The war in Ukraine is defining a new and more dangerous world order

New international equations and 'the rise of the rest'

An article for Foreign Affairs magazine by Richard Haass, the chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington, captured the feeling of the times in its title: "The Dangerous Decade ... A Foreign Policy for a World in Crisis".

In it, the former diplomat wrote: "The United States' preponderance of power was bound to diminish, not owing to American decline but because of … the economic and military development of other countries and entities and the emergence of a world defined by a much greater diffusion of power."

This approach is not recent or related to the outbreak of the Ukraine war and its consequences. It dates to the global financial crisis in 2008.

The Indian American writer Fareed Zakaria talked about this in his book "The Post-American World", in which he predicted that the US would not remain the only superpower, because of what he called "the rise of the rest", with a focus on China, India, Brazil, South Africa, among others.

The French sociologist Emmanuel Todd has been predicting the disintegration of the American system and the post-empire phase since 2001 to 2003.

Paying attention to the facts and the course of events is more important than making predictions or charting expectations.

Today, China and Russia are working together to end American hegemony and build a multipolar international regime. They are using the Ukraine war to try and separate Europe from Washington and bring together the southern hemisphere to support this change.

Read more: It's a brave new world for Russia, China, and Europe

Meanwhile, Washington is using the Ukraine war to send a message to Beijing, aiming to impede China's continuous attempts to ascend. European and American efforts are aimed at preventing a strategic alliance between China and Russia, which could undermine the current global balance.

The next few years are expected to be challenging as the new international landscape takes shape. Washington aims to maintain its dominant position in global leadership and remain an exceptional and indispensable power amid the emerging bipolarity.

To achieve this goal, America is utilising its political, military, economic, cultural, and scientific capabilities, along with its network of alliances including Nato, to contain China and maintain its strategic ties with Europe.

At the same time, Russia's new national security doctrine aims to end the current world order based on western hegemony. It seeks to establish a partnership with China and India, and foster close ties with countries such as the Brics – Brazil, Russia, India and China –  the Shanghai Organisation, Islamic countries, Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

Read more: Will China collaborate with Russia in the Arctic?

The world is paying close attention to China and its ambitions. Beijing has begun to employ a combination of soft power and blunt force, including recent military manoeuvres around Taiwan.

Additionally, China is showcasing its economic and geopolitical power and has focused on becoming an influential player in building a new world order through its Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure investment scheme.

Read more: China's peace diplomacy sets example for world

It appears that Beijing is promoting global pluralism and its model of shared development, positioning itself against the American approach, led by President Joe Biden, which focuses on strengthening democracies over alliances of dictators. 

All this sets the stage for an ideological battle between the two models. China believes its proposal will be more persuasive and attractive to the developing world.

French President Emmanuel Macron made a statement in April on his way back from China, calling for independent strategic European powerbase, while avoiding the division of the world into opposing blocs.

Most European countries are likely to share Macron's preference for a focus on regional interests and the avoidance of a confrontational stance against China.

More independent regional powers

As the international equations change, regional powers are gaining more independence and prioritising their interests. There are clear examples of this with Saudi Arabia, with the Kingdom's positioning over Ukraine and the energy war, alongside a wider diversification of international relations.

India's presidency of the G20 group of nations this year has brought attention to New Delhi's role in this critical phase. Its ties to both Russia and the US have forced it to take a delicate stand on Ukraine.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi rightly pointed out that global governance has failed in his speech during the opening session of the G20 foreign ministers' meeting.

It all follows significant challenges over the last few years to the multilateral international system, including financial crises, climate change, pandemics, terrorism, and wars. The alternatives do not seem ready given the intensification of global confrontation and strategic confusion.

Military lessons from an escalating war

Russia had anticipated a swift victory in its attack on Ukraine, but the conflict has persisted and deteriorated over the past months, leaving the outcome uncertain.

Europe's military spending had significantly declined during the three decades of peace that followed the Soviet Union's fall in 1991, but Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 reversed that trend. Moreover, Germany and France's failure to implement the Minsk Agreement over Ukraine's future has helped create a lasting conflict.

Ukraine has marked the return of intense war and significant human and material losses to Europe after a long period of relative peace. Geopolitically, this conflict represents a turning point in the concept of defence in the European Union.

There are a range of factors that reveal Europe's significant changes in its approach to defence. Germany has taken a new position, there is an EU military commitment to support Ukraine, while Poland leads Nato's eastern front and Finland has joined the alliance, with Sweden's accession imminent.

Europe's pursuit of achieving collective defence within the Atlantic framework or via its own, independent strategic pole, is becoming clear.

A hybrid conflict

The ongoing war in Ukraine is a hybrid conflict that combines classic warfare from the 19th and 20th centuries with modern warfare from the 21st. It involves Russia's nuclear intimidation, the use of cyberspace, electronic warfare, and the first time space has become a theatre of war.

The conflict provides several strategic, military, and structural lessons. One of the most crucial is the importance of strategic depth and human mass in offence and defence. Clashes take place in all domains, including land, air, sea, space, and cyber, as well as in the information and electromagnetic fields.

In this high-paced conflict, tanks, high-tech drones and ballistic missiles form its vital trio. Infantry, equipped with light weapons and artillery, ranks first. Combat aircraft and naval weapons come second.

The war has consumed vast amounts of weapons and ammunition, and most nations were not prepared for this during the period of happy globalisation. As a result, armies need to learn how to improve their management of the present and the future.

Fighting in Ukraine has shown that the models armies use to cooperate with allies to defend territory during intense conflict need to adapt. Undoubtedly, the Donbas battles are rich in lessons on changing strategies and understanding the evolution of threats.

The military must be prepared to respond to all types of threats, including conventional combat and areas such as information and the internet, which have become crucial in influencing modern day conflicts.

Another significant lesson is the severe shortage of ammunition and weapons in protracted wars. This situation requires planning for additional orders and establishing new production lines instead of relying on incoming supplies and stockpiles.

There is now a need for nuclear powers to prepare for the escalation of nuclear rhetoric. Russia has repeatedly threatened to use nuclear weapons since February 2022, and President Vladimir Putin has ordered the transfer of nuclear weapons to Belarus.

This situation requires an assessment of the evolution of this threat and the possibility of renewed worldwide nuclear proliferation, particularly with the development of North Korean armaments and the Iranian programme.

As all these lessons are absorbed, many countries are likely to focus on developing their own sovereign tools and seek military alliances.

Field escalation and the repercussions of a drawn-out war

Intense battles continue in and around the city of Bakhmut, along with ongoing operations in eastern and southern Ukraine. The war of attrition has intensified, with both sides increasing their efforts and facing difficulty in achieving their objectives.

Read more: Bakhmut holds as battle heats up amid fog and mud

Russia is pushing to gain complete control over four regions this spring -- Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhya -- while the Ukrainian-Western alliance is betting on a counter-offensive against Russian forces. Despite the shortage of equipment and ammunition and heavy casualties, some battles resemble World War I's Battle of Verdun.

It is evident that both sides are pushing to achieve their goals, and Washington is showing reluctance to facilitate a settlement. The situation remains uncertain, and the conflict is ongoing until further notice.

Negotiations on the Ukrainian war are currently closed until further notice, particularly after the visits of the Chinese president to Russia and the French president to China.

The recent leak of US secret information on the developments of the conflict has also complicated the situation, with some suspecting it to be organised or suspicious.

Read more: Pentagon leaks show Western resolve in Ukraine war  

Russia is actively seeking military gains, either to prepare for a large-scale offensive or to prevent a Ukrainian counterattack. In response, the Western alliance continues to support Kyiv, regardless of the duration of the conflict, to show Russia that it cannot easily win a war of attrition.

Global strategic confusion and a north-south split

The war has led to a split of a different kind between the global north and south, with strategic implications. Even in a world with the US and China as its two major powers -- with an alliance between Russia and China and the West led by Washington -- there remains a considerable amount of confusion and lack of clear direction.

This has stoked debate among a range of intellectuals, theorists, and experts. French historian Jean-François Colosimo said: "This conflict is taking place in the context of the return of empires, not only in Russia but also in China, India, Iran, and Turkey.

The battle for Ukraine is the most critical because it could be a prelude to a global conflict in which the West and the new imperialist powers would face off."

The American think tank RAND has warned about the danger of European countries adopting a discourse on the "war of democracies against tyranny." It argues that this narrative would prevent Europeans from playing an active role in resolving the conflict.

Russia's Alexander Dugin has acknowledged that "the military operation in Ukraine was intended to be swift, but it became impossible due to Ukraine's deep integration with Nato and the West." The Putin-affiliated thinker emphasised that Russia is at a crossroads and cannot afford to lose the war.

The outcome of Vladimir Putin's objective in the war will largely depend on the world order established by the West, which represents the American unilateralist system, as well as China's stance.

China's choice will be linked to its economic and geopolitical interests. Furthermore, the global confrontation could potentially move to other areas, and the conflict between the American and Chinese powers will be the determinant of international relations in the contemporary era.