EKIP– Expert Club for Economics and Politics A Different Opinion
In 2025, world affairs are precariously poised between the bright horizon of technical ingenuity and the dark legacy of conflict. On one side stands Aldous Huxley’s futuristic dystopia: a realm powered by artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and hyperconnected digital societies that promise longer, more carefree lives. On the other is Erich Maria Remarque’s dark tale of the scars of war—how national rivalries, even temporarily suppressed, can erupt into tragedy. In today’s multipolar climate, these two perspectives intersect. And here’s a brief tale of what’s happening in 2025…
Once upon a time, in the not-so-distant year of 2025, the world stage was a grand tapestry of shifting alliances, clashing ambitions, and quiet hopes. At the center of this panorama stood the world’s two most formidable powers, the United States and China. Like rival clans in a vast kingdom, they vied for economic and technological supremacy. From Silicon Valley to Shenzhen, their industries flourished, but each country tightened its national regulations to protect critical sectors from foreign interference. In theory, separation sounds noble, but in practice, interdependence remained insurmountable. Even as officials in Washington talked about protecting supply chains, their national industries still sought Chinese manufacturers, just as new data centers in Beijing required American software breakthroughs. These delicate ties gave the world a seeming stability, but beneath the surface simmered the unsettling awareness that neither side could fully trust the other.
Heading west, we enter the aging realm of the European Union, often compared to a grand palace that has lost some of its luster. The EU enjoyed great economic clout and had once promised to become a beacon of “strategic autonomy.” Yet the corridors of power in Brussels echoed with disagreements over budgets, refugee policies, and common defense. At times, start-ups with bold ideas found Europe’s legal maze too difficult, forcing them to cross oceans in search of friendlier innovation hubs. Meanwhile, leaders’ speeches offered visions of clean energy and reduced imports of Russian fossil fuels, but ongoing reports of oil shipments slipping through complicated supply chains cast doubt on the sincerity of those promises. The EU’s dream of a unified defense pact remained a whisper at summits, overshadowed by member states’ concerns about local sovereignty. In this kingdom, unity was professed but rarely practiced to its full extent, leading some courtiers to be skeptical of the Union's ability to muster real collective action.
Beyond these familiar territories lies the expansive alliance known as BRICS, a confederation of countries, each with its own ambitions and challenges. Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa have come together under a banner that promises an alternative financial order, less dependent on the old Western structures. At first glance, the pact seemed enticing. India’s growing population and digital prowess suggested an economic renaissance, while Russia, cut off from many Western deals by its war-mongering ambitions, saw BRICS as a more favorable venue for its energy exports and technology. China, always the stable among them, has invested in digital payment systems that promise to revolutionize cross-border trade. Yet, like a feudal council of powerful lords, the five could not ignore their private rivalries. China and India have clashed over disputed borders. Brazil, torn between nationalist appeals and global commitments, hesitated to commit. For South Africa, burdened by domestic problems, it was a challenge to fully respond to the enthusiasm of its partners. So, even as the BRICS leadership talked about new trade corridors and alternative currencies, skepticism persisted: how long, skeptics wondered, would it be before the group’s diverse interests began to unravel?
Turning south leads to a vast continent full of promise and peril. Africa’s population has surpassed 1.5 billion, bringing with it the potential for growing consumer markets, inventive startups, and vibrant cultural movements. The African Continental Free Trade Area was the new bright spot of this drive, creating a single economic space designed to raise incomes and bring nations closer together. Foreign entrants flocked: some from China, expanding data centers and digital trade routes; others from Europe, seeking resources for renewable technologies or labor for manufacturing. In epicenters like Lagos and Nairobi, innovators experimented with fintech tools, hoping to circumvent the traditional constraints that have long held Africa back. Yet conflict raged in parts of the Sahel and the Horn of Africa, raising doubts about the durability of this renaissance. Local institutions, already fragile, struggled to quell the rebellion. Even as hope emerged, skeptics feared that corruption, poor infrastructure and sporadic violence could keep Africa's dream forever half-realized.
Far away in the dry but prosperous Persian Gulf, a very different drama was unfolding. Here, countries enjoyed high oil and gas revenues, bolstering their wealth with futuristic megaprojects that glittered like jewels under the desert sun. Saudi Arabia touted dramatic transformations under its grand “Vision,” pouring countless funds into cutting-edge research centers and breathtaking architectural endeavors. The United Arab Emirates also boasted futuristic cities and modern logistics networks, attracting global investors. But rivalries simmered behind closed doors, and strained relations with Iran cast a long shadow over sea lanes like the Strait of Hormuz, through which much of the world’s energy still passed. Traditional security ties with the United States remained—though less secure now that Washington’s priorities had shifted again—prompting Gulf rulers to deepen their contacts with other giants like China. Beyond the shiny facade of AI-driven cityscapes, labor inequality persisted, and policymakers grappled with the harsh reality that a sudden geopolitical shock could reverberate across the globe.
Taken together, these realms formed a planet of protective alliances and uneasy truces. The unstoppable rise of technology—from quantum computers to automated factories—sometimes seemed like a dazzling promise of prosperity. Yet at every turn, old feuds and new disputes undermined trust. Even the glossy facade of global markets was no shield from suspicion: while summits of leaders sometimes led to agreements, deeper national interests often undermined collective progress. Among insiders—seasoned diplomats, cautious investors, and dedicated observers—doubt prevailed: perhaps the world had become too complex for simple contracts to sustain. Could patchwork agreements and half-measures really prevent the next crisis?
Thus the history of 2025 resembled a grand but fractured history of kingdoms bound together neither in complete harmony nor in open hostility. In each, grand ambitions emerged, but they clashed with structural flaws or lingering fears. Although no cataclysm had yet erupted, the sense that the next plot twist might upset the balance hung in the air. For all the talk of forming grand alliances and embracing modern wonders, it remained unclear whether these scattered efforts would coalesce into a broader, more stable order, or whether hidden fault lines would inevitably crack under the weight of so many ambitions.
Ultimately, whether 2025 will be a step toward harmonious cooperation or a difficult prelude to future conflict depends on the choices that leaders and societies make at this critical moment. Trade deals and technological cooperation can offer a path to peace if they are combined with genuine efforts to overcome inequalities and regional flashpoints. If we fail, then the dazzling but dystopian possibilities of a Huxleyan tomorrow risk collapsing under the weight of Remarque’s unlearned lessons about conflict. In this fragile balance lies the fate of a multipolar world—a world in which the promise of cooperation clashes with the danger of new divisions.
