Listen carefully these days to Israelis and South Koreans. What they are hinting at is no less than a tectonic shift in the international system -- the shift from a unipolar to a multipolar world.
Israelis are rediscovering Europe. They intuitively sense that they can no longer rely only on the absolute security guarantee represented by the combination of active and passive support of the US. The war in Lebanon, so frustrating for Israel, accelerated that subtle change. Now Europe and its various contingents are playing a leading role in picking up the pieces there.
The US, of course, remains Israel's life insurance policy, but enlargement and diversification of diplomatic alliances is starting to be seen as crucial by Israeli diplomats, if not by Israeli society.
The Quartet (the US, Russia, the EU and the UN) used to be regarded as "One plus Three," but that is no longer the case. Europe and Russia no longer see themselves as secondary players, because the US, not to mention Israel, needs them.
As for the South Koreans, they are counting on China to deal with the North Korean nuclear crisis. They, too, see the world through a prism that makes the US continue to appear essential, but no longer preeminent.
Recently, a high South Korean official listed in hierarchical order the countries that mattered most in the North Korean nuclear crisis. China came first, followed by the US, Russia, Japan, and South Korea, whereas Europe was absent.
These are only a few signs among many others. One could also mention the recent Sino-African summit in Beijing, or the intensification of Venezuelan-Iranian relations. All these developments subtly indicate a deep trend that can be formalized in one sentence -- The unipolar moment of the US, which began in 1991 with the collapse of the Soviet Empire, is over.
Of course, one should not "bury" the US too soon. The US is much more resilient than its critics believe. It has a unique capacity to rebound, and it controls unparalleled military, intellectual, economic, and even political resources.
The Republicans' defeat in this month's mid-term Congressional elections is a sign that Americans want to sanction their leaders for their strategic and ethical shortcomings, and they did so with gusto.
But this resilience should not hide a deeper evolution. The US is no longer alone. It no longer qualifies, if it ever did, as a "hyper power," to use former French foreign minister Hubert Vedrine's term, though it is still far from being a "normal" power.
The inadvertent "passivity" of the US in the Clinton years and the wrong directions of the Bush years coincided with the rise of China and India, as well as Russia's renewed international clout as a result of high oil prices.
These developments ushered in the slow, imperfect return of an unbalanced multi-polar system. The world in which we live may be moving toward the multi-polarity wished for by French President Jacques Chirac, but not necessarily in a successful and stable way.
If, contrary to the traditional "Gaullist" vision, multi-polarity is not bringing stability, but instead generating chaos, there are two reasons for this outcome.
First, key emerging actors -- China, Russia, and India -- are not ready, willing, or even capable of performing a stabilizing international role. They are either too cynical or timid in their vision of the world, or they have others priorities, or both.
They probably contemplate with barely disguised pleasure the difficulties currently encountered by the US in Iraq and elsewhere, but they do not feel any sense of a "compensating responsibility" for global stability. The common good is not their cup of tea. They have too much to catch up with, in terms of national ego and national interest, to care for others.
Second, the EU is the only natural US ally in terms of values. It is the EU that can make multi-polarity work if it plays its role positively.
If the EU appears more concerned with the best ways to avoid the responsibilities that may befall it as a result of the new and enforced modesty of the US, then multi-polarity will result -- by default, not by design -- in a more chaotic world, rather than leading to greater stability.
Europe has a unique chance to demonstrate that it can make a difference in the post-unipolar moment of the US. It starts right now in the Middle East.
The world that Europe has called for is coming closer, and it can fail abysmally without the EU or improve at the margin thanks to it.
In some ways, the end of a unipolar world could truly be the "Hour of Europe." But that can happen only if the EU regains its confidence and steps into a positive role -- one that it must play with, not against, the US.
Dominique Moisi, a founder and senior advisor at IFRI (French Institute for International Relations), is a professor at the College of Europe in Natolin, Warsaw.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
RSS