Middle East Program
  • Experts
  • Events
  • Media
  • About
    • Mission & Vision
    • People
    • Jobs
    • Contact
  • Donate
Select Page
Home / Grand strategy / The ‘axis of evil’ is overhyped
Grand strategy, China, Iran, North Korea, Russia

August 14, 2024

The ‘axis of evil’ is overhyped

By Jennifer Kavanagh and Daniel DePetris

Speaking at the Aspen Security Forum in July, longtime U.S. intelligence official John McLaughlin described the threat posed by China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia as “the distinguishing characteristic of our world right now.” McLaughlin, the former acting director of the CIA, warned that the United States’ adversaries had “formed a group” and were increasingly cooperating against Washington and its allies.

He is not the first to make this case. Many foreign-policy analysts, policymakers, and senior U.S. military officers have argued that China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia are increasingly aligned, if not outright joining forces. Others have described the relationship as a new “axis of evil,” recalling then-U.S. President George W. Bush’s phrase in the months after the 9/11 attacks. Whether people call them the axis of upheaval, axis of authoritarians, or axis of disorder, the tendency to see combinations of these four powers as a unified threat spans the U.S. political spectrum.

Fortunately, fears about a resurrected axis of evil are as sensationalized today as they were more than 20 years ago. Although China, Iran, North Korea, and Russia are cooperating more fruitfully than in the past, what they share is best described as a collection of pragmatic, largely bilateral, and likely temporary arrangements held together by geopolitical circumstances and a shared view that current U.S. policy and posture are highly detrimental to their respective interests.

Grouping these four U.S adversaries under a single banner distracts from the self-interest and very different ambitions driving them, oversimplifying the individual partnerships that connect them. If anything, the axis of evil treatment harms the United States’ ability to protect its interests more than it helps.

Read at Foreign Policy

Authors

Jennifer
Kavanagh

Senior Fellow & Director of Military Analysis

Defense Priorities

Photo of Daniel DePetris

Daniel
DePetris

Fellow

Defense Priorities

More on Asia

Op-edChina, Asia, US‑Israel‑Iran

Why Donald Trump’s war could play into China’s hands

By Lyle Goldstein

March 17, 2026

In the mediaChina‑Taiwan, Asia, China

U.S. spent roughly $3.4 trillion in military competition with China between 2012 and 2024, Watson study estimates

Featuring Jennifer Kavanagh, Benjamin Friedman, and Lyle Goldstein

March 10, 2026

In the mediaChina, Asia, China‑Taiwan, Taiwan

Stability comes first: Chinese defence chief signals Beijing’s strategic caution

Featuring Lyle Goldstein

March 10, 2026

Op-edChina‑Taiwan, Asia, China

Trump-Xi Taiwan talks could defuse the tinderbox

By Thomas P. Cavanna

March 6, 2026

Op-edTaiwan, Asia, China‑Taiwan

Taiwan’s Defense Budget Dilemma

By Lyle Goldstein

March 2, 2026

Op-edAsia

U.S. missile deliveries to Philippines are pointless and escalatory

By Thomas P. Cavanna

February 27, 2026

Events on Grand strategy

See All Events
virtualGlobal posture, Grand strategy, Military analysis

Assessing the 2026 NDS: What comes next?

February 9, 2026
virtualEurope and Eurasia, Asia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Alignment with restraint?

February 9, 2026
virtualNATO, Alliances, Burden sharing, Europe and Eurasia, Grand strategy

Assessing the 2026 NDS: Will it usher in burden shifting?

February 9, 2026

Receive expert foreign policy analysis

Join the hub of realism and restraint

Expert updates and analysis to enhance your understanding of vital U.S. national security issues

Defense Priority Mono Logo

Our mission is to inform citizens, thought leaders, and policymakers of the importance of a strong, dynamic military—used more judiciously to protect America’s narrowly defined national interests—and promote a realistic grand strategy prioritizing restraint, diplomacy, and free trade to ensure U.S. security.

  • Research
  • Experts
  • About
  • For Media
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Contact
© 2026 Defense Priorities Foundation. All rights reserved.