Back To The Future: The New International Era

The Decisive Decade

The COVID-19 pandemic was supposed to usher in a new era: one in which existing international systems such as the WHO would be reinforced and differences between long-standing adversaries would be cast aside as they worked hand in hand to defeat the virus. This new “Era of Cooperation” would see Americans working alongside their Chinese counterparts to deliver vaccines to the world’s most vulnerable, and would prove that when faced with a common threat humanity could prevail. Instead, the pandemic shined a light on the inability of these existing international systems to function as they should, created an environment where vaccine competition triumphed over vaccine distribution, and gave authoritarians the perfect justification to increase their grip on power.

The response that the world had to Russia's invasion of Ukraine has also failed to meet expectations; the prediction that Putin would be met with a decisive coalition composed of not only Europe and North America—but also China, India, Africa, and Latin America—never came to fruition. While the EU and US response has been authoritative, the Global South has refused to sanction Russia, while key players such as China and India navigate their relationship with their gargantuan northern neighbor as carefully as a neurosurgeon with a scalpel. 

Both the pandemic and the invasion of Ukraine failed to bring about the kind of radical change that many had hoped for, but have instead accelerated already existing trends and shined a light on the current international order’s shortcomings. In doing so, both the pandemic and the invasion serve as harbingers for what the next global decade will look like.

A Multipolar World

The fall of the USSR brought with it the rise of the US as the world’s sole hegemon. With its military sprawled across every continent, its influence across the WTO, UN, and NATO cemented, and the dollar becoming the de facto global currency, the United States—closely followed by its Western allies—enjoyed 30 years of steering the direction in which the world was headed. Although a multipolar world (a world in which the distribution of power is more evenly distributed amongst two or more countries) was inevitable, the European security situation coupled with Xi’s rapid ascension to power, has greatly accelerated this shift. This decade will mark the end of the “American Era” in which the US was the sole world super-power and begin a new—likely more unstable—global distribution of power.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine forced the US to push the brakes on its long-awaited shift towards the Pacific; tying up its military and intelligence analysts in Eastern Europe for the foreseeable future. This shift is critical if the US is to curve the rise of China while at the same time cement American influence in an area that will become the major regional focus over the next century. Yet, it is not only the security situation in Ukraine keeping the US from pivoting towards Asia, but the lack of leadership in Europe itself. The hope that Europeans will finally take their security into their own hands (the US provides over 50% of NATO’s total military capability and all but dictates what kind of military aid Europe can provide to Ukraine) has yet to materialize as the continent struggles to find a county amongst its members who has the capacity to replace US leadership.

For every pledge that German, French, and British leaders make regarding their support for Ukraine and desire to strengthen the European bloc, there is a receipt showing that they are incapable of leading it.

Germany’s complete reliance on Russian gas, their ill-founded fear of nuclear energy, and the government’s apparent compromise by Russian spies, serves to cripple any notion of a German-run European bloc. Macron’s failure to deter Russia from invading Ukraine, his past calls for providing Putin with an “off-ramp,” and withholding 98% of the military aid that France has pledged to Ukraine has led to a souring of French and Eastern-European relations. The UK, who united the Europeans to fight against Hitler during WWII, has seen its influence crumble at an incredible speed. Their exit from the European Union managed to alienate them from their closest allies, dealt a near-fatal blow to its economy at a time of global uncertainty, and will likely come to a head with Scotland declaring its independence. The UK’s further political turmoil, which began with the resignation of Theresa May, followed by the chaos that was Boris Johnson’s ousting, has now brought us the renunciation of Liz Truss—who held the unglamorous title of most unpopular British Prime Minister in history.

Europe’s hope lies instead with the emerging countries in the East (Poland, Finland, and the Balkans) who have been raising the alarm about Russian energy dependence for years and are leading the charge to both bolster NATO’s military force and increase European aid to Ukraine. But the reality is that these countries are not yet experienced enough—nor are they ready—to take on the responsibility that leading Europe entails, and by the time that they are, it will have been too late for the US to effectively pass the torch and shift its focus towards the giant on the horizon: China.

The US’s shift towards the Pacific—if fully implemented years ago—would still not have guaranteed the continuation of the “American Era,” but there now remains little doubt that the next decade will see the emergence of a multipolar world. China and the US are likely to vie for control over Asia, with China having made significant inroads in the area over the last 9 years after Xi Jinping was tapped for the Presidency and made it his stated goal to lead China into “a new age of rejuvenation and global power”. Unable to fuel his never-ending quest for power, Xi emerged from the 20th Party Congress in October as strong as ever, with an accumulation of power even Napoleon would envy. His ability to ruthlessly clamp down on dissent—whether it be by eradicating democracy in Hong Kong, creating ‘re-education camps’ in Xinjiang, or by stoking fear within his population by turning Covid-zero into his own form of the Cultural Revolution—will only prove more dangerous as he inches closer to an invasion of Taiwan.

The fact that a majority of Indo-Pacific countries backed China after Speaker Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan serves as a reminder of China’s growing influence in the region. To China’s northeast, Xi provides a lifeline to North Korea as Kim Jong Un pledges to keep South Korea and Japan distracted. To the country’s southwest, China arms Myanmar’s military junta as they brutally clamp down on their opposition. To the country’s south, China forcefully cements its influence over the South China Sea while nurturing its alliance with Sri Lanka, allowing Xi to push back against India (its largest regional competitor). In Africa and the Middle East, Chinese contractors are tasked with building the continent’s largest infrastructure projects, but instead leaves the host countries with an un-payable debt that China does not hesitate to take advantage of. Xi is not just fighting for control of Asia, but he is pushing back against American hegemony.

For the first time in nearly 30 years, America’s unipolar international order is being challenged by China, and with Europe unable to fend for itself, the United States is faced with the impossible task of both containing Russia to Ukraine and suppressing China’s global influence.

Calls for a New World Order

Putin has re-framed his invasion of Ukraine as a war against the “Western-founded, Western-led, and Western-skewed” world order as he has long felt that the US and Europe have held an unequal amount of power among international institutions. During his September 30th speech, Putin pointed to the US invasion of Iraq, the NATO intervention in Libya, and the Western-led “containment” of Russia, China, and Iran, as evidence to prove the hypocrisy of the order that exists today. Putin’s words did not fall on deaf ears, and in fact were reiterated by dozens of countries from Latin America to the Middle East. But the staunchest supporters of Putin’s quest to overthrow the current world order are none other than China and India. For decades, China has felt that it has not been fairly represented through international financial institutions such as the WTO, IMF, and World Bank. The new world order would see China on equal footing with the US and EU when it comes to the governance of these international organizations. India on the other hand, has been vying for a permanent UN Security Council seat for years, and believes that it is past time that it receives the global recognition that it deserves. With the Western world failing to accommodate to these wishes, we are heading towards conflict.

Growing calls for a change to the international order, if left unheard by the US and its European allies, are likely to further divide the world into two camps. For lack of a better name, the terms “Allies” and “New Axis'' have been recently used to distinguish between these opposing sides. The Allies would compose of those who are content with the current order: North America, Europe, Japan, South Korea, Australia, etc., while the New Axis would be composed of those countries who would like to alter these international systems: China, Russia, India, Iran, Pakistan, Brazil, and much of the Global South. These allegiances—although not official—are all but marked in stone. In the Middle East, the relationship between Iran and Russia continues to grow as Iran provides Putin with thousands of its Sahed-style drones for its invasion of Ukraine, and work together to expand their “sanctions busting network.” In South Asia, Putin recently met with Pakistan’s PM to reiterate the important role that Russia and Pakistan play in stabilizing the situation in Afghanistan, as well as announced the construction of a new natural gas pipeline between the two countries. In September, Iran, Russia, and China announced their intention to conduct joint naval drills throughout the Indian ocean, signaling the deepening relationship between the countries. The New Axis has also seen renewed interest in strengthening its existing organizations; Argentina recently announced that it was seeking to join BRICS (an economic coalition composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) while Turkey has shown interest in joining SCO (the Shanghai Organization for Cooperation). Both of these coalitions offer a counterbalance to the Western-led G-7 and are likely to see their membership and importance increase in the coming years as the New Axis begins to push back. 

The US’s decoupling from China, and Europe’s war-like posturing against Russia, coupled with the relationships that countries such as China and Iran have begun to nurture with one another, show us what the future world looks like: one in which the lines between keeping the status quo and change, friend and foe, the Allies and the New Axis, are clearly marked.

De-globalization and Militarization

The world dividing itself into these two camps will also see the new era taking on a more war-like posture. Economically, the idea of “decoupling” our supply chains and onshoring vital products (such as semiconductors) will take precedence—in other words, increasing our economic resilience will take precedent over short term economic performance. The Allies (especially the US) will focus on becoming technologically and energy independent from countries associated with the New Axis, while the New Axis will increasingly do the same. It is likely that this next decade will see a decline of globalization and an increase in economic isolationism. 

Just one year ago, the international consensus was that developing deep economic ties with adversarial countries (just like Europe did with Russia and the US has done with China) would be enough to deter these countries from going to war. But it is clear that no amount of economic interdependence is enough from dissuading ruthless leaders from taking military action in order to accomplish their goals. As such, this era will see a shift towards the most foundational deterrence strategy of them all: an increase in conventional military force. Germany, Poland, Norway, Sweden, and many other European countries have pledged to increase their defense spending as Russia inches closer to NATO’s eastern border. Japan, Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan have increased their military budget significantly to counteract the threats they face from both China and North Korea. It is safe to say that this next decade will see a military buildup the likes of which has not been seen since the onset of WWII.

Fukuyama Gives us Hope

Although this decade will certainly be turbulent (to say the least) from an international point of view, Francis Fukuyama gives us hope. In 1992 he authored a book titled The End of History and the Last Man, which argued that liberal democracies and capitalism marked the final form of human government; as it is one that humans intrinsically favor. 30 years ago, fellow academics and political scientists alike disavowed his conclusions as ludicrous. Now, many are beginning to think that he might have been right all along.

Countries which have decided to deviate from the path of liberal democracy are beginning to see the limits of their political systems. The recent protests in Iran have shown that repression, propaganda, and fear are not enough to silence the will of the people, and are casting real doubt as to the future livelihood of the current regime. In China, Xi’s zero-Covid policy and ruthless crackdown of dissidents has culminated in widespread social unrest, where people openly advocate for evading public authorities. China’s coercive diplomacy leaves it with a handful of allies, while those under its sphere of influence yearn for their independence. At the same time, Xi’s policies are beginning to stall the Chinese economy—so much so that the annual release of GDP and other statistics will be delayed indefinitely as to not cause widespread panic.

Russia is perhaps the greatest example of the failure of illiberalism. Not only has Putin plunged Russia into an un-winnable war; unable to achieve his initial objectives and turning Russia’s fighting-age population into mincemeat, but has turned the country into an international pariah. Any hope that Russia would be integrated into the Western-led international world after the fall of the Berlin wall evaporated the minute that Russian troops crossed into Ukraine. Until the fall of Vladimir Putin, Russia will continue being forcefully removed from the world-stage. In addition, while Putin envisioned his invasion marking the beginning of his Great New Empire, it will instead leave Russia with a shrinking sphere of influence. The Caucasus (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, etc.) have officially condemned Russia’s invasion at the United Nations, publicly humiliated Putin during recent SCO meetings, and protests calling for a wider separation from Russia continue to occur throughout the region.

The NATO alliance has never been as strong nor as united as it is now, and the Western world is beginning to prepare for this difficult decade by acknowledging the problems that lie ahead. Ukraine, with their tireless persistence in kicking out the invading Russian army, has provided countries just like it—those who are smaller and facing a much greater enemy—with inspiration. Even the most pragmatic and realist countries, such as Turkey and India, are beginning to realize that directly siding with the New Axis might not be in their best interest.

The re-emergence of waging wars for the sole purpose of seizing land, the global increase in autocratic leaders, the move towards isolationism, and the escalating military ramp-up is reminiscent of 1939. This decade will force a change to the current international order and alter the way in which the world is organized. Yet, Fukuyama’s prediction that democracy and the ideas that it cultivates are intrinsically desirable to all people—regardless of their race, ethnicity, or geographic location—and will therefore prove resilient, provides us with a much-needed silver lining.