KUALA LUMPUR, Malaysia, Dec 17 (IPS) – The new geopolitics after the first Cold War undermines peace, stability, and human development. Hegemonic priorities continue to threaten people’s well-being and prospects for progress.
With the fall of the Soviet Union and the allied powers, the US appeared unchallenged and unchallenged in the new ‘unipolar’ world. The influential US journal Foreign Affairs has called the US foreign policy following ‘sovereigntist’.
But the new order also gave rise to new discontent. Explaining cultural differences, Samuel Huntington blamed the ‘clash of civilizations’. His invented cultural categories employ a new strategy of ‘divide and rule’.
Contemporary geopolitics often associates geographic and cultural differences with ideological, systemic, and other political differences. Such so-called fault lines have also fed into ‘identity politics’.
The new Cold War is hot and bloody in some parts of the world, sometimes spreading rapidly. As bellicosity has become more and more common, hostilities have escalated dangerously.
Economic liberalization, including globalization, has been unevenly reversed since the turn of the century. Meanwhile, financialization has destroyed the real economy, especially industry.
The finance ministers of the G20, representing twenty of the world’s largest economies, including many from the Global South, first met after the 1997 Asian financial crisis.
The G20 first met at the government level following the 2008 financial crisis, which was seen as a failure of the G7. However, the relevance of the G20 has also declined as the North has reasserted the centrality of the G7 in the new Cold War.
NATO rules
The apparent raison d’être of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) went with the end of the first Cold War and the Soviet Union.
The face of Western countries has also changed. For example, the G5 grew into the G7 in 1976. The US obsession with the post-Soviet Russia of Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin even brought it into the G8 for some years!
Following the illegal invasion of Iraq in 2003, the Wolfowitz Doctrine of 2007 redefined its foreign policy priorities to strengthen NATO and start a new Cold War. NATO’s mobilization of Europe – behind the US against Russia – now we support Israel against China, Iran and others.
Violating the UN Charter, Russia’s invasion of eastern Ukraine in 2022 united and strengthened NATO and Europe behind the US. Despite previous tensions across the North Atlantic, Europe supported Biden against Russia despite its high costs.
International law also did not stop NATO’s expansion east of Russia’s border. The US unilaterally defines new international norms, often ignoring others, even allies. But Trump’s re-election has raised the ‘centrist’ of Europe.
Developing countries were often forced to take sides in the first Cold War, which was thought to have been fought for political and ideological reasons. With mixed economies now ubiquitous, the new Cold War is certainly not over capitalism.
Instead, the diversity of competing capitalists shapes the new geoeconomics as the diversity of state is the foundation of geopolitics. Licensing, communist organizations and other liberal dirty words are often asked to work.
The New Europe
Despite her controversial record during her first term as president of the European Commission (EC), Ursula von der Leyen is now more powerful and belligerent in her second term.
He immediately replaced Joseph Borrell, the former EC Vice-President and High Representative in charge of international relations. Borrell described Europe as the garden of the Global South, the surrounding jungle, which he wanted to invade.
For Borrell, Europe cannot wait for the forest to invade. Instead, it should attack the jungle in advance to contain the threat. Since the first Cold War, NATO has done more, mostly illegal military intervention, by going outside of Europe!
US, UK, German, French and Australian navies are now in the South China Sea despite the 1973 ASEAN (Association of South-East Asian Nations) commitment to ZOPFAN (a zone of peace, freedom and neutrality) and no request from any government. in the region.
Cold War nostalgia
The first Cold War also saw bloody wars involving so-called ‘proxies’ in southwest Africa, Central America, and elsewhere. However, despite the most common enemies of the Cold War, there were rare instances of cooperation.
In 1979, the Soviet Union challenged the US to eradicate smallpox within ten years. US President Jimmy Carter accepted the challenge. In less than a decade, smallpox was eradicated worldwide, underscoring the benefits of cooperation.
Official Development Assistance (ODA) currently equals 0.3% of the national income of rich countries. This is less than the 0.7% pledged by rich countries to the UN in 1970.
The end of the first Cold War led to ODA cuts. Levels are now below those after Thatcher and Reagan were in power in the 1980s. Trump’s views and the known ‘collaborative approach’ to international relations are expected to reduce aid.
The economic case for a second Cold War is clear. Instead of devoting more to sustainable development, scarce resources go to military spending and related ‘strategic’ priorities.
IPS UN Bureau
Follow @IPSNewsUNBureau
Follow IPS News UN Bureau on Instagram
© Inter Press Service (2024) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service
