As the systemic rivalry between China and the United States intensifies, the global security situation also rapidly evolves. New geopolitical hotspots are emerging and nations in conflict are adopting warfare tactics that differ from those of the 20th century. For Europe to adequately tackle these challenges, a broad public debate will be required.
War is
an unfortunate constant in history. But the way it is fought has evolved.
Before the French Revolution, battles were mostly waged by armies of paid
soldiers in the service of lords. After, with the rise of the idea of nations
came large armies based on conscription rather than paid volunteers. This led
to massive bloodshed and degenerated into total war, where civilians were no
longer protected, during World War II.
Hybrid
tactics
Traditionally,
war has been understood as an armed conflict. However, other aspects – some
already existing, some entirely new – are gaining importance. Big powers are
more reluctant to confront each other directly, and prefer proxy
confrontations. For example, the war in Yemen is in fact a conflict between
Saudi Arabia and Iran. More and more actors are using economic measures and
sanctions, propaganda, engineered social unrest, fake news and cyberattacks.
These are instruments of hybrid warfare. This “hidden” form of war is already
taking place, especially between major powers. This strategy allows them to
avoid direct military confrontation and the ravages caused by weapons of mass
destruction (be they nuclear, chemical or biological).
Where
does the clash of the titans leave other powers?
Hybrid
wars are not yet perceived as real wars, since there are no direct casualties
or obvious damage. But they have the potential to be highly destructive, and
could also foreshadow more serious developments.
Big
power competition, especially between the United States and China, is gaining
momentum. Rival hegemonic aspirations are unfolding in a systemic and economic
conflict. Both sides are ramping up their direct military efforts. Hybrid war
is being waged through trade, propaganda, espionage and cyber strikes. The
Taiwan issue is prompting continuous muscle-flexing on both sides.
Allegations
that the Covid virus escaped from a Chinese laboratory has led to claims that
Beijing is undertaking preparations for biological warfare.
Hotspots
have developed in the Caucasus and Ukraine. The Middle East has long been one.
The most contentious areas, however, are now in East Asia, especially around
Taiwan and in the triangle between China, India and Pakistan, potentially
involving Central Asia. The latter will radicalize in the wake of the U.S.
withdrawal, which amounts to handing power over to the Taliban. Refugees are
already pouring into neighboring countries like Tajikistan by the thousands.
Radical Islam is a major concern for all countries in the region, and perhaps
even more so for China and Russia.
But
where does this clash of titans leave other powers, Russia and Europe?
The
Swiss model
Russia
is justifiably concerned about Western attempts to influence its internal
matters. It is also intent on protecting its long borders. Moscow will try to
keep away from a U.S.-China conflict. However, the American administration’s
harsh attitude as well as European indecisiveness and the resulting sanctions
could push Russia, the world’s largest country and a nuclear superpower, to
increasingly align with China – and this in spite of the fact that there is no
love lost between the two.
The
required response is not to talk, quarrel and ponder the matter of
institutional responsibilities on foreign affairs and security. The old
continent is in a weak position, and it needs to stop burying its head in the
sand and congratulating itself on the success of its assumed soft power and
outstanding regulatory frameworks. Geopolitics will catch up with Europe.
The
first step, instead of the institutional discussion on whether Brussels or
national capitals should be in charge, would be a broad and open debate on the
challenges. Concerns vary. Southern and Western Europe fear insecurity in
Africa and the Middle East. The United Kingdom has a more global outlook and is
seeking to increase its presence in the Indo-Pacific and antagonize Russia – a
historical pattern. Similar apprehensions prevail in some Central European
countries, the Baltics and Scandinavia. Berlin tries to get along with
everybody and pays lip service to building up defense. In many European
countries, the broader public remains unaware of the current security risks.
For example, Germany certainly needs more awareness of global challenges.
Geopolitics
will catch up with Europe
Switzerland’s
effective armed neutrality, which is maintained to this day, has allowed the
country to remain at peace throughout two world wars. Bern is also considered a
trusted broker in conflicts. This allowed the recent meeting between the
American and Russian presidents.
Recently,
the Federal Council in Bern decided to acquire 36 F-35 fighter planes from the
U.S. The decision was heavily criticized by Germany and France, as they had
hoped that Switzerland would opt for a European plane, either the Rafale or the
Eurofighter. The Swiss left also wants to hold a referendum to halt the
purchase.
Bern’s
choice is significant. During the Cold War, the Swiss defense apparatus was
informally aligned with NATO. After the implosion of the Soviet Union, internal
support for armed neutrality started to falter. However, Switzerland is still
aware that the world is a dangerous place and that peace can only be preserved
with credible deterrence, alongside economic strength and social stability. In
addition to their technical superiority, choosing American planes might be
driven by some doubts on the effectiveness of European defense.
Switzerland
realizes the importance of civil society’s role in defense matters
Unlike
many other European countries, Switzerland also realizes the importance of
civil society’s role in defense matters. Recently, political parties and
business and social associations have launched an institution to initiate a
broad debate on geopolitics. This should help raise awareness of current global
security challenges among the population. Civil protection and a credible
defense are still necessary. The discussion will contribute to the country’s
safety and counteract damaging attempts by the left to remove the armed defense
system.
Like
with economic, governance and fiscal matters, Switzerland could be a model for
the rest of Europe.
The
continent would be less at risk if it was more aware of the true nature of the
situation, and as a result more decisive. Hybrid war is already a reality. The
U.S. and China are the main players in geopolitics, and Russia understands the
situation. Meanwhile, Europe persists in its blissful ignorance.
https://www.gisreportsonline.com/the-return-of-geopolitics-and-war,3565,c.html
****Prince
Michael of Liechtenstein has completed his trainings at the Economic University
of Vienna (Austria) with a Magister der Sozial- und Wirtschaftswissenschaften
(M.A. in Business Administration). During his studies he took various practical
training periods / work with banks and manufacturing companies in Canada, the
US and Belgium (Brussels).
From
1978 to 1987 he worked for Nestlé SA in the fields of controlling, management
and marketing on various markets in Europe and Africa.
In 1987
he returned to Liechtenstein where he took over the position of a Managing
Director with Industrie- und Finanzkontor Ets. Vaduz, which today is a leading
trust company with tradition and expertise in the long-term and
multi-generational preservation of wealth, family values and businesses. Today,
Prince Michael of Liechtenstein is Executive Chairman of Industrie- und
Finanzkontor Ets. as well as Founder and Chairman of Geopolitical Intelligence
Services AG Vaduz.
Prince
Michael of Liechtenstein is member of various professional organisations such
as STEP. Furthermore, he is board member of the Liechtenstein Institute of
Professional Trustees and Fiduciaries as well as Chairman of the European
Center of Austrian Economics Foundation Vaduz.
He is
co-founder of the International Institute of Longevity and Longevity Center.