The year 2024 was marked by dramatic escalation of conflicts across the globe. In our immediate vicinity here in the Middle East, Lebanon and Syria joined the expanding circle of confrontation between Israel and Iran. The world was stunned when Hezbollah signed a humiliating ceasefire with Israel – and a few weeks later, the Assad regime, which had ruled Syria with an iron fist for half a century, shattered into pieces under a rebel offensive.
In Eastern Europe, Russia and Ukraine continued their dance of destruction and death brought by the Russian invasion in 2022, and for the first time, Ukrainian army forces entered Russia's sovereign territory in the Kursk region and managed to hold it. In Southeast Asia and Africa, local conflicts ignited into full-scale wars – and behind all this unrest lies the fear of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan, one that would put the Chinese giant face-to-face with the American superpower.
These various military confrontations are all local and based on separate histories and politics – but there are many common threads between the different fronts, and as time passes, these characteristics become increasingly clear. It begins with similar combat characteristics: the use of UAVs, drones, and ballistic missiles, simultaneous documentation uploaded to social media, and intensifies with media reports about Ukrainian intelligence assistance to rebels in Syria, or Russian forces' activity supporting the RSF organization in Sudan. Who could have imagined five years ago that North Korean soldiers would be fighting on Russian soil against Ukrainian forces charging on American tanks?
During the past year, regional conflicts became increasingly global, and fears grew of a total conflagration that would pit Western nations against a Russia-China-Iran axis in a war unlike anything the world has seen in many decades. To understand the developing crisis, with the end of 2024 and Donald Trump's entry to the White House approaching – let's examine some of the central arenas, and some less prominent ones, in the global crisis.
The Chinese Giant Threatens
Beijing's aspiration to annex Taiwan, which maintains an independent and democratic regime, is not a secret or suspicion, but rather the declared policy of the Chinese government since the 1950s. Due to American backing for the small nation, Beijing previously avoided invasion attempts that could have ended in military disaster, preferring to try to bring the rebellious government in Taipei closer through a combination of diplomacy and veiled threats.
However, in recent years, and especially since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, Chinese threats have become less and less veiled. In the past decade, China has built an impressive naval force which, although never tested in battle, its size and superiority over Taipei's armed forces inspire confidence in Chinese authorities, and the idea of an amphibious operation to defeat the small nation seems less and less far-fetched.
While experts predicted that the Chinese were preparing for an invasion in 2027, Beijing began to intensify its naval and aerial exercises around the island in the past year, involving hundreds of aircraft and dozens of ships. The Chinese even practiced landing, ground force deployment, and seizure of government centers in the country. Additionally, a Chinese maritime militia began operating in coastal areas and islands near Taiwan, aiming to accustom the Taiwanese and Americans to a permanent Chinese presence in the area and "blind" them to Beijing's military actions.
It's important to note that a conflict between China and Taiwan, even without any foreign intervention, could be one of the largest and bloodiest the world has seen since World War II. Both sides have significant military capabilities, and if they choose to use them fully – the fighting could be long, difficult, and very costly. Such a conflict could also lead to an unprecedented economic crisis in the 21st century and the destruction of Taiwan's semiconductor industry, on which the global tech industry heavily relies. The question now is how much can the Taiwanese expect help from the Trump administration in case of a Chinese invasion, and more importantly – how much do those in Beijing think the president-elect will come to the aid of the small nation.
Russia-Ukraine Still Here
It's easy to forget that until three years ago, the possibility of a major conventional war in Europe seemed like an empty threat, meant to frighten voters in Western nations. But the Russia-Ukraine war is expected to enter its fourth year soon, the casualty rate is only increasing, and no real end to the fighting appears on the horizon.
In the past six months, the Russian army managed to capture extensive territories in eastern Ukraine, but paid for it in a terrible blood price that will make it difficult to continue fighting in the same manner without completely changing its recruitment system. Military bloggers estimated last week that the Russian army's casualty rate in a single week stands at more than 1,600 killed, not including wounded or missing – more than all IDF casualties since October 7. On the other hand, the Ukrainians are also suffering from an acute manpower shortage, and signs of war weariness are strongly felt in the country.
Despite this, or perhaps because of Kyiv's dire situation, the Ukrainians' success in holding onto the Kursk region in southwestern Russia, on Moscow's sovereign territory, is a severe blow to Russian prestige. Ukrainian control of the enclave will not allow Moscow to "compromise" on freezing the conflict as part of an agreement imposed by the incoming president, Trump. In fact, the Russians' problem may be even greater. Russia's economy, which has shown great resilience during the past three years, is beginning to show signs of breaking. The interest rate Moscow dictated is among the highest in the world, but the ruble's value continues to plummet, just as the foreign currency reserves Putin accumulated before the war are running out. With both sides battered, the possibility that Trump will at least succeed in bringing them to the negotiating table seems more likely than ever.
Collapse of the Shiite Axis
No arena in the world saw such dramatic upheavals in the past year as the Middle East. The "Shiite Crescent" – the axis Iran built from Beirut, Damascus, and Baghdad – was damaged and broken in an unprecedented way, after Hezbollah was severely struck by Israel and signed a ceasefire agreement, losing thousands of fighters and suffering major destruction of its strongholds in Lebanon and its military arsenal.
If the outcome of the confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah surprised the world – what happened a week later completely stunned it: In just over a week, a major rebel offensive managed to topple the Assad regime, which had ruled Syria for five decades, since the days of the father, Hafez Assad. Now, instead of looking at Israel's military activity in Gaza, the world's eyes are fixed on Damascus, where former al-Qaida member Abu Mohammad al-Jolani is working to establish a new government and bridge between the jihadist ideology that brought him to power and the pragmatic needs of rebuilding Syria.
The primary beneficiary of the sudden change in Syria is Turkey, which trained many of the rebel organizations and assisted them, maintaining strong connections with them. Ankara has already begun trying to cash in on the rebels' victory dividend, sending forces under its command to attack the Kurdish autonomy in the northeast of the country.
While a new regional order is being built in the Levant – south of there, on the Red Sea shores, things appear to be moving toward a boiling point. The Houthi rebels in Yemen, a pro-Iranian organization controlling the capital Sanaa and large parts of the country, continue to paralyze international maritime trade in the Red Sea, fire at US Navy ships, and launch ballistic missiles and UAVs toward Israel. This hot potato will roll straight into the lap of the new President Trump, who may seek a solution to the great embarrassment that Houthi rampaging is causing to American prestige in the region and to international shipping.
Desert Storm: Sudan
The civil war in Sudan can serve as a good example of enormous, violent, and unimaginably cruel events occurring under the world's media radar and bursting into consciousness only when something dramatic happens. The bloody war has been raging since April 2023, when forces of the Sovereignty Council head, General Abdel Fattah al-Burhan, began fighting against RSF organization members, a militia formerly loyal to the government but which rebelled with support from the UAE and Russia.
The UN estimates that between 60,000 and 150,000 people have been killed in less than a year of fighting, and that seven million people have become internally displaced as a result of the battles. For almost half a year, the fighting situation remained static, while the rebels controlled the outskirts of the capital Khartoum and the western part of the country. However, in recent months, al-Burhan's forces managed to push the rebels from extensive areas, including around the capital, and inflict heavy casualties on them.
Although the war receives sparse coverage in global media, if at all, it is intrinsically linked to power struggles between superpowers and other burning conflicts. Fighters from the Russian Wagner Force mercenary company have been documented countless times assisting the rebels, and Ukrainian intelligence personnel even published videos of them attacking Russians on Sudanese soil. Events in Syria also influence the war in Sudan. The possibility of Russian forces withdrawing from Syria could make it difficult for Moscow to continue its regular activities in Africa, forcing it to reduce its support for its allies in Sudan.
Ukraine in the Jungles: Myanmar
The past year was particularly bloody in Southeast Asia as well, with the civil war in Myanmar raging and turning into a life-or-death struggle between dozens of rebel organizations in the country and the military junta, which has ruled it with an iron fist since the military coup of 2021.
In October 2023, several large rebel organizations, in prior coordination and with assistance from foreign countries, launched a major offensive against the junta's rule and managed to take control of extensive parts of the country. The rebels employed drones, UAVs, and shoulder-launched missiles, while demonstrating skills and capabilities observed on battlefields in Ukraine and the Middle East.
The junta declared mandatory conscription of all young men in the country during the summer months, and the forced recruitment caused thousands to flee from junta-controlled territories and seek asylum in regional countries. Others joined the rebel ranks, fueling the endless fighting. Here too, superpower involvement is felt. While Thailand chose to side with several rebel organizations, China armed and operated ethnic Chinese in the north of the country to fight the junta and pressure it. However, in recent months China decided to "switch sides" and aligned with the military junta leader, ordering rebel organizations under its influence to cease offensive activities.
It's hard to say how successful Beijing's gamble was, as the rebels, including those previously supported by China, continue their war against junta rule, and it's possible that China's change of direction came too little too late for the military junta's control.
The Match That Will Ignite the Fire
The transition from the long peace period after the Soviet Union's fall and the end of the Cold War to a period of regional conflicts, and the possibility of a global-scale war erupting, are things military and political experts have been discussing for some time, long before the October 7 events and the major escalation in the Middle East.
Professor Danny Orbach, a military historian from the Hebrew University's History and Asian Studies departments, published an article in July 2023 explaining that the world is on the brink of a war that could collapse the old order, and provides a chilling forecast, "What will come after the war is very hard to know, but it will clearly be more interesting, in the sinister sense of the word, worse, more chaotic.
"World War II began as a series of local conflicts that connected into one war. A local war between Germany and Poland became a regional war, which turned into a European war with Germany's invasion of the USSR. The war became global several months later, when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, and the war between Japan and China connected through the US to the war happening in Europe.
"Today we see three such local conflicts in the world: we see the tension between China and Taiwan, Russia versus Ukraine, and Israel against Iran. The great powers are involved in these conflicts. China is involved in its own and partially in others, Russia is involved in all three, and the US is naturally involved in all three conflicts. The danger is this connection, which could ignite and unite the three arenas into one war," Orbach explains.
If that's not enough, Orbach explains that instability between the superpowers encourages players who were previously excluded from international play to act in ways that could ignite the fire the whole world fears. "For instance, Kim Jong-un might decide that since the world is busy with other matters – this is exactly the right time for him to take major action against the South. It has happened before that such a misunderstanding of the opposing superpower's intentions drew North Korea into an attack. Stalin, who misinterpreted the American Secretary of State's words, assumed that the US would not intervene in case of a North Korean army invasion of the South – a mistaken assumption that brought a bloody war," he says.
Today, such a small mistake is enough to throw the entire world into war. "It's enough that Xi Jinping assumes the US won't intervene because Trump is an isolationist, or because it's preoccupied with events elsewhere, and then Washington decides to intervene," Orbach says with concern. "Beyond destruction and death on an enormous scale, such a war could lead to a reversal of the social and political order that enabled the rise of democracies."
The West and the Barnacle Problem
The old world order, now threatened by the possibility of war, is maintained by America's enormous military capability and the deep pockets of its partners in Europe, Japan, Korea, and other places in the world. However, according to Orbach, the West is entering this dangerous period with one hand tied behind its back. To explain the processes that led to this, Orbach needs a metaphor from the field of maritime and marine biology, comparing the decision-making system in democratic countries to a ship.
"The ship accumulates over time a layer of barnacles, small animals that attach to the vessel's hull, slowing it down and making it harder to maneuver until they're cleaned off. Like the ship, advanced Western democratic countries progress over the years. They accumulate more laws, regulations, rules, and decision-making processes that slow them down and restrict their elected officials' actions. Look how long it takes to add a country to the European Union. How long it takes to supply new weapons to Ukraine, even when they want to do it. How long it takes to approve a civil service worker, how long it takes to do a security check for a new CIA employee. If you check, you'll see it's constantly getting longer. That's because every politician wants to add another law, another transparency regulation, another accessibility regulation, another anti-discrimination regulation. All these together create an increasing burden on decision-making processes and make policy implementation difficult," says the historian.
The process, familiar to almost all of us regarding dealing with state bureaucracy and obstacles, makes it difficult for Western nations to respond to threats quickly and effectively. The problem is indeed clearly evident in the Biden administration's response to threats like the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and the Houthi attack in Yemen on international shipping routes in the Red Sea. The desire and ability to respond forcefully were indeed there – but the long response time and limitations on the nature of response imposed by the barriers diluted the White House's steps, allowed the conflict to drag on, and increased the risk of even greater escalation.
"These problems don't bother the West's rivals, like Russia, Iran, Hezbollah, and China, but they greatly restrict democracies," Orbach maintains. Another problem he raises is the dominance of international law and international institutions in Western powers' actions. "Think, for instance, that during the conflict with Iran, the West might consider recognizing Somaliland's independence – something very difficult according to international law, which forbids recognizing separatists without the parent state's consent. All this makes Western nations slower and more predictable, which could encourage their rivals to take action."
The Trump Card
Donald Trump's entry to the White House, in such a turbulent period, puts a huge question mark over America's commitment to its allies in each and every one of the local and regional conflicts currently taking place in the world. Orbach himself believes this might prove to be a strength, rather than a weakness, for the Western side.
"Trump, more than being an isolationist, is a deal-oriented man. He very much dislikes commitments he doesn't understand the benefit of, he despises the slow action of international institutions, and he likes to reach deals he thinks are good for America," says Orbach. "There are many bad things Trump can do, like getting into fights with foreign countries without real reason, encouraging enemies of the West like Putin and Xi Jinping. The good thing he can do is take steps that will improve America's ability to respond to threats quickly and effectively. Countries will need to explain to Trump why he needs to invest in their defense, and do it themselves. This could shake off decades of laziness and over-reliance on America. It could cause Western nations to rethink their political conventions."
As advice for citizens of a democratic Western nation, Orbach believes that the most important thing to do to allow our state's ship to move forward is to shed the damage caused by identity politics that has spread in the West in recent decades, from both right and left. "For us to have a chance to overcome the challenges that the near future provides, we must put pragmatism as a supreme value, and choose politicians who don't hide behind a mask of identity, but rather offer orderly work plans," he concludes.
