Over two years since I first pronounced World War 2.5, primarily due to the increasing intensities and dimensions of wars and conflicts in different regions. The Russia-Ukraine war is likely to enter its fourth year, and the Gaza genocide continues without any meaningful break. Syria is being raised to the ground, and Yemen is the next target. Iran keeps guessing about its own time. Who is to blame for this morass? The flawed international system favours the relatively stronger states or the weak and corrupt leadership of the developing countries. If the interests of the state are of paramount importance based on the realist paradigm, why should the developing states not follow the same for themselves, and their leaders serve the purpose of the stronger states? This question will never be answered by any leader, serving or former, from any developing state. There is little debate among academics and practitioners that power is primarily acquired to influence the behaviour of other states, be they friendly or adversarial. However, what remains to be debated is the methodologies adopted by the relatively stronger states to influence the behaviour of the relatively weaker or smaller states. Soon after World War II, the US-led Western countries adopted an anti-communist or containment of communism narrative and managed to control their former colonies through the installed regimes. Their control over most of the former African colonies is still in place even though China has started to make inroads through its bold diplomacy and economic incentives under the Belt and Road Initiatives (BRI). Power is primarily acquired to influence the behaviour of other states, be they friendly or adversarial. Under President Xi Jinping’s bold leadership, China launched a global infrastructure development plan called BRI in 2013. The projects under the BRI include “connecting people, financial integration, infrastructure connectivity, policy coordination, and unimpeded trade.” The BRI, known as the One Belt One Road and the New Silk Road, is expected to complete its objectives by 2049. The projects under BRI span more than 150 countries and 30 international organisations. According to a World Bank report, the BRI increased trade by 4.1 percent and foreign investment by five per cent. Moreover, it has dramatically helped the host countries reduce poverty by creating at least 400,000 jobs. Back to US-led Western narratives of the Cold War era, which succeeded in breaking up the erstwhile Soviet Union in its quest to influence extra-regional states, such as in the Middle East, South Asia, South East Asia, and Africa. However, in the process, it ignored China’s rise of China; the alliance is faced with a more significant challenge than before because Russia has consolidated itself since the breakup of the Soviet Union, and China has quietly risen to a level not anticipated by the US-led Western powers. Therefore, the enduring rivalries among the more considerable powers will continue in the coming decades, but with a different opponent. The US-led Western powers will now face China, which has a different philosophy of acquiring and employing power. China’s differing political philosophy is already showing promise for its rising global aspirations, as it has successfully overtaken Japan as the second-largest economy and is now challenging the US to top the list of largest economies by 2028. Militarily, the US will continue to enjoy the status of history’s best-equipped and most potent force in the coming decades until China competes for the slot in that domain too. However, Chinese leadership does not consider military competition a priority, which is perhaps the right thing to do now. Perhaps, this is one reason that China, despite active disputes in the South China Sea, Taiwan and India, does not talk of resolving any of its conflicts using military power. In my opinion, China would prefer to keep Russia on the military front and continue to develop its economy so that it has enough surplus to invest in modernizing its military in the coming decades. Perhaps this is one reason why China has gone the extra mile to support Russia in its war against Ukraine, knowing fully well that the US-led NATO is actively supporting Ukrainian forces in their training and latest military equipment. It is evident that enduring rivalry for the status of superpower will continue even at the cost of destroying the relatively smaller and weaker states, particularly in the Middle East and South Asia. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Gaza, and even Ukraine will never be the same again. The only reason behind this madness is the acquisition of more and more power to influence the behaviour of the other states. China does it through its soft power, whereas US-led Western powers are continuing the old-styled use of hard power through sanctions, compellence, regime change, and, if needed, physical violence. The writer of this article has authored three international books: “Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan” “South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace” and “Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War.”