Col R Hariharan
Recently, a scribe raised a few questions after POTUS Donald Trump kidnapped Venezualan President Maduro. They largely pertained to the emerging strategic equatio. My answers are in two parts. The first part is available at https://col.hariharan.net/2026/01/trump-and-understanding-emerging.html. Here are my answers to the rest of the questions:
1. There are no races for colonies today but yet the big powers are carving out their spheres of influence? Is it just a raw display of the realist strategy of IR?
I beg to differ. Despite Trump and MAGA philosophy,
multilateralism is here to stay because of a few reasons: WTO has increased the
global trade both in width and depth superpower equation has changed. Global
South is finding a place in the first four economic powers with the US in the
first place with China as an immediate challenger. They are followed by Russia,
India, Japan, Germany and UK/France in that order.
Secondly, warfare has changed in scale both in width and
depth. Now hybrid warfare involving inciting the population through propaganda,
cyberwarfare, misinformation used to soften target country before waging war.
Drones in thousands tie down anti-aircraft systems, while long and short range
missiles take on military command and control systems so vital in present day informatized
scenario. This has garbled the traditional strategic equation of East and West.
Global south are no more bystanders as India and China have made progress in
both economic and military power. These
have the alliances between super powers ending clear cut equations. Terrorism
at the global level has become an instrument to carry on the indirect warfare
against big powers. Collective action at the UN has been rendered into
irrelevance with a maverick POTUS cocking the snook at the UN. The very fact
BRICS, ASEAN, for that matter even SCO have continued to flourish is a
testimony as to collective action is no more superpower monopoly.
To sum up, multilateralism is here to stay as warfare is no
more limited to land, air and sea; there are space, cyber and information
warfare adding confusion to the battlefield.
Robotics is making an entry into battlefield; command and
control systems in battlefields are poised to change when artificial
intelligence makes a big entry future.
Trump cannot wish away newer energy sources emerging like ‘green hydrogen.’ Whether US likes it or not, natural phenomenon like global warming and downward in swing in population replacement rate are here to stay. This may mean new alliances and equations between countries
2. There are no alliance systems today. Is the lack of a balance of power a good thing or bad?
I have not understood as alliances NATO, QUAD, BRICS, SCO etc continue to exist. There is nothing good or bad about balance of power. Alliances are formed to achieve a common objective, often to boost their strength through collective action
The US was never a colonial power and entered the world wars towards the end when it was hit. This time, it is playing a proactive role in triggering a global conflict. Could it hurt its invincibility in some way? Could China also emerge as a similar power today, given its policies and aggression vis-a-vis Taiwan?
3, The US
was never a colonial power and entered the world wars towards the end when it
was hit. This time, it is playing a proactive role in triggering a global
conflict. Could it hurt its invincibility in some way? Could China also emerge
as a similar power today, given its policies and aggression vis-a-vis Taiwan?
The U.S. military participated both in World War I and II by deploying over 2 million troops and 16 million troops respectively. They fought alongside Allies in crucial battles in contributing significant naval power (destroyers against U-boats), and providing massive financial, industrial, and material aid (loans, arms, food). It is now the largest naval power (though China might outnumber it in warships). It will continue to support Europea war efforts against common enemy i.e. Russia and Iran.
But US may not overtly support Taiwan invasion by China as it has acknowledged "One China Policy" in 2017. It is a policy steeped in strategic ambiguity acknowledging Beijing's position that there's only one sovereign China and Taiwan is part of it. Covert support could be to supply vital arms to Taiwan, encourage Japan and South Korea to take a hostile stance in case PRC invades Taiwan.
4. Peace had zero chance in
the 1914 world as powers clashed inevitably. Could it be the same again in
these times?
I will not be so pessimistic
of the future. Warfare has continually changed since machine guns were
introduced in 1884. As nations make progress in MIRV -Multiple
Independently-targetable Re-entry Vehicles – warfare enters in new frontiers in
space with satellites becoming targets. This will compel nations to come
together for evolving common code of conduct to enforce international
protocols.
For instance, as global marine
traffic increased in the last five decades 32 international protocols have been
introduced. Similarly, as international air traffic increased separate
protocols for dealing with communication and phraseology, navigation and
surveillance, separation standards between aircraft, flight operations, regulatory
systems and key documents have been introduced. Though UN has become talk shop,
we can expect new conventions like the Geneva Conventions to be evolved as and
when obstacles are encountered as new warfare systems take over. This does not
mean warfare will become obsolete; they will become short duration, pin pointed
to achieve key objectives, though side by side we will have a few wars like
those of Gaza and Ukraine wars.
