With the global order being upended by arbitrary action from the Trump administration, concerns about global leadership are causing a turbulent period. Trump’s return to power in the United States has triggered Europe and US allies around the world to face the grimmest security crisis since the end of World War II, and perhaps the Korean war in its aftermath.
The last time something like this happened, the British empire was in decline, and the ‘United Kingdom’ abandoned their duties hastily in their colonies, ensuing the Greek crisis of 1947. With the UK withdrawing from the Suez and effectively from most of the Mediterranean, the US stepped in to fill the security void. Faced with the prospects of Soviet Union expansionism and control of trade routes, the US responded with the Truman doctrine, and the rest as they say is history. The world order, which was built since then, which has largely been shaped by the foreign policy interests of the United States, Europe and Russia, is no more today. And Trump is driving in the last nails into decades of multilateralism which had brought relative stability to the world (at least, more so the global North, than South). Trump’s approach to the Ukraine-Russia conflict is rapidly eroding its long-standing reputation as a steadfast ally of Europe. However, Europe’s lethargy and negligence of their own security architecture over the last four decades may have played a role in Trump’s pressure for Europe to get off its moral high horse and regain the necessary kinetic capacity and capabilities needed to manage an effective deterrence and security posture in their own continent.
In the wake of the tariffs and trade disruptions, the second Donald Trump administration is causing trade partners around the world to reconsider their economic policies and supply chains. Such moves have resulted in a new era of economic nationalism and transactional diplomacy, rattling global markets and undermining long-standing trade norms. Trump’s sweeping tariff measures targeting China, the European Union, India, and key supply chains have triggered a cascade of protectionist responses and injected fresh uncertainty into global commerce. Sri Lanka is also a victim of the arbitrary tariffs (some of which have been challenged by Judiciary in the US). Over the last decade, US and India were becoming strategic partners, with the aim of strengthening democratic rivals in Asia to stand up to a rising China – with close security, industrial, technological cooperation, and investments between both countries improving significantly, and was reinforced by the QUAD partnership. However, Trump’s criticism of India and harsh tariffs for purchasing Russian oil may be the start of the undoing of some of those close ties.
As such, there is a concerted push to redefine a new world order, and leading the charge is China, Russia, and Europe. Russia and China sense an opportunity to reshape the world order to one that suits their view of the world. With Asia gradually rising, many in the region are now concerned about their traditional partnership with the US, in light of what Trump has done. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) meeting last weekend was likely used as a platform to message the US and the collective West, the displeasure and change in attitudes from the ‘rest of the world’.
The major diplomatic event saw the Indian Premier in close proximity, being friendly and holding hands with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese Premier Xi, seemingly giving Trump the diplomatic middle finger. For Putin, it was a good platform for him to regain credibility and agency in the international stage, surrounded by other world leaders, all of whom were very welcoming. Putin indicated that he is amongst friends, and he has shown respect to Xi Jinping, now a close ally of Russia. The Chinese Premier used the occasion to showcase that he is an alternative source of international power to the United States, by demonstrating that he can gather world leaders. Both Xi and Putin have long called for a new world order that is not built on Western and US power.
Missing in the audience was any high-level representation from Sri Lanka. While Sri Lanka has its own share of issues to focus on, such gatherings like the SCO offer valuable bilateral side talks, which Sri Lanka cannot afford to miss out on. Sri Lanka has also lost an opportunity to improve its visibility and gain diplomatic credit outside the western sphere of influence by not sending a worthy delegation to such an event. Let us hope that our Government and its foreign policy advisors are prudent not to miss such opportunities in the future.