World nears breaking point with rising global tensions

Over the past month (since Trump took office), geopolitical tensions have only intensified. And I don’t see even a hint in the coming weeks that such fragmentation could turn into unity on any issue. There are too many contradictions in strategies, tactics, and actions regarding Europe, Russia, and Ukraine. And then there’s the Global South, China, Israel and Palestine, Turkey’s push for regional leadership...

Instead of reducing chaos, the world is shifting into a phase of "everyone against everyone." Because yesterday’s friend can turn into an ally of your enemy within a week (as proven by the United States). This disrupts both diplomatic settlement mechanisms and personal relationships. Over the past six months, too many promises have been made, and expectations have been set too high for them to become reality.

Right now, we are witnessing the reckless behavior of teenagers at a drunken party.

Stopping chaos on this scale (I don’t want to jinx it) would require something truly global. And perhaps even critical. Because, for example, to return to normality in transatlantic relations between the US and Europe, both sides must want it. Shared goals, a common enemy, a mutual threat.

At this moment, we should not fall into deep anti-Americanism (just look at the level of support for Ukraine among the American public). Around Trump, as it happens, there are many different groups of people. Each faction is offering him its own arguments on how he should govern—whether he should focus more on geopolitics and global dominance or make short-term “deals” without always considering who they are with. The Ukrainian word “agreements” does not fully convey the essence of these processes, as they are more about dishonest games and bluffing rather than a genuine negotiation between two sides.

Essentially, Trump's behavior is the same as Putin's—juggling phrases and constructing his own parallel world. The question is: can these worlds truly intersect at some point, finding common ground and breaking all previous scenarios? Or, within two or three months, will they be flung to opposite poles? Let’s wait for this experiment—after all, Trump also has the right to follow the same path as his predecessors, who once sought to “reset” relations with Moscow.

However, any deal with Putin at this stage will provoke very different reactions among other players. Xi will not allow China’s influence over its resource supplier (as he sees it) to be diminished, while Europe may consolidate under the umbrella of those with nuclear weapons.

Why am I writing all this?

I want to explain that we are at a point where no global upheavals have occurred yet, but they are possible this year. We are both the object and the subject of these processes because the "Ukrainian case" is actually the key to resolving many issues—both in a positive and negative sense. The number of those who would like to see Ukraine’s capitulation as a way to de-escalate the situation compared to last year has increased, not decreased. But at the same time, the number of those who do not want to see Russia strengthened has also grown.

The US strategy of offering Putin something in the hope that he will be satisfied and stop expanding his influence has been flawed from the start. We know this, the Finns know it, the Baltic states know it. But the new administration in Washington still believes that if you let the Russian bear bite off a finger, it won’t take the whole hand.

I sincerely hope the Russians slip up. Because for the past two weeks, they have been trying with all their might to restrain themselves from showing their true face.

And then… everything will be fine.

Source

About the author: Viktor Shlinchak, chairman of the Institute of World Policy.

The editorial team does not always share the opinions expressed by blog authors.