Since the international system is evolving rapidly, its age-old term, International Relations (IR), should also have a new name: International Revenge (IR). Let me explain before the IR theorists and practitioners declare me a proponent of the sub-discipline of strategic studies.
IR, in theory and practice, are considered essential among societies much before states became the unitary units of the international system. The relations between communities and societies formed the basis of the IR since time immemorial. However, the present international order, which is chaotic and anarchic, is failing to act as a bridge between states, and the race for resources is creating more divisions than among states that were once considered inseparable, socially, culturally, and economically.
While the U.S. intervention in Venezuela was still in the news, President Trump’s desire to acquire Greenland has hit its European allies harder than expected. Trump has successfully created a wedge among the EU’s leadership, which was once considered a model of IR among regional alliances.
Elsewhere in the Middle East, until a few years ago, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) were a part of a larger coalition in Yemen’s war, but now Saudi Arabia has bombed an Emirati weapons shipment in the port of Mukalla on December 30, 2025, to eliminate its support for the separatists.
There are more conflicts among states across different regions than cooperative agreements. It appears that relations have been directed toward revenge rather than toward building bridges among the states. Nearly all wars in the 21st Century have been between the Unequal Military Powers (UMPs). On the one side was the U.S. alone or with its coalition partners, and on the other was usually a poorly equipped Islamic country. The result was obvious. Afghanistan and Iraq were destroyed and will never be the same. Many other states in the Middle East, such as Yemen, Syria, and Palestine, were also faced with external interventions.
At times, it appears as if the global powers are out to take revenge on the decolonisation process, and a neo-colonisation seems to be evolving differently. The global powers have not only monopolised the technology but also made the developing countries dependent on them.
I have consistently assessed that we are in World War 2.5 for the last two years, and it can expand horizontally and vertically with one small mistake due to a technical malfunction or strategic miscalculation.
The Western world continues to defame China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which the developing world sees as a blessing in disguise. In fact, China’s BRI, launched in 2013 by the incumbent President Xi Jinping, aimed to connect China with various regions and came at a time when the developing world was in dire need of heavy infrastructure investment. Therefore, it was not surprising that the entire developing world quickly jumped on the Chinese train and put forward their wish list of development projects.
China offered support in all domains: financial, technical, and technological. The projects included road and rail infrastructure, bridges and underpasses, ports and airports, agriculture and environmental, and education and health. The developing world needed all of it, and hence, the BRI projects were welcomed by all the host nations. The beauty of BRI projects lies in their investment across all regions, regardless of the host nation’s ideology, strategy, or political orientation.
However, when I refer to IR as the international revenge, I mean the sanctions imposed by the U.S. on all states that even think of having a different thought. The Trump Administration is not even allowing its allies to think differently, and there is no way that a relatively smaller state can dare to do that. How long this kind of international governance, if I may refer to it, will continue like this, is difficult to predict. However, one thing is for sure: the rise and fall of the great empire dearly depends on the mistakes of its leaders. Will the revengeful governance of the developed West continue similarly, or will it change with the evolving world order, which may become multilateral in the coming decades, is yet to be seen.
Honestly, I am not comfortable with this situation, especially given that I have consistently assessed that we are in World War 2.5 for the last two years, and it can expand horizontally and vertically with one small mistake due to a technical malfunction or strategic miscalculation. I sincerely urge the world leaders to join hands and make the U.S leadership realise the grave consequences of having too many wars and conflicts at the same time and in different regions.
The writer of this article has authored four international books: Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan, South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace, Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War, and Diplomacy and Deterrence.”
The writer of this article has authored four international books: Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan, South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace, Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War, and Diplomacy and Deterrence.”