The Great Powers Are Playing by Raw Force Again

142 countries have declared their support for China's efforts to achieve "national reunification" with Taiwan. Of those, 89 nations didn't even specify that this reunification should be peaceful. What does this tell us about where the world is heading?

Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine. The United States abducting Venezuela's president. Donald Trump's public musings about annexing Greenland. These seemingly disparate events all point in the same direction: after decades of Western dominance, economic globalization, and expanding multilateral institutions, the ostentatious exercise of raw military power is back at the center of world politics.

Geopolitics Never Really Left the Building

When the Cold War ended, geopolitical language seemed to fade. The expansion of multilateral institutions and global trade suggested that brute power politics had given way to cooperation and rules-based order. But geopolitics never actually went away.

Major powers continued to shape and control foreign territories, directly or indirectly, particularly to secure strategic influence and access to resources. What changed was the packaging. After the fall of the iron curtain, military interventions were wrapped in the language of counterterrorism, democracy promotion, or humanitarian protection rather than naked territorial ambition.

The United States, often with NATO allies, intervened in numerous countries. Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were framed as defensive or moral imperatives while multilateral cooperation remained central to U.S. foreign policy rhetoric. Democracy, free trade, and human rights were presented as guiding principles, even when reality diverged sharply from those ideals. And when international law was bent or broken, governments felt compelled to justify their actions.

The Brazen Return of Spheres of Influence

What we're witnessing now isn't the return of geopolitics per se, but the reappearance of overt geopolitics – a style of major power politics that doesn't bother hiding behind international law or multilateral norms.

Russia's invasion of Ukraine exemplifies this shift. While Moscow has long viewed much of the post-Soviet space as its backyard, under Vladimir Putin these claims have become a manifest dimension of Russian foreign policy. The Kremlin openly seeks to reassert dominance over parts of Eastern Europe, framing this ambition as a matter of national security.

Under Trump, the United States has increasingly adopted similar logic. In its latest national security strategy, Washington openly claims dominance over the Western Hemisphere, echoing the 19th-centuryMonroe Doctrine. Venezuela has been the most striking example of a Trump-led America openly doing what it deems best for its national interests, but it's unlikely to be the last.

For weeks, it seemed like Greenland – and thus the territory of another U.N. member state – could well be next. Traditional U.S. allies pointed to the danger of NATO disintegration should Washington decide to forcefully take control of Denmark's autonomous region. Trump, however, continued to insist that America should "own" Greenland, allegedly to defend it against Russia and China.

China as the Unlikely Multilateral Champion

Ironically, the Trump administration's embrace of spheres of influence may ultimately benefit China. Compared with Trump's America, Xi Jinping's China can present itself as the only major power still interested in protecting multilateralism.

China has repeatedly emphasized that multilateral cooperation – particularly the U.N. Charter – plays a central role in its vision of international order. Compared with Trump's disdain for the binding nature of international agreements, criticism of Beijing's attempts to reinterpret international human rights norms or limit liberal-leaning multilateral bureaucracies appears almost negligible.

Thanks to Trump's endorsement of overt geopolitics, China's appeal as a multilateral partner has markedly increased, even if many in Western capitals disagree with Beijing's policy preferences.

Taiwan and the "Reunification" Window

The U.S. turn to overt geopolitics is set to further one of Beijing's most cherished objectives: "national reunification" with Taiwan. While Ukraine and Denmark are U.N. member states and widely recognized as sovereign nations, Taiwan is neither.

Since 1971, when Beijing took over China's seat at the United Nations from Taipei, the island has been without U.N. membership. The People's Republic of China has been remarkably successful in making the vast majority of U.N. member states endorse some sort of One China policy.

As the Lowy Institute noted, only 11 – mostly tiny – U.N. member states currently recognize Taiwan. All other states recognize Beijing instead, with 142 countries endorsing the PRC's sovereignty over Taiwan. Crucially, 89 countries support efforts by China to "achieve national reunification" without specifying that these efforts should be peaceful.

In case of a full-scale Chinese attack on Taiwan, the United States and some allies might still try to support Taipei. But compared to Russia's war against Ukraine and U.S. attacks against Venezuela, the widespread endorsement of One China logic makes Beijing's claim appear far more legitimate. The global outcry over a PRC invasion of Taiwan would likely be considerably less audible than it would have been a decade – or even a few months – ago.

An Uncomfortable New Reality

For most states, this explicit return to sphere-of-influence logic is deeply troubling. Countries across Africa and other parts of the Global South have long understood that sovereign equality is a chimera when faced with great power interests. But the current moment represents something qualitatively different: major powers are no longer even pretending to respect the multilateral norms they once claimed to champion.

With their "great space" fantasies reminiscent of 19th and 20th-century imperialism, Putin and Trump might have done an invaluable service to Xi and his ambition to go down in history as the leader who achieved "the complete reunification of the motherland."