On January 6, 1942, the *China National Daily* published a signed article titled "On the Future of the World," co-authored by He Rui and Li Runshi. Due to the war, official relations between nations had been severed, but every country had its own channels to obtain such weighty news. The Soviet Union, which remained neutral at this stage, maintained diplomatic relations with both the Asian Alliance and the Euro-American Allies, serving as a conduit for a vast amount of information between the two sides.

Stalin received a substantial Russian translation immediately. Sipping a cup of brewed tea and lighting a pipe of tobacco, Stalin quietly began to read "On the Future of the World" in his office at the Kremlin.

The article pointed out at the very beginning that there were currently only four countries in the world with clear global strategies: China, the United States, Britain, and France. However, France had been defeated, and the British colonial system was already crumbling. Even if the two old powers, Britain and France, had clear global strategies, as they no longer possessed the capability to execute them, they had already been eliminated from the competition for global order.

The reason for the current war between China and the United States was not any hatred between the two nations, but rather that both insisted on implementing their own global strategies. There existed an irreconcilable, massive contradiction between these two global strategies, and this was the true cause of the war.

Stalin paused his reading, unwillingly scanning the previous content once more. He confirmed that "On the Future of the World" indeed explicitly stated that only the four nations of China, the US, Britain, and France had global strategies. Only then did he continue reading with a sense of loss.

Stalin did not know that for this article, "On the Future of the World," He Rui had sent his draft to Li Runshi, who had modified it before sending it back to He Rui for the final version.

In their exchanges, He Rui and Li Runshi had discussed why they did not analyze the Soviet Union. Li Runshi agreed with He Rui's view that the Soviet Union did not have many choices at this stage. Cooperating with any country other than China, the Soviet Union would at least be a power of the same level, capable of securing sufficient benefits for itself. But cooperating fully with China would likely reduce the Soviet Union to the status of a "Golden Horde" vassal state. From the perspective of geopolitics, full cooperation with China was precisely one of the choices the Soviet Union could least accept.

Since that was the case, He Rui and Li Runshi simply did not mention the Soviet Union at all in the article. As for where to go, they would let the Soviet Union make its own decision.

Stalin read through the article quickly, finding that the Soviet Union was completely unmentioned, as if it did not exist. Even leaving the Soviet Union aside, the analysis in this article remained logically rigorous and rich in content.

"On the Future of the World" argued that lacking the ability to execute one's own global strategy did not equate to having no global strategy. Britain and France were participating in the US-led global strategy through the platform of the Allies, and through internal gaming within the Allies, they were attempting to secure maximum benefits for their own nations within the US-led global strategy.

The reason the United States could execute its global strategy through the Allied platform was that the American global strategy was an upgraded version based on the British and French global strategies. The United States knew very well that if it could not solve the various problems facing the world today, American interests could not be realized. So, looking only at the results, if the US-led global order could be realized, it could indeed solve some of the world's problems, and would necessarily promote world progress to a certain extent.

However, counting on the American world order to solve world problems meant inevitably facing the conflict between the solutions to these problems and American interests.

The core of the US global strategy was to establish a brand-new world order that matched American national productivity. The purpose of this new order was not to eliminate colonialism, but when colonialism conflicted with American interests, the United States would not hesitate to strike at the colonialism that affected its interests. If a solution conflicted with American interests, the United States would not agree to such a solution.

Compared to the US-led world order, the China-led world order sought to first solve the various problems facing the world. To solve world problems, China was willing to adjust its own interests and work with countries around the world to build a fairer world order.

This introspective attitude, this methodology of solving problems by excavating internal strength, was a tradition of Chinese civilization. It was also the fundamental reason why Chinese civilization had stood tall for thousands of years. The Chinese civilization, having stood for millennia, had enough time to refine the study of global fairness. The understanding of global fairness, in turn, reinforced the vitality of Chinese civilization.

The world order led by China was naturally based on China's perception of fairness and rationality, making China willing to undertake the most difficult challenges and expend tremendous effort to build a truly fair world order.

Regarding the choice of allies, both China and the United States chose allies that could maximize their national interests.

The United States believed that capital capable of bringing power to the US right now was its ally. People without capital were merely consumers controlled by the US, and these consumers were just a type of human resource providing profit for the US.

China believed that the vast majority of laborers in the world were the root of productivity, and the laborers of the world were China's allies.

Up to this point, both China and the United States believed their choices were the most correct. When this contest deciding the future of the world ended, the final victor would naturally emerge.

China held nothing back from its allies, and the vast laborers of the world chosen by China also knew very well that they actually had no other choice that better fitted their fundamental interests. Such cooperation was frank and sincere; the strategic direction chosen for cooperation could undoubtedly withstand discussion and was highly unified.

The cooperation strategy within the Euro-American Allies was not based on internal generation, but stemmed from the resistance Europe and America faced from oppressed peoples pursuing fairness. Now that this resistance had become strong enough to thoroughly defeat Euro-American industry, the Euro-American imperialist nations had to cooperate temporarily based on the goal of maintaining their predatory status.

Therefore, massive contradictions existed between the internal strategies of the Allied nations. The strategies that different countries truly wanted to implement not only had huge divergences but also huge contradictions. Due to the development of the World People's Liberation Cause, the internal contradictions of the Allies might not have the opportunity to explode, but their internal divergences were bound to explode because these divergences were based on the priority of protecting their own national interests.

If the Allied bloc won, but France was thoroughly sacrificed, completely losing the ability to maintain current French interests after the war victory—based on the tradition of Euro-American culture, France would certainly not believe that it would get its due share after the war. Therefore, when France faced the choice of sacrificing itself to help the Allies win, it would certainly not make the decision to sacrifice France for the Allies.

In contrast, the internal divergences of the World People's Liberation Movement were merely about whether the cost of revolutionary victory could be a little less, or the time for victory a little shorter. These divergences belonged to the technical level and could be resolved through rational analysis and discussion.

Therefore, the more critical the situation for the Allied nations, the greater their internal divergences, and the faster their defeat. In the words of a Chinese proverb, "It is easy to share wealth, but hard to share hardship."

The World People's Liberation Cause, on the other hand, belonged to "It is easy to share hardship, but hard to share wealth." But the brand-new world order proposed by China provided a model for economic cooperation among nations, as well as means like the establishment of a World Bank to provide support to parts of countries needing assistance through fiscal transfers. This solved the problem of economic development in the new world, thereby resolving the difficulties encountered in "sharing wealth."

Judging from the current strategies and internal relations of both sides, the final victory would undoubtedly belong to the World People's Liberation Movement. The laborers would lose only their chains in this revolution, but they would gain the whole world.

Workers of the world, unite!

Having finished the article, Stalin threw his pipe onto the table. The final paragraph had truly irritated him, making him feel very unhappy.

Although He Rui had always considered himself a communist, and Europe and America now used "Communist Party" to describe He Rui, in Stalin's internal assessment, he consistently believed He Rui was at most a relatively left-leaning bourgeois reformist, not a communist. To put it more bluntly, Stalin emotionally believed that He Rui was "unworthy of the surname Zhao."

So when He Rui and Li Runshi used a slightly modified final paragraph of the *Communist Manifesto* at the end of "On the Future of the World," a wave of anger surged in Stalin's heart.

However, Stalin was Stalin after all. He quickly picked up his pipe and filled it with tobacco, beginning to think about the true reason for his flash of anger. Stalin soon thought of an explanation. Just as "On the Future of the World" stated, every country could formulate an effective national global strategy. But few countries could formulate an effective "global strategy led by their own country." The Soviet Union, to this day, had indeed not formulated a global strategy led by the Soviet Union. In comparison, China and the United States had indeed completed their global strategies.

Stalin knew very well what a huge gap having or not having such a global strategy meant for a nation. With a global strategy led by one's own country, one could obtain resources, capital, and markets from the globe, maximizing national productivity and influence.

Britain, inferior to Russia in both population and land area, had been able to suppress Russia consistently. The difference was simply that Britain had built a global strategy belonging to Britain and operated it effectively.

Although the Soviet Union was now considered a beacon of civilization in Europe, and vast numbers of people in European countries supported the Soviet Union without seeking reward, providing it with various classified intelligence, before a Soviet-led world order was formulated, this moral appeal could not become the capability to change the Soviet Union's relatively weak position.

Once the Soviet Union formulated a global order and could implement it, all support would be strengthened tenfold or a hundredfold, and the Soviet Union would immediately become the most advantageous party among the many forces in the world.

Although the logic was easy to understand, and the Soviet Union had tried very seriously to formulate a Soviet-led world order, up to now, those plans still remained at the level of wishful thinking.

The Soviet global order that truly seemed systematic was, ironically, the theory of global revolution formulated by Trotsky, whom Stalin had brought down. But Stalin had studied Trotsky's global revolution theory very seriously and had personally engaged in extensive discussions, debates, and arguments with Trotsky. Stalin's evaluation of Trotsky's global revolution theory was "bluffing and unrealistic."

Even the Trotskyist global revolution theory, so negated by Stalin, was at least theoretically more reliable than the Soviet-led world order currently researched by the CPSU. So Stalin knew very well that what the Soviet Union could strive for at this stage was only the status of regional dominance. To engage in a worldwide struggle with China and the United States, the Soviet Union was truly not ready.

Having figured this out, Stalin still felt unsatisfied, because this realization still felt like a puzzle missing an important piece. For Stalin, this intuitive feeling was very real; he had relied on this intuition to solve many problems.

So, what exactly was this feeling of missing a piece? Stalin smoked his pipe silently, pondering. Thinking left and right, he couldn't find the problem. Stalin asked his secretary to call, inviting Commissar Kirov over. After giving the order, Stalin took a few puffs of smoke and added to the secretary, "Invite Comrade Beria to come along as well."

Lavrentiy Pavlovich Beria. He had a square face and a broad forehead. This man had become the First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Georgia at the age of 33, gaining Stalin's appreciation during that time. This year, the 43-year-old Beria had relatively sparse hair, and wearing a pair of glasses, he presented a scholarly appearance rare among the Soviet upper echelons.

It was just that Beria rarely showed any expression, looking somewhat cold and gloomy. But Beria had been appointed People's Commissar for Internal Affairs in 1938, beginning his long-term control of Soviet intelligence agencies. Compared to this position, Beria's expressionlessness fit his job very well.

Compared to Beria, Kirov, who was considered Stalin's successor, appeared gentler and more energetic. Regarding the relationship between Kirov and Beria, a rumor had recently emerged. Stalin hoped that the future CPSU would be composed of a troika of Kirov, Beria, and Molotov, with this troika exercising supreme power.

Kirov didn't care about such rumors at all. He greeted Stalin first before greeting Beria. Stalin had originally wanted to invite Molotov as well, but since the matter concerned He Rui's evaluation of Stalin, Stalin ultimately didn't call Molotov.

Facing the two young comrades he trusted completely, Stalin frankly raised his doubts. Kirov frowned slightly in thought. Stalin did not rush him; he didn't expect Kirov to immediately figure out something he himself hadn't been able to fully recall.

However, out of politeness, Stalin looked at Beria. Beria's expression didn't change at all. Due to his myopia, Beria's gaze was slightly dull and not bright. But Beria could still see Stalin's demeanor clearly, so he replied calmly, "General Secretary, I remember He Rui once expressed a view to a comrade who participated in the Sino-Soviet talks. He believed that both the Soviet Union and Germany think Europe is the center of the world, whereas in reality, Europe will soon no longer be the center of the world, but merely an important component of it."

As soon as these words were spoken, Stalin immediately felt he had found the missing fragment in his intuition. The fitting of this fragment resolved Stalin's confusion regarding that part of "On the Future of the World."

Kirov looked at Beria with some surprise. He had also finished reading "On the Future of the World." With Kirov's rank, he could see whatever Comrade Stalin could see. So Beria's answer also made Kirov's eyes light up.

He Rui believed that "the carnival era of middle-sized nations has ended," and Europe, clustered with a bunch of middle-sized nations, had thoroughly lost its dominant position. Anyone who thought that controlling Europe meant controlling the world was outdated.

There was merit to this statement, but for Russia, which considered itself a European nation, it was completely impossible to truly accept such a judgment. Even if this judgment was made by a world-class leader like He Rui, it only made the impression of this statement more profound.

In "On the Future of the World," although He Rui did not directly use this judgment again, his underlying arguments were based on it.

Kirov carefully savored "On the Future of the World," and for some reason, a sudden sense of panic arose in his heart. If Europe was no longer the center of the world, what position would the Soviet Union, which was not even in the central position of Europe, occupy?

This emotion left Kirov momentarily speechless, and he could only silently calm his own mood first.

Beria had absolutely no such sentimental emotions. As the head of the supreme intelligence agency, Beria was not only extremely professional in his work but also possessed very high political sensitivity. After choosing to support Stalin, Beria wrote and published the book *On the History of the Bolshevik Organizations in Transcaucasia*. Printed in nine editions and widely disseminated, it not only raised his political prestige but also gained the attention of CPSU theorists and Stalin's confidants because it exaggerated Stalin's role in the Transcaucasian revolution, thereby greatly reinforcing Stalin's prestige.

Because Beria was very certain that the Soviet Union at this stage must build a leadership system with Stalin as the core. And Stalin, understanding this, began to trust Beria greatly from then on.

Towards He Rui, Beria never showed any appreciation. But after carefully studying He Rui, Beria was convinced that He Rui was indeed a steadfast communist leader. Beria had always agreed with He Rui's political understanding and methods of judgment.

Only Beria himself knew this. Outsiders had no idea that in Beria's heart, regarding status in the world revolution, He Rui and Stalin were leaders of the same level. Moreover, Beria believed He Rui's status was actually slightly higher.

Of course, this perception did not shake Beria's loyalty to the Soviet Union and Stalin in the slightest.

At this moment, Stalin woke from his contemplation first. Stalin asked, "Beria, how much preparation has been done for the plan to liberate Finland?"

Beria replied, "Comrade General Secretary, I personally still oppose liberating Finland now."