The events in the eastern Mediterranean today are a clear indication that Turkey is gradually shedding the cloak of dependency in favour of a relationship that is based on partnership with international powers.
Since 2008, political observers and commentators have said that America is withdrawing from its role as the only global superpower, and this coincided with a speculation about the return of a multipolar world, as was the norm before World War II. Although there is disagreement about the extent of American withdrawal, there is general agreement on the decline of American influence, especially under the current president, who has made this decline very obvious, prompting America’s allies to look for alternatives.
The US disengagement automatically leaves a huge global vacuum that becomes clear with every international crisis and regional conflict, and since a political vacuum cannot remain for so long, major and medium powers are moving in to fill the global void. But can they replace Washington’s influence?
Washington’s usual rival is, without doubt, Russia. Since 2008, when Moscow supported the separatists of Abkhazia and South Ossetia against the European-backed government of Georgia, Russia’s project to regain its superpower status has been visible, and then it passed through Ukraine, Syria, Libya and Afghanistan where Moscow intervened in various ways.
These interventions tested the strength of Washington’s alliances, but despite the best efforts, there are limits to Russia’s military and political capabilities.
Despite the strengths of Russian army, it does not have a thriving, solid economy like the US. Despite Moscow’s success in achieving its goals in Syria, it resorted to measures to reduce expenditure, and the Russian economy is not in a state of real growth, especially due to low oil prices. Vladimir Putin has succeeded in forming a network of alliances that provide him with a political cover, but these alliances include only fragile and failed states or small players which can be managed without major risks. A more prosperous economy and wider alliances would have boosted Moscow’s profile.
China is considered the most likely candidate to succeed Washington, or at least share the stage internationally. The Chinese policy before was based on a principle of isolationism and non-interference in international conflicts, but this gradually began to change with the current president, whose government is known for its military postures in the China Sea, taking an aggressive stance in many disputes, eliciting the ire of its neighbours who happen to be US allies. This had irked the Obama administration, which placed confronting China among its priorities. But, like the rest of the files, they left the issue pending and the Trump administration, whose hallmark was confusion, effectively gave China greater opportunities to pursue its expansionist agenda. The Belt and Road project and the Chinese military presence in the African continent marked a strategic rise in China’s importance as a great power.
There is still a long way to go for China, which despite having a mighty army, still needs to build its military capabilities. It has only two aircraft carriers to face 43 of Washington, not to mention the huge difference in the number of military bases outside the borders of the country. While Beijing has one in Djibouti, America has hundreds of bases, numbering 500, according to some estimates, spread over 70 countries in all continents except Antarctica, and 7 fleets roaming the seas of the world.
At a secondary level, we find major regional players seeking to fill the void in their regions without necessarily competing with Washington. For example, India, which continues to strengthen its alliance with Washington, has begun to choke its neighbours again, and in this context comes the recent crisis with Pakistan and the border tension with China. The Indian ruling party is nationalistic and has an open appetite for confronting opponents and is pursuing expansion in the immediate surroundings.
We also have Turkey, which Erdogan has made a regional power again. Turkey faces the axis of Saudi Arabia and the UAE in the Middle East, while it aggressively opposes the policies of the Zionist entity. It supports the reconciliation governments in Libya, Syria and Iraq, but at the same time seeks to liberate itself from the shackles of the post-world war agreements. Developments in the Eastern Mediterranean today are an indication that Turkey is gradually removing the mantle of dependency in favour of the mantle of partnership with international powers. And how things have changed! In 1996, when an American intervention via a telephone call could reduce tension with Greece, today, Turkey is standing strong, with strict demands, and whoever intervenes, like Germany, does so within the framework of negotiations and not in the form of dictations.
There is no doubt that the global situation is much more complicated than presented here, but these represent a sample of attempts to fill the void which will increase tension in the world. There will be a lot of interplay and competition between international and regional powers, as part of attempts to fill the void. We have to mention that no structural change in the international system takes place without resetting the existing order, and armed conflicts and wars are part of this realignments.
The criteria for success for smaller countries in the coming years are mastering the game of balance in order to provide an appropriate deterrence before the greedy and an appropriate, added value for allies.