The Unresolved Issues in Analyzing the State of the World in “Hard Times”
In attempts to understand the world, expressions like “complexity” and “uncertainty” are common. We tried to grasp it from various angles through theoretical engines that came from the state of production forces, dominant ideas on change, or realistic analysis based on the state of forces and their balances. The reason for trying to understand from the beginning is that, despite the common assertion that globalization is receding or eroding in other ways (Deglobalization), the undeniable truth is that countries and their peoples are connected to the world and interact with it more than ever before in human history—through travel, trade, culture, and education.
What happens in the world is no longer events occurring in other lands; no matter the distance, war or peace casts its shadows on the foreign policies of countries and on individuals in their decisions regarding travel, work, education, and even shopping.
Understanding the world in this way is essential, not only because it is related to international security and peace in an era where nuclear weapons are openly or secretly widespread, but also because it is closely tied to human daily life. In previous attempts, we, along with others, tried to distinguish between the “international system” and the “global system,” and to differentiate between a multipolar world, bipolarity, and unipolarity, as these described a world we saw and tried to simplify. Now, it is no longer that easy; rather, there is a race towards a multipolar world where Germany and Japan return to the scene, and where India and Turkey seek presence in one way or another. The G7 and the G20 are defending their polarity, while new groups like “Shanghai” and the new “BRICS” are emerging with new members; amid all this, the Non-Aligned Movement is trying to find a new place for itself.
Dr. Mohamed Abdelsalam, an international relations scholar, recently published an article in the “Interregional” journal, first titled in English “Hard Times,” then subtitled in Arabic: The Unresolved Issues in Analyzing the State of the World in “Hard Times.” In the text, he started with a list of topics that stand between us and understanding the world: first, what can the world do with “pandemic diseases”? Second, has nature permanently deviated from the “usual pattern”? Third, has international conflict returned? Fourth, what is happening within regions? Fifth, how can a war like Ukraine’s end? Sixth, how do we deal with “non-state actors”? Seventh, why do social unrests erupt in developed countries? Eighth, what have social media done to public opinion? Ninth, what do we do with artificial intelligence?
These nine issues are common in all public discussions attempting to understand the world first, then to predict what will happen next. This may reflect challenges and opportunities that can be prepared for with wise and rational policies. Certainly, other issues can be added related to identity, the global economic system as it falters amid its organizations and international alliances, and whether it is possible to break away from the international currency, the dollar; and whether democracy based on the majority and minority is still effective within or outside countries.
What is certain so far is that there is no comprehensive theory that includes “everything,” like the “Internet,” or explains the universe and its developments, like Einstein’s “relativity” or Darwin’s “evolution”; different writings on cosmic issues continue to proceed according to various groups oscillating between “idealism” and “realism”; “hegemony” and “sovereignty,” and the possibilities of explosion and settlement. The grand theoretical comprehensiveness has become impossible while the world’s population exceeds 8 billion, of which 3 billion are in just two countries: India and China.
Any of the issues presented by the writer could lead towards heaven or hell; and on the way to each, there is no longer a “crossroad” urging the world to choose. Such might be deferred to avoid the annihilation of a pandemic, nuclear war, or the anticipated disaster of artificial intelligence.
Avoiding choice is what makes the United States determined to be present in the Indo-Pacific region while trying at the same time to keep the doors open to China. Continuous promotion of the means of equitable deals over the capacity for Transnationalism may create opportunities or open doors, but the international community knows it will not rebuild the planet in an acceptable way. The new “regionalisms,” including the Middle East, create reasonable fields far from the brink of global abyss, but they are not sufficient to guarantee the future.
The new term about the Global South may provide an understanding of the position of developing countries regarding the Ukrainian-Russian war characterized by a kind of theoretical neutrality, another kind of experience, and the borrowing of previous policies, such as non-alignment, that fit the era while maximizing interests even temporarily.
The issue that can be added is that the current understanding confusion may lead to policies that will arrange additional hard times; especially since countries will find nothing but increasing elements of power necessary in this difficult phase. In the Middle East, a nuclear arms race might solve the international failure to “discover” Israeli nuclear weapons or deal with the Iranian nuclear weapon approaching the moment of truth with possession while the world watches in amazement at the levels of Iranian enrichment. Such will necessitate Israeli violence igniting a war no one has managed to avoid, perhaps adding what the Israeli newspaper “Yedioth Ahronoth” recently mentioned about getting Israel out of the Palestinian impasse by establishing a Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip, with Hamas leading the nascent state, and enhancing gas extraction off the coast of the Strip, enabling Israel to achieve the missing success from its successful political, economic, and technological march since its establishment three-quarters of a century ago!
