Escalating global challenges: a world in which crises are intertwined

Listen to the article. The audio text is automated, generated by an automated system

International relations are going through a phase in which geopolitical conflicts, economic and technological competition, and environmental and social pressures are intertwined, making crises more capable of moving across borders, markets, and trade networks. The danger of this transformation lies in the fact that crises are no longer separate events that can be contained individually, but rather have become interacting factors whose combination may lead to multiplying the repercussions and confusing countries’ calculations and their ability to protect their interests.

In this environment, economic resources or military and technological capabilities alone are no longer sufficient to ensure strength and stability. The most important criterion has become the state’s ability to employ its resources, anticipate risks, coordinate policies, and absorb shocks. Thus, the efficiency of national institutions is no longer an administrative issue, but rather has become an element of strategic power, on the basis of which the margin of independence of national decision-making is determined.

One of the dimensions of the crisis is evident in the decline in the effectiveness of international multilateral institutions, especially the Security Council, with the use of veto power to disrupt decisions that conflict with the calculations of the major powers or the interests of their allies. This reveals a defect that goes beyond the inability of institutions to settle disputes to a widening gap between the legitimacy of the international system and the balance of power that governs its work. As confidence in collective security declines, the possibility of countries resorting to unilateral arrangements increases, which may exacerbate competition and weaken the chances of settlement.

International competition is taking on an increasing geo-economic dimension, as customs duties, sanctions, technological restrictions, and tools for controlling supply chains have become means to redistribute influence. Economic interdependence is no longer a sufficient guarantee to avoid conflict, but can turn into a source of pressure and coercion. This pushes countries to diversify their partners and sources of supply, in an attempt to achieve a balance between the gains of integration into the global economy and the risks of excessive dependence on external parties.

Global debt compounds these challenges, as debt servicing depletes available resources for development, infrastructure and social protection, and limits the ability of governments to respond to shocks. Developing countries are exposed to greater pressure due to their high financing needs, limited resources, and market fluctuations. Thus, debt is not limited to reducing financial space, but it may limit the independence of economic decisions and deepen the disparity in the ability to withstand, making financial stability an integral part of national security.

The multiple centers of international power do not guarantee the emergence of a more balanced system. It may expand opportunities for cooperation, but it also increases the potential for friction in the absence of common rules for managing competition. The dilemma is not the rise of new powers per se, but rather the ability of the international system to absorb the transformations without turning them into struggles over influence and areas of influence.

The war in Gaza, and the war against Iran, reveal the intersection of humanitarian, legal, and security considerations with strategic interests. In Gaza, the protection of civilians, reconstruction, governance and security arrangements are linked to the future of the political settlement and stability of the Middle East. As for the war on Iran, its repercussions extend beyond the borders of the region, given the importance of the Gulf in oil and gas supplies and the status of the Strait of Hormuz. Any prolonged disruption to navigation threatens to raise prices, transportation and insurance costs, fuel inflation and put pressure on energy-importing economies. This confirms that the cost of conflicts is not limited to its parties, but is distributed throughout the global economy to varying degrees.

The Red Sea, the Bab el-Mandab Strait, and the Suez Canal clearly embody this interconnectedness. Threatening navigation raises shipping costs, lengthens voyages, and reshapes trade routes. Therefore, protecting sea lanes is inseparable from addressing the roots of conflicts, and requires international cooperation that combines maritime security and political settlements.

In the technological field, artificial intelligence has become a factor influencing productivity, military and economic competition, but it raises risks related to the concentration of technical capabilities, the future of jobs, cyber attacks, and media misinformation. Climate change and water scarcity also increase pressure on food security and social stability. The combination of these challenges reveals that security in its traditional sense is no longer sufficient to understand the sources of strength and weakness in countries.

For Arab countries, these transformations require linking political security with economic, food, water, and technological security, diversifying partnerships and sources of supply, developing early warning systems, and enhancing regional integration in the face of common risks. Coordinating policies, exchanging information, and building productive capabilities provides countries with a wider margin for maneuver and reduces the cost of external dependence.

The real strategic test does not lie in the ability to deal with each individual crisis, but rather in preventing the interaction of crises from turning into a comprehensive threat to stability and development. This requires moving from managing repercussions to anticipating risks, and from relying on resources alone to building resilient institutions, adaptive economies, and partnerships based on mutual interests. In an international system in which collective guarantees decline, power and status will be determined by the ability of states to protect the independence of their decisions, safeguard their interests, and transform cooperation into an actual ability to confront shocks. Strategic steadfastness is no longer just a means of containing crises, but rather has become a prerequisite for maintaining status and influence in shaping the international system.

Quoted from Al-Masry Al-Youm