After the Second World War, the United States of America started to dominate the political and economic structure of the international world. The cold war was fought between the USSR and the USA and ended in 1979. Washington, after defeating the USSR, emerged as a sole super power in the world. The US began to spread its sphere of influence through capitalism, democracy and freedom of speech.

The leadership of the US focused on dominating the countries that got freedom from colonizers. The establishment of Washington consensus and international organizations such as the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the World Trade Organization and others further incentivised US influence in the international world. Also, the former presidents of the US tried to enhance their dominance in the world and preserve the hegemony of Washington globally.

Additionally, the victory of president Trump in the country is demonstrating that the US is back tracking its feet from the world order maintained by the country since decades. The executive orders by the Trump administration to leave the World Health Organization, the World Trade organization, the Paris agreement and freezing UNICEF aid would create a vacuum, that China might fill.

For instance, aid to the developing countries in diverse sectors preserves the soft power of a country and strengthens bilateral relationship with those countries. In the context of the US, the aid for the South Asian region not only helped Washington to prevent Chinese influence in the region but also strengthened its dominance in the region.

The announcement of the Trump administration to call back all UNICEF workers is a concerning issue for the developing countries that are relying on US aid in health, education and other sectors. Millions of people are relying on US aid driven healthcare and education sectors in remote areas. In Bangladesh, the aid cut by the US would affect the Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh as well.

China is playing a great role in mitigating the risk of climate change and aligning its projects with a climate friendly future

The US pulled out of the Paris Agreement and termed climate change as a myth. The world is witnessing serious damage from the climate-led disasters. The climate refugees and deteriorating climate crisis needs a leadership to solve these non-traditional security issues. But at the time of urgency, Washington pulled out from the climate agreement and the absence of the country in COP29 also demonstrated the indifferent behavior of the sole super power towards a threatening global issue. Therefore, China is playing a great role in mitigating the risk of climate change and aligning its projects with a climate friendly future.

Undoubtedly, the vacuum left by the US would be filled by China and other major countries. The Trump administration imposed heavy tariffs on countries, especially China and adopted a protectionist policy which is against globalization that spread the concept of democracy and capitalism. The recent administration targeted the WTO and also criticized its functioning. The organizations established by the US for decades, which enhance its role to dominate the world, are witnessing betrayal from its parent country.

Similarly, the Trump administration’s criticism of the World Health Organization portrays indifferent stance of the new administration to run the global organizations for the benefit of people. The WHO plays a significant role in the research of new medicines and control mechanisms of pharmaceutical products. The organization has been successful in preventing diseases such as HIV, AIDS and others. The decision of Trump would affect the international standing of the sole super power.

So what will be the future scenario, if the new administration of the United States is pulling away from its own established world order?

The U.S. has always been a key player in governance, economic aid, and security, and its absence would truly overhaul the international order altogether

If Donald Trump or any other future U.S. president with similar policies would withdraw the U.S. from all international organizations and freeze international aid, that would create a significant vacuum in international relations, which would have very wide ranging consequences. The U.S. has always been a key player in governance, economic aid, and security, and its absence would truly overhaul the international order altogether. In such a circumstance, the void would fill with different world powers, each with its strategic interests.

China would be ready to reap the benefits from such a move by the United States. For the last two decades, it integrated power with increased influence on the two fronts that seem to be promising- first, through the BRI and then increasing financial contributions to bodies like the UN and WHO. Locking the Chinese down with the withdrawal made by the U.S. could even see China raising its allocations to these institutions-theirs would be a bigger governing authority for increased investments-and building ties with the developing world in Africa, Latin America, and Asia.

Apart from advancing new economic frameworks, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), China might use this as an opportunity to compete with Western-led financial institutions, such as IMF and World Bank.

The EU could move to increase financial contributions to world organizations to prevent their collapse and strengthen diplomatic ties with developing nations

The European Union (EU) would up the ante for international governance, but it faces domestic problems that risk limiting its effectiveness in such a mission. The EU could move to increase financial contributions to world organizations to prevent their collapse and strengthen diplomatic ties with developing nations. It would start with climate initiatives.

Nonetheless, internal political differences among states, financial limitations, and lack of joint military power might confine the EU from assuming the position of the world leader, in reality supplanting the U.S. While it could develop into a stabilizing factor, the EU will not likely fill the leadership void on its own.

Moscow will find this as an opening for incorporating new regions into its geopolitical domain, especially those areas where the void created by U.S. military exit will allow such actions, like Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe. Russia does not have as much economic heft as either China or the EU, but it could forge stronger alliances with authoritarian regimes and those nations that stand against the West, thus increasing their global role in security and energy politics. Alternatively, it may focus on UN Security Conciliations and all other aspects of juggling diplomacy, using military and intelligence mechanisms to mould conflicts and regional dynamics favorably.

India could open up to be a leader for the Global South by deepening its economic partnerships and diplomatic ties.

Beyond these two major nations, middle-order nations such as India, Japan, and the Gulf States will perhaps play an important role in the ‘new world order’. India’s example is that it could open up to be a leader for the Global South by deepening its economic partnerships and diplomatic ties. Storage in hi-tech realization and precious humanitarian aid contributions might get Japan increased visibility in the global institutions but, most likely, will not aspire to become a superpower. As a counterpoint, Middle East states, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar, could strengthen their power as a result of financing by the resource-rich nations.

The question of cooperation versus fragmentation hinges on how the global powers will react and live to this unprecedented change in international dynamics

This will create a vacuum at the global level as weakened international governance will lead to growing lawlessness, trade disruptions, and an increase in difficulties in enforcing agreements at the global level. More importantly, however, is the fact that the sudden cutoff of U.S. aid, which plays a significant role in stabilizing many fragile states, is likely to spark increased number of civil wars and refugee crises, along with economic collapse in affected areas. Last but not least, dollar’s hegemony in global finance would decline as China, Russia, and other countries are hammered into existence and push for alternative currency systems.

The reality of the absence of superpower stretches into annals of history, as several actors will try to create alternatives to replace those lost. An age of chaos will come, which will herald the entrance of instability to the global population. A world, that could change or become a multipolar with no single leadership country, shall enter into possible fluid alliances, an economic realignment to or among nations, and possibly inflame geopolitical tensions. The question of cooperation versus fragmentation hinges on how the global powers will react and live to this unprecedented change in international dynamics.

Disclaimer : The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia