The original Cold War ended long ago. Is the world heading into a new Cold War?

The political and territorial equations during the Cold War were far simpler than what they are today. Then, two formidable armed camps fought for supremacy. The nuclear deterrent prevented “hot” wars between them, though many proxy wars were fought in other lands. As both camps realised that a nuclear war guaranteed mutual destruction, a modus vivendi for coexistence was evolved.

However, the scene changed adversely for the Soviet Union when it was dismantled, when its numerous constituent republics separated, when the Red Army was dispersed and its arsenal divided. The West exulted that capitalism had triumphed. The USA briefly reigned supreme as the sole superpower.

Within a decade of the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the world saw the USA’s unprovoked invasion of Afghanistan in search of Osama bin Laden. The war against terrorism continued into the third decade with the USA making overtures for peace to its dreaded foe, the Taliban. Many more Afghans have been killed and displaced, and large portions of the infrastructure destroyed during 2001-2021 than during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 1980s.

Not content to unleash havoc in Afghanistan, George Bush and his mentors, Rumsfeld and Cheney, with a cooing Blair in tow, decided to depose Saddam Hussein so that the oil-fields of Basra and Mosul in Iraq could be seized. The Muslim citizens of Central Asian nations had looked askance at the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. India’s condemnation of these invasions had been unfortunately tepid.

In his report, the renowned British politician, Sir John Chilcot, has condemned this brazen violation of international law. This inglorious escapade has been portrayed in an American film, appropriately titled Vice.

In 2011 Syria plunged into a civil war. Gradually ISIS fighters, Kurds and foreign countries including Turkey, Russia, the US, Iran and several Arabic countries got involved in the conflict. Syria also faced the scourge of the invading democracy of USA but Basher al Assad could not be deposed because his ally, Vladimir Putin, decided to travel on the road to Damascus. The terrible warfare has left Syria in smouldering ruins. Restoration of its infrastructure, said a neutral journalist, would take half a century – if funds are available.

Neutral observers now agree that the Cold War was not a battle of ideologies, between democracy and authoritarianism, socialism and capitalism. After all, the USA gave support to the brutal regimes of Franco, Pinochet, the Shah of Iran, and the Saudi elite. The Cold War was, and now the new war, is a battle for power and influence.

While the Russian Federation under Yeltsin reached out to the West, there was no corresponding response from them.

Despite assurances given by President Ronald Reagan to Mikhail Gorbachev that there would be no eastern expansion of NATO into what was Russia’s sphere of influence, NATO began extending its boundaries by nibbling into the former Soviet republics through various “coloured revolutions”. To halt this trend, in 2008 Russia intervened in Georgia, a former Soviet republic and now a NATO member, to aid the breakaway Ossetia.

It was clear that the promised “freedom and trade and movement from Vladivostok to Lisbon was a chimera.” The vast and enigmatic Russia continued to make Europe uneasy, as it did from the days of Prince Alexander Nevsky in the thirteenth century. Old fears of the Cold War re-surfaced.

President Barack Obama of the USA sought cooperation with Russia on various issues. When the American president abandoned the previous administration’s plans to build a missile defence system in Eastern Europe, Russia opened its skies to US airplanes to carry supplies to Afghanistan. The two nations signed a New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in 2010. It seemed, finally, as if past antagonisms were being cast aside.

The prospect of Ukraine joining the European Union posed a serious challenge to the security of the Russian Federation. When Russian ally Yanukovych was ousted in a coup and the pro-American Poroshenko installed as President, Russia supported Russian-speaking separatists in Eastern Ukraine and then reclaimed the Crimea, accompanied by Western condemnation. They ignored the fact that Crimea had been an integral part of Russia from 1763. Unease at Russia’s resurgence was accompanied by severe sanctions on Russia, which affected her economy and closed her markets in Europe.

The Russian Federation was excluded from the G8 group. This may have influenced President Putin’s decision to step in to give military support to the Syrian President’s failing attempts to defeat Syrian rebels and the ISIS.

Nevertheless, Russia and the USA coordinated efforts to resolve the Iran nuclear policy. Their efforts culminated in 2015 in a successful agreement whereby Iran agreed to limit its nuclear development only for civil purposes.

As a counterpoise to a growingly hostile West, President Putin drew former Soviet republics into the Eurasian Economic Union. The Presidents of Kazakhstan and Belarus signed the treaty. Many observed that this was a nominal union without solid economic foundations or commitments. However, two other such formations – the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS forum – have acquired substance and significance.

In a way these semi-alliances have a Cold War flavour about them, with Russia and China forging an alliance after many decades of bitter disputes and rivalry with the common purpose of forming a block against the West. Both states have fears about the United States making incursions in the resource rich and strategic region of Central Asia. A strong American presence in Central Asia would be a perpetual cause of friction to Russia.

After the USA under President Trump withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal and imposed more sanctions on Iran, Russia and China stepped in to provide financial and technical aid to Iran. The development of Chabahar Port, which was languishing, is now making progress with Chinese funding.

While these are shared anxieties both by the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS members, there is subtler subterranean uneasiness that is neither articulated nor expressed – the possible rivalry between Russia and China in the Central Asian heartland. Deliberately, these groups have been termed as associations rather than alliances.

However, changed circumstances have altered the original tenor of SCO as Russia and China participate in joint military exercises. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) does not have the military might of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Nor does this loose non-military association have the bond and amity that the USA and Japan share in the Pacific region. This amity made President Obama propound the “Pivot to East Asia” policy for containing Chinese expansion. How long this association will endure will depend on mutual interests.

Within Eurasia lie divergent interests and contests that can disturb the equilibrium.

In April 2016 the first formal meeting of the NATO Council took place to discuss the current scene of Russian resurgence. Soon after the meeting NATO Secretary General Jen Stoltenberg stated at a press conference in Brussels that the “two sides disagree on facts, the narrative and the responsibilities. ... Russia and NATO have profound and persistent differences ...”

The Russian envoy to NATO Alexander Grushko responded by criticising NATO military exercises on the Baltic Sea. In June 2016, NATO made an astounding declaration that Russian expansion was as dangerous as the Islamic State. This is more astounding as it was Russia who had first recognised and fought the danger of Islamic fundamentalism in Afghanistan in the 1980s which was sponsored and funded by USA and its allies.

NATO staff reported that Russian submarines “are prowling the coastline of Scandinavia and Scotland, Mediterranean Sea and North Atlantic.” General Stoltenberg and earlier Mr Rasmussen observed that increased Russian presence challenges the USA’s and NATO’s undersea dominance. The head of the US navy in Europe has stated that Russian Navy chief Victor Chirkov has affirmed that their submarine presence has risen by 50%. It is reported that President Putin has ordered an expenditure of billions of dollars for manufacturing diesel and nuclear-powered quieter submarines, as well as augmenting the country’s nuclear arsenal.

The Pentagon responded by requesting a budget of 8 billion dollars for the US Navy and development of sophisticated technology to monitor encrypted messages from Russian submarines and remotely controlled autonomous vessels. The NATO states are planning to build new submarines that can repel Russian aggression in the Baltic and Arctic Seas.

There is also serious concern in the West on intelligence reports that Russian submarines and spy ships operate in the vicinity of vital undersea cables of all international internet connections. There are fears in American defence circles that these could be vulnerable in times of conflict.

Magnus Norden, Director of the Atlantic Council Trans- Atlantic Security Initiative, observed that “Russia has a visceral fear of NATO” and “Russia regards NATO as an existential threat.” To neutral observers it would appear the opposite to be true. The end of the cold war and communism has not reduced western paranoia about Russia.

The US 6th fleet in Naples has been deployed to monitor “maritime choke points” which separate Greenland, Iceland, and the UK – crucial to the defence of Europe. US–NATO forces have performed numerous military exercises on Russia’s borders – Poland, Czechoslovakia, Romania, and Hungary. The USA has placed missiles in Eastern Europe and Georgia.

A retired Admiral of the US Navy and former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO said: “We aren’t quite back to the Cold War but I sure can see one from where I am standing.”

The unfolding new contest between Russia and the USA will not be contests in military might or clashing political ideologies. The twentieth century slogans of free enterprise and democracy versus socialism have lost their contentious nature as most nations have adopted market economies.

As the violence of the Islamic State spread across the world, the then US Secretary of State, John Kerry met his Russian counterpart, Sergei Lavrov to discuss how to fight Islamic terrorism. The endless bloodshed in Syria, the decimation of defenceless people, the obliteration of cities, the bombardment of the pro-Assad strongholds by USA and the ISIS bastions by Russia have been done in the name of restoring order and peace. The United Nations looked on helplessly, offering homilies but with no viable solution to end the carnage.

In the shifting sands of power politics, the USA and its former and bitter foe China had united to challenge Russia from 1971 to the early 1990s. In order to be the paramount power in East and Central Asia, China wanted to undermine Soviet power and influence. The coincidence of objectives of the USA and China required a common strategy – the containment of Russia. Nixon and Kissinger did not heed Napoleon’s warning of the awakening of “the sleeping giant”.

Now, despite prodigious trade relations, there is growing tension between the USA and China. And with growing tension in the Pacific region, China has turned to Russia. This has created new power alignments.

The dissolution of the Soviet Union created a power vacuum filled by China. The USA slumbered on as Chinese commerce and finance spread tentacles into the American economy. At the turn of the millennium the USA woke up to the formidable growing power of China in the Asia-Pacific region. The USA’s traditional Asian allies – Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Thailand, Australia, and New Zealand – watched apprehensively as the Chinese Juggernaut ploughed through international waters to claim and grab what it could. In pursuance of President Obama’s Pivot to Asia Doctrine the USA moved its warships there to offer protection to her allies. In application of the classical Chanakyan formula (enemy’s enemy is one’s friend) Russia and China united – a volte face not anticipated by the USA.

Assisted by Russia, China began building nuclear and conventional deterrents in 2015. In November 2016 the Russian Defence Minister met his Chinese counterpart in Beijing to conclude a massive arms deal to supply China with advanced weaponry. China intends to use its power to nullify any US or Japanese attempts to attack the artificial islands on the South China Sea.

Defence agreements were augmented by energy deals in which China depends heavily on Russia’s vast reserves of gas, which is an important source of Russia’s export earnings. With Russo–Chinese amity established once more, China can revert to her old dream of dominating the Eurasian heartland that commenced from Han dynasty times. The Silk Road Economic Belt and the Belt Road Initiative is one of these projects. Pakistan has been persuaded to participate in these ventures to preclude any friction along the road.

While President Trump took a hard line with China and a fierce trade war began to curb its expansionist agenda after the outbreak of the Covid-19 pandemic, China concluded a mega trade deal with fifteen Asian-Pacific nations titled Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) in November 2020. These nations comprise 30 per cent of the total global income. Though Russia has a long coastline on the Pacific Ocean, it has not joined this trade union. Nor has India on the ground that cheap Chinese products will undermine Indian manufacturing industries.

In December, amidst hostility of the West (and elsewhere) against China, the European Union concluded a massive trade deal with China.

For all the protestations about human rights violation and minority persecution in China, the EU had glossed over these ethical reservations for the lure of commerce. It has yet to be ratified by the European Parliament. This act may be the unintended consequence of Trump’s belittling the European Union. It remains to be seen if the new American President Biden will give his blessings to this development.

What might emerge is a new great game of the USA and its allies on one side, opposed by Russia, China, and those Asian nations whose interests lie in Eurasia. Though former President Trump announced in his campaign trail in 2016 that US policy towards Russia would be without tension, this did not materialise. President Trump’s US Establishment accused Russia of interfering in the 2016 elections, though the House Committee Hearings found no proof of this.

The alleged poisoning of the Skripals and then of Navalny have brought fresh criticism of Russia. The Navalny episode has been used by the USA and some EU nations to prevent the progress of the Nord Stream 2 project whereby Russia would supply gas to Germany and other Western European nations. The US has once more imposed sanctions on Russia and the EU chief Mrs Ursula van der Leyden insists that Russia must be punished for Navalny’s poisoning. Yet US and its Western allies imprisoned and harassed Julian Assange who exposed Western war crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Nor is the EU prepared to punish China for spreading the devastating Wuhan virus. When the Russian government asked for proofs of the alleged poisoning, the German doctors who are said to have treated him (after Russia permitted him to be taken to Germany for treatment) refuse to pass on Navalny’s medical reports to Russia.

In this atmosphere there is the apprehension that regional wars in Ukraine, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and the South China Sea, could erupt into wider wars. In the absence of these “hot wars” the new cold war may take other forms – cyber wars and the hacking of military and political information. The new Information War has already commenced as NATO and Russia deplore each other’s methods and aims.

In the vortex of undeclared wars between the NATO nations and Russia, and the USA against China, amidst the background of the deadly Covid-19 pandemic, a new chess game between the USA and Russia may take shape.

This could be different from the chessboard of the Cold War days. After disruption in Ukraine and reclamation of Crimea, the USA under President Obama sought to resurrect old West European fears of Russia, which would compel their dependence on US-led NATO. When President Trump criticised the NATO states for using American funds for their protection, Europeans became wary of involvement in American friction with Russia.

Eastern European nations such as Bulgaria, which were happy to be in NATO, are now trying to build better relations with a resurgent Russia. The anti-Russian psychosis in Europe coexists with Islamophobia after murderous attacks in European cities by Islamic terrorists. President Macron of France has openly announced that Islamic fundamentalism and its attendant violence shall not be tolerated on French soil. He is voicing what other European nations feel.

A decade of military campaigns in Iraq, Libya, and Syria has destroyed the prosperity and stability of these fuel-rich nations. Afghanistan was the scene of daily bomb blasts. With the Taliban now in power, the nation’s future is uncertain. The exodus from West Asia is unprecedented in human history. Only Iran has escaped this tragedy because they have the weapons to retaliate if attacked.

The influx of refugees from these countries has deepened the Islamophobia.

Excerpted with permission from Treaty of Peace, Cooperation & Friendship, Achala Moulik, Authors Upfront.