Global Order And New Geopolitical Challenges: Ukraine War, Iran Crisis And Future Of International Stability

If we follow the 24-hour satellite television or the relentless barrage of social media posts, we would come to the conclusion that the world today is a violent, brutal place. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Hamas’s act of terror on Oct 7, 2023, followed by Gaza bombing by Israel, the Hezbollah-Israel conflict that ended in an uneasy truce, Houthi attacks on shipping in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, India-Pakistan tensions following the terror attacks in Pahalgam, and the recent bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities by Israel and the United States—all these give the impression that the world is in turmoil.

But the truth is, despite all these instances of violence, bloodshed and conflict, the world, over the past 80 years after the Second World War, has been remarkably peaceful and stable. Yes, there are many unresolved issues and a lot of tension leading to armed skirmishes or conflicts. But the bigger picture is one of stability and broad acceptance and observance of global norms.

Nevertheless, the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Israeli and American bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities also indicate a changing world order. The global system today is built on the foundations of the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 after endless conflict and bloodshed in Europe.

Modern notions of sovereignty, non-interference in the domestic affairs of other states, and equal treatment of sovereign states have taken root with the Westphalian system. Over time, this led to the nation-state system that we now see. Finally, the end of the two World Wars and the decolonisation in the post-war period created the global order that we now take for granted.

The cardinal feature of the post-war global order is that use of force by one nation against another is generally a practice of the past. Forcible change of boundaries of a nation or invasion of a country, which were a matter of routine for millennia, are abhorrent to the modern world.

In today’s world, it is broadly accepted that there cannot be use of force against a nation unless the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) sanctions it in order to maintain international peace and security, or in self-defence, or a pre-emptive attack in anticipation of an imminent attack, or, in extreme cases, humanitarian intervention to protect innocent people from harm.

The real challenge in global affairs is to determine when a pre-emptive attack is justified. The ‘Caroline Test’ was articulated by the then US secretary of state, Daniel Webster (1837), in the wake of the British attack on the US ship, Caroline, supplying weapons to Canadian rebels against British rule.

Webster enunciated that anticipatory self-defence is justified if the attack by the other party is imminent, the necessity of instant self-defence is overwhelming, and there is no other choice of means and no moment for deliberation. This standard stood the test of time for about 150 years.

The six-day Israel-Arab war (1967), the Israeli attack on the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq (1981), US air strikes against Libya (1986) after the terrorist bombings in West Berlin, the infamous Iraq war of 2003 on suspicion of stockpiling weapons of mass destruction (later proved to be baseless), and the 2007 Israeli bombing of the suspected nuclear reactor in Syria are examples of pre-emptive attacks.

The Ukraine war is a clearly unprovoked invasion of a weaker neighbour by Russia. It is an undisguised attack to conquer Ukraine and end its sovereignty or bring it under Russian control with nominal independence. That such an invasion is launched by a major nuclear power and a permanent member of the UNSC is shocking and without precedent.

China did invade Vietnam in 1979, but it was not with any territorial claims, and in a month’s time, China withdrew its forces in March 1979. The Ukraine war is a serious aberration of the post-war order.

If Russia prevails and Ukraine is annexed by Russia with impunity, then it marks a reversion spin to the earlier era of invasion, expansion and annexation when might was right. The story is still evolving, and it is too early to predict the final outcome.

The bombing of Iranian nuclear installations in June is clearly a pre-emptive attack. But it is obvious that the Caroline Test standards cannot be met, because the timing of a nuclear attack on Israel by Iraq cannot be precisely anticipated. In fact, nuclear threat is a new type of unique existential threat, and the Caroline Test is insufficient to meet this extraordinary challenge.

Iran is an ancient country with a great civilisation. But it is a fact that Iran is in pursuit of nuclear weapons, violating the treaties it has voluntarily signed. Nuclear power plants require uranium enrichment of 3-5%. Iran has enriched significant quantities of uranium, up to 60%, and such enrichment has only one use—nuclear weapons!

The Iranian government, after the 1979 revolution, repeatedly and publicly declared that they would destroy Israel, and ‘Death to Israel’ and ‘Death to America’ are the officially approved chants in public gatherings! Given this context, the global community’s response to the US and Israeli attacks has been muted or supportive.

Both the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the pursuit of nuclear weapons by some states with the avowed intention of destroying other nations are new challenges the world today is facing. The way world nations address these twin challenges will shape the global order of tomorrow.

The author is the founder of Lok Satta movement and Foundation for Democratic Reforms. Email: drjploksatta@gmail.com / Twitter@jp_loksatta

news