The flurry of diplomatic, military and political activities witnessed across the globe in recent weeks suggests that humanity may once again be descending into a Hobbesian world – one where anarchy, power struggles and Machiavellian tactics dominate the global order. Respect for international law and adherence to global norms seem to have become extinct. The question, therefore, arises: are we heading towards a pre-1914 situation?
The self-styled pacifist president of the US has threatened Nigeria with a possible intervention, while also authorising the CIA to employ its notorious tactics against Venezuela. The 'man of peace' now seems determined to see death and destruction in every corner of the globe. His order to test the efficacy of American nuclear weapons clearly indicates that his failure to achieve that prestigious accolade has driven him to extremes.
This wave of insanity is not confined to the skyscrapers of the US alone. Moscow has also announced the successful testing of even more lethal weapons than the world has ever seen. Russian President Vladimir Putin is now attempting to convince his soldiers and citizens that with these new weapons, their vast country would be invincible. He conveniently ignores the fact that with such tools of mass destruction, there may be nothing left to conquer.
The war mania appears to be spreading eastward as well. In New Delhi, the Hindu nationalist government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has struck a deal with Washington to produce more weapons of death and destruction. This comes despite Modi’s earlier fury over Trump’s pronouncements during the recent Indo-Pak conflict. Now, ironically, the same Indian leadership is cosying up to the very man who spared no opportunity to humiliate their country in recent months. The deal has exposed the contradictions of Modi and his ardent acolytes, who had not long ago vowed to teach the US a tough lesson and asserted that India would never bow to Washington’s tariff pressures. The new defence cooperation agreement has also shattered the myth that the East could unite to offer a collective front against the West, which has dominated global politics since 1492.
This development will likely be viewed with deep apprehension in Islamabad and Beijing, neither of which was prepared for this sudden change. China had only reluctantly accepted New Delhi’s recent goodwill gestures. Russia, too, may be uncomfortable with the arrangement, but given its trade compulsions, it may refrain from publicly expressing its displeasure to avoid antagonising Modi.
Across the Durand Line, things do not look promising either. Despite the fragile peace, Pakistan and Afghanistan remain at odds over the issue of terrorism. Islamabad wants the Afghan Taliban to crack down on TTP militants, but the Islamic Emirate appears unwilling to turn against its ideological brothers. Instead of taking action against the militants, Kabul has unleashed a smear campaign against Islamabad and its institutions. The recent propaganda campaign against Pakistan clearly indicates that the Taliban intend to escalate hostility towards their neighbour. The group has also begun questioning the rationale for accepting the Durand Line as a permanent border – stoking fears that it may resort to nationalist rhetoric in addition to religious justifications in its opposition to Pakistan.
All this creates the impression that the world is heading towards a period of greater military and political tension. The US seems determined to change the government in Venezuela while eyeing Nigeria with similar intent. India could sharpen hostilities with China and Pakistan, while Russia threatens to use its most lethal weapons against its perceived enemies if the US supplies Tomahawk missiles and other modern weaponry to Ukraine, allowing them to be used against the world’s second-largest military power. Former US president George W Bush withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty with Russia in 2002. In 2019, Washington also abandoned the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, raising the spectre of another arms race. The recent military buildup across continents shows that those fears were not unfounded. The world has witnessed an alarming increase in militarisation over the past few years.
It is not only the major powers flexing their muscles; smaller states, too, are mired in conflict. The internecine war in Sudan has claimed tens of thousands of lives and displaced millions. The flames of conflict in Gaza refuse to die out completely, while tensions between Thailand and its rivals remain unresolved. The spectre of tension now haunts nearly every continent. From Europe to Asia and Africa to the Americas, peace seems increasingly elusive. If the US intervenes militarily in Venezuela, it could plunge the entire Western Hemisphere into chaos. Similarly, any US involvement in Nigeria could provoke militant groups across the Muslim world to target Western interests, not only in Africa but elsewhere as well.
Russia’s determination to seize Ukrainian territory is seen across Europe as expansionist. Meanwhile, Washington’s reluctance to take decisive action against Moscow is being described as a new form of appeasement. Naro’s military buildup, on the other hand, is viewed by Russians as aggressive, fuelling fears that their country might once again be attacked from the European front. Adding to these geopolitical crises is an escalating economic turmoil. Global economic instability, coupled with rapid technological advancement – particularly in artificial intelligence – threatens to render millions jobless, swelling the ranks of the unemployed. Such economic dislocation could push societies further towards nationalism, protectionism, and xenophobia.
Despite differences with Trump, some sections of Europe’s ruling elite share his worldview that the world is once again divided into two camps: one led by Russia, China, North Korea and Iran; the other dominated by the US and Europe. The positions of India, Brazil and South Africa remain uncertain – much like Turkey, Italy and other 'neutral' states before World War I.
It increasingly appears that the world is entering a pre–World War I situation – marked by deepening economic crises, rising militarisation and shifting alliances. From the contested waters of the South China Sea to the battlefields of Ukraine, and from the military buildup in the Himalayas to sabre-rattling in the Americas, the planet is brimming with political tension, mutual mistrust and unrestrained ambition. Any spark in Asia or miscalculation in Europe could be enough to ignite a new global conflagration – one whose consequences could far surpass the horrors of the last century.
The writer is a freelance journalist who can be reached at: egalitarianism444gmail.com