International Relations are passing through a generational overhaul where revisionist tendencies and far-right politics are talking big time. The European powers are keen on developing their own military-industrial complex to cater their defense needs and to support the Ukrainian war efforts. As a matter of fact, doing so would demand great stress on European economies and unseen challenges are likely to follow the suit. The U.S. under the President Donald Trump is on an over-ambitious, colonial campaign of reorienting the United States’ commitments around the globe. Trump’s plans for Gaza, Panama Canal, Greenland, Canada and cutting down USAID’S missions are just the tip of the iceberg. It is not surprising to witness President Trump’s appreciation of Vladimir Putin and other Autocratic leaders in Latin America, Asia and Europe.
Challenge for Rule-based International order and European democracies
Since the Trump’s Presidential campaigns, Europe has been wary of its security and defense. President’s Trump rhetoric of pulling out of NATO and substantially reducing its share in NATO joint efforts for security has sent ripples across the European Continent. United Kingdom, France, Germany and Poland have been at the forefront of sponsoring the Ukrainian war efforts. Contemporaneously, the think tanks in Europe are signaling the drastic impact on the European democracies if U.S. threatens or actually cut the funding of NATO.
In such an unprecedented condition in nearly a century, European leaders would have to revisit their whole equations regarding their own defense against any potential aggression from the Russia and simultaneously fund the Ukraine for its survival against Russian invasion until it’s over. German chancellor Olaf Scholz, French President Emmanuel Macron and UK’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer have rally behind Ukrainian President Zelensky along with other EU leaders after a White House Briefing spat.
However, moral support followed by a bulk of military equipment and financial aid is a big ask. It is indeed true that Europe produces some of the finest military and defense equipment; nonetheless it does not produce it in mass quantity which could sustain a war of attrition.
Secondly, the United Nations is just the tool in the hands of the powerful. The United States which provided Ukraine with $350 billion worth of munitions and military aid is now openly siding with Russia regarding the termination of the conflict. The U.S. has vetoed two resolutions which aimed at condemning Russia’s aggression in the Eastern Ukraine. These are vivid reminders of transitioning in the world order where only the power and powerful will decide the fate of the major global events and wars. The whole debate around the validity of international organizations is now affirmed by two wars. One is depicting the rule of Realpolitik, while the other (Israel-Hamas war) is apprehensive of the dire human rights conditions of innocent civilians of Gaza.
The World did have a divided view regarding both the wars; ultimately these are the leaders who decide the fate of the global events. The climate change is much deliberated about, the grim conditions of people suffering from the disease, wars, calamities remain a peripheral issue. In the post WWI, the U.S. economy was booming until the great depression of 1930s made it rethink its policies and economic outlook. The world today is adjusting to new realities while the established norms are still in the hindsight.
Alignment of the Authoritarian Leaders: Trump, Putin, Xi, Modi
These are head of states of more than 40% of world’s population and represent world’s top economies except Russia which is a war economy. In the foreseeable future, the potential coming together of these leaders threatens the world order. In fact, currently these leaders have amicable relations which despite some differences enjoy a fruitful partnership. It is a less explored facet that personality of the leader steers the country in a direction unimaginable to the intelligentsia of the respective regions much like what Hitler did a century ago.
The analogy should not be misunderstood here but the trade wars and strategic partnerships do remind us of interwar period (1919-1939). Such alignments usually commences with little hope for future upheavals, as the years pass on the world witness what they thought were just the premature phase of any treaty or agreement.
To better explain this, the point to emphasize is not that these leaders are destined to unpick the current world order; rather they are the agents of transition which is in the making. Their decisions and moves would have repercussions for the whole world in the coming years. Italian Fascist dictator Benito Mussolini and German Nazi chancellor Hitler had the modest beginnings which went unnoticed for a significant time and ultimately brought the catastrophe.
Analyst firmly believe no event in history is akin to the current setting of any world event today however some resemblance is what makes one to predict the unfolding of world politics through realist perspectives.