Connect with us

Diplomacy

Munich Security Report warns of US-led dismantling of global order

Published

on

The Munich Security Report (MSR), titled “In the Destruction Phase” and released ahead of this Friday’s Munich Security Conference, concludes that the US administration is systematically dismantling the international order established after 1945.

According to MSR 2026, this shift is driven by the rise of rival states within that very “order.” The report suggests that the Trump administration and far-right forces in Europe can rely on broad public support in their efforts to dismantle existing structures. Facing a pervasive sense of crisis, these groups sympathize with “destruction politics” because they see no future for themselves in the current system.

However, the MSR warns that this environment does not favor the “weakest” but rather the “most powerful actors in the international system.”

An era of “destruction politics”

The 2026 Munich Security Report describes an era of “destruction politics” characterized by the systematic dismantling of the post-1945 international order. Under the second Trump administration, the US has transformed from the primary architect of global stability into a disruptive force, withdrawing from multilateral institutions and significantly slashing humanitarian aid. The report argues that the American retreat—coupled with the war in Ukraine and China’s growing influence—has forced European and Indo-Pacific allies into a “struggle to find strategic autonomy.”

Identifying a “deep pessimism” across G7 nations, the report highlights that many citizens have lost faith in the ability of democratic governments to manage inequality, climate change, and security. Consequently, traditional alliances are devolving into “transactional” relationships, leaving the international community facing an existential crisis. The remaining “rules-based actors” are now compelled to forge new, independent partnerships.

The Munich Security Report adds that current political upheavals should not be attributed solely to President Donald Trump’s “personal beliefs.” Instead, the MSR points to the fact that these disruptions are rooted in the still “extraordinary” power of the US and the specific interests of American elites.

The return of “spheres of influence”

According to the report, “destruction politics” is redefining the global order by discarding the institutions, norms, and alliances of the post-1945 system in favor of a transaction-based, power-oriented approach. Led by the US—the former architect of the old order—this dynamic favors “comprehensive destruction” over incremental reform, based on the premise that existing structures are broken beyond repair.

For example, the “Pax Americana” security umbrella is being replaced by a volatile environment where security is conditional and alliances are viewed as financial liabilities rather than strategic assets. The US administration now approaches international relations through the lens of “deal-making” rather than shared values.

Under the threat of a US withdrawal, NATO allies are being forced to accept defense spending targets of 3.5% to 5% of GDP. Security guarantees are increasingly linked to economic concessions, transforming partnerships into fragile “patron-client relationships.” Core norms, such as territorial integrity and the prohibition of the use of force, are being openly questioned. The report cites the US threat to “acquire” Greenland, military operations in Venezuela characterized as “enforcement of domestic law,” and pressure on Ukraine to cede territory to Russia as prime examples.

The MSR suggests this shift marks a transition toward a “post-legal” world where the only limit on power is the leader’s “own morality.” Pointing to a fragmentation of the global order into regional spheres of influence (a new Großraumpolitik), the report believes the US National Security Strategy prioritizes “American primacy in the Western Hemisphere” while effectively ceding other regions to rival powers like China and Russia.

Similarly, the global trade system is shifting from a “rules-based” framework governed by the World Trade Organization (WTO) toward a landscape dominated by economic nationalism and coercion. According to the MSR, these actions trigger unprecedented economic uncertainty, often described as the “highest tariff.” While some countries attempt to form new trade coalitions independent of the US to preserve the “rules-based system,” the general trend is toward fragmentation and a “law of the jungle” economy where the strong prey on the weak.

The report criticizes the politics of “creative destruction” in problem-solving, warning that this approach could leave the international order in “ruins” and create a world that “privileges the rich and powerful while leaving vulnerable populations and small states at the mercy of great powers.”

Two focal points: Europe and the Indo-Pacific

The report defines the regional consequences for Europe and the Indo-Pacific as the erosion of the traditional US-led security order, the rise of aggressive regional powers, and a forced adaptation to a more “transactional and unpredictable” US.

For Europe, the primary consequence is the collapse of the “Pax Americana” security umbrella, which previously allowed the continent to prioritize prosperity over hard power. Identifying Russia’s ongoing war in Ukraine and an intensified “hybrid war” campaign as the most significant threats to European security, the report claims Moscow has shifted to a “full war economy” and is actively testing European defenses through sabotage, cyberattacks, and airspace violations.

According to the organizers of the Munich conference, intelligence estimates suggest that Russia could restructure its forces shortly after a potential ceasefire to threaten the Baltic Sea region. The report emphasizes that the US has sharply reduced military aid to Ukraine, forcing European nations to create mechanisms like the “Priority Ukraine Needs List” (PURL) to sustain Kyiv’s war effort. Furthermore, a leaked US peace plan reportedly blindsided European capitals by suggesting territorial concessions for Ukraine and a rejection of NATO membership—moves that serve Russian interests.

While European countries increased their defense budgets by approximately 41% between 2021 and 2025, they remain heavily dependent on US military equipment. Efforts to build “strategic autonomy” are hampered by uncoordinated procurement and financial constraints, leaving the continent vulnerable during its difficult transition from a security consumer to a security provider.

In the Indo-Pacific, US “unpredictability” has created a power vacuum that China is “aggressively” seeking to fill, forcing regional actors to re-evaluate their alliances. The report notes a shift from US hegemony toward Chinese dominance. The long-promised US “pivot to Asia” is seen as unfulfilled; instead, the US administration has alienated allies through coercive economic policies, including “Independence Day” tariffs that have caused economic chaos in Japan and South Korea.

Allies perceive US actions as self-serving steps focused on burden-sharing and deal-making with Beijing, rather than principled security guarantees. In response, regional powers like Japan, South Korea, and Australia are significantly increasing defense spending and deepening bilateral partnerships. However, harboring doubts about US “reliability,” many countries are pursuing “hedging” strategies by drawing closer to China. For instance, New Delhi is expanding economic ties with Beijing, while ASEAN is broadening its free trade area with China.

Both regions face a “new era of uncertainty,” forced to navigate a security environment characterized by US withdrawal and the “assertive stance of authoritarian powers.”

Trump’s partners in destruction: The European right

The Munich Security Report also examines why the Trump administration’s policies enjoy broad approval, similar to those of far-right forces in Europe. The report points to a deep economic and social crisis in the Western world. For many, the “current order” is directly associated with the cost-of-living crisis, rising inequality, the end of social mobility, and stagnant or declining living standards.

According to a survey conducted for the Munich Security Conference, a relative majority of the population in Western countries firmly believes that future generations will be worse off as a result of current government policies. In Germany, France, and the UK, this figure exceeds 50%. Conversely, 61% and 80% of the populations in India and China, respectively, believe future generations will be better off.

In the West, an increasing number of people believe their political systems have failed and that governments can no longer make the necessary corrections. According to the report, this sentiment fuels the acceptance of “destruction politics.” Political forces promising to lead their countries to a new greatness by breaking free from the constraints of the existing order are gaining prominence, with the Trump administration at the forefront of this movement.

The MSR identifies Trump alongside other politicians working to dismantle norms—such as Argentine leader Javier Milei—referring to them as “demolition men.” These groups are classified as part of a broader “destructionist” movement fueled by dissatisfaction with the status quo. Rather than seeking reform, they are characterized by a “desire for destruction” (Zerstörungslust) and a will to tear down existing institutions. These figures believe in a world shaped not by “international rules,” but solely by the “will of the great powers.”

The report emphasizes that the traditional Western “liberal internationalist” understanding is being openly challenged by an “illiberal-nationalist” counter-proposal. This internal division weakens the alliance’s normative bond, while some leaders, such as Giorgia Meloni, attempt to bridge the gap with slogans like “Make the West Great Again.”

Social Darwinism returns in the guise of geopolitics

The authors of the Munich Security Report warn that the elimination of all international norms will not lead to the “creative construction” of a new, tolerable order. Instead, they foresee a “world full of rubble” that the strongest in the international system can exploit for their own ends, while the “weakest” at the bottom face the danger of being crushed.

At this year’s Munich Security Conference, the US delegation will be led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio and two billionaires, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Neither holds an official political office, yet both serve as the President’s chief negotiators in various major conflicts and are board members of the Peace Board, an organization directly reporting to Trump.

The report notes that “public” interests are being displaced by “private” interests, pointing out that in the US, the President’s policies can no longer be separated from the real estate and crypto interests of his inner circle.

Diplomacy

Greece’s Marinakis says paying Hormuz transit fees beats enduring Red Sea shipping crisis detour

Published

on

Evangelos Marinakis, one of Greece’s leading shipowners, has announced that he is prepared to pay up to $200,000 per transit to keep the Strait of Hormuz open to civilian maritime traffic.

Speaking to the Financial Times, Marinakis stated that paying a transit fee would be a far better option for him than having the strait closed to navigation.

As the chairman of Capital Maritime Group, which controls a fleet of 185 vessels including approximately 35 tankers, Marinakis emphasized that shipowners have been forced to use alternative routes around the Cape of Good Hope for years due to attacks launched by the Houthis in the Red Sea, a detour that has generated substantial additional costs.

The Greek shipowner indicated that paying a transit fee of $100,000 or $200,000, depending on the size of the cargo or the vessel, is far more reasonable than enduring the current logistical challenges. He added that such payments could offset all the losses experienced so far.

Following US strikes on Iran and the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, the Tehran administration had introduced transit fees of up to $2 million for certain vessels transiting the waterway.

In May, Iran announced the establishment of a state agency tasked with managing the Strait of Hormuz. It was stated that the institution in question would provide real-time updates regarding maritime activities in the waterway.

Ebrahim Azizi, the chairman of the Iranian Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, had noted that only commercial vessels and countries cooperating with Iran would be able to benefit from the facilities provided under this “professional mechanism.”

US President Donald Trump has explicitly opposed the imposition of transit fees in the Strait of Hormuz. In a statement on the matter, Trump said, “We want the strait to be open. We do not want any transit fees to be charged. This is an international waterway.”

On the other hand, the draft text of a planned 60-day ceasefire extension agreement between the parties stipulates that the Strait of Hormuz will remain open without any transit fees being demanded.

According to the draft details reviewed by Axios, the US in return commits to lifting the blockade it has imposed on Iranian ports. The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, however, announced that the management of the Strait of Hormuz has been excluded from the scope of the agreement with the US, asserting that the issue will be addressed solely by littoral states.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Pashinyan promises aid to farmers hit by Russian import restrictions

Published

on

Armenian Prime Minister Nikol Pashinyan has pledged compensation for Armenian farmers affected by restrictions on exports to Russia.

According to Sputnik Armenia, Pashinyan made the announcement during an election campaign meeting in the Gegharkunik region.

Speaking at the event, Pashinyan said the subsidies would be designed to offset losses incurred by producers.

The prime minister also acknowledged that some Armenian products had failed to meet required quality standards, adding that such companies would receive support aimed at improving product quality.

Addressing alternative markets for Armenian exports, Pashinyan said several Armenian business delegations were already engaged in negotiations abroad.

He added that Armenia had received offers for the purchase of roses as well as fresh fruits and vegetables.

Pashinyan argued that Armenia’s agricultural output was not particularly large, describing this as an advantage under current circumstances. According to the prime minister, “a respected supermarket chain in Europe” would be capable of selling the entire volume of these products on its own.

Russia’s Federal Service for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Surveillance (Rosselkhoznadzor) imposed temporary restrictions on imports of stone fruits and grapes from Armenia effective July 2.

The ban covers cherries, sour cherries, apricots, plums, peaches and nectarines, among other products.

On the same day, a temporary suspension was also introduced on certification procedures for live fish shipments from Armenia. Russian authorities had previously restricted the entry of flower products originating from Armenia into the Russian market.

In addition, Russia’s Federal Service for Surveillance on Consumer Rights Protection and Human Wellbeing (Rospotrebnadzor) halted the import of all consignments of Jermuk mineral water from Armenia.

In a statement, the agency said levels of bicarbonate, chloride and sulfate ions in the mineral water exceeded established limits and could mislead consumers regarding the product’s medicinal properties.

The Russian regulator argued that the growing number of violations stemmed from the abolition of Armenia’s Agriculture Ministry and the transfer of its responsibilities to the Economy Ministry.

Rosselkhoznadzor further stated that Armenia’s Economy Ministry was experiencing structural problems and was unable to adequately perform the supervisory functions assigned to it.

Continue Reading

Diplomacy

Zelenskyy urges US to grant Ukraine license to produce Patriot missiles

Published

on

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he has asked the United States to grant Ukraine a license to manufacture missiles for the Patriot air defence system.

In a post on social media platform X, Zelenskyy argued that current US production of missile defence interceptors is insufficient and could contribute to crises in different parts of the world.

“Producing 60-65 missiles a month is nothing compared with the challenges we face today. This is no secret, and Russia knows it as well,” Zelenskyy wrote. “We need to expand production. As I requested from the previous US administration, I am asking the current administration to grant Ukraine a license to produce Patriot missiles.”

Zelenskyy said US companies possess advanced technologies that are not available in Ukraine, while Kyiv could contribute its extensive battlefield experience in return.

He also argued that granting such a license would benefit not only Ukraine, but also the Middle East and any country Washington chooses to support.

Washington pledges to maintain defence support

Zelenskyy’s remarks came a day after US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said on May 30 that Washington would continue supporting Ukraine’s defence capabilities and ensure military shipments to Kyiv continue.

“We want them to be able to defend themselves, and we will find a way to help them do that,” Hegseth said.

Several days earlier, Yuriy Ihnat, spokesperson for the Ukrainian Air Force, warned that the country’s air defence forces were experiencing a shortage of missiles.

“Due to certain supply problems, we are practically at starvation levels when it comes to missiles today,” Ihnat said.

Concerns persist over air defence missile stocks

In April, Zelenskyy warned that Ukraine’s stockpile of air defence missiles could be exhausted at any moment.

He said that under current conditions, air defence missiles were more critical for Ukraine than the air defence systems themselves.

Highlighting what he described as a critical shortage of Patriot missiles, Zelenskyy said: “We are facing a deficit now that could hardly be worse.”

Concerns that Ukraine could face a severe shortage of US-made air defence missiles had previously been reported by Reuters.

The situation was expected to worsen as the United States and its allies depleted significant portions of their arsenals during tensions with Iran, a point Zelenskyy also underscored.

In a separate statement in January, Zelenskyy said Ukraine lacked sufficient missiles for both US- and European-made air defence systems.

The Ukrainian leader said he had been forced to personally secure every package of missiles from European countries and the United States.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey