The Fragmentation of Western Politics 

Abstract

International relations are increasingly shaped by assertive actions from powerful states, exemplified by recent US involvement in foreign politics. These interventions set global precedents on sovereignty as limited opposition from other Western nations highlights a lack of enforceable international oversight and a startling capacity for unilateral decision-making by major powers like the US, Russia, and China, challenging the traditional post-WWII order of international cooperation. Under the pressure of political fragmentation and rising nationalism, Western nations are left balancing divergent US priorities, alliance uncertainties, and economic coercion. 

Shifting World Order

The aftermath of the Second World War (WWII) saw a significant transformation in the nature of global conflict. The emergence of nuclear weapons as a central element of international security brought about a powerful deterrent effect. The increasingly interdependent dynamics of the global economy have created further incentives for states to avoid widespread conflict, as economic stability and growth are closely tied to international cooperation and peaceful relations. However, this environment does not eliminate the dangers associated with smaller-scale hostilities. Bilateral conflicts continue to pose a substantial threat, particularly as ideological, territorial, and resource-based tensions escalate. 

The global structure of power is currently experiencing significant upheaval, a period marked by a series of overlapping geopolitical crises that are challenging long-standing political structures and alliances in the Western world. Western politics is increasingly fragmented as far-right rhetoric gains platform and national sovereignty comes under fire. Recent geopolitical tensions echo long-standing power rivalries, regional instabilities, and polarisation, as major powers hegemonic ambitions dominate global conversations.

The cumulative impact of these geopolitical shocks is reshaping the political landscape and altering relationships that have previously been considered stable. The prevailing post-WWII world order, defined by international cooperation, has become undermined by a nationalistic ‘might makes right’ mentality, as seen in the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, the US and Venezuela, and China and Taiwan. The increasingly volatile geopolitical environment has bought uncertainty around the stability of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) alliance between Europe and North America, carrying implications for the future of Western politics. 

The United States as an Inciting Force

The US has historically involved itself in foreign politics, largely driven by economic opportunities and counterterrorism campaigns in the Latin American, Pacific, and Middle Eastern regions. US foreign policy is dominated by an interventionism ideology, with recent actions in South America receiving heightened international attention. 

Europe: The 2025 US National Security Strategy (NSS) calls for ‘cultivating resistance’ to current political trajectories and claimed civilisational decline in European nations, supporting nationalist parties and far-right values. This has been interpreted as an attempt to interfere with European politics and weaken the EU Commission.

Nigeria and Syria: On the 19^th and 25^th of December 2025, the US carried out government authorised military strikes against the Islam State (IS) terrorist organisation in Syria and Nigeria. They are described by Washington officials as a consistent foreign policy approach to Islamic extremism.

Iran: On the 26^{th of} December 2025, Trump announced US willingness to intervene in ongoing regional anti-corruption protests in Iran after its recent currency collapse, prompting Iran officials to respond that such threats ‘cross the line’ and risks pre-emptive military response.

Venezuela: On the 3^{rd of} January 2026, the US carried out unauthorised military strikes on Venezuela, arresting President Nicolás Maduro for narcoterrorism. Following the removal of the head of state, the US announced it would run Venezuela until there can be a judicious transition. This action has been met with widespread condemnation, especially from Eastern powers like China and Russia, with concerns over US intention to use its crude oil reserves and natural resources.

Cuba, Cambodia, and Mexico: The US invasion of Venezuela has left the countries of Cuba, Cambodia and Mexico rattled after President Trump singled them out in a warning of further strikes in the name of national security. The US currently maintains a 15,000-strong military presence in the Caribbean to protect US interests.

Greenland: Discussion around the security priority of the US acquiring Greenland, a semi-autonomous region of NATO member Denmark, has resurfaced. As of the 6^th of January 2025, Trump has been discussing options to gain control over the territory, including use of military force. European allies have strongly opposed this move, with Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen commenting an attack would mean the end of NATO.

A New Standard 

US interference in foreign politics has the potential to reverberate across the globe, influencing the strategic calculations of major powers. It sets a dangerous precedent, establishing the legitimacy of imperialistic interference on weaker nations. Although major power’s ability to enforce control is increasingly constrained by the complexities and contestations of international political and economic forces, the actions taken by the US against Venezuela demonstrate the limits of international policy. 

A lack of foreign opposition in the West would indicate that the US has the capacity to impose unilateral control on a sovereign nation, and that US President Trump can carry out these decisions without democratic oversight. This development underscores the evolving landscape of international relations, where established norms are increasingly challenged by the actions of dominant states. International condemnation over the US’s actions in Venezuela will heavily influence the likelihood of further assaults being carried out. 

China and Taiwan: China’s President Xi Jinping has strong ambitions regarding China’s reunification with independent nation Taiwan. Observing the lack of significant foreign opposition from the West, China perceives the US intervention in Venezuela as a potential blueprint for its own aspirations to reclaim Taiwan. China’s interpretation of the US approach to Venezuela may embolden its resolve in respect of its concerns with international narratives, highlighting the impacts associated not only with imperialistic interference but the lack of enforceable accountability against global superpowers.

Global Resistance

Widespread apprehension over interference linked to conflict escalation and entrenchment of hostilities has encouraged a cautious approach to foreign policy. Despite this caution, there has been clear and broad condemnation for the US’s aggressive measures in Venezuela. Internationally, debate has intensified over US intentions towards Greenland, with significant European opposition against what is perceived as overreach by Washington. 

• At the emergency meeting of the United Nations security council on the 5^th of January 2026, countries including Russia, China, Colombia, Cuba, Mexico, South Africa, and Spain denounced the US attack on Venezuela and the arrest of its head of state. Russia and China have been vocal in their criticism and demands to free Maduro, compared to a much quieter European response.
• On the 6^th of January 2026, European leaders from the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Poland rallied together in support of Denmark and Greenland following discussion of the US taking the Danish territory by force. While Europe has offered a rare rebuke against the US, it seeks to avoid deepening the transatlantic rift.

NATO Uncertainty 

Europe faces the challenge of adapting to these geopolitical shocks to ensure economic and political stability. Intensifying global competition, fiscal restraints, structural fatigue, and political fragmentation increase pressure on key chokepoints like energy realism, industrial policy, and security strategy. Developing strain around the US and Europe’s alliance over the course of the Russo-Ukrainian war signifies the necessity of regional coordination and resilience. 

NATO represents the primary military alliance that unifies Europe and North America against attack, safeguarding the freedom and security for its member states through collective defence and crisis management. US reluctance to maintain long-term defence measures on behalf of Ukraine against Russian invasion, alongside pressure from the Trump Administration over disparity between US and European defence spending, introduced uncertainty over the stability of the alliance. Comments by President Trump over the US annexing Greenland further shakes European confidence, as Trump’s takeover designs on the Danish territory would undermine NATO from within, risking its collapse.

• European Union: In response to the increasingly uncertain political environment and US pressure over NATO, the EU’s security strategy prioritises a significant defence spending push by 2030 to achieve greater strategic autonomy and reduce reliance on the US.
• Russia: The end of NATO would have severe implications for Western security, offering strategic benefits for Russia as a major obstacle to its geopolitical ambitions is removed. Its regional dominance would increase with the internal division of the Western power structure. 

Economic Implications

Global interdependence reflects an economy orientated world structure where the realities of trade, tariffs, and sanctions are cornerstone conflict deterrents and methods of coercion. 

Canada and Mexico: Regional US trade corridors are dominated by nearshoring and supply chain integration efforts with Canada and Mexico. Following the introduction of Trumps tariff policy in early 2025, Canada and Mexico entered a trade war with the US, facing pressure over trade deficit and border security. The US political slide into protectionism and authoritarian rhetoric is a key driver of political and economic risk for its closest trading partners. Since starting his second term as president in 2024, Trump has expressed appeal for the annexation of Canada into the 51^st US state and military intervention in Mexico, further straining relations.  

Europe and the US: The looming risk of a NATO collapse has the potential to trigger severe global economic instability via recession, trade disputes, and shifts in defence spending. The sudden suspension of such a significant security shield may impact US treasury bonds and the US dollar, as the US-EU split redefines political, military, and trade relations. The macro-scale disruption to Western cohesion signifies trade disruption, leading to increased price volatility for key exports as mutual defence commitments dissolve. Increased EU military expenditure may influence national debt and interest rates in the long term if financed by borrowing, while European defence industry expansion offers opportunities for economic growth, job creation, and enhanced supply chain resilience.

Conclusion

The pathways of Western politics established in the post-WWII era have been increasingly worn down by a widespread rise in imperialistic ambitions. As the US enacts more forceful control in the Western Hemisphere, the principles of sovereignty are redefined once more by military might and the foreign policy fear of interference leading to conflict escalation. 

An increasingly volatile international system challenges countries to balance fortifying security and safeguarding national independence with essential foreign coordination and interregional trade agreements. Alliance uncertainty, increased security risks, and foreign interference in political outcomes encourage investment in military upscaling, tighter border defence, and democratic safeguards. Amid global condemnation, the US stands at the precipice of a new world order, one where it loses its logistical foothold and strategic intelligence advantage through the alienation of its allies. 

Collectively, these developments underscore the fragility and complexity of the current international order, highlighting the urgent need for adaptive strategies and renewed commitments to collective security and democratic oversight. 

Niamh Allen is a fellow of the GPIU at The Sixteenth Council