Javier Saldaña Sagredo
Army Colonel (R)
In 2025, the world will probably be torn between those States that consider the normative model of the democratic and liberal rule of law that emerged after the French Revolution as the paradigm of inter-State relations and those that consider nationalist policies, which ensure the survival of the State itself and in which the cult of the leader is above the interests of the collectivity itself, to be the precise counterpoint to the dominant capitalism imposed by the former until now.
This new narrative on world order, which undoubtedly modifies that of Samuel Huntington’s clash of civilizations, will probably lay the foundations of international relations at the dawn of the second quarter of the 21st century. However, unlike the theory of the American political scientist, who analyzed the conflict on the basis of the objective element that best defines civilizations, religion, the new narrative is based, as we have guessed, on the infinite power that the economy gives to the States themselves; an economy that most of them will use as the central axis on which their international relations will pivot.
One of the main protagonists of this new narrative is undoubtedly the next American president. The world is expectant for the return of Donald Trump to the US presidency, still the most powerful nation in the world in terms of military capabilities.
Trump’s global strategy is uncertain because of the unpredictability of his actions, as he demonstrated in his previous term. For this reason, the whole planet has its eyes on him. Some (the more deluded) are hoping that his foreign policy will contribute to the achievement of a safer world, others (the more astute) are waiting for new revenues from his policies in which the economy is the engine of his development. Facing the US will again be China and perhaps Russia, in one of the big questions that makes us uneasy: how the Sino-Russian “strategic partnership” will work in the face of Trump. During his previous term, Donald Trump managed to sow some conjunctural chaos between Putin and Xi with regard to undertaking common policies in the face of “Trumpist” trade expansionism, but now they know each other.
Therefore, and although Putin has always helped Trump (so many think), Russia is rather more dependent on China than the world thinks, especially in terms of military support after the war in Ukraine. Also the US has some dependence on the Asian giant. Let’s not forget that China has been speculating on the almighty dollar for years by selling its US Treasury bonds and investing its current account surplus in other different assets. That is why, among other reasons, China and its extraordinarily effective expansionary trade policy is undoubtedly better prepared than it was four years ago to confront US tariff policies, Trump’s favorites. A war in which, as he did in the past, the US president seems also willing to play, because the economy is his “weakness”. What is not known is whether this war will remain in the purely commercial sphere or will be advocated to the use of military means in the South China Sea or even to the entire space of the Indo-Pacific, conceptually devised by Obama, which was so much promoted by Trump in his previous term.
With these parameters, the three strategic competitors will also face each other in the emerging scenario of the Global South. A group of states scattered around the world, possessing most of the raw materials and rare earths available on the planet, which are essential for the progress of the major global technology companies, and which are willing to sell themselves to the highest bidder. Whoever wins the trade war in the Global South will be assured a large part of the success to be crowned as the undisputed geopolitical leader in the middle of the present century. So far it seems that China was winning the battle, but the entrance of Donald Trump on the scene again could change things if he is able to ally with the opportunistic Putin (or vice versa); a leader with whom it seems that the American leader has a certain weakness, an issue that many analysts see as a light at the end of the tunnel for the resolution of the war in Ukraine.
And what will become of Europe in the second half of the 21st century?
Europe deserves special mention. A supranational entity that has not been able or has not known how to adapt to the geopolitical momentum that the world is experiencing at the end of the first quarter of the 21st century.
Europe, the origin of Christian civilization and the cradle of the values that inspired the charter of human rights, is at a crossroads with an uncertain future where the influences of other major geopolitical players among its members are becoming increasingly evident. The war in Ukraine, China’s aggressive trade policy and the vagueness of US foreign policy has clearly destabilized the Union’s objectives as embodied in the Lisbon Treaty. Its security and defense strategies have proven not to have worked. There is no longer a majority perception among its members that in 2025 Europe will be a safer and better defended place than in past decades. Despite the effort made in the Ukrainian war, the Strategic Compass needs to be reviewed and above all pushed to the highest level in the shortest possible time.
As a result of all of the above, the planet will continue to be involved in a high level of conflict that will encompass a wide range of simultaneous or successive multispectral actions, within what analysts call the “gray zone”, understood as the space of conflict between States where hostility is permanent. In this new sphere of dispute, war will be only part of the spectrum. Although bloody wars of a symmetrical nature and conventional means will continue to exist, they will be clearly diminished and the use of third actors or “proxies” will nevertheless increase significantly. Thus, the asymmetry of conflicts will continue to be a constant, so that the weaker will always seek unpredictable actions, relying on the unstoppable and uncontrolled advance of technology for new weapons that can operate over long distances with the maximum possible destructive effect.
The role of new technologies on the battlefield
The new technologies will also be the appropriate breeding ground where the cognitive and cybernetic spheres will play a leading role in the new battle and competition space of the “gray zone”. In the first case, communication strategies will be based on “fake” mechanisms that will provoke a new post-truth where the separation between true and false will often become imperceptible. In cyberspace, the intangibility of the actions provided by cyberspace will blur the perception between friends and enemies and its use will be permanent within the virtual space provided by the web. In both cases, new tools based on artificial intelligence are already claiming their space by leaps and bounds.
However, it will be in this context that commercial struggles will take on the most predominant role. States’ tariff policies will be a real battle tool in the “gray zone”. On the other hand, control of energy resources will be paramount and strategies to adapt to “climate change” will compete in a scenario of emerging conflict. This will provoke unequal trade struggles between those who advocate respect for green policies and those who prioritize energy generation regardless of its origin in order to gain an advantage in global trade.
Another vital resource for humanity, water, will further deepen the North-South conflict, which will reach previously unsuspected heights, increasing poverty and hunger in the world. Uncontrolled migratory flows will be a consequence of this and a decisive multiplier of global instability. The world will thus become divided between countries that receive and countries that export human beings, which will further widen the human rights gap.
The consequence of all this will be the systematic violation of the spirit of the United Nations Charter and the hitherto universally accepted tenets of international humanitarian law. The world order will be further endangered and humanity will watch helplessly in the face of the incapacity of its rulers.
© This article was originally published in Escudo Digital
