USA
Three scenarios: What a new world order could look like
Wolfgang Hansson
This is a commentary text. Analysis and positions are those of the writer.
Published 21.05
Every morning we wake up to new, breaking news about a changed world.
The current world order is under threat, but it is not certain that Trump and Putin will succeed in abolishing it.
A new world order is not something that emerges overnight.
Quick version
- The current world order is challenged, and the role of the United States in European defense is being questioned, forcing European countries to increase their defense spending.
- Despite tensions and Trump's criticism, NATO cooperation and the collective defense guarantee remain intact with a continued focus on European security.
- Three possible scenarios for the future include a potential return to power-based world politics, a total collapse of the transatlantic alliance, or a preserved liberal world order in which Europe plays a greater defense role.
But there is a middle ground between the current world order and one in which the US and Europe are enemies or foes.
Much will depend on who takes power in the US when Trump's term ends in early 2029. It may sound like an eternity, but four years go by quickly in world politics.
It is unlikely that Trump and his staff will be able to maintain the same pace throughout his term.
Not omnipotent
In less than two years, there will be mid-term elections in the US. Then the balance of power in Congress could change to Trump's disadvantage. It is very unusual for a president who has a majority in both houses of Congress to retain it for four years.
Although the president has great freedom to determine foreign policy on his own, he is not omnipotent.
Europe has had a rude awakening after many years of sleeping beauty sleep in which it has become accustomed to unwavering support from the US.
Vladimir Putin.
Vladimir Putin. Photo: Evgenia Novozhenina / AP
Trump is whining
Now, with Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine and Trump's hostile signals to Europe, the continent's leaders have more or less immediately promised to greatly increase defense spending to meet the threat from Russia.
Before France's Macron traveled to the White House at the beginning of the week, he promised increased defense spending. Britain's Keir Starmer declared ahead of today's visit to the White House that the country will invest three percent on defense within a number of years. Sweden is already up to 2.6 percent and is promising more. Germany has gone from just over one percent to over two percent and the soon-to-be new Chancellor Friedrich Merz is promising further increases.
A new minimum figure will be decided at the NATO summit in The Hague this summer. Two percent will be scrapped and will likely be raised to at least three.
When Trump continues to whine about Europe not investing enough, it is now mostly a game for the domestic political gallery. He already has Europe on board.
Much will depend on who takes power in the US when Trump's term ends in early 2029. It may sound like an eternity, but four years go by quickly in world politics.
It is unlikely that Trump and his staff will be able to maintain the same pace throughout his term.
Not omnipotent
In less than two years, there will be mid-term elections in the US. Then the balance of power in Congress could change to Trump's disadvantage. It is very unusual for a president who has a majority in both houses of Congress to retain it for four years.
Although the president has great freedom to determine foreign policy on his own, he is not omnipotent.
Europe has had a rude awakening after many years of sleeping beauty sleep in which it has become accustomed to unwavering support from the US.
Vladimir Putin.
Vladimir Putin. Photo: Evgenia Novozhenina / AP
Trump is whining
Now, with Putin's war of aggression against Ukraine and Trump's hostile signals to Europe, the continent's leaders have more or less immediately promised to greatly increase defense spending to meet the threat from Russia.
Before France's Macron traveled to the White House at the beginning of the week, he promised increased defense spending. Britain's Keir Starmer declared ahead of today's visit to the White House that the country will invest three percent on defense within a number of years. Sweden is already up to 2.6 percent and is promising more. Germany has gone from just over one percent to over two percent and the soon-to-be new Chancellor Friedrich Merz is promising further increases.
A new minimum figure will be decided at the NATO summit in The Hague this summer. Two percent will be scrapped and will likely be raised to at least three.
When Trump continues to whine about Europe not investing enough, it is now mostly a game for the domestic political gallery. He already has Europe on board.
Of course, JD Vance's jabs at Europe in his speech at the Munich Security Conference were an insult and disappointment to European leaders, but in practice they have changed nothing but the mood.
Defense guarantee applies
What today looks like a growing gap between the US and Europe does not have to mean a definitive break. The two continents are intertwined by deep cooperation in a number of different areas. We will not suddenly become enemies overnight.NATO is one of the most important cooperations. This time, Trump has not threatened to leave the military alliance. He has not even repeated his threat from the election campaign to let Putin “do whatever the hell he wants” with NATO countries that do not invest enough in their own defenses.
On the contrary, the new Defense Minister Pete Hegseth has stated that NATO’s collective defense guarantee applies.
The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 was not “the end of history”.
For Europe, there may also be something positive in taking greater responsibility for its own security instead of blindly trusting the US forever. On the other hand, Europe will find it difficult to cope without the ultimate American deterrence guarantees provided by US nuclear weapons.
When the Berlin Wall fell on 9 November 1989, it felt as if the world order had changed overnight. Eternal peace was here. It was the most dramatic event since the end of World War II.
No end to history
But even then, the world order was gradually changing.It took just over two years before the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, definitively confirming the defeat of communism. But instead of being the “end of history,” the new world order contained the seeds of Putin’s and Russia’s revanchism.
Although today it feels like the rules-based, liberal world order is on its way out, we don’t have the final say yet.
I see at least three possible scenarios:
The world returns to an order where the right of the strong prevails. The world returns to an order where the right of the strong prevails. The US, Russia, and China divide the world into spheres of interest that they want to control. Seems to be Trump’s favorite and definitely Russia’s and China’s. But it feels very outdated. In addition, it will take time for the US to take Greenland, the Panama Canal, and turn Canada into the 51st state if Trump is not prepared to start a war against allies.
A total collapse of the transatlantic alliance that means that Europe alone must try to save Ukraine as an independent nation and deal with Russia regardless of what comes after Putin. NATO withers away.
The liberal world order survives in a more multipolar world with more centers of power and a changed order of things. Europe takes responsibility for its own defense but retains the protection of the American nuclear umbrella. NATO continues to play an important role.
Which alternative will it be? The jury is still out, as they say in the United States.
Inga kommentarer:
Skicka en kommentar