Navigating the New Interregnum

My new article, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, that explores the post Pax Americana world, and what it means for middle powers.

Image: Council on Foreign Relations

Countries such as Australia have no time to waste in rethinking their options and strategies for engaging with the world after this period between global systems. This period has dispossessed nations of their long-held, cherished assumptions about how the world works. Reframing their view of the world is now imperative.

U.S. action in Venezuela and the Trump administration’s threats against Greenland have pushed NATO and the broader international system to the brink of oblivion. The familiar old world order is disappearing. But no cohesive new global operating system has emerged to replace it.

Nations now exist in an interregnum as they attempt to navigate the roiling and dangerous seas of a post–Pax Americana world. No one can guarantee that this will be a peaceful period, nor can one predict how long this time of global uncertainty could last.

Some experts already predict that the other side of this period will feature a return to spheres of influence. The model most frequently touted is a “Big Three” framework, where the United States, China, and Russia divide the world into regions of domination.

However, the Big Three model has some problems. For example, Europe poses a significant challenge to the establishment of a Russian sphere of influence. At the same time, countries such as Brazil, India, Japan, Nigeria, and South Korea are middle powers that wield significant global influence. Their agency needs to be accounted for. One could imagine more than three global spheres of influence if those countries break away and form their own power centers.

Australia, with its large economy and geographic isolation, has options for surviving and thriving in such an uncertain world. Simply aligning with one of the Big Three powers could no longer be the right strategy. However, operating outside of that structure would necessitate Australia to increase its spending on defense, intelligence, and other elements of national security—it could even need to secure its own nuclear deterrent.

You can read the rest of this piece, as well as a collection of other terrific articles on the changes to the world order, published by the Council on Foreign Relations at this link.