The crises, conflicts and wars that are currently raging highlight just how profoundly the geopolitical landscape has changed in recent years, as great-power rivalries have again become central to international relations. With the wars in Gaza and Ukraine exacerbating global divisions, an even more profound geopolitical reconfiguration — including a shift to a new world order — might well be in the works.
These two wars heighten the risk of a third, over Taiwan. No one — least of all Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — could watch the US transfer huge amounts of American artillery munitions, smart bombs, missiles and other weaponry to Ukraine and Israel without recognizing that US stockpiles are being depleted. For Xi, who has called Taiwan’s incorporation into the People’s Republic of China a “historic mission,” the longer these wars continue, the better.
US President Joe Biden understands the stakes and is now seeking to defuse tensions with China. Notably, after sending a string of cabinet officials to Beijing, Biden’s planned summit talks with Xi on the sidelines at the APEC summit in San Francisco from Wednesday to Friday is set to steal the spotlight. Biden and his G7 partners have stressed that they are seeking to “de-risk” their relationship with China, not “decouple” from the world’s second-largest economy.
Whatever one calls it, this process is set to reshape the global financial order, as well as investment and trade patterns. Already, trade and investment flows are changing in ways that suggest that the global economy might be split into two blocs; for example, China now trades more with the Global South than with the West. Despite the high costs of economic fragmentation, China, seeking to reduce its vulnerability to future pressure, has been quietly decoupling large sections of its economy from the West.
In no small part, the US has itself to blame for the current situation. By actively facilitating China’s economic rise for four decades, it helped to create the greatest rival it has ever faced. Today, China boasts the world’s largest navy and coast guard and is overtly challenging Western dominance over the global financial system and in international institutions. China is working hard to build an alternative world order, with itself at the center.
Though the current system is often referred to in neutral-sounding terms such as the “rules-based global order,” it is undoubtedly centered on the US. Not only did the US largely make the rules on which that order is based; it also seems to believe itself exempt from key rules and norms, such as those prohibiting interference in other countries’ internal affairs. International law is powerful against the powerless, but powerless against the powerful.
When it comes to creating an alternative world order, the current conflict-ridden global environment might well work in China’s favor. After all, it was war that gave rise to the US-led global order, including the institutions that underpin it, such as the IMF, the World Bank and the UN. Even reforming these institutions meaningfully has proved very difficult during peacetime.
This is certainly true for the UN, which appears to be in irreversible decline and increasingly marginalized in international affairs. The hardening gridlock at the UN Security Council has caused more responsibility to be shifted to the UN General Assembly, which was forced, notably, to adopt a resolution on the war in Gaza calling for a “humanitarian truce” and an end to Israel’s siege. Yet the General Assembly is fundamentally weak, and, in contrast to the Security Council, its resolutions are not legally binding.
As US-led institutions deteriorate, so too does the US’ authority beyond its borders. Even Israel and Ukraine — which depend on the US as their largest military, political and economic backer — have at times spurned US advice. Israel rebuffed the US’ counsel to scale back its military attacks and do more to minimize civilian casualties in an already dire humanitarian situation in Gaza. US officials have blamed Ukraine’s wide dispersal of forces for its stalled counteroffensive.
Beyond the global reordering that the Sino-American rivalry appears to be causing, important regional shifts are possible. A protracted conflict in Gaza could set in motion a geopolitical reorganization in the greater Middle East, where nearly every major power — except Egypt, Iran and Turkey — is a 20th-century construct created by the West (particularly the British and the French). Already, Israel’s war is strengthening the geopolitical role of gas-rich Qatar, a regional gadfly that has become an international rogue elephant by funding violent jihadists, including Hamas.
If the conflict spreads beyond Gaza, the geopolitical implications would be even farther-reaching. Whatever comes next, Ukraine might well be among the biggest losers. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has acknowledged, the war in Gaza already “takes away the focus” from his country’s fight against Russia at a time when Ukraine can ill afford a slowdown in Western aid.
Yet more forces and trends — including Russia’s increasingly militarized economy, China’s stalling growth and the growing economic weight of the Global South — are making fundamental changes to the international order more likely. Meanwhile, the world is grappling with widening inequality, rising authoritarianism, the rapid development of transformative technologies such as artificial intelligence, environmental degradation and climate change.
Though the details are impossible to know, a fundamental global geopolitical rebalancing now appears all but inevitable. The specter of a sustained clash between the West and its rivals — especially China, Russia and the Islamic world — looms large.
Brahma Chellaney, a professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and a fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin, is the author of Water, Peace, and War: Confronting the Global Water Crisis.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The return of US president-elect Donald Trump to the White House has injected a new wave of anxiety across the Taiwan Strait. For Taiwan, an island whose very survival depends on the delicate and strategic support from the US, Trump’s election victory raises a cascade of questions and fears about what lies ahead. His approach to international relations — grounded in transactional and unpredictable policies — poses unique risks to Taiwan’s stability, economic prosperity and geopolitical standing. Trump’s first term left a complicated legacy in the region. On the one hand, his administration ramped up arms sales to Taiwan and sanctioned
The Taiwanese have proven to be resilient in the face of disasters and they have resisted continuing attempts to subordinate Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Nonetheless, the Taiwanese can and should do more to become even more resilient and to be better prepared for resistance should the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) try to annex Taiwan. President William Lai (賴清德) argues that the Taiwanese should determine their own fate. This position continues the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) tradition of opposing the CCP’s annexation of Taiwan. Lai challenges the CCP’s narrative by stating that Taiwan is not subordinate to the
US president-elect Donald Trump is to return to the White House in January, but his second term would surely be different from the first. His Cabinet would not include former US secretary of state Mike Pompeo and former US national security adviser John Bolton, both outspoken supporters of Taiwan. Trump is expected to implement a transactionalist approach to Taiwan, including measures such as demanding that Taiwan pay a high “protection fee” or requiring that Taiwan’s military spending amount to at least 10 percent of its GDP. However, if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) invades Taiwan, it is doubtful that Trump would dispatch
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) has been dubbed Taiwan’s “sacred mountain.” In the past few years, it has invested in the construction of fabs in the US, Japan and Europe, and has long been a world-leading super enterprise — a source of pride for Taiwanese. However, many erroneous news reports, some part of cognitive warfare campaigns, have appeared online, intentionally spreading the false idea that TSMC is not really a Taiwanese company. It is true that TSMC depositary receipts can be purchased on the US securities market, and the proportion of foreign investment in the company is high. However, this reflects the
RSS