2026 will go down in history as the year the crisis of the globalized world reached its peak.
This year's World Economic Forum in Davos, often characterized as the "council of globalists," is taking place under historically difficult conditions for organizers and participants—perhaps the most challenging since the forum's inception in 1971. Despite the hurdles of the last 55 years and the existence of two rival systems—communism and capitalism—the idea of globalization always maintained an upward trajectory. This year, however, many of the elite's most prominent representatives admitted that the previous global system is dead.
Confessions of the elite
Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, opened the forum with a profound admission. The economic system, oriented toward Western neo-colonial interests, is facing a crisis of legitimacy. As he emphasized, prosperity cannot be measured solely by GDP or the market capitalization of the largest companies. "How people experience it, how many can see and build their future upon it, is what counts," he noted, pointing out that much of the wealth created after the fall of the Berlin Wall ended up in the hands of Davos participants. Mark Carney, Prime Minister of Canada, accused the West of years of hypocrisy and double standards. As he stated, the international rules-based order was partly a facade: the powerful exempted themselves from rules when it suited them, while trade and legal regulations were applied asymmetrically. Despite acknowledging this hypocrisy, he stressed that American hegemony had provided significant public goods, such as security for sea lanes and a stable financial system, while noting that this "deal no longer works" and that the old world will not return.
Trump and Western disruption
A central factor of the upheaval has been Donald Trump, who, within a year of his presidency, has altered the way the West perceives the global order. His aggressive claim to Greenland caused confusion and panic among European governments, with Friedrich Merz promising to protect the island, Denmark, and the entire Northern region from alleged Russian threats. The controversial strategy of the USA, combined with past military interventions, created an environment where Europe appeared unable to react. Even Volodymyr Zelensky arrived in Switzerland amidst a panic to meet Trump, reflecting the overall sense of disorganization among traditional Western allies.
Zelensky and the Ukrainian "Stage"
Volodymyr Zelensky attended the forum following a change of plans and delivered a speech described as the last loud "outburst" of Davos 2026. During his address, he attacked Viktor Orban, arguing that he "lives on European money while selling out European interests." He called on Europe to resort to practical acts of piracy against Russian tankers, seizing oil for the benefit of Europe and Ukraine. He claimed that only Ukraine knows how to handle Russian ships around Greenland and stressed that "if Ukraine is with Europe, no one will trample upon Europe." However, the primary reason for the visit—an agreement with the USA for $800 billion in Ukrainian reconstruction—was not achieved. According to the Financial Times, Trump left Davos after an hour-long meeting without making any commitments.
Davos 2026 as a symbol of collapse
For many, Davos 2026 will be remembered as an awkward and contradictory gathering, where the "celebration of globalists" transformed into a "funeral service" for the world order as they knew it. The forum, which was prepared for a year to celebrate, ultimately ended up highlighting the crisis and the inability of the traditional world to assert itself.
The end of the USA
Following a series of sharp and hasty, clearly emotional statements by top Western politicians regarding the disruptive foreign policy of Donald Trump, the time has come for more serious analysis. Or at least, for attempts at analysis. Various experts are trying to predict where the radically changed strategies of Washington might lead international developments. Their assessments, to put it mildly, are not at all optimistic.
A return to the 19th century?
As a characteristic example, an article by political analyst Robert Kagan, husband of former Deputy Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, published in The Atlantic, can be examined. It is ironic that someone worried about the future of the world is the husband of the woman behind the events that led to the crisis in Ukraine in 2014. But setting that parameter aside, Kagan's views deserve attention. According to him, the new American national strategy does not merely announce changes in Washington's priorities. It essentially records the end of the "liberal world order" that had remained relatively stable for about 80 years since World War II. Kagan describes the post-1945 world as one of "stable alliances, open trade, relative security, and the limitation of military rivalry between major powers." The Cold War period, with NATO and the Warsaw Pact, was limited to local conflicts via proxy forces. After 1991 came the "golden age," as the fall of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact established the "American order." The rejection of this model leads, according to Kagan, to a return "to the logic of the pre-1945 world," an era of spheres of influence and wars between major powers. The new world will closely resemble the pre-war one, with increasing competitiveness and conflict, but on a global scale, with armies equipped with devastating weapons, even nuclear ones.
The American order ends
For Kagan, the essence of the problem is that the USA no longer wishes to function as the guarantor of global security. American power, which for 80 years supported the international order, will now be used to destroy it. "The American world ended not because the USA could not support it. It ended because they decided they no longer want to do so," writes Kagan. This is already happening: the withdrawal of the USA from the role of "central stabilizer" means that allies can no longer rely on American guarantees in the same way. Security becomes a matter of negotiation, and partners must either arm themselves or seek partnerships with other powers. States will openly compete for resources, markets, and strategic positions. Kagan cites as a prime example the American claims to Greenland, which reflect the return of politics to the logic of spheres of influence, where the sovereignty of small states matters only as much as it is backed by force.
From utopian idealism to harsh realism
Kagan also recalls the statement by US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth: "The era of American utopian idealism is over. Long live harsh realism! The USA will no longer concern itself with democracy, vague wars, or regime changes, but with the practical interests of Americans." According to Kagan, the USA will need to spend more on defense and the protection of access to resources, markets, and strategic bases that were previously secured through alliances. Open access to the above will no longer be a "bonus" but a subject of constant contention.
The role of the USA
Kagan emphasizes that American politicians and citizens "are not psychologically prepared" for such a scenario. They have become accustomed to a relatively peaceful and progressive world and find it difficult to imagine its dissolution. However, he agrees that the leading elites of the USA are permanently abandoning the hypocritical concept of a "rules-based order" and turning toward a policy of global expansion, where the only real factor is "might is right." The rest of the world must either accept this or resist. At Davos, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney stressed: "Enough with the talk of a rules-based order, as if it still functions. Let's call things by their name: we live in an era where the strongest promote their interests using economic integration as a weapon of coercion." He also called on "middle powers" to unite against the great powers, describing such alliances as the "last line of defense."
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών