Trump means war

Writing in this paper in January, I described a geopolitical chain reaction of spreading conflicts that were emerging from the collapse of the post-1945 world order. As 2024 ends, regional wars are becoming increasingly intertwined between emerging coalitions. A growing cabal of autocrats are increasingly seeing the benefit of collaborating on drones, intelligence, sanctions-busting and deploying troops in service of each other’s wars.

Israel and Iran have traded direct missile attacks (as have Israel and the Houthis who have attacked international shipping in the Red Sea). The reaction to the murderous attacks of October 7 2023 has devastated Gaza, and expanded to a war in Lebanon. A stretched Russia and Iran were unable to prevent the fall of Bashar al-Assad in Syria, as they had in 2015. In Europe, North Korean troops have been deployed to fight alongside Russian troops attempting to retake Russian land that Ukraine has seized, while western weapons are being used to hit targets in Russia. Russia’s “grey zone” war has continued to spread across Europe with increasingly brazen attacks. Warfare is no longer restricted to the battlefield.

While the incoming US president has vowed to end the Ukraine war in a day, the spreading of conflict looks set to continue in 2025. Indeed, the return of Trump could see an explosive acceleration of the chain reaction.

If Trump is successful in abruptly ending the war in Ukraine, it could hasten the beginning of a new one. If Ukrainian land is ceded to Russia without concrete security guarantees, such as Nato membership, this would weaken long-term European security, erode US credibility as an ally and embolden Russia and other states with long-held territorial ambitions. This includes China’s ambitions of reunification with Taiwan. Economic challenges within China, leading to internal instability, could change president Xi’s timelines for achieving this ambition.

In 2025, Israel will run out of things to destroy in Gaza. A ceasefire is possible in the near future, with Benjamin Netanyahu providing Trump with a foreign policy win in exchange for support against Iran. Trump’s social media suggests the return of the Israeli hostages will be a priority – but he will do nothing to ease the pain of a generation of Gazans who have lost loved ones. This will leave a fertile recruiting ground for those seeking violent revenge.

A fragile ceasefire with Hezbollah doesn’t mean an easing of tensions with Iran. Removing Hezbollah’s offensive capabilities was always a part of a wider Israeli plan to deal with Iran. If Trump gives Netanyahu the green light to attack the Iranian nuclear programme, he will have to carefully manage his relationship with Putin. Russia has deepened its relationship with Iran. However, Trump and Putin will feel they can do business: US concessions over Ukraine given in exchange for Russian concessions over Iran.

As for China, it is walking a delicate line between fostering an anti-US military partnership between Russia, North Korea and Iran, and avoiding sanctions and the disapproval of key economic partners. Trump has announced that he will increase tariffs on China by 10% in January. Many expect an escalating trade war as Trump uses tariffs as a weapon of diplomacy.

Trump’s disruptive and unpredictable approach could have its uses. Yet his inconsistency, aversion to multilateral approaches and vulnerability to flattery will undermine his pursuit of “peace through strength”. Next year may be defined as much by what Trump doesn’t do, as by what he does.

The philosopher John Gray believes Trump’s return “…marks a historic turning point, comparable in its geopolitical consequences with the Soviet collapse: the definitive end of a liberal world order. With regime change in the US, countries that relied on American protection face an unavoidable choice: arm and defend themselves, or else make peace with the rising authoritarian powers.”

America remains an economic superpower at the centre of AI development, which has the potential to create exponential economic growth (albeit with accompanying social upheaval). Trump, however, wants to be free to focus on the primacy of US economic interests, not the primacy of western ideals. His isolationist approach will weaken America’s already waning position.

Many in the global south have learned the lesson of Afghanistan, Libya and Syria: don’t trust western coalitions to stand up for the ideals they claim to hold. Along with Burkina Faso, Mali, Somalia and Sudan, these countries are again becoming safe havens for extremism, which are likely to fuel the revival of terrorist networks. While the fall of Assad is being rightly celebrated, 2025 could see Syria descend into the same chaos that engulfed Libya after the fall of Colonel Gaddafi. When ideologically diverse groups, united by a single objective, achieve their goal, what they have in common becomes less than their differences. But even if the dominant rebel group in the push to Damascus, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, which emerged from al-Qaida, manages to hold together a new Syrian government, the risk of Syria becoming an Islamist terrorist safe haven remains.

Israel is already taking steps to minimise this risk by targeting weapons factories and other elements of Syria’s military infrastructure as well as seizing strategic land. Dormant conflicts are awakening.

The revival of terror networks highlights another theme of 2025: turning your back on the world won’t stop it coming to you. EU foreign policy chief, Kaja Kallas, claims Russia is already waging a “shadow war” on the streets of Europe. Regardless of the outcome in Ukraine, Russia will likely step up its covert activities, including deniable sabotage and arson, cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns and the targeting of energy and communications infrastructure (including undersea pipelines and cables) and supply chains.

As demonstrated by the running battles between Israeli football fans and Palestinian supporters in Amsterdam, we will see the spread of the Middle Eastern conflict on to the streets of Europe, with protests, counter-protests and antisemitic and Islamophobic attacks.

Trump may find his domestic immigration and narcotic policies will further the spread of Mexican cartel violence on American streets, as sources of cartel labour and revenue are disrupted. A trade war between the US and China will affect the cost of living for all of us.

Xi will hope Trump’s isolationist “America First” will further the emergence of a China-centred alternative to the western-dominated financial system. Through state investment and espionage, China is attempting to surpass the west’s technological and military capabilities. Through the Belt and Road Initiative and its successor, the Global Development Initiative, China has spread both debt and the tools for autocracy across the global south, in exchange for natural resources and trade deals.

Xi’s vision discards the idea of alliances based on universal values in favour of non-binding partnerships predicated on common interests. This is not dissimilar to Trump’s view – the tension between the two is over who has primacy in this new world of “equals”.

Wars tend to concentrate at times when power is transitioning. The old system benefited the west and lifted many in the global south out of poverty, yet it has also perpetuated inequality, and western foreign policy has regularly been hypocritical.

What the new order will be is not yet determined. As others try to turn their back on the world or focus on the primacy of their own interests, our government must build new coalitions and institutions to ensure that we avoid losing the international norms we value. If they fail, the growing cabal of autocrats will take advantage of the disorder.