The Geopolitics of the Cross: Why Washington is Dismantling Faith-Driven Diplomacy Just as China Embraces It

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
The Geopolitics of the Cross: Why Washington is Dismantling Faith-Driven Diplomacy Just as China Embraces It

By Stephanos A. Peppas

In the quiet corridors of the United Front Work Department in Beijing, a new tactical manual is being written. After decades of successfully instrumentalizing Buddhism to build diplomatic bridges across the Global South, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is pivoting to a more ambitious target: the exportation of “Sinicized Christianity.” This is not an expansion of faith, but an expansion of statecraft—a model where religion is subservient to the party, designed to offer an alternative to Western-aligned religious networks.

Yet, as China ramps up its religious soft power to win hearts and minds in Africa, Southeast Asia, and Latin America, the United States is doing the unthinkable: it is dismantling the very infrastructure that has made it the world leader in faith-driven diplomacy for over two decades. Through a combination of institutional freezes and domestic polarization, Washington is creating a religious vacuum that Beijing is all too happy to fill.

The CCP’s “Patriotic Education” Export

For the CCP, religion has long been a “national security imperative” rather than a matter of individual conscience. As academic research and internal party documents confirm, Beijing has mastered the “Sinicization” of Buddhism, using state-controlled religious organizations as cultural ambassadors to advance socialist values internationally (Zumwalt, 2026).

One example is the cooperation between the Chinese authorities and Buddhists in organizing the inaugural World Buddhist Forum, which took place in Hangzhou from April 13th to 16th, 2006. At this forum, the 11th Panchen Lama, Bainqen Erdini Qoigyijabu, a prominent “living Buddha” of the Tibetan Buddhist tradition in China, stated that: “Defending the nation and serving the people is a solemn commitment that Buddhism has made to the nation and society.” (Kung, 2006).

Now, that same “Sinicization” pipeline—managed by the United Front Work Department—is preparing “politically reliable” Christian leaders for international deployment. The goal is to teach that politics must take precedence over faith and that all religious practice must be “obedient to the Beijing government” (Zumwalt, 2026). By exporting this model, China offers a version of Christianity that is compatible with authoritarianism, directly challenging the democratic, rights-based religious influence the U.S. has projected for half a century.

The U.S. Retreat: A “Wrecking Ball” to Soft Power

The American response to this challenge is currently paralyzed. Since early 2025, the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)—the primary engine of American engagement with global faith communities—has faced an unprecedented “freeze” on its grants. This disruption has been described by practitioners as a “wrecking ball” that threatens to kill the very “patient” it was intended to heal (CFR Workshop, 2025).

The irony is that the Strategic Religious Engagement (SRE) policies currently being paused were not the product of a single “liberal” or conservative” agenda. In fact, roughly 80% of the USAID policy released under the Biden-Harris administration was actually drafted during the first Trump administration (Mandaville, 2025). For twenty years, from the passage of the 1998 International Religious Freedom Act to the expansion of White House faith offices under George W. Bush, Barack Obama, and Donald Trump, there was a bipartisan consensus: faith leaders are among the “most trusted institutions” in unstable regions (Miller, 2026).

By pausing these grants, the U.S. is not just cutting “waste.” It is halting human rights programs in Pakistan, cutting off aid to religious minorities in Northern Iraq, and even leaving tons of American-grown wheat to rot in ports like Houston because the humanitarian partnerships required to distribute them have been suspended (Norquist, 2025).

Acknowledging the Counter-Voice in favor of the USAID freeze, it is presumed that the illegal trade observed in Uganda and Congo is tolerated, if not actively endorsed, by the governments of nations importing goods from this area, including the United States. Considering the magnitude of these operations and the increase in commodities from the Democratic Republic of the Congo transiting through Uganda, it appears that reports from USAID personnel are likely unwelcome in Washington (Anders, 2025).

The Cost of Domestic Polarization

The retreat is driven, in part, by a domestic shift toward the instrumentalization of religion. When U.S. leaders use forums like the National Prayer Breakfast to cast political opponents as “anti-God,” they do more than deepen domestic rifts; they shatter the “moral authority” required for international diplomacy (Rogers, 2025).

When American religious engagement becomes a “political football,” it loses its efficacy as a national security tool. While U.S. officials debate the “establishment clause” and “DOGE” budget cuts, China is building genuine, if coerced, ties. The U.S. Military Chaplaincy and organizations like the International Center for Religion & Diplomacy (ICRD) have spent decades building trust with local faith leaders to mediate conflict and “bridge generational divides” (Miller, 2026). That trust is an asset that, once lost, cannot be easily rebought.

The U.S. military identifies the chaplaincy as a “unique institutional capability”—a specialized resource that provides the “situational awareness” needed to navigate complex sacred spaces where traditional diplomacy might falter (Zumwalt, 2026). Specifically, U.S. military doctrine —Joint Publication 1-05— has long recognized that ‘religious situational awareness’ is a prerequisite for mission success. Chaplains aren’t just there for the troops; they are ‘strategic sensors’ who prevent conflict by bridging the gap between secular military objectives and the deeply religious societies in which they operate (Otis, 2009).

Countering the Sinicized Soul

If the United States is to compete in the new era of Great Power Competition, it must recognize that religious freedom is a strategic necessity. A world where “Sinicized Christianity” becomes the default for the Global South is a world where the concept of universal human rights—independent of the state—ceases to exist.

Washington must move past the demonization of the word “religion” in foreign policy. Protecting the global “mosaic” of faith is not just a moral duty; it is a defense against a Chinese model that seeks to nationalize the human  soul. The U.S. must lift the freeze on USAID and empower its “faith-driven diplomacy” once again. In the battle for global influence, the most powerful tool in the American arsenal isn’t a missile—it is the protection of the “voiceless” and the sanctity of the individual conscience.

Sources

Anders, Sophia. (2025, February 26). USAID cuts and their fallout on the ground – LSE International Development. LSE International Development – Social, Political and Economic Transformation in the Developing World. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/internationaldevelopment/2025/02/26/usaid-cuts-and-their-fallout-on-the-ground/.

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). (2025, February 19). 2025 Religion and Foreign Policy Workshop: Bipartisan Religious Engagement in U.S. Foreign Policy. Featuring Samah Norquist, Melissa Rogers, Knox Thames, and Peter Mandaville. https://www.cfr.org/event/2025-religion-and-foreign-policy-workshop.

Kung, L.-Y. (2006). National identity and ethno-religious identity: A critical inquiry into Chinese religious policy, with reference to the Uighurs in Xinjiang. Religion, State and Society, 34(4), 375–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/09637490600974450

Miller, Martine. (2026). International Center for Religion & Diplomacy (ICRD): Five-Year Strategic Vision.

Otis, Pauletta. (2009, December). An overview of the U.S. military chaplaincy: A ministry of presence and practice. The Review of Faith & International Affairs 7(4):3-15. DOI: 10.1080/15570274.2009.9523410.

U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff. (2018). Religious Affairs in Joint Operations (Joint Publication 1-05).

Zumwalt, Zachary. (2026, February 17). China’s Exportation of Sinicized Christianity and the United States Military Chaplain Response. Berkley Center, GW University academic report.

Escalating Middle East Conflict and Its Global Geostrategic Implications

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
Escalating Middle East Conflict and Its Global Geostrategic Implications

By Qazi Zaheer Ahmad

The ongoing conflict in the Middle East has intensified significantly, creating a dangerous humanitarian, military, and economic situation across the region. Reports from multiple areas indicate that civilian infrastructure—including schools, hospitals, and residential buildings—has been struck during the hostilities. As a result, a large number of innocent civilians have been killed or injured, while thousands of families have been forced to leave their homes and seek safety elsewhere. The humanitarian cost of the conflict continues to rise, with displaced populations facing shortages of shelter, medical care, and essential supplies.

Iran–Israel Confrontation at the Core of the Crisis

The confrontation between Iran and Israel has been at the center of the escalating tensions. According to various reports, missile attacks in Israeli cities have injured more than one hundred people, some of whom remain in critical condition. Damage has been reported in several areas of Tel Aviv where buildings and vehicles were destroyed during the strikes. Iranian military officials have claimed that their operations targeted important Israeli military and administrative facilities, presenting these actions as part of what they describe as a defensive response to aggression.

Iranian Denials and Claims of False Flag Operations

At the same time, Iran has denied responsibility for several attacks reported across the broader region. Iranian officials have stated that Tehran has no involvement in drone attacks targeting Saudi Arabia or other neighboring states. They have also argued that some actors may be using copies of Iranian-designed Shahed drones in order to carry out attacks and falsely attribute them to Iran. According to Iranian statements, such actions could represent attempts to create “false flag” incidents intended to escalate tensions and blame Tehran for operations it did not conduct.

Iranian political figures have warned that certain parties may be planning incidents designed specifically to provoke wider war. They argue that Iran fundamentally opposes terrorism and destabilizing actions, and that its conflict is not with the American people but rather with policies and military actions that Tehran views as aggressive. From the Iranian perspective, the country is engaged in what it considers defensive measures against Israeli and American military pressure in the region.

Expansion of the Conflict across the Region

Meanwhile, the conflict has begun to spread beyond the immediate Iran–Israel theater. Reports have emerged of drone attacks and military incidents in Iraq, including near Erbil and close to the Baghdad International Airport, where installations associated with American forces were reportedly targeted. Some groups in Iraq have even released videos claiming responsibility for drone strikes against foreign military facilities. In addition, tensions have extended toward the Gulf, with reports of drone incidents near government compounds in Abu Dhabi and heightened military alert levels in several Gulf States.

Strategic Importance of the Strait of Hormuz

The conflict has also raised concerns about the safety of maritime routes in the Persian Gulf. The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical oil shipping lanes, has come under particular scrutiny. Although some commercial vessels—including Indian ships—have reportedly passed through the strait safely, there have been indications that shipping movements could be restricted if tensions escalate further. Because nearly one-third of the world’s seaborne oil passes through this narrow waterway, any disruption there could have dramatic consequences for global trade and energy markets.

Impact on Global Oil Markets

Indeed, the economic consequences of the crisis are already being felt worldwide. Rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East have pushed oil prices higher on international markets. Brent crude prices have increased by approximately $2.68 per barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate (WTI) crude has risen by nearly $2.98 per barrel. In some trading sessions, U.S. crude oil prices have approached roughly $98.71 per barrel. Analysts warn that if the conflict intensifies or if shipping routes in the Gulf are disrupted, oil prices could climb much higher, placing additional strain on global economies—particularly developing countries that rely heavily on imported energy.

Risk of Global Economic Shock

A prolonged disruption of the Strait of Hormuz would likely trigger a serious global economic shock. Oil supply shortages could lead to dramatic price increases in petroleum products, potentially causing inflation, economic slowdown, or even recession in multiple regions of the world. In such scenarios, the United States and its allies may attempt to stabilize markets by releasing oil from strategic petroleum reserves or deploying naval forces to secure shipping lanes. However, analysts caution that purely economic measures might not be sufficient if the military confrontation continues to escalate.

Military and Strategic Costs of Prolonged Conflict

Beyond the economic consequences, the military dimension of the conflict is also becoming increasingly complex and costly. Sustained operations in the region require enormous financial resources, logistical support, and long-term strategic planning. Critics argue that prolonged engagement could place heavy pressure on American military and economic capabilities. Some observers believe that repeated attacks against American interests or facilities in the region may indicate a broader pattern of asymmetric resistance by local actors.

Historical Comparisons and Strategic Concerns

Because of these challenges, a number of analysts have drawn historical comparisons with past conflicts. Some experts warn that if the confrontation continues to expand and draw in additional actors, the situation could become a prolonged and costly struggle similar to earlier wars that proved difficult for major powers to sustain. In particular, there is growing discussion among commentators that a large-scale conflict involving Iran could become highly complex due to the region’s geography, political dynamics, and network of allied groups.

In summary, the escalating tensions across the Middle East have created a volatile situation with far-reaching consequences. The humanitarian toll continues to rise, regional security remains fragile, and the global economy is already feeling the effects through rising energy prices. Whether the crisis stabilizes or expands into a broader conflict will depend on diplomatic efforts, military decisions, and the ability of international actors to prevent further escalation in one of the world’s most strategically important regions.

About the author:

Qazi Zaheer Ahmad is a former senior civil servant of the Government of Pakistan and write regularly on geopolitical developments in South Asia.

75-Years Diplomatic  Anniversary  Philippines – Netherlands

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
75-Years Diplomatic  Anniversary  Philippines – Netherlands

By Roy Lie Atjam

Celebrating 75 years of partnership, friendship, and a relationship that continues to grow

This milestone marks 75 years of diplomatic relations between the Republic of the Philippines and the Kingdom of the Netherlands, highlighting more than seven decades of friendship, shared history, and cooperation. The celebrations included an appreciation dinner and the presentation of awards as tokens of this valued partnership. Interestingly, despite being thousands of miles apart, the Philippines and the Netherlands were once part of the same entity from 1565 to 1581, under Emperor Charles V and King Philip II. The Philippines is named after King Philip II. For the 75th anniversary celebration, a commemorative logo representing various aspects of the bilateral relationship was launched on January 1, 2026.

The Embassy of the Philippines in the Netherlands has released documentation highlighting various achievements and accomplishments to commemorate the 75th anniversary of diplomatic relations between the Philippines and the Netherlands. The festive evening began with welcome speeches from H.E. Mr. Eduardo Malaya, the Ambassador. The keynote address was delivered by H.E. Mr. Allan B. Gepty, the Undersecretary for International Trade at the Department of Trade and Industry. A summary of both speeches is included in this review. Dutch Ambassador Saskia de Lang also addressed the gathering.

Dutch Ambassador Saskia de Lang at 75th anniversary Philippines-Netherlands relations

Additionally, the program featured a written statement from H.E. Ferdinand Marcos Jr., the President of the Philippines, who proudly stated, “The Philippine economy is not only growing; it is thriving. Together, we can unlock unprecedented opportunities for growth and development.” The appreciation dinner for Dutch companies operating in the Philippines brought together prominent Dutch business figures, government officials, international representatives, members of the Philippine Netherlands Business Council (PNBC), and several other guests.

An exquisite seated dinner formed part of the evening. Everyone left the venue in high spirits, carrying a bag filled with Filipino treats.

Abbreviated Speeches by Ambassador Malaya and Undersecretary Gepty

Abbreviated welcome speech by Ambassador H.E. Eduardo Mlaya:

 “75 years of partnership, friendship, and a relationship that continues to grow.” Over the past 75 years, our partnership has thrived through strong business-to-business engagements. Many in the Philippines may be surprised to learn that the Netherlands consistently ranks among the top 5 investor countries and often leads within the European Union. In the last 12 years, Dutch investors contributed P755 billion (Euro 12 billion) to the Philippines, making the Netherlands the top source of foreign investments. Trade relations have flourished, with a steady annual growth of 10%, predominantly facilitated through the Port of Rotterdam.

As Ambassador, I’m pleased to see both governments recognizing the importance of these business ties. The Bilateral Consultation Commission met in June 2021 and September 2024 to enhance political interactions, with significant developments including the October 2023 visit of Foreign Minister Hanke Bruins Slot. In September 2024, we formalized a platform for economic discussions through the Coordinating Authorities, established under the 1995 MOU on Economic and Technical Cooperation.

This anniversary year began with the Netherlands’ Minister for Trade and Development visiting Manila on February 9-10, resulting in five agreements between Dutch and Filipino partners across various sectors. Recently, Undersecretary Gepty and I attended the Philippine-Europe Connectivity Exchange organized with PLDT at the KIT Tropical Institute in Amsterdam, showcasing the Philippines’ expanding digital industry. We also met with Deputy Director General for Foreign Economic Relations Yvette van Eechoud. Upcoming events include an economic mission for Philippine semiconductor companies mid-year and a concert featuring Filipino soprano Rachel Gerodias-Park on May 21 at Nieuwe Kerk. Please mark your calendars.

Tonight celebrates you, your companies, and the contributions of the two chambers and exemplary individuals to the strong Philippines-Netherlands partnership.

75th anniversary Philippines-Netherlands relations

As President Marcos stated, “foreign investments … fuel our growth … and broaden our economic base.” We express our heartfelt gratitude to everyone here, especially to our collaborators, the Philippines-Netherlands Business Council, represented by Ambassador Saskia de Lang, and the Dutch Chamber of Commerce, particularly Arthur Plugge. We also appreciate the Netherlands Ministry of Foreign Affairs, represented by Director Jacobs, Mr van Tooren, and Ms Karlijn van Bree.

There have been challenges in doing business in the Philippines, but your perseverance has brought rewards. In the spirit of a Dutch saying about appreciation, I’ll quote Jean Baptiste Massieu: “gratitude is the memory of the heart.” Thank you all, and I wish you a wonderful evening.

Celebrating 75 year Philippines – Netherlands

Abbreviated speech by H.E. Allan B. Gepty, the Undersecretary for International Trade at the Department of Trade and Industry:

Our economies, despite cultural differences, share values like good governance, adherence to rules, and a commitment to fair trade, innovation, and sustainable development. The Netherlands is a key economic partner for the Philippines, ranking as the 13th largest trading partner and 5th largest export market as of 2025.

It’s encouraging to see Dutch companies expanding in sectors like semiconductors, electronics, software development, and IT-BPM services, which align with the Philippines’ strengths in a skilled digital workforce and a growing innovation ecosystem. A stable partnership with the Dutch fosters innovation in a globalized economy, as the Netherlands was a pioneer in this regard.

H.E. Allan B. Gepty, Undersecretary for International Trade at the Department of Trade and Industry.

 Additionally, ASEAN has led the creation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, the largest trading bloc globally, representing 50% of manufacturing output, 50% of automotive products, and 70% of electronic products, serving as key hubs for China, South Korea, and Japan.

Just like the Netherlands in the 17th century, ASEAN is reshaping global trade networks as we upgrade existing agreements and establish a new one with Canada. Southeast Asia’s digital economy is expected to hit USD 1 trillion by 2030, driven by rapid growth in fintech, e-commerce, and digital payments. The region is also developing digital trade ecosystems through the Digital Economy Framework Agreement, reminiscent of historical financial innovations in Amsterdam. For investors and companies, this presents dynamic opportunities to connect European innovation and capital with Asia’s growth markets.

The Philippines is emerging as a key connectivity and digital services hub in the Asia-Pacific, driven by expanding subsea cable systems, cloud infrastructure, and a young, tech-savvy workforce. This positions the country as an attractive market for Dutch firms looking to expand into ASEAN. Trade between the Philippines and the European Union is growing, with the EU being a major trading partner, boosted by the GSP+ scheme.

The Netherlands plays a pivotal role as a trading hub, facilitating the entry of various Philippine products like electronics, coconut products, bananas, tuna, and garments into Europe. The Philippines boasts one of the fastest-growing digital economies in Southeast Asia, with rapid advancements in digital payments, e-commerce, and technology services—providing ample opportunities for Dutch investors in fintech and smart urban solutions. Additionally, the shift toward a sustainable and circular economy opens up opportunities in renewable energy and sustainable resource management, where Dutch companies excel in areas like water technology and offshore wind. We anticipate that our collaboration will yield both economic and environmental benefits.

As we pursue food security, we can leverage Dutch expertise in smart agriculture and water management. Our partnership transforms lives and shapes the future for our people. Dutch investments enhance our workforce in key sectors like manufacturing, services, and agriculture, while also bringing advanced innovations in technologies such as semiconductors and sustainable practices. The Netherlands and the Philippines exemplify a partnership between a global gateway and a dynamic emerging market, combining experience in logistics and sustainability with growth and talent. The message is clear: Europe must strengthen its presence in Asia to maintain its innovation and industrialization advantages.

The Philippines has the potential to foster innovation-driven industries, act as a strategic trade route, and promote sustainable development. Historically, global transitions reward regions that plan ahead. The free trade agreement with the European Union is transforming our relationship from a traditional trade partnership to a strategic alliance focused on sustainability, security, and shared prosperity, encompassing good governance, economic resilience, and exclusivity.

Spain Boosts Support for Victims at the ICC

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
Spain Boosts Support for Victims at the ICC

The Kingdom of Spain, a State Party to the International Criminal Court (ICC) since 2000, has made voluntary contributions totalling EUR 340,000 to the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV) in 2025, reaffirming its strong commitment to international justice and to the rights of victims of crimes under the Rome Statute.

Spain’s contribution—currently the second largest received in 2025—is unrestricted and will support efforts to redress the harm suffered by victims through the implementation of reparations ordered by the ICC, as well as programmes aimed at their rehabilitation and well-being.

Welcoming the contribution, H.E. Mr. Kevin Kelly, Member of the Board of Directors of the TFV, stated: “Spain has been a steadfast supporter of the Trust Fund for Victims, and its commitment to international justice is truly commendable. On behalf of the Board of Directors, I warmly welcome Spain’s contributions and encourage other States to follow its example in strengthening support for victims of the most serious crimes.”

H.E. Mrs. María Consuelo Femenia Guardiola, Ambassador of the Kingdom of Spain to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, added: “Spain reaffirms its strong commitment to the work of the Trust Fund for Victims. Providing reparations, assistance, and support to victims is essential in the fight against impunity, in ensuring accountability for the most serious crimes, and in strengthening the international criminal justice system as a whole.”

Spain has provided regular voluntary contributions to the Trust Fund for Victims since 2006 and is currently its seventh-largest donor, with total contributions exceeding EUR 3.3 million—demonstrating its sustained commitment to supporting victims of international crimes.

The Iranian Crisis and the Reconfiguration of the Global Balance

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
The Iranian Crisis and the Reconfiguration of the Global Balance

or the End of the Geopolitical Illusions of the Post–Cold War World[1]

“Crises do not create new realities; they reveal those that already existed.”
— inspired by the reflections of Raymond Aron

By Major General (Two Stars) (retd) Corneliu Pivariu

At certain moments in history, regional conflicts transcend the geographical framework in which they occur and become indicators of deeper systemic transformations. They function as genuine stress tests for the international order, revealing the limits of existing institutions, the fragility of geopolitical balances, and the emergence of new centers of power. The war unfolding around Iran belongs to this category of revelatory conflicts.

Beyond its immediate military dimension, it brings to light a series of structural tensions that run through the international system and indicate that the world is entering a phase of strategic reconfiguration. In this sense, the conflict surrounding Iran does not represent merely a regional crisis, but rather a moment of strategic clarification in which the structural fractures of the post–Cold War international order become visible.

The Seven Fractures of the Emerging World Order

The war unfolding around Iran should not be interpreted merely as a regional military confrontation limited to the traditional dynamics of rivalries in the Middle East. In reality, it functions as a genuine geopolitical revealer, bringing to the surface the structural tensions that run through the international system during this period of historical transition.

Major conflicts of the contemporary era are no longer simple regional episodes. They become moments of strategic clarification in which the legitimacy of international institutions, the balance among major powers, and the capacity of states to protect their interests in an increasingly fragmented geopolitical environment are simultaneously tested. In this sense, the confrontation surrounding Iran can be viewed as a moment in which a series of fractures already present within the international system become visible and acquire major political relevance.

These fractures are not produced by war; they are merely accelerated and amplified by it. They reflect the gradual transformation of the global order constructed after 1945 and consolidated following the end of the Cold War. From this perspective, the conflict can be interpreted as a symptom of the broader process of geopolitical rebalancing that characterizes the early twenty-first century.

In the history of international relations, such moments of crisis have often functioned as points of strategic clarification, in which the real structures of power become more visible than during periods of apparent stability.

1. The West and the Global South

One of the major transformations of the contemporary international system is the erosion of the global consensus regarding the norms and legitimacy of Western interventions. The first of these fractures is represented by the increasingly evident divergence between the West and what is today commonly referred to—albeit imperfectly yet suggestively—as the Global South.

While in Western capitals military intervention against Iran is justified primarily through arguments related to security, regional stability, and the prevention of nuclear proliferation, in many states across Asia, Africa, and Latin America the perception is different. In these regions, military action is often interpreted as another episode of Western geopolitical interventionism, reinforcing the perception of double standards in the application of international law.

This difference in perception has important political consequences. It does not reflect merely a divergence of interpretation, but rather structural differences of interest between the states that built the international order after 1945 and those that now aspire to a more balanced redistribution of power within the global system. It contributes to the erosion of the legitimacy of international institutions created after the Second World War and accelerates the fragmentation of the international system. Instead of a global consensus regarding the rules governing the system, a plurality of geopolitical perspectives is gradually emerging, in which states interpret their interests and international norms in an increasingly autonomous manner.

2. The Crisis of the Legitimacy of Military Interventions

The second fracture concerns the issue of the legitimacy of military interventions. Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, numerous conflicts have raised questions about the limits of the use of force in international relations. Interventions in Iraq, Libya, or Syria have generated intense debates regarding the relationship between state sovereignty and the responsibility of the international community to prevent major threats to global security.

The conflict surrounding Iran brings this dilemma once again to the forefront. The argument of preventive war, invoked to justify strikes against potential nuclear programs or military infrastructures, remains one of the most controversial concepts in contemporary international law. In the absence of a clear consensus regarding the legitimacy of such actions, the interpretation of legal norms increasingly tends to depend on the balance of power among states.

3. The Resilience of Political Regimes

A third fracture concerns the stability of political regimes under external pressure. In recent decades, strategies aimed at changing political regimes have often been based on the assumption that eliminating leaders or destroying military infrastructure could produce a rapid collapse of authoritarian political systems.

Recent historical experience, however, suggests that this assumption is frequently exaggerated. Revolutionary or ideological regimes, such as the Iranian one, possess complex institutional structures, networks of political loyalty, and mechanisms of succession capable of ensuring the continuity of the system even under conditions of external military pressure. In such situations, military strikes may generate destabilization and significant economic costs, but they do not automatically guarantee the collapse of the regime.

4. The Regionalization of Conflicts

Another defining phenomenon of the emerging international order is the increasing regionalization of the global security system. This fracture manifests itself particularly at the level of regional security dynamics. The Middle East represents one of the most heavily militarized regions in the world, characterized by a complex combination of historical rivalries, religious tensions, and geopolitical competition. In such a context, any major conflict tends to quickly extend beyond the borders of the state directly involved.

Networks of alliances, armed organizations, and non-state actors transform military confrontations into a regionalized system of warfare, in which front lines become diffuse and theaters of confrontation multiply. From this perspective, the conflict with Iran has the potential to draw in a number of regional actors, either directly or through allied or proxy forces.

5. The Vulnerability of the Global Energy System

A fifth fracture concerns the vulnerability of the global energy system. Iran’s geographical position gives it major strategic importance within the architecture of the world’s energy system. Its proximity to the Strait of Hormuz—through which a significant share of global oil exports transits—transforms any conflict in this area into a factor of global economic instability.

Thus, a regional war produces effects that go far beyond the strictly military dimension, influencing energy markets, commercial flows, and international financial stability. In a globalized economy, energy security inevitably becomes part of the geopolitical equation.

6. Rivalry among Major Powers

The sixth fracture is represented by the divergences among the major powers. For the United States, the confrontation with Iran forms part of a broader strategy aimed at maintaining influence in the Middle East and preventing the emergence of regional power centers capable of altering the strategic balance of the region.

For other major powers, such as China or Russia, however, the situation is interpreted differently. Any conflict that limits the freedom of action of the United States or creates geopolitical opportunities in other regions of the world may be perceived as an element favorable to the broader strategic competition. In this sense, a regional conflict inevitably becomes an episode within the rivalry among the major centers of power of the international system.

7. The Transformation of Modern Warfare

Finally, a seventh fracture concerns the transformation of the nature of contemporary warfare. Modern conflicts are increasingly characterized less by large-scale conventional confrontations and more by combinations of advanced technologies, informational operations, and instruments of hybrid warfare.

The use of drones, precision strikes, cyber operations, and informational manipulation have become essential components of modern warfare. Military superiority is no longer determined exclusively by the number of troops or industrial capacity, but also by the control of information, technology, and the digital domain.

Conclusion

Viewed from this broader perspective, the war surrounding Iran does not represent merely a regional confrontation, but rather a moment of geopolitical clarification within an international system undergoing profound transformation. The seven fractures highlighted by this conflict indicate that the global order constructed after the end of the Cold War is entering a phase of accelerated reconfiguration.

Instead of a structure dominated by a single center of power, a system characterized by strategic plurality, competition among major powers, and a growing autonomy of regional actors is gradually taking shape. In this context, local conflicts increasingly become points of intersection between global rivalries, energy interests, and technological competition.

Thus, the war surrounding Iran can be interpreted not only as a military episode of Middle Eastern regional politics, but also as an indicator of a deeper historical transformation: the transition from the post–Cold War international order toward a multipolar world in which the balance of power will be defined not only by military force, but also by the control of resources, technology, and strategic narratives.

Taken together, these seven fractures represent more than the consequences of a regional conflict. They point to a profound transformation of the international system. The war surrounding Iran shows that the global order built after the end of the Cold War is gradually losing its coherence, being replaced by a far more fluid strategic configuration in which power is distributed among multiple centers of decision-making.

In this new geopolitical reality, local conflicts can no longer be interpreted in isolation, since they become points of convergence for global rivalries, competition for resources, and the confrontation between different models of political and economic organization.

From this perspective, the Iranian crisis does not represent merely a confrontation for influence in the Middle East, but one of the moments through which the end of the geopolitical illusions of the post–Cold War world becomes visible, together with the emergence of a far more fragmented and competitive international order.

Brașov, 14 March 2026

[1] Some of the reflections developed in this article were inspired by the analysis presented in the text “The Seven Fractures of the Emerging World Order,” published on 4 March 2026. The article argues that the international system is entering a phase of structural fragmentation, characterized by the emergence of several geopolitical fault lines, such as rivalry among major powers, regional conflicts, economic fragmentation, and competition between different political narratives regarding the future of the global order. The interpretations and conclusions presented in this material, however, belong entirely to the author.

Germany Strengthens Support for ICC Reparations

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
Germany Strengthens Support for ICC Reparations

Germany has reinforced its role as a leading supporter of the International Criminal Court (ICC) by making a voluntary contribution of EUR 40,000 to the Trust Fund for Victims (TFV). A State Party to the Rome Statute since 2000, Germany continues to demonstrate its strong commitment to international justice and to the rights of victims of crimes under the Court’s jurisdiction. This latest contribution is specifically earmarked for the implementation of Court-ordered reparations.

Welcoming the contribution, H.E. Mr. Kevin Kelly, Member of the Board of Directors of the TFV, stated: “Germany has long been a bastion of support for the International Criminal Court, and its regular contributions to the Trust Fund for Victims clearly reflect its commitment to victim-centred justice. Such steadfast support is to be commended.”

H.E. Mr. Nikolaus Meyer-Landrut, Ambassador of Germany to the Kingdom of the Netherlands, highlighted the broader significance of the Fund: “The Trust Fund for Victims plays a key role in advancing the reparative justice pillars of the Rome Statute, through measures that recognise and redress the harm suffered by victims and their families as a result of genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and the crime of aggression. Germany has supported the International Criminal Court from its very beginning and remains a major financial contributor, both to the Court’s general budget and to the Trust Fund for Victims and its important work.”

Germany has provided regular voluntary contributions to the Trust Fund for Victims since 2006 and is currently its fifth-largest donor, with total contributions exceeding EUR 4.4 million—underscoring its long-standing leadership in supporting victims of the most serious international crimes.

Realism’s Path to Peace: Beyond the War in Ukraine 

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
Realism’s Path to Peace: Beyond the War in Ukraine 

Possible scenarios and hope for Europe

By Ján Figel

It is logical and painfully visible that to start was is always easier and faster that to end it. Internal and international war on Ukraine, Gaza, Iran and the whole Middle East confirm this. War itself does not bring new benefits, but suffering, destruction and instability.

Despite growing unrest and tension in the world, we must not give up in our efforts for a more peaceful and humane century. In the current state of the ongoing hot and cold wars in Eastern Europe, there are essentially only three scenarios: bad, much worse and … a hopeful one.

1) Today the most likely is the continuation of the war. Ukraine is bleeding, losing people, territory and infrastructure for four years already. Without a reasonable political solution and constructive diplomatic efforts, only a destructive military path is advancing. Interventions against infrastructure and facilities in Russia are numerous, but Russia is capable of a long, exhausting war. Even with the support of the collective West so far, Ukraine does not have the strength to push Russian troops out, nor even stop it.

2) A catastrophe through the escalation of war cannot be ruled out. Two world wars have emerged from Europe. The tragedies of the 20th century may get repeated, if escalation continues or fanaticism gets a chance. NATO has failed to implement a wise and effective policy of war prevention. The EU has gradually changed from the fruit of the Schuman peace project to a consumer of peace. The unprecedented armament promoted today in NATO and the EU may deter future aggression and strengthen defense industry, but it will not bring peace, nor create a prosperity.

3) Regrettably, France and Germany were not committed enough to guarantee implementation of the Minsk Agreements. Ukraine could have remained integral, democratic, multinational. After 2014 the hidden cold-war type confrontation between the West and Russia continued and grew. In February 2022 the full-scale international war erupted by invasion of Russian troops into Ukraine. a true peace agreement, acceptable to Russia and Ukraine, supported by the USA and Europe, can therefore arise on the basis of a turnaround in relations between the two decisive parties to the decade of confrontation: the USA and the Russian Federation. They are de facto parties of the current proxy war. This U-turn is possible, if President D. Trump’s determination to stop the war in Ukraine, confirmed at the Alaska Summit with President V. Putin, continues with a resolve.

Building Europe means building peace

An acceptable peace agreement as a package of conditions and solutions acceptable to warrying parties have not been found yet. Therefore, every constructive effort to reach an agreement between Russia and Ukraine should be appreciated. European powers (France, Germany) have failed to secure peace in Ukraine in the past decade. Unfortunately, current EU leadership does not follow mentality, nor practice of R. Schuman, neither K. Adenauer – Founding Fathers of reconciled and united Western part of Europe after the WWII.

The path to peace is narrow and difficult. In the spirit of Jean Monnet, building Europe means building peace. However, such a vision and process require a new and strong foundation. Change of strategic paradigm raises difficult questions. First, is it possible to turn the political, security and economic relations between the superpowers by 180 degrees? Second, is it possible to make war in Eastern Europe materially impossible and peace stable and lasting? Third, is it possible to achieve this in a short time? It is certainly easier to answer such fundamental questions after the fighting is ended and the peace agreement being prepared for signature.

I am convinced that, despite everything that happens today, the current geopolitical situation allows us to answer these three questions by YES. Surprising, perhaps even provocative solution is realistic. Realism is based on the history of the Euro-Atlantic area after World War II and on ongoing international consultations. We may have many reservations about the actions of the D. Trump and his Administration towards Europe, Venezuela or Iran. But his determination to stop the war in Ukraine as soon as possible is evident. This good will  and readiness can become a decisive factor. Realism of the proposed vision is already evidenced by some points from the agreement, which is being gradually discussed between the USA, RF, Ukraine and the EU (E3).

A peace scenario in the spirit of R. Schuman and G. Marshall

I am convinced that peace in Eastern Europe can be achieved through an updated combination of the principles of the Schuman and Marshall plans. Their authentic historical results are consistently inspiring, proven and valid even today. The original Schuman plan was about preventing further war and devastation in Europe. For the participating countries, this project has become a reality and has been successfully operating for more than 75 years. And George Marshall proposed to include and finance reconstruction of the originally aggressor country – Germany.

Today, we need an analogous action. I am deeply convinced that the Schuman and Marshall Plan 2.0 are possible. Transforming confrontation between two superpowers into their long-term and strategic cooperation is in the interests of both countries and their successful development. Leaders come and go, but nations remain. However, leaders can leave a positive legacy that will raise the lives of the peoples concerned to a higher level. The joint effort of East and West, Moscow and Washington, was the prerequisite and basis for the victory over Nazism and fascism in Europe. Likewise, the peaceful demise of communism was achieved non-violently and more rapidly thanks to dialogue, understanding and cooperation between the West and the East, between Washington and Moscow.

Foundation of this peace initiative should be an agreement between the two Euro-Atlantic powers: the USA and Russia. Economic and trade cooperation in the form of a common market must cover the resources and commodities necessary for waging war: energy and its infrastructure, and natural raw materials and rare minerals. Likewise, it is important to open up information technologies, artificial intelligence and intellectual property to the common market. An agreement on common markets for the aforementioned resources and commodities between two strong protagonists must be open to all free nations, especially those of Europe, North America and Central Asia. This must logically be accompanied by an agreement between the participating countries on shared security. Mutually beneficial cooperation could gradually lead to the creation of a great, new West-East Community from Anchorage on Alaska, to Vladivostok on Kamchatka, across Europe and Central Asia. War in such Community would become impossible and unthinkable, as it was in the case of a unified Western Europe after 1950. Such a vast zone of shared security, cooperation and prosperity in the Northern Hemisphere would constitute an unprecedented force for peace and stability throughout the world. Opening Alaska summit can be followed by decisive, great deal concluding summit of the two Presidents in Central Europe. The first reactions to this vision are encouraging.

Thanks to the proposal of R. Schuman and the approval of K. Adenauer, France and Germany began peaceful cooperation after 1950 in coal and steel. Schuman’s plan for a united Europe was an unprecedented political innovation. For many Europeans, reconciliation and unification with the former hostile power and aggressor was a utopia, for others a provocation, and some in France considered it a betrayal. However, the unthinkable partnership and friendship gradually became reality. This great and creative innovation, supported by the firm commitment of national governments and parliaments, proved to be a real and constructive path to a peaceful, stable and prosperous Europe! Unfortunately, this peacebuilding process in recent decades has not reached the entire continent, from the Atlantic to the Urals. Now we pay a very high price for the many failures in the necessary efforts.

A way out of the war is possible. However, true statesmanship, political courage, goodwill and programmatic perseverance in shaping this new path are crucial. The roots of conflict must be removed to make peace sustainable. And prevention of conflicts lies in the sharing of security and strategic resources. The roots of our common Judeo-Christian civilization invite us to mutual respect, to beneficial cooperation and to live in peace and unity

A dignified peace agreement

Such a Great Deal will help to create a new, West-East Community in the Northern Hemisphere, but will also offer and stimulate the basis for a dignified peace agreement beneficial and acceptable to the USA, the Russian Federation, Ukraine and the countries of Europe. The package of conditions and compromises must include the return of refugees and displaced populations, respect for the dignity and fundamental rights of citizens, including ethnic minorities, a transitional, time-limited administration of the disputed territories with international support (UN, OSCE), respect for the transparently expressed will of the citizens of the affected territories for democratic self-determination, the application of transitional justice and the restoration of the rule of law, and the termination of all sanctions. Marshall Plan 2.0 will define conditions and offer effective help for economic stability, growth and prosperity. Special support must be given to a targeted, dynamic reconstruction of destroyed territories and infrastructure. Such process also requires constructive efforts for reconciliation, dialogue, confidence-building and will certainly deliver new relations among nations and states.

This basis for a dignified peace agreement can be an acceptable and face-saving way out for all, without gray, disputed areas and without a postponed, future or hidden confrontation. Lasting peace in Europe is a demanding, but noble and rewarding objective. Innovation does not come only from new ideas, but from the ability to see old ideas in a new light. I am convinced that creative, constructive and responsible efforts can triumph over the forces of conflict, violence and war in the near future.

About the author:

Mr. Ján Figel is a Former EU Commissioner and Deputy PM of Slovakia.

ICC Concludes Two Preliminary Examinations: Venezuela II Closed, Belarus-Lithuania Probe Opens

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
ICC Concludes Two Preliminary Examinations: Venezuela II Closed, Belarus-Lithuania Probe Opens

The International Criminal Court (ICC) Office of the Prosecutor has concluded two preliminary examinations: the Situation in Venezuela II and the Situation in Lithuania/Belarus, both referred by States Parties to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

After assessing jurisdiction, admissibility and the interests of justice, the Office reached different conclusions in the two cases.

In Venezuela II, the Prosecutor found no reasonable basis to believe that crimes within the ICC’s jurisdiction were committed as a result of sanctions imposed by the United States on Venezuela since 2014. The Office determined that available information did not establish the necessary causal link or criminal intent required under international criminal law. As a result, no investigation will be opened. Venezuela has 90 days to request a review of the decision.

The decision does not affect the separate and ongoing ICC investigation into alleged crimes against humanity in Venezuela related to detention practices since 2014.

In contrast, the Prosecutor has opened an investigation into the Lithuania/Belarus situation after concluding there is a reasonable basis to believe that crimes against humanity may have been committed, including deportation and persecution on political grounds. The case concerns alleged actions by authorities in Belarus that affected victims on the territory of Lithuania, an ICC member state.

The investigation will examine alleged transboundary crimes committed since May 2020, where at least one element occurred in Lithuania.

The Office has notified ICC States Parties and invited individuals or organizations with relevant information to submit it through its secure platform.

ASP Receives Expert Panel Report on Alleged Misconduct by ICC Prosecutor

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
ASP Receives Expert Panel Report on Alleged Misconduct by ICC Prosecutor

The Hague, 10 March 2026 — The Presidency of the Assembly of States Parties (ASP) to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court has confirmed receipt of the conclusions of an external panel of judicial experts regarding alleged misconduct by the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court.

The panel, established by the ASP Bureau, was mandated to assess the matter under the legal framework of the Rome Statute and to provide a legal characterization of findings contained in a report by the United Nations Office of Internal Oversight Services (OIOS).

The Bureau is expected to meet within five working days to review both reports. The documents are confidential and will not be made public. The ASP Presidency also called for respect for the privacy and rights of all parties involved while the process continues.

International Operation Dismantles Global Cybercrime Proxy Network

Diplomat Magazine
-
0
International Operation Dismantles Global Cybercrime Proxy Network

The Hague, 12 March 2026 — Authorities from eight countries have dismantled a large-scale online service allegedly used by cybercriminals to conceal their identities and conduct illegal activities worldwide. The investigation, coordinated by Eurojust and supported by Europol, targeted a website offering IP proxy services that allowed users to mask their real locations by routing their internet traffic through compromised devices across the globe.

The proxy service allegedly enabled customers to hide their true IP addresses by providing access to IP connections belonging to unsuspecting individuals and organisations. These connections were obtained by infecting internet modems with malware, allowing cybercriminals to reroute their online activity through legitimate networks without the knowledge of the device owners.

Investigators estimate that approximately 369,000 routers and other devices in 163 countries were compromised through the malware. The service reportedly attracted a customer base of around 124,000 users, highlighting the scale and global reach of the operation.

Access to the proxy network required payment through a dedicated platform designed to facilitate anonymous transactions using cryptocurrency. Authorities estimate that the platform processed more than €5 million in payments from users purchasing access to the service.

The international investigation revealed that servers used to distribute the malware were located in France, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Romania, and the United States. To dismantle the infrastructure, Eurojust coordinated judicial cooperation and ensured that European Investigation Orders were prepared in advance and executed simultaneously on the designated action day.

Judicial authorities from France, Austria, the Netherlands, and the United States held several coordination meetings in The Hague to exchange intelligence and develop a joint operational strategy. Additional judicial requests were transmitted through Eurojust to authorities in Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary, and Romania in preparation for the coordinated enforcement action.

Operational support was provided by Europol, which assisted investigators with cryptocurrency tracing, malware and network analysis, and database cross-checks. On the day of the operation, Europol hosted a Virtual Command Post at its headquarters in The Hague to facilitate real-time coordination among participating authorities.

During the coordinated operation carried out on 11 March, law enforcement agencies successfully targeted the infrastructure running the proxy network. Authorities took down 24 servers across seven countries and seized 34 domains linked to the service. The infected modems used to facilitate the proxy network were also disconnected.

In addition, U.S. authorities froze approximately €3.5 million in cryptocurrency connected to the operation.

The enforcement actions involved a wide range of judicial and law enforcement agencies, including authorities from Austria, Bulgaria, France, Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Romania, and the United States, demonstrating the growing importance of international cooperation in combating cybercrime.

The operation represents a significant step in disrupting criminal infrastructure that enables cybercriminal activities worldwide and highlights the critical role of coordinated global action against increasingly sophisticated digital threats.

123...894Page 2 of 894