Monday Commentary: The end of empires?

This Monday Commentary was  written by Dr Dennis Sammut, Director of LINKS Europe and Managing Editor of commonspace.eu

Empires tend to self-destruct. They peak to greatness and military might, and then gradually decline, either as a result of military defeats, or internal discord, or more likely, a mix of both. Decline can take along time. The Roman Empire, first split in  two and the Eastern part survived until the fall of Constantinople in 1453. The British and French empires, that dominated the world in the last part of the 19th and early 20th centuries never recovered from WWII. They emerged victorious but weakened. The formal end of the British empire happened with the withdrawal from the Gulf and South Yemen in the 1970s. The British left because they simply could not afford to stay. The emerging states, roughly the six GCC states and Southern Yemen (an independent country until 1991), did not even bother to join the British Commonwealth.

These days we call empires superpowers, and for 30 years there has only been only one – the United States. It remains the richest and best armed country n the world, but its ability to act as global arbiter and policeman is fading away. The current Iran war has exposed the limits of American power, to the incredulity of friends and foe alike.

The international system does not like vacuums. What is left empty is often quickly filled by something else. People look at China as the new superpower, that will fill whatever space US decline will empty. It will not happen. China’s economic resurgence is nothing short of miraculous. It has the second largest economy in the world, and growing. Its armed forces have gone through a major transformation, and are designed primarily to deal with a confrontation with the United States. Under president Xi, in the “new era”, China is ready to make its mark on the world. It will, and is already, a global player that must be taken seriously. But it lacks the ability to be a global hegemon. There are several reasons: first, it will always be seen by the US as the primary threat, and even a weakened US can still take on China. China will spend much of its effort at managing this. Second, China is boxed in, not only through its maritime arteries, but also through its two strong Asian neighbours: Japan and India. The Chinese navy, and a robust and assertive Chinese policy in the South China Sea is trying to mitigate this weakness, but  with mixed results.  This means that China cannot even become a hegemon in Asia, let alone the world; Third is the issue of Taiwan, which remans China’s priority, and which will always be a distraction; and fourthly, last but not least, the Chinese political model is unattractive to everyone else. The reaction of most nations when confronted by the Chinese model is, “Thank you, but No thank you”.

In this situation the likely scenario for the rest of this century is likely to be the absence of a global hegemon, and the rise, or consolidation of strong big powers, assisted by smaller but not insignificant regional powers, with areas of competition, where conflict is likely as big powers, assisted by regional powers, fight each other through proxies.

One can already see this taking shape: The United States has already identified the Western Hemisphere (Latin America, the Caribbean etc.) as its primary area of interest. Its adventure in Venezuela, and increased threats to Cuba are part of it. The noise around Canada and Greenland can be seen in this context too.

In Asia the predominant power will be China, but its role will be contested by India and Japan, and in Oceania, by Australia.

China has a number of allies that it will use increasingly, even though they come with their own baggage. Interestingly all three are nuclear powers: Russia, North Korea and Pakistan. In all three China needs to ensure it will use them, and not let them use it – not an easy task. Russia’s Putin was in Beijing last week; president Xi is going to North Korea next week, so the work is ongoing.

In between the Western Hemisphere and Asia is Europe, emerging slowly but surely, as a power in its own right. At the core is the EU, which has pledged to spend billions on defence going forward. Very much part of the European configuration, are the UK, Turkiye, and increasingly Ukraine.

Russia remains the biggest threat to Europe, but after Ukraine Russia will no longer be an independent player. In the Arctic, Russian and Chinese interests will join forces, and Europe will have to make a stand

This still leave the issue of the “near abroad”, Russia’s former Soviet Empire. Europe and Russia will increasingly see the Caucasus and Central Asia as contested regions, where they will confront each other.

The situation in the Middle East will not calm down completely, even if the US and Iran make a deal. Iran is a genie that has come out of the bottle. It is impossible to put it back. Israel has big regional ambitions that are not going to be muted soon. In between the GCC countries need to forge a future independent of both. The Middle East will remain contested territory for influence and power, and for a slice of the large financial cake, with the big powers, US, Europe and China, and some regional big powers, such as Turkiye, UK, Israel,  India and Pakistan, competing.

In Africa, we are already seeing wars of terrible destruction on going, and this is likely to get worse as outsiders use proxies to hurt each other.

One can argue that Artificial Intelligence and other high tech developments might change all these consideration, but this is an area where big powers and important regional powers are already competing aggressively.

Finally, despite all the justified pessimism can one still have hope in international institutions.

On Tuesday (26 May), the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) will hold a high-level open debate on “Upholding the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter and Strengthening the UN-Centred International System”. It is a Chinese initiative, coinciding with their chairmanship of the Council in May. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi will chair the meeting, during which UN Secretary-General António Guterres is expected to brief.

Security Council Report, an authoritative publication on the work of UNSC says:

“Tuesday’s open debate takes place at a time of heightened uncertainty about the future of the multilateral system and ongoing mutual recriminations between the major powers about their failure to adhere to international law, including to the Charter, and the resulting adverse effects on vulnerable populations. The Security Council, the UN body entrusted with the primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security, is more divided now than at any point in the post-Cold War era, struggling in recent years to adequately address many pressing conflicts on its agenda—for example, Haiti, Gaza, Myanmar, Sudan, and Ukraine—notwithstanding the significant time and energy it devotes to these issues. Member states and regional organisations have increasingly taken on a leading role in diplomatic efforts to resolve crises in places like Gaza, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and Sudan, largely sidelining the UN in these processes.”

It is good that countries ponder this topic, but world opinion must be more vocal in making the case for multilateralism. The empire system must not be reconstructed in any form.

source: This Monday Commentary was  written by Dr Dennis Sammut, Director of LINKS Europe and Managing Editor of commonspace.eu

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Uzbekistan strengthens its relations with China and US

Uzbekistan strengthens its relations with China and US

In recent days, Uzbekistan welcomed the Chinese and American governments in quick succession. During Chinese Premier Li Qiang’s visit on 17-18 October, the Uzbek presidential administration said that joint projects backed by firm agreements had reached nearly $60 billion. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio then arrived in Samarkand for C5+1 talks, accompanied at the time by American business leaders seeking contracts, particularly in critical minerals. During the visit, Uzbekistan announced 54 agreements covering trade, investment, and technology. The agreements are said to be worth a total of $12 billion, according to Uzbekistan’s Ministry of Investment, Industry and Trade. However, China still accounts for 23% of Uzbekistan’s foreign trade in January-August 2026, while US goods trade with Uzbekistan totalled at $1.05 billion in 2025, which is less than a fifteenth of the value of its trade with China. Rubio said Washington was not asking Central Asian countries to stop cooperating with other partners, but would instead compete for investment. Tashkent is likely to welcome investment from both sides, but the trade gap shows how challenging it will be if it were to decrease its dependence on Beijing. “Chinese Premier Li Qiang visited Uzbekistan on October 17–18, just ahead of United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who arrived in Samarkand on October 18 with a delegation of American business leaders seeking new contracts. While China already has a substantial presence in Uzbek manufacturing and energy, Washington is seeking to expand American involvement in critical minerals and technology. The visits highlight the growing competition between the world’s two largest economies for influence in Central Asia. On October 17, President Shavkat Mirziyoyev received Li Qiang. According to the Uzbek presidential administration, the portfolio of joint projects backed by firm agreements has reached nearly $60 billion. More than 6,000 joint ventures with Chinese participation have been established in Uzbekistan. (...) Construction of the China–Kyrgyzstan–Uzbekistan railway was another topic of discussion. Work officially began in December 2024. The route will cross mountainous areas of Kyrgyzstan and connect the railway networks of China and Uzbekistan. The 304-kilometer section through Kyrgyzstan alone is estimated to cost $4.7 billion and will require 50 bridges and 29 tunnels. (...) On October 19, Rubio attended talks in Samarkand under the C5+1 format, bringing together the U.S. and Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. Rubio said nearly 300 American businesses were represented in Samarkand. Companies were discussing agreements potentially worth billions of dollars, with concrete announcements expected following the meetings. Among Washington’s priorities are critical minerals used in advanced technologies, including electronics and batteries.”

Popular

Editor's choice
Interview
Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Thursday Interview: Murad Muradov

Today, commonspace.eu starts a new regular weekly series. THURSDAY INTERVIEW, conducted by Lauri Nikulainen, will host  persons who are thinkers, opinion shapers, and implementors in their countries and spheres. We start the series with an interview with Murad Muradov, a leading person in Azerbaijan's think tank community. He is also the first co-chair of the Action Committee for a new Armenian-Azerbaijani Dialogue. Last September he made history by being the first Azerbaijani civil society activist to visit Armenia after the 44 day war, and the start of the peace process. Speaking about this visit Murad Muradov said: "My experience was largely positive. My negative expectations luckily didn’t play out. The discussions were respectful, the panel format bringing together experts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Turkey was particularly valuable during the NATO Rose-Roth Seminar in Yerevan, and media coverage, while varied in tone, remained largely constructive. Some media outlets though attempted to represent me as more of a government mouthpiece than an independent expert, which was totally misleading.  Overall, I see these initiatives as important steps in rebuilding trust and normalising professional engagement. The fact that soon a larger Azerbaijani civil society visits to Armenia followed, reinforces the sense that this process is moving in the right direction." (click the image to read the interview in full)