When international organisations such as the UN and the International Criminal Court (ICC) are increasingly proving their incapacity as regulatory bodies with each condemnatory statement or failed arrest warrant, influential countries, such as China, the US and Russia, are stepping up international policy efforts.
Need in new world order
The war in Ukraine, more than a hundred executive orders signed by US President Donald Trump immediately after his inauguration in January, China’s endless military exercises off the coast of the self-governing island of Taiwan, and Israel’s war in Gaza – all are attempts to resolve long-standing disputes in the absence of appropriate political mechanisms.
Ukraine’s allies are increasingly expressing concerns that Trump and his counterparts Vladimir Putin in Russia and Xi Jinping in China may agree on a new world order reminiscent of the 1945 Yalta Conference, as Bloomberg columnist Andreas Kluth reported.
At a conference in Yalta, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt, Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin and UK Prime Minister Winston Churchill met to define the post-war world order. And now a similar situation may repeat itself, only instead of the Second World War, the impetus for redivision is likely to be the war in Ukraine, and the influential British politician in the trio will be replaced by the president of China.
Trump the Reformer
Upon returning to the White House, Trump rocked world stability the same day. Seeing the weakness of international institutions and their inability to enforce their own decisions, the US leader began to promote his vision of the world order in the spirit of “imperialism.”
In the existing global chaos, Trump plans to create a new reality, not considering the current state of affairs. And now Trump is capitalising on the contradictions of his opponents and allies by issuing ultimatums and threatening sanctions.
Trump is dangerous because he destroys established rules and creates new ones that are convenient for him in the first place. And when he fails to achieve something, threats, tariffs and risky ventures come into play.
International institutions that could have confronted Trump are in crisis, exacerbated by the wars. The United Nations, the European Union, the Council of Europe, NATO have no tools to effectively deter the US president. And Trump is skillfully seizing the moment.
However, he has to reckon with China, a country whose material resources are comparable to the United States and whose strategic ambitions he perceives as justified. At the same time, he does not understand how to deal with Russia against the backdrop of shattered trust and Europe separating the two powers as a potential theatre of war.
To show dominance over other players, Trump imposed duties of 25% on imports of goods from Canada and Mexico and 10% on imports from China. However, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau then announced retaliatory 25% duties on imports from the US, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum instructed her economy minister to take retaliatory measures, including tariffs.
China’s Ministry of Commerce sharply criticised Trump’s decision, vowing to file a complaint with the World Trade Organisation, from which the US may soon withdraw.
Just world needed
Meanwhile, UN Secretary-General António Guterres has called for a just peace for Russia and Ukraine. According to him, the peace should be in line with the charter of the world organisation and international law.
We desperately need a just and sustained peace for Ukraine, for Russia, and for the world. A peace in line with the UN charter and international law, which establishes the obligation to respect the territorial integrity of sovereign states.
Back in October last year, Russian President Putin emphasised that world leaders were fighting for a just world, not against each other. He stressed that everyone wanted to build relations on a fairer basis. The vast majority of countries proceed from their own national interests and seek to combine those interests with other countries without violence.
And, unfortunately, this so-called Collective West, […] these sanctions, it’s pressure, constant shouts of ‘You can’t!’, ‘We won’t allow it!’, ‘Keep in mind.’ Who likes it? No one likes it, everyone sees it as an atavism, a remnant of colonial thinking and the Cold War era.
Ukraine’s issue
At the same time, Keith Kellogg, Trump’s special envoy for Ukraine and Russia, said in an interview that presidential and parliamentary elections in Ukraine, suspended during the war with Russia, “need to be done.”
Most democratic nations have elections in their time of war. I think it is important they do so.I think it is good for democracy. That’s the beauty of a solid democracy, you have more than one person potentially running.
Military experts have singled out four options for ending the war in Ukraine. The first one is the country’s defeat due to the reduction of US military aid. The second scenario implies negotiations between Kyiv and Moscow and Ukraine’s relinquishment of some territories. However, such developments will be perceived by many as Kyiv’s defeat, especially considering how much aid the country received for the victory.
The third option is a ceasefire. However, such a step without any agreement will only freeze the conflict, which will threaten a new war in the future. The last scenario is to pump weapons into Ukraine and impose new sanctions against Russia in order to reinforce Kyiv’s negotiating position.
However, even so, taking into account new supplies of weapons and equipment, Ukraine will hardly be able to regain the lost territories, experts said.
THE ARTICLE IS THE AUTHOR’S SPECULATION AND DOES NOT CLAIM TO BE TRUE. ALL INFORMATION IS TAKEN FROM OPEN SOURCES. THE AUTHOR DOES NOT IMPOSE ANY SUBJECTIVE CONCLUSIONS.
Xiao Duong for Head-Post.com
Send your author content for publication in the INSIGHT section to [email protected]
