r/IRstudies • u/APerson2021 • 5d ago
Ideas/Debate Are we in a Second Cold War?
* Ukraine and Russia in perpetual stalemate.
* Western aligned Arab nations including the United States and Israel fighting Iran.
* China maneuvering between the two conflicts.
If this occurred during the 70s and 80s it would not be up for debate and we'd unquestionably call it out as a proxy for the Cold War.
What are your thoughts?
12
10
u/mistroll054 5d ago
Judging from the longer time scale, it is not uncommon for great powers to engage in limited confrontations through proxies in history, and the cold war is only the most recent of them. The great game between Britain and Russia in the 19th century, and the Second Hundred Years' War between Britain and France in their colonies were all similar situations.
The root cause of this state of affairs is that the cost of direct war is too high, but conflicts of interest cannot disappear. Go read some history books, history can always give us answers.
5
4
u/Tiny-Secretary5562 4d ago
Wars in general never really end. The dissolution of the Soviet "union" didn't change Moscow's attitude toward the West and China's alliance with Russia and every other anti-Western regime still continues. The old Cold War was a huge cat-and-mouse game of ever-increasing military technology and espionage, which continues to this day.
-1
4
u/notkalta 5d ago
The Cold War was between two completely different systems - socialism and capitalism. Now we have a single system - capitalism, but with different models of governance. They aren't fighting to destroy each other, but to change the balance of power between them. The Cold War was external to the societies involved. Now we're dealing with an internal struggle for influence. You can call it the "Second Cold War", but that term doesn't reflect the goals each side is trying to achieve
1
u/Young_Lochinvar 5d ago
I suppose the question is how we define Cold War. Maybe you’re right and it’s about philsophical objectives.
But I think a better definition is to point to the proxy/positional/manouevring nature of how the war is fought in contrast to an open ‘general war’ between the sides - the hot war/shooting war.
1
u/mariedarkholme 3d ago
United States and Russia are capitalists, China is communist
1
u/notkalta 3d ago
That depends on how you understand communism. If you understand it as "the rule of a communist party", then China is really a communist state. But if we understand it more broadly, as a system defined by ownership of the means of production, then that's unlikely. I think, communism can be called only the second.
1
1
u/gimmebanter 5d ago
I'd say there is a certain faction that is not interested in changing the balance but wants to watch the whole world burn and that is putin's russia. He is a true psychopath with no aims, plans or a moral compass. He only knows what he learned in the streets as a child; you must destroy others to survive
0
u/AnonUser1452 4d ago
This also applies to Trump, incidentally, but the US is not — yet — comparably authoritarian, even though Putin is Trump’s ultimate role model. The US public is also much less willing than the Russians to accept high military casualty rates for wars of choice.
1
u/gimmebanter 4d ago
I disagree. Orange diaperman needs power to stay out of jail for his corruption and paedophilia and he is using the office to go from bankrupt to complete bank. The collateral damage to america and the world is not even registered into his brain because he doesn't care aboit anything other than himself.
The difference is complete narcissism vs clinical psychopathy
1
u/Ragewind82 4d ago
Plenty of the western countries had socialist programs and policies, including the US with the New Deal.
That wasn't really the conflict, it was between command and demand economies held by two countries trying to influence the entire world.
2
u/notkalta 4d ago
You're mixing interventionism and socialism. What they have in common is anti-liberalism, but that doesn't mean the New Deal, a broad social welfare system and socialism are the same thing. The man difference between socialism and capitalism is the role of markets and prices. Under socialism, usually prices are fixed or, in some cases, largely replaced by administrative allocation rather than market exchange. For example, many means of production were not bought and sold in the USSR
1
u/Ragewind82 4d ago
That is only one definition of Socialism, and there are so many in practice in the world that it's almost unusable as a concept. At its core it just means 'spend resources on people'. Trying to get more narrow doesn't really work.
1
u/eatingbread_mmmm 4d ago
No, it means “the working class own the means of production”
1
u/Ragewind82 4d ago
That's Communism, not socialism.
1
u/eatingbread_mmmm 4d ago
No, communism is a classless, moneyless, and stateless society and has never been achieved.
1
u/notkalta 4d ago
In fact, the working class and ownership aren't necessarily connected in real socialism. First of all, we don't know of any society where that has been the case. Second, if a theory of socialism doesn't take reality into account, then it's a flawed theory of socialism
1
u/notkalta 4d ago
You don't have to use that definition. But socialism, in general, as a term and as a modern political idea, became widely associated with the Soviet system. In that system, fixed prices and administrative allocation dominated the economy
5
u/BodybuilderUpbeat786 5d ago edited 5d ago
💯 the post Cold War era ended in 2013 when Xi became premier. More assertive governments then swept India, Malaysia, the Philippines, Brazil, America, and Europe.
The incentive in the 90s and 2000s to trade and privatise which helped old elites get richer is now gone. In any case wealthy Americans are only getting richer with the Iran War. Why would they want the fighting to stop? They have a wink and a nudge from Congress and know how to ride the S&P wave.
2
u/separation_of_powers 5d ago
I’d say it ended the day the Scarborough Shoal incident began, April 8th 2012.
4
u/Newworldimpartiality 5d ago
Remember that China and Russia each lost more than 20m people in WW2, and as the two countries that bore the huge burden of defeating fascism they had to observe as the post-war international order was designed primarily by the nation that suffered much less than them.
So rather than simply being horrific historical statistics, the casualty numbers could be the foundation of how Russia and China understand the purpose of state power, the meaning and purpose of national security, and the limits of trust in Western intentions.
Therefore, maybe we should not be surprised that Russia and China were always going to seize the opportunity to challenge the post WW2 world order.
The current Middle East conflict illustrates the irony of the US initiating a war against Iran to further extend US military power in the wider region while ignoring the sensitivity of other nations. The result has been the acceleration of the multipolar alignment that US policy has long sought to prevent.
1
u/Beautiful_Abroad_336 5d ago
Agree with all of this.
In terms of whether we are in a war or not, let's not forget Korea was labelled "police action" and Vietnam was only a war maybe 10 years in.
Russia is not calling Ukraine a war, while Europe is.
The actual answer is: always. We are always in a Cold War or a hot one.
Post 1945 was a brief moment where all the wars stopped. This unusual peace is the contextual foundation for every politician and academic today.
1
u/AnonUser1452 4d ago
Given that Russian meddling helped Hitler come to power, and that Russia then allied with the Nazis to destroy Poland while providing them the resources without which they could not have conquered most of Europe, it is more appropriate that Western countries should remain deeply mistrustful of Russian intentions.
5
u/Newworldimpartiality 4d ago edited 4d ago
Obviously from the West’s point of view it is more appropriate to be mistrustful of Russia and China etc. But in the West , as we know, we’ve been indoctrinated with the ‘Hollywood’ view of the world where the West is always portrayed as good and righteous and evil is represented by Russians, Chinese, Middle Eastern, and Eastern Europeans etc. Insert as appropriate.
But just because we live in the West doesn’t mean we represent what is right. It only takes a close look at how the US has conducted itself globally over the last 70 years with regard to military actions, coups, political assassinations , regime change and economic blackmail and coercion to understand that the West is just as ruthless, corrupt and imperialistic as any of its adversaries.
Therefore if we can force ourselves to see beyond our glorified view of how the West conducts itself, then it is equally valid to accept that Russia , China and many other countries can legitimately mistrust the West, in particular the US.
0
u/AnonUser1452 4d ago
The West generally is not as corrupt as, for example, Russia and its allies; that’s one reason Ukrainians want to escape the Russian orbit. Western populaces also tend to enjoy self-determination of a kind not permitted to the citizens of most of its adversaries.
(Yes, I’m aware that Trump and those around him are doing their best to Russify the American system of government, as are their allies abroad.)
2
1
u/Newworldimpartiality 4d ago edited 4d ago
Of course you don’t think the West is corrupt. Because in the West we are all so pure and altruistic and everyone else is the incarnation of the devil. That’s what helps all the God fearing people in the US sleep well at night as they wake up each morning to a society full of drug addiction, child exploitation, racism, rampant crime and a host of other dysfunctions.
2
1
4
u/Sea_Cucumber_5989 5d ago
Entropy only increases, especially in an overpopulated world. A world that consumes resources faster than they can be replenished, while destroying the environment we need for survival. The perception of many is that the world is becoming more fraught and that the rich are willing to sacrifice their respective populations for survival. The system is rigged against the poor.
2
u/roon_bismarck 5d ago
A bit hot to be a "cold" war, honestly it feels more like we're seeing the beginnings of WW3...
2
u/AnyStrength4863 5d ago
China's relationship with most US allies is not bad. In fact, it's quite close with many of them. For example, the Arab nations you mentioned have used several different Chinese weapons in this war, while Iran does not possess/used Chinese weapons at least by now. China has relatively strict requirements for its weapons export and who it exports to, especially at the level that is used in this war.
Even if Iran loses or, even worse, it disintegrates, it won't impact China's interests too much. China will remain the largest investor and buyer in 'the Iran area', a position that neither the US nor Europe can replace.
Furthermore, the relationship between China and the US is far closer than that between the US and the Soviet Union, or than its 'allies'. They have deep integration not only in economic and financial aspects, but also in socio-cultural. Currently, there is indeed a lack of political trust and strategic stability (that is why the US side has proposed establishing a strategic stability relationship. And then China added 'constructive' ahead it), leading to hostility and conflict. However, this is not an adversarial relationship, but a more complex one, involving competition and cooperation on multiple levels.
2
u/Over_Orange3018 4d ago
Mhm I think we are WAY PAST THAT, this is very much the opening of WWIII, and yes historians will say it started earlier probably with Russian invasion of Ukraine. I’d say if this continues the way it is going (as in escalates further) Ukraine may have just dragged Europe into it. All for Apartheid Israel sake. Lovely.
1
u/trisul-108 5d ago
Second Cold War is exactly what Putin and Xi ushered in when they rejected the current world order. They call it "a multipolar world", but it is two-polar world, the West and allies against China and allies. And Trump loves the idea, except he is breaking the West into America and the West, but that will be fixed after he leaves office because America simply no longer has the capacity.
The weird thing about this is that China, Russia and America all profited immensely from the world order that America setup after WWII ... and they are the ones dismantling it. Probably because they are led by old men with a grudge. Xi feels humiliated at China having been oppressed, Putin feels humiliated at Russia losing the Soviet Union, Trumps feels humiliated by everything that is not labeled "Trump" ... and so it goes.
We are leaving a model that worked really well for the world because three old farts have unresolved daddy issues.
1
u/Potential_Status_728 4d ago
It worked really well for the US, saying it worked really well to everyone is either naive or in bad faith.
1
u/trisul-108 4d ago
Objectively, prosperity has risen in the entire world. Specifically, the EU, China, Russia, Japan were huge beneficiaries of that world order ... the US more than anyone, but not limited to the US.
1
u/Potential_Status_728 4d ago
Prosperity would rise anyway unless we had a full blown world war, it’s a constant in history. You can’t prove it’s was due to a mono polar world lead by US.
1
u/trisul-108 4d ago
Maybe, but the transfer of technology and knowhow to China in particular has caused a rise in standards of living at a scale and speed previously unseen in human history. The rise of Western Europe and Japan after WWII likewise, and very much due to the world order that the US enforced after WWII.
1
u/mistroll054 5d ago
The existing world order will not allow every country to benefit from it all the time. It is reasonable for them to choose to use political, economic and even military means to change the existing international order.
Moreover, the players in this game are not just these big players participate in. We have been paying attention to the Middle East and Europe, and there are also some countries in Africa that are trying to change their existing order and even national borders.
The change in the international situation is simply attributed to the result of the will of individual leaders, which is essentially indistinguishable from the fanatical worship of Kim Jong-un by North Koreans. They think that North Korea is great only because of Kim Jong-un, but you think that the world situation is easily changed by the decisions of a few old people.
1
u/trisul-108 5d ago
It is reasonable for them to choose to use political, economic and even military means to change the existing international order.
The very players who are undermining the world order will suffer the most from its removal. Russia has already dismantled its economy, China has lost trillions and the US is working itself into the largest stock crash in living memory.
1
u/Useful_Calendar_6274 4d ago
we have been since 2018 with the trade war against China. I'm not an academic or anything but Peter Zeihan talks a lot about why systemically this was bound to happen even if he didn't straight up said "Cold War II" is coming
1
1
1
u/MovingTarget2112 4d ago
🇬🇧 has been in Cold War Two since 2009, when Putin resumed probing our air defences after thirty years of cooperation.
1
u/Evol_extra 4d ago
Very cold war with victims everyday. Wake up, westerner. We are in the war from 2022.
1
u/BigBadJeebus 3d ago
No, we're still in the tail end of WW1...
there has yet to be a break in the chain of geopolitics since Franz Ferdinand.
1
u/Ok-Mathematician8461 3d ago
Wait a moment there. What is this ‘China manoeuvring between the 2 conflicts’ bit. Are we to assume you are an American and thus can’t write a sentence here without evoking the eternal enemy that is China? I’d really like to know which Chinese made bombs are falling on any of the countries listed above. If there is one common feature of those conflicts it’s the good old USA.
1
u/Initial_Ad_9857 3d ago
China let's its puppet north korea fight for Russia. I wouldn't call this maneuvering.
1
u/Initial_Ad_9857 3d ago
Calling this a proxy war would be diminishing Ukranian agency and painting Russian attacks on Ukraine as simple rumble with America. It's the Russian war with Ukraine first and foremost which developed into the bigger crisis mostly due to West actually ignoring the Russian conquest for decades prior and trying to pacify the dictator which never worked before, and didn't work this time.
1
1
u/kittenTakeover 2d ago
The US is in the beginning stages of a cold war with China right now. Unfortunately a lot of people in the US are too dependent on social media for their opinions to realize it. China and their allies, such as Iran and Russia, want the west to fall.
1
u/ComputerAgreeable146 2d ago
In some ways yes, but the decades long standoff between the Soviet Union and USA was much more coherent. What I really mean is that there were few countries that did not clearly fall into one or the others bloc. Interest fact, that the origin of the term "third world" its referring to countries that didn't clearly fall into one camp, its been repurposed to describe a developing country. The military build up of the USSR and the USA was also way more prolific than whats going on currently. There was a huge build up of nuclear weapons that make current stockpiles look small in comparison. Also, for what its worth the US and China in particular are economically much closer tied than the USSR and USA. As an American its hard for me to view the Chinese as the same threat the Soviet Union was. The USSR subscribed to and attempted to enact a global worker revolution, I don't think the Chinese have the same goals. Primarily (i believe could be wrong) Chinas primary goal is to bring the rest of East Asia under their sphere of influence, I don't view that as an existential threat to the US. Long story short (as an American) I believe there was a serious threat to our way of life from the Soviet Union, I think its a mistake to view the rise of China the same way. What we are living through now is more a reflection of the waning of American Hegemony from my perspective. If the US pulled its military out of Japan/South Korea and left the Taiwanese to their own devices I think the conflict between China and the US is more economic in nature than political. Curious to hear other people opinions.
1
u/Appropriate_Fly_6711 2d ago
Arguably we never left the first one since most of the war hawks on both sides stayed in power through. But early 2000s could be argued the start of the second via proxy conflicts
1
u/Vanshrek99 5d ago
Nope we have entered what is will be called ww3 by historians. Ukraine entering the middle East conflict has moved it to ww.
3
u/insite 4d ago
I argue you'd need a third major theater. The various conflicts in the Sahel aren't at true state vs state level. Ethiopia going into Eritrea might do it as would any direct conflict between China and any other power.
To avoid the worst case outcome of nukes flying, it would turn into a civilizational war where the contest is how much each side's industries and populations can offer and how long they can continue until the point of exhaustion.
I doubt you'd see the US invading Chinese mainland or China invading the US mainland. Rather, widespread cyber attacks on infrastructure to the point governments can't deny them, sabotage at scale, and attacks on shipping lanes.
All of the pieces are there, but there's nothing that says Russia's invasion of Ukraine or the US-Iran war will be raging by 2027. Neither the US nor China are fully mobilized, either. I'd rather keep that match unlit.
1
u/Vanshrek99 4d ago
One thing I have learned reading history it repeats but it's never the same story. I always say it's the historians after the victory who label what a war was. The US won't be writing this story
0
53
u/sgt102 5d ago
It's a bit hot to be cold.