US, Russia - The birthing pains of the New World Order
“Think of it, a modestly successful comedian, Volodymyr Zelensky, talked the United States of America into spending $350 Billion Dollars, to go into a War that couldn’t be won, that never had to start...
...Why didn’t Sleepy Joe Biden demand Equalisation, in that this War is far more important to Europe than it is to us — We have a big, beautiful Ocean as separation...".
U.S President Donald Trump's complete break with western geopolitical orthodoxy left other leaders and elites shocked, angry and disorientated.
Trump's position represents a break with the Neo-Conservative that has held since the downfall of the Soviet Union in the early 1990s.
The section of the U.S capitalist class that Trump represents recognise that a 'New World Order' is arising from the transition from a unipolar world to a multi-polar world.
Marco Rubio, Secretary of State, articulated this in an interview with Megyn Kelly. It’s worth quoting it at length:
 |
Secretary Marco Rubio with Megyn Kelly of The Megyn Kelly Show |
"Where our interests align, that’s where you have partnerships and alliances; where our differences are not aligned, that is where the job of diplomacy is to prevent conflict while still furthering our national interests and understanding they’re going to further theirs. And that’s been lost.
And I think that was lost at the end of the Cold War, because we were the only power in the world, and so we assumed this responsibility of sort of becoming the global government in many cases, trying to solve every problem. And there are terrible things happening in the world. There are. And then there are things that are terrible that impact our national interest directly, and we need to prioritize those again. So it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power. That was not – that was an anomaly. It was a product of the end of the Cold War, but eventually you were going to reach back to a point where you had a multipolar world, multi-great powers in different parts of the planet. We face that now with China and to some extent Russia...".
Break from the 'Project for a New American Century'
A Neo-Conservative consensus was formed after the fall of the Soviet Union. This was set out in a document written in 2000 by the think tank, 'The Project for the New American Century' (PNAC), 'REBUILDING AMERICA’S DEFENSES: Strategy, Forces and Resources For a New Century'.
The document details the military resources needed to provide a:
"...blueprint for maintaining U.S. preeminence, precluding the rise of a great power rival, and shaping the international security order in line with American principles and interests.".
To:
"...preserve and extend its position of global leadership by maintaining the preeminence of U.S. military forces.".
And to:
"fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars".
At the time this all looked well within grasp. The rise of China was a twinkle in the eye of economic power. Russia was still reeling from the chaos of the 1990s.
But by the end of the 2000s and the beginning of the 2010s this Neo-Conservative consensus was being challenged by the rise of China as an economic power and a resurgent Russia.
This changing world balance of power prompted President Barack Obama to prioritise regions of interest. His response was to 'Pivot to Asia' to challenge the rise of China.
But this was not straightforward. There were real world challenges such as the Middle East and separatist fighting in Ukraine.
Sections of American capitalists were also opposed.
Robert Kagan, who worked under Ronald Reagan, spoke for them. As late as 2015 he wrote:
"The United States has been not simply a regional power, but rather a regional power in every strategic region. It has served as the maintainer of regional balances in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East.".
In fact, the influence of this Neo-Conservative consensus was so deep that at the beginning of his 2016 presidency, Donald Trump appointed Neo-con advisers such as John Bolton to advise on foreign policy.
Balance of power upended; consensus questioned
Russia upended the world balance of power when it invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
The U.S under Biden and Europe upheld their consensus and poured weapons into Ukraine. But in 2023 the Ukrainian counter offensive failed and the predicted collapse of the Russian state never materialised.
This brought the U.S/Western strategy into doubt and with-it growing opposition to 'Forever Wars' and the cost of supporting Ukraine.
Trump has been signalling a challenge to the Neo-con orthodoxy for some time. In September 2024 AP reported him responding:
"Trump argued Ukraine should have made concessions to Russian President Vladimir Putin in the months before Russia’s February 2022 attack, declaring that even “the worst deal would’ve been better than what we have now.”".
He went further:
"Trump laid blame for the conflict on President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, his Democratic rival in November. He said Biden “egged it all on” by pledging to help Ukraine defend itself rather than pushing it to cede territory to Russia.".
Consensus ossified into orthodoxy
German Defence Minister reacted to Trump’s move to negotiate with Putin. The FT reported that:
"“What the negotiation results will look like is still unclear. It is unfortunate...that Trump has already made public concessions to Putin before negotiations have even begun,”".
"He warned that it would be “naive” to believe that the threat from Moscow would abate after a peace accord."
John Lough, an associate fellow at Chatham House’s Russia and Eurasia Program commented:
“The understanding that Europe is going to be treated in a very different way by this administration is something that’s left European leaders stunned,”.
The inherent danger of a consensus, especially one that has existed for some time, is that it can ossify into an orthodoxy.
Judging by the reaction of European elites and political classes, this orthodoxy has taken on something immutable - akin to the law of gravity.
New turn for American capitalism
Donald Trump along with other sections of the American capitalist class have concluded two things:
- The U.S does not have the resources to, "fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars"
- China with its growing economic might is the main threat to American global dominance.
The new strategy, Pivot to China
There's no mystery to what Trump is doing, he is trying to complete a task that Barack Obama failed to do - A 'Pivot to Asia'. He has no choice but to make the Russian/Ukraine conflict a problem for the Europeans. But not before the U.S extracts its payback!
Under Trump the U.S administration has made access to rare earth minerals a priority.
The U.S is the leading technological power but it has a problem. Significant amounts of the mineral resources and production needed in technology are controlled by rivals.
China accounts for about 60% of global rare earth production and holds approximately 37% of the world's rare earth reserves.
Russia has the world's fifth-largest reserves of rare earth metals.
Ukraine is also rich in mineral reserves but Russia controls around 70% of it. Russia also controls more than 50% of Ukraine's rare earth mineral resources.
 |
| A map provided by Ukrainian group UnitedMedia 24 |
Trump has been pushing Zelensky hard for a deal over access to minerals in Ukraine. In a statement on 19th February, he said:
"Zelensky better move fast or he is not going to have a Country left. Gotta move. Got to move because the war is going in the wrong direction.".
The urgency and impatience from Trump are with good cause. Russia has been slowly advancing in areas rich with mineral resources.
Reuters was reporting that day (19th February) that Russian troops were within four miles of Shevchenko in Donetsk, a major lithium deposit.
This explains the speed that Trump has moved on ripping up the consensus. The pivot to China will be undermined if the U.S can't access and control more of the world's supply of rare earth and other critical minerals.
The U.S also hopes that some reproachment with Russia will loosen it from China's orbit. Russia probably would like to lessen its reliance on China as well.
The U.S' pivot to China will probably not be smooth. There is still considerable domestic opposition to the pivot away from Europe. On top of that it still faces intractable problems in the middle east that will continue to consume considerable resources.
Class position
Geopolitical conflicts often arise from the competition between capitalist nations for resources and markets, leading to wars and economic instability.
It is the working class that pays the highest price in lives and possessions.
Ukraine has become the plaything of the 'great powers', dividing the spoils between themselves.
Socialists should oppose any deal that robs the Ukrainian people of their resources.
Those resources including state owned enterprises and agriculture should be put under democratic workers’ control. Not looted by oligarchs and western multi-nationals.
Birthing pains of a New World Order
The world is entering a period of great upheaval and instability. There will be sharp and sudden turns in events. The forces of dark reaction in the shape of the far right are beginning to stalk the developed world.
There is first of all a crisis of world capitalism. It is no longer able or willing to provide the basic necessities of life for large swaths of the population.
Many of the elites, political classes and some in the labour movement have been disorientated by the impact of the transition from a unipolar world to a multi-polar world.
It is not our job to choose one geopolitical interest over another. Our starting point is always, what is in the best interest of the working class? What will advance or best defend the interests of the class?
It's important any analysis and action are based on a class analysis. That gives socialists the advantage of foresight over astonishment.
Gary Hollands 25th February 2025
