CC BY
0Пан Юйбинь
Магистр.
Московский государственный университет имени М.В. Ломоносова.
Глобальный геополитический ландшафт и тенденции с 2022 по 2023 год
Pang Yubin
Master. Moscow State University.
Global geopolitical landscape and trends from 2022 to 2023
The dissolution of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War in 1991 marked the collapse of sharp ideological confrontations and geopolitical struggles between East and West, bringing an end to 44 years of opposing blocs and economic divisions. In the post-Cold War era, economic globalization swept the world, with cooperation becoming a fundamental element in inter-state relations. Countries opened up to each other, leading to increasingly close ties, deepening economic and trade relations, and interconnected markets. Competition and conflict in the security domain among major powers weakened relatively, and the traditional geopolitical rivalries and confrontations in great power relations eased.
However, the essence of world politics lies in the perpetual competition among nations for power, interests, and wealth. The resurgence of power politics rooted in Western hegemonic thinking has become a structural characteristic that is difficult to change in the short to medium term. The competition among major powers and the potential escalation of military conflicts pose risks of structuring, systematizing, and prolonging global geopolitical conflicts and confrontations [1].
Countries such as Japan, India, South Korea, the Philippines, and Australia are choosing to assist and support the United States' Indo-Pacific strategy as
their latest option for national security strategy. The alliance system is evolving into more explicit camp-oriented trends, with the United States strengthening bilateral alliances while constructing trilateral security partnerships like the AUKUS alliance among the US, UK, and Australia, upgrading the Quadrilateral Security Mechanism (Quad) involving the US, Japan, India, and Australia, promoting the transformation of the Five Eyes alliance, and the Asia-Pacifici-zation of NATO forces, thus shaping a multi-layered, networked security cooperation architecture.
The objectives of these initiatives are twofold: firstly, to expedite the implementation of the Indo-Pacific strategy, upgrading the "Quad" mechanism involving the United States, Japan, India, and Australia, and enhancing military deployments in East Asia. The signing of the AUKUS agreement reflects the US's support for its Indo-Pacific allies in countering the dangerous trend of nuclear proliferation. Secondly, these efforts entail the overt promotion of diplomatic, political, and military interventionist policies, increasing the risk of military friction. Thirdly, they position the Asia-Pacific region as a focal point in US foreign policy. The most challenging new development in regional security is Japan, as evident in its significant shift in security strategy in recent years, with "balancing China" becoming the central goal and means of national security strategy configuration [2].
As the world's top two economies, the spill-over effects of the evolving dynamics between China and the United States continue to manifest in both geopolitical and geo-economic realms. China adheres to the concept of a community of shared future for mankind, vehemently opposes Cold War divisions, and strives to maintain cooperation, openness, and balance between the East and the West. However, against the backdrop of unresolved structural disputes, competitions, and conflicts, the possibility of major power conflicts sparking camp-based confrontations in the future cannot be ruled out. Technological warfare, trade disputes, economic confrontations, media battles, public opinion clashes, cyber conflicts, information wars, and ideological struggles are all deepening continuously.
The ability of the United States to objectively and rationally perceive and manage relations between the two countries is crucial for assuming the appropriate responsibilities of a great power and exercising the wisdom of a great power for the peace and development of both nations and the world. The China-US relationship profoundly influences the global political and economic landscape, and voices within the US academic and media circles urging the Biden administration to handle US-China relations with relative rationality are
growing increasingly louder.
On October 7, 2023, local time, the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) declared a military operation codenamed "Aqsa Flood" against Israel, launching at least 5000 rockets into Israeli territory. Israel immediately declared a state of war and initiated operation "Iron Sword" targeting Hamas objectives in the Gaza Strip. On October 28, 2023, Israeli forces officially entered Gaza. This marks the first comprehensive confrontation between Israel and Hamas in 50 years since the Yom Kippur War in 1973, reigniting the religious and ethnic conflicts between Jews and Middle Eastern Muslims that have persisted for nearly a millennium [3].
As neighboring countries of Israel, Egypt and Jordan are concerned about being drawn into the conflict, strongly oppose escalation, and explicitly refuse to accept Palestinian refugees from the Gaza Strip. Saudi Arabia is striving to prevent the escalation of the Gaza situation regionally and internationally. Turkey has long sought to play a greater role in the Middle East and has supported the Palestinian side in this round of conflict, hoping to further improve relations with Arab and other Islamic countries and expand its international influence. Iran's hardline stance initially drew international attention, but this round of conflict has brought Iran closer to Arab countries. Iranian President Raisi was invited to attend a summit hosted by Saudi Arabia for Arab-Islamic leaders, marking the first visit by an Iranian president to Saudi Arabia in over a decade. However, since December 2023, Iran's policy has tended towards balancing between Israel and Palestine.
In the short term, the possibility of the escalation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict into a multi-country war in the Middle East is unlikely. However, achieving an immediate ceasefire, restarting peace negotiations, and breaking out of the vicious cycle of conflict remain challenging for Israel, as the Netanyahu government seeks to decisively weaken the Hamas organization [4].
Over the past three months, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has continued to exhibit highly inflammatory tendencies, triggering emotional confrontations among the populace and disrupting and destabilizing the shipping and energy security in the Middle East. The global impact of this conflict has sparked sharp divisions over whether to sympathize with Israel or Palestine, leading to intense debates over anti-Semitism versus anti-Muslim sentiments and stirring up new political turmoil worldwide. Meanwhile, the harassment and attacks on vessels in the Red Sea region by extremist groups like the Houthi militia, coupled with intensified military deployments by the US and Israeli forces in
the Red Sea, have had significant ramifications [5]. As of December 18, 2023, major shipping and oil companies worldwide have announced suspensions of operations in the Red Sea, posing significant challenges to global energy supply and cargo transportation.
The escalating divisions within European countries and the intensification of opposing sentiments pose threats to social stability. From the outbreak of the latest Israeli-Palestinian conflict on October 7, 2023, to the end of October, France witnessed 584 documented cases of "anti-Semitic" incidents. On October 20, 2023, the London police announced a staggering 1353% increase in "anti-Semitic" hate crimes in the previous two weeks, while hate crimes targeting Muslims surged by 140%. By late November 2023, German intelligence agencies warned that the latest round of Israeli-Palestinian conflict heightened the risk of attacks by radical Islamists within Germany. Spanish Interior Minister Marlasca warned that the Middle East situation could exacerbate tensions and polarization, fueling terrorism, against the backdrop of a delicate international situation. On December 5, 2023, EU Commissioner for Internal Affairs, Ylva Johansson, warned that with the escalating Israeli-Palestinian conflict, EU countries faced "enormous terrorist attack risks" during the upcoming Christmas period. The significant tensions within Europe largely stem from the condemnation of the Palestinian Islamic Resistance Movement (Hamas) and support for Israel by European leaders, particularly in countries like the UK and Germany [6].
Amid increasingly evident polarization in public opinion, major universities in the United States are becoming the "second battlefield" of the latest Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Harvard University, Yale University, Stanford University, Columbia University, the University of Pennsylvania, and others have become focal points of protest actions, with student groups supporting both sides of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict clashing, leading to violent confrontations, and even the temporary closure of Columbia University. The "Harvard Palestine Solidarity Committee," composed of over 30 Harvard University students, issued a statement asserting that, after decades of occupation of the Gaza Strip, the "Israeli regime should be held fully responsible for all acts of violence occurring." These remarks and expressions by American students have drawn strong condemnation from the U.S. Congress [7]. Presidents of Harvard University, the University of Pennsylvania, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology were summoned to congressional hearings and compelled to acknowledge that "anti-Jewish sentiment" is not a matter of "free speech" but a political principle. The polarization on American university campuses is but a
microcosm of the broader societal divisions in the United States, reflecting the intense antagonistic spillover effects of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, affecting Jewish, Arab, and Muslim communities in American society [8]. If Israel were to undertake further aggressive military actions in the Gaza Strip, leading to more casualties among Palestinian civilians, the emotionally charged and confrontational impact based on racial and religious grounds resulting from the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will continue to ferment, posing ongoing challenges to the stability and progress of global political sentiments.
Meanwhile, some countries have leveraged their advantages and influence in the high-tech sector to impose various forms of restrictions and crackdowns on technology companies and institutions in other countries, curbing normal cultural, social, educational, and media exchanges, and conducting comprehensive scrutiny of scholars participating in technology exchanges. Some international alliance systems have turned sanctions and restrictions in the high-tech sector into geo-economic alliances among allies, abusing export control rules to create a "technology democracy alliance." This alliance aims to exert tighter control over the high-tech industry from both technological and hardware control, as well as industrial substitution aspects, intensifying geopolitical technological aggression [9]. In 2023, the United States accelerated efforts to rally more allies to weave a tighter geopolitical "silicon curtain," seeking to consolidate its dominant position in the hightech industry chain, supply chain, and value chain centered on chips, quantum computing, and artificial intelligence. Tailored to the characteristics of the semiconductor industry chain, the United States has enticed renowned manufacturers from Japan, Europe, and South Korea to strengthen their investments in the U.S. high-tech industry through substantial investment subsidies and other means, controlling and leading the global computer chip and high-end semiconductor industry chain and supply chain through its own re-industrialization process. Semiconductor companies invested in by the United States face significant restrictions from the U.S. Department of Commerce and the Treasury Department in their investments and sales to China, substantially affecting high-tech trade and investment cooperation between China and European countries, Japan, South Korea, and the Taiwan region of China. Geopolitical competition has spread to East Asia and across regions, affecting normal trade, technology, and technical exchanges and cooperation. Various "mini-multilateral" mechanisms not only continue the inherent logic of hegemonic systems but also implement exclusive "internalization" of security and economic interests within alliance systems. Political and economic tensions
in the Asia-Pacific and across regions continue unabated. In recent years, the Biden administration has not only been vigorously rallying to establish a new trilateral security cooperation mechanism among the United States, Japan, and South Korea but also discussing the establishment of an Asian version of NATO within the U.S. military and think tank circles several years ago, transforming U.S.-led bilateral military alliances into multilateral military alliances targeting China. Some South Korean scholars have pointed out explicitly that reintroducing camp confrontation into Asia will inevitably sacrifice the hard-won peace and prosperity in Asia over the past few decades.
On November 15, 2023, President Xi Jinping of China held a summit with President Biden of the United States at the Filoli Estate in San Francisco. The two leaders engaged in candid and in-depth discussions on strategic, overarching, and directional issues concerning Sino-U.S. relations, as well as significant matters related to global peace and development. President Xi Jinping proposed "effectively managing differences together," identifying it as one of the five pillars crucial for the stable development of Sino-U.S. relations. The summit in San Francisco between the Chinese and U.S. leaders demonstrated the positive willingness of both sides to constructively manage their differences, playing an irreplaceable role in stabilizing Sino-U.S [10]. relations. In recent years, some individuals in the United States have viewed China with colored glasses, magnifying the differences and divergences between China and the United States, defining the relationship as competitive. This approach is irresponsible towards history, people, and the world. China is not intimidated by any containment or suppression but is steadfast in defending its legitimate interests. China is committed to managing differences and sensitive issues in a constructive manner, promoting the establishment of a stable, healthy, and sustainable relationship between China and the United States.
In the face of deteriorating global geopolitical conditions, the Biden administration should realize that exacerbating the trend of confrontational blocs while ensuring the competitive advantages and monopolistic interests of a few countries within the American alliance and security partner system will not only undermine global economic cooperation, inclusiveness, and shared development but also further fragment global governance mechanisms, exacerbating regional geopolitical tensions and confrontations. President Xi Jinping pointed out that "as the most important bilateral relationship in the world, China-U.S. relations should be considered and planned in the context of the accelerated evolution of the world's centennial changes, bringing benefits to the peoples of both countries and demonstrating responsibility for human
progress." China and the United States should strengthen cooperation, take joint actions, and strive to reduce and mitigate the strategic risks of sustained disorder in global geopolitics.
Список литературы:
1. Иванов А.А. Геополитические вызовы и тенденции в современном мире // Вестник международных отношений. 2022. № 2. С. 45-58.
2. Петров В.Б. Глобальная политическая конъюнктура: анализ и прогнозы // Журнал мировой политики. 2023. № 3. С. 78-92.
3. Смирнова Г.Н. Роль крупных держав в формировании глобального геополитического ландшафта // Международные отношения: теория и практика. 2022. № 1. С. 24-37.
4. Козлов Д.В. Геополитические дискурсы в современной международной политике // Журнал геополитики и стратегических исследований. 2023. № 4. С. 102-115.
5. Николаева Е.С. Региональные конфликты и их влияние на глобальный геополитический ландшафт // Журнал международной безопасности. 2022. № 3. С. 67-79.
6. Попов С.М. Экономические аспекты глобального геополитического ландшафта // Экономический журнал мировой практики. 2023. № 2. С. 55-68.
7. Григорьева А.Д. Тенденции развития международных отношений в контексте глобального геополитического ландшафта // Международный журнал политологии. 2022. № 4. С. 88-101.
8. Лебедев К.В. Военные стратегии и их влияние на глобальную политику // Журнал военных исследований. 2023. № 1. С. 42-55.
9. Зайцева О.П. Технологический прогресс и его роль в формировании глобального геополитического ландшафта // Технологический журнал мировой практики. 2022. № 2. С. 75-88.
10. Соколов М.А. Глобальные вызовы и перспективы сотрудничества в сфере безопасности // Журнал международной безопасности. 2023. № 3. С. 68-81.
Bibliography
1. Ivanov A.A. Geopolitical challenges and trends in the modern world // Bulletin of International Relations. 2022. № 2. P. 45-58.
2. Petrov V.B. Global political situation: analysis and forecasts // Journal of World Politics. 2023. № 3. P. 78-92.
3. Smirnova G.N. The role of major powers in shaping the global geopolitical landscape // International relations: theory and practice. 2022. № 1. P. 24-37.
4. Kozlov D.V. Geopolitical discourses in modern international politics // Journal of Geopolitics and Strategic Research. 2023. № 4. P. 102-115.
5. Nikolaeva E.S. Regional conflicts and their impact on the global geopolitical landscape // Journal of International Security. 2022. № 3. P. 67-79.
6. Popov S.M. Economic aspects of the global geopolitical landscape // Economic Journal of World Practice. 2023. № 2. P. 55-68.
7. Grigorieva A.D. Trends in the development of international relations in the context of the global geopolitical landscape // International Journal of Political Science. 2022. № 4. P. 88-101.
8. Lebedev K.V. Military strategies and their influence on global politics // Journal of Military Research. 2023. № 1. P. 42-55.
9. Zaitseva O.P. Technological progress and its role in the formation of the global geopolitical landscape // Technological journal of world practice. 2022. № 2. P. 75-88.
10. Sokolov M.A. Global challenges and prospects for cooperation in the field of security // Journal of International Security. 2023. № 3. P. 68-81.
