The world seems to be drifting toward a new geopolitical paradigm. The old rules-based order built after World War II is fading, giving way to a framework where power sometimes seems to be exercised by whoever has the strongest hand. This shift is profound and stirs concern among the top global governance institutions.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has left little doubt that parts of one country may be absorbed by another under certain strategic pressures. In Gaza, the fighting has intensified in ways that challenge longstanding international norms, with actions that many authorities deem a challenge to UN resolutions and the international system itself. In the United States, the political landscape has grown more volatile, and the possibility looms of a MAGA-backed leadership returning to the White House with an appetite for upheaval and a loyal, fervent base behind it. These dynamics are not merely domestic but have potential global reverberations.
There is a growing sense that the world is witnessing a progressive loosening of conflict management tools. The instruments that previously governed peace and war are losing their central role as both Gaza and Ukraine test international legality and the legitimacy of the United Nations. In this context, leaders and scholars alike talk about the erosion of long-standing rules that once framed international behavior.
The inflection point, some say, can be traced back to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, a moment that a Lebanese professor and diplomat, Ghassan Salamé, helped popularize by describing a trend toward the desynchronization of force and norms. As Carme Colomina, a senior researcher at the policy think tank CIDOB, notes, violence increased even as impunity grew. The current era presents a condition where geopolitical competition and the use of force occur alongside a broader erosion of international instruments and customary norms.
With active wars raging in Ukraine, Gaza, Sudan, and Yemen, the world concentrates the highest level of armed conflict since the end of the Second World War. The dispersion of fighting and the fragmentation of alliances are reshaping how states engage with one another and how international bodies respond. [Citation: CIDOB and other policy analysts]
A broader trend is evident in the growing loss of centrality for the United Nations. It is not only Russia in Ukraine or Israel in Gaza; recent events show that several international institutions are wrestling with their footing. For instance, last autumn tens of thousands of Armenians fled Nagorno-Karabakh after incursions by Azerbaijani forces. UN representatives could not enter the area until after evacuations occurred, and the international community’s response appeared cautious — a sign of the changing weight of global institutions on the ground. [Citation: UN and regional analyses]
In the Sahel, West Africa’s belt south of the Sahara, international peacekeeping forces and anti-terror coalitions once present in the region have faced expulsions and withdrawals following coups in Mali and Niger. The Sudanese crisis, marked by civil strife and political upheaval, culminated in a UN departure earlier this year at the invitation of the government, leaving a volatile landscape without robust international oversight in a region that has already endured extreme humanitarian crises and displacement. [Citation: regional security reports]
The tone toward international engagement is shifting in the European Union as well. Analysts agree that the era is moving away from a straightforward strengthening of shared rules and toward a multipolar and more adversarial global climate. During a recent debate, the EU’s top foreign policy official warned that Europe must rethink security and invest in common defense, rather than rely on the old models of steady cooperation. He pointed to a world that includes the rise of the Global South, a political realignment in the United States, and the cascading effects of pandemics, wars, and subsidization in rival economies. The Gaza crisis, occurring after those remarks, underscored the real-world stakes of these shifts.
The European Commission’s leadership has warned that the possibility of a broad continental war cannot be ruled out and that Europe needs to bolster its defense posture. In tandem, strategic thinkers emphasize that the EU must prepare for the worst while remaining open to the best outcomes. The 2022 Strategic Compass framed a security environment defined by strategic competition, complex threats, and a surge in political and military activity near Europe and beyond. It also highlighted the growing instrumental role of non-traditional tools such as vaccines, data governance, and technology standards in the political contest [Citation: EU strategy documents].
As conflicts proliferate, norms appear more fragile. The global community faces a future of heightened uncertainty, shifting alliances, and the steady erosion of established frameworks in international relations. This era invites policymakers and scholars to rethink how security, cooperation, and human security can be safeguarded in a world that is becoming less predictable and more interconnected, yet increasingly adversarial in tone and approach.