What a mess we are in today, even with all of the scientific and technological breakthroughs that I write about almost every day. Why? Global warming is accelerating because of inaction by industry and governments. Political leaders are playing power politics and stirring up conflict. Based on my latest count, we have 21 ongoing wars (I may have missed a few).
China in the Indo-Pacific, the U.S. in the Western Hemisphere and Russia in Eurasia are carving the planet into geopolitical spheres and circling one another like boxers in the ring. Meanwhile, humanity continues to consume the sum total of Earth’s resources every three months. This is unsustainable.
When I received a telephone call a few days ago from a friend in the Liberal Party of Canada from a neighbouring riding, (full disclosure, I am a Policy Chair for the Party here in my home riding in Oakville, Ontario), he asked me if I wanted to join a group of Liberals concerned with the current state of geopolitics and wanting to create a new narrative, I said yes.
Present Geopolitics
The latest war in the Middle East involves the United States, Israel and Iran, as well as the latter’s neighbours, who are being dragged into it. This has happened not more than a few days after President Trump chaired the first meeting of the Board of Peace for Gaza and Palestine. This new conflict is costing more than a billion-dollars-a-day. The goal appears to aim at changing the Middle East status quo, but it will likely do nothing more than cause death and destruction, followed by a massive rebuilding effort without resolution, leading to future violent outbreaks. War in the Middle East appears to be an endless cycle.
Meanwhile, China keeps building a nuclear arsenal and navy to bully neighbours in the South China Sea, and to assert its hegemony in the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean. China talks about reuniting Taiwan with the mainland, if not peacefully, then by force. Taiwan’s supporters remain steadfast in defence of the island’s independence. The unanswered question remains. Will this spark the next world war?
Then there is the Russia-Ukraine conflict, which appears to have no end in sight. Russia’s “police action” is more than 4 years old. Today, the frontlines of the conflict resemble the Western Front in World War I. Ukraine is supported by NATO countries and the European Union. With the front inching in metres rather than kilometres, the static land war has turned into a bloody grind. Where the action lies is in the air with drone swarms, missiles and glide bombs dispensed upon enemy targets, both military and civilian. It is the biggest Eurasian land war since World War II. That it hasn’t gone global is more about the fear of Russia’s nuclear capacity leading to a global Armageddon.
Israel has been using this latest Middle East conflict to re-engage Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon. It is a continuation of the war initiated by Hamas in its attack on Israel in October 2023, followed by the latter’s subsequent retaliation in Gaza. Gaza’s status, the future of Hamas, Hezbollah, and a weakened Iran, remain up in the air. Meanwhile, in a strange twist, Iran’s latest response to the United States and Israel is to align more Arab countries with them to stop Iranian attacks. Israeli weapon systems are now being used in Arab countries to combat Iranian attacks.
Lessons from History No Longer Apply
The first two world wars featured identifiable combatants. World War I had its Triple Entente (Britain, France, and Russia), joined by Italy, Japan and the United States, facing the Triple Alliance (Germany, Austria-Hungary, and the Ottoman Empire).
In World War II, the Allies (Britain and the Commonwealth, France and its overseas empire, and China) were joined by the USSR after it was attacked, and the United States, even later after Pearl Harbor, faced the Axis (Germany, Italy and Japan). These combatants could be identified by cause, ideology, and goals.
That cannot be said about wars today, a long and growing list, as you can see below:
- Russia-Ukraine (involving Iran and China on the former’s side, and NATO countries and the European Union, supporting the latter)
- Israel-Gaza (Hamas and currently in a ceasefire of sorts)
- Israel-Lebanon (Hezbollah)
- Israel-West Bank (Settler attacks on Palestinians)
- Israel-Iran (multiple attacks and counterattacks)
- United States-Iran (a second go round)
- United States-Venezuela (with the kidnapping of the latter’s leader, attacks on boats allegedly carrying drugs, and the seizure of a “black fleet” of tankers along with their manifests)
- United States-Cuba (a blockade to squeeze the latter to create regime change)
- Sudan (civil war)
- Myanmar (civil war)
- Congo-Rwanda
- Nigeria, Mali, Niger and Chad (Islamic insurgency)
- Horn of Africa, involving Ethiopia, Tigray, Eritrea, Somalia and Somaliland
- Yemen (an ongoing civil war with the Saudi-supported government on one side and Iran-supported Houthis on the other, and involving attacks by the latter on ships in the Red Sea and Arabian Gulf)
- India-Pakistan (an ongoing, never-ending dispute over Kashmir)
- Afghanistan-Pakistan (Taliban incursions)
- Thailand-Cambodia border war
- China-India Himalayan border disputes
- China’s South China Sea Hegemony (involving disputes with the Philippines, Vietnam, Japan and Taiwan)
- Syria (post-Assad regime change disruptions and unrest involving Turkey and the Kurds)
- Libya (civil war)
Future Global Conflicts
Today, we have a Great Power struggle emerging involving the United States, Russia and China. These are the national players of future global conflicts.
Wars in the 20th century and earlier were fought to control land and resources. In World War II, Germany sought Lebensraum while Japan sought to establish a Europe-free East Asian Prosperity Sphere. Will we see 21st-century wars follow a similar path, carving out spheres of influence?
Another player in future global conflicts is not a country. It is climate change which will exacerbate scarcity and disrupt economies.
A closer look provides a glimpse of the struggle that lies ahead.
America
It is hard to describe Trump as a peacemaker, although he craves the Nobel Peace Prize.
His “America First” policies pose threats to both his adversaries and allies. He has reasserted the 19th-century hegemonic Monroe Doctrine, threatens to seize Greenland from Denmark, and questions NATO’s purpose, challenging members to spend more on their militaries.
Trump displays revised American maps showing Canada as the 51st state. He threatens to invade Mexico to quell the drugs coming across the border.
Where will all of this posturing take America? With Trump having three years left in his mandate, how many more allies will he target?
What form of “manifest destiny” will drive his next ambitions?
Russia
Vladimir Putin, Russia’s President, is the Trump of Russia with a dose of more cunning. He wants to restore the post-World War II Soviet empire. He has referred to the collapse of the USSR as the worst geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century.
Are his territorial ambitions limited to reabsorbing Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova, Belarus and the Baltic states? Will it end there, or will the Central Asian republics be fair game, as well as the nations of the former Warsaw Pact?
His willingness to play the nuclear card makes his threats more sinister.
China
Xi Jinping sits alone atop China. It is his vision to reunite Taiwan with the mainland. He is behind China’s industrial, economic and trade strategies. He seeks control of the South China Sea, asserting exclusive sovereignty over its waters and resources.
China’s “no limits” alliance with Russia is Xi’s policy. It secures China’s northern border, gives the country access to discounted Russian energy, and counterbalances the future threat from a rearming Japan and America’s vague assurances to defend Taiwan.
China’s nuclear arsenal and rapidly expanding navy represent future points of conflict with America, reminiscent of Japan’s naval expansion before World War II. If that history lesson isn’t enough, then China should look to the guns of August 1914 that began World War I, started by a naval arms race between Germany and Britain to build ever-more Dreadnought-class battleships.
Climate Change
The last conflict accelerator is climate change. Its influence in 21st century conflict is already profound, and many climatologists recognize that the next El Niño event may prove to be not just a global warming but also a conflict amplifier.
The next El Niño will begin later this year. Past climate data shows that the last half-decade, even during La Niñas, presents an alarming trend. We are experiencing the warmest temperatures recorded since the mid-19th century, and they continue to climb.
In studying the past through the lens of climate change, we now know that climate variability plays a critical role in conflict. A world heating up acts like a conflict accelerator and risk multiplier.
Here is a past example that I have previously described on this blog site. It involves the Roman Empire with new paleo-climate evidence explaining the impetus behind tribes from Central Asia migrating to the edges of the Roman Empire in the 2nd, 3rd and 5th centuries. It turns out, climate change was the driver. Now, classical historians see climate change pressures as key to explaining the Western Roman Empire’s disintegration in the 5th century.
A more contemporary example can be found in today’s Africa. Here, evidence shows the role increasing temperatures are playing in disrupting the African nations of the Sahel. Climate change is causing crop failures, droughts, food shortages, freshwater scarcity, and disease outbreaks. These conditions are linked to rising violence and civil wars across the Sahel, to the tragedies in Sudan’s Darfur, South Sudan, Ethiopia and Somalia.
Climatologists express concern that the next El Niño could drive mean global temperatures well above the 1.5°C (2.7°F) acceptable lower threshold agreed to by signatories to the Paris Climate Agreement.
One can hope that instead of being a conflict accelerator, it speeds up mitigation efforts to tackle wildfires, crop failures, food and water shortages and the spread of vector-borne diseases. Then, climate change can be seen as a de-escalator of conflict and an accelerator to transition from carbon energy to renewables. Instead of conflict, our collective efforts can focus on projects to reduce climate change, rather than on conflicts that point to a darker 21st-century future.
