By Corneliu Pivariu
Just as the 20th century, after two world wars, gave birth to a bipolar and then unipolar world order, it is very possible that not long after the first quarter of the 21st century, we will witness the birth of a new multipolar world order which, why not, could later transform into a new unipolar world order.
For now, the year 2024 seems to bring some clarifications regarding possible future geopolitical developments. 2024 is a year in which elections are held in many countries around the globe, representing approximately half of the world’s population, from the general elections in January 2024 in Taiwan to the presidential elections in the USA in November. We have already witnessed the European Parliament elections and the early general elections in France, as well as the historic victory of the Labour Party in the United Kingdom.
These elections are taking place amid a growing economic crisis, the conflict in Ukraine, and conflicts in the Middle East – especially in Gaza – and the increasing tensions between the United States and China, particularly in the economic field. Analysts who predicted major changes in the global political landscape brought by these elections have tempered their expectations, and as things have evolved so far, it will not be the 2024 elections that will primarily determine future geopolitical developments. Among the main themes that constitute the subject of this year’s elections, we mention: the rising cost of living, the transition to a green economy and climate change, a stronger shift towards right-wing politics (even far-right), the increasing external debts of states, defense and security, and the evolution of democracy.
Among the main important geopolitical actors who will influence future geopolitical developments, we will refer to two recent significant events, leaving for another occasion the analysis of other influences, such as the Big Five, other transnational organizations, or the 1% of the world’s wealthiest people (with NGOs or other organizations they lead, control, or are part of – a special mention for the World Economic Forum in Davos), who continue to get richer.
Of course, all these elements are intertwined and influence each other to a greater or lesser extent.
Next, we will refer to the annual summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)[1], held between July 3 and 4 in Astana. The first important action was the official acceptance of Belarus as a new member, thus bringing the organization to 10 members, along with important partners usually present at SCO meetings (Azerbaijan, Qatar, Turkey, Turkmenistan, United Arab Emirates), as well as Mongolia as an observer. Thus, SCO states cover 80% of the Eurasian land area, represent one-third of the world’s GDP, 40% of the global population, hold 20% of the world’s oil reserves, and 44% of natural gas. All have an average GDP growth of over 5% and an average inflation of 2.4% in the last year.
In the final declaration of the summit, SCO members stated that “tectonic changes are occurring in international relations,” “the norms of international law are being systematically violated,” and that SCO commits to “creating a new international democratic, equitable, political, and economic order.” Iran proposed the creation of a common SCO bank, a proposal received enthusiastically. Through the development of transport corridors, socio-economic integration, the elimination of external military presence, and the establishment of a new financial system based on their own currencies and not the US dollar, the aim is to create a “new security architecture in Eurasia.”
Of course, the rather cold relations between India and China, especially following border disputes and their inevitable rivalry, being the largest countries in terms of population, cannot go unnoticed.
The meeting between Putin and Xi was also significant, where they discussed the progress of the Power of Siberia 2 gas pipeline construction, allowing China to increase its influence in the former Soviet Union as long as the result will be Eurasian development, independent of the West.
Thus, the SCO meeting is shaping up as a prelude to the BRICS summit scheduled for October this year, considered one of the most important international meetings of the year.
Regarding the NATO Summit in Washington, the 33rd meeting marked the 75th anniversary of the alliance’s establishment on April 4, 1949, and was held from July 9 to 11 under the title “Ukraine and Transatlantic Security.” The main geopolitical developments following this event are:
– Strengthening the Eastern Flank by increasing presence in the Baltic States, Poland, and Romania in response to Russia’s military activities.
– Expanding NATO with Sweden and Finland, significantly strengthening NATO’s position in northern Europe, giving the Alliance greater control over the Baltic Sea region and the Nordic airspace, significantly changing the security configuration in northern Europe.
– Technological Innovations and Cyber Defense: NATO is intensifying efforts to face cyber threats, integrating new technologies such as artificial intelligence into defense strategies.
– Transatlantic Cooperation: The summit emphasized the importance of unity between the US and European allies in facing common challenges, including tensions with Russia and China.
The summit’s title was fully justified by the special attention given to the situation in Ukraine. Following the 38 points of the NATO Washington Declaration, there is a separate chapter in six points, titled “Long-Term Security Assistance Commitment to Ukraine”[2]. Also, on July 11, a Security Cooperation Agreement was signed between Romania and Ukraine by the presidents of the two countries. According to publicly declared by President Johannis, all other NATO member states have signed similar agreements with Ukraine[3].
What can be noted, both in the summit declaration and in the Agreement signed by Romania, is that there is no obligation for the Ukrainian side and no way to control how the funds provided are spent or how other aids are used.
Voices are already being heard saying that NATO is an old organization, and doubts are being expressed about its ability to reform. I remember well that the same thing was said immediately after the end of the Cold War, and NATO demonstrated that it is an alliance capable of adapting to the geopolitical developments that followed. I have no doubt that this is possible in the new much more complex geopolitical developments, but with one condition: politicians should pay more attention to the opinions of career military personnel and let the Alliance remain an organization where the military side has the relevance it should have as the world’s most powerful military alliance.
The increasing global geopolitical competition is also highlighted by several recent specific events that cannot be overlooked, among which I mention in random order: China’s participation in military exercises in Belarus and President Xi’s statement that if Russia is attacked, America will sink into the ocean; President Putin’s proposal to create a BRICS parliament (thus aiming to create a stronger cohesion of the organization, an idea probably inspired by the existence of the European Parliament); the attempted assassination of President Donald Trump[4], which will certainly have an important impact on the US elections. Generally, developments in the United States are closely watched and will significantly influence future geopolitical developments.
We are facing a series of major geopolitical problems, and I will list those considered the most important: the rise of China and its rivalry with the US; changes in the structure of alliances and partnerships; technological developments and cyber warfare; climate crises; regional tensions and conflicts; global multipolarity; demography and migration; energy and natural resources; economic instability and pandemics; the strengthening of national identities and the rise of populism.
These trends suggest an exceptionally complex and dynamic geopolitical future, with many new aspects, numerous challenges, but also opportunities for states and international organizations. Adapting to these changes and proactive, intuitive action will be crucial conditions for each country to find its place and role in this concert of the world’s nations, for maintaining global stability and security.
Most likely, by the middle of this century, we will witness the birth of a new multipolar world order (very likely after a new world conflict, unfortunately), and then its transformation into a unipolar world order.
Brașov, Jully 15, 2024
[1] Held under the title “Strengthening Multilateral Dialogue,” the conference brought together 16 heads of state, including Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Ilham Aliyev, and UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres. Almost all these leaders had bilateral meetings outside the general sessions.
[2] Source: https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_227678.htm
[3] It is still unknown whether the parliament has authorized the President of Romania to sign such a document, and unofficial sources say that the president fully accepted the version proposed by Ukraine, while other states came up with their own proposals for modifications according to their interests.
[4] It is premature to make a judgment on this event, but it seems that an important cause of the failure during the assassination attempt is the hiring and promotion policy within the Secret Services, based on diversity (DEI – Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) rather than on promotion based on personal results, qualities, and accumulated experience. Moreover, the DEI policy is also promoted at the EU level, and I consider the results to be unsatisfactory.
