Israel’s devastating war in Gaza, Russia’s bloody invasion of Ukraine, the US’ extraterritorial assassinations and China’s aggressive expansionism all point to one conclusion: The global system that emerged after World War II is giving way to a world without order. However, while the upheaval is undeniable — and being compounded by a reshuffling of trade and investment flows, rapid technological advances and profound demographic shifts — what will emerge from it remains an open question.
The coming transition could be illuminated or even accelerated by the outcome of key elections this year, when 4.2 billion people would be eligible to vote in 76 countries, making this year the biggest election year in history. Elections are to be held in eight of the world’s 10 most populous countries (Bangladesh, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, Pakistan, Russia and the US) — and the EU.
This year’s raft of elections would serve as a gauge of the state of democracy globally. With autocracy on the rise, there is plenty of cause for concern. The new year began with controversy-fueled elections in two democracies in the Global South: Bangladesh and Taiwan. In Bangladesh, the opposition boycotted the election altogether, calling it a sham, and as expected, Bangladeshi Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina secured a fourth consecutive term in office.
Bangladesh is not the only country where elections this year would bring no surprises. Russian President Vladimir Putin would undoubtedly be “elected” to another term. Assuming he completes it, he will have surpassed Soviet leader Joseph Stalin as the longest-serving Russian ruler since Catherine the Great. In Pakistan, the election result is practically a moot point, since the military would ultimately remain in control.
However, even true democracies are at risk of a rightward lurch in upcoming elections, continuing a trend seen in Finland (a freshly minted NATO member) and, most recently, in Argentina. While Poland bucked this trend, the upcoming European Parliament elections — the first since Brexit — appear likely to prolong it.
Right-wing politics could tilt the scales from peace to war. Consider Israel: though the catalyst of the war in Gaza was the horrific terrorist attack carried out by Hamas on Oct. 7, the hardline policies pursued by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s far-right government — the most nationalist in Israel’s history — undeniably set the stage for conflict.
However, this is not always the case. In the US, President Joe Biden’s national security team largely comprises “liberal interventionists” — essentially, hawks on the left — whereas many on the right could be considered non-interventionists (or, as their critics call them, “isolationists”).
Elections are not everything. Numerous dangerous trends in international relations have persisted across election cycles. Longstanding rules and norms — including non-intervention and non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs, and the prohibition of territorial conquest — have increasingly been flouted in recent years, often by those that preach adherence to them most loudly. The countries that made the rules — starting with the US — have proved all too willing to disregard them when their perceived interests are at stake.
Meanwhile, the influence of international institutions such as the UN is waning, as the Western countries that established them resist structural reforms that would better align global governance with current geopolitical realities. All of this is undermining the rules-based order that the West claims to be trying to preserve.
Other efforts to preserve the West’s global supremacy have also proved counterproductive. For example, the routine use of sanctions as an instrument of foreign policy and the weaponization of finance are encouraging non-Western states to pursue “de-dollarization” — an effort gaining momentum in oil markets — and parallel financial arrangements. On Jan. 1, the BRICS grouping (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) expanded its membership to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. Rifts between East and West, North and South, are widening.
As global tensions rise, countries are increasingly embracing protectionist and nationalist economic policies, raising the specter of economic fragmentation and the emergence of rival trading blocs. This trend could not only impede economic growth and development but also threaten peace. Recall that a similar shift from multilateral trade toward trade within geopolitical blocs in the 1930s fueled tensions that eventually contributed to World War II.
The risk of Chinese aggression against Taiwan appears particularly acute. The victory of the pro-sovereignty William Lai (賴清德) in the nation’s recent presidential election, together with mounting global turbulence and China’s economic slowdown, could lead Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) to decide that China’s window of opportunity to impose unification on Taiwan is closing fast.
Any way one looks at it, a major geopolitical reconfiguration is under way. The outcome would depend significantly on developments over the next year.
Brahma Chellaney is professor of strategic studies at the New Delhi-based Center for Policy Research and a fellow at the Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin. He is the author of Water, Peace, and War: Confronting the Global Water Crisis.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
RSS