Contenu du sommaire : COVID-19 : choc sanitaire et géopolitique

The unforeseeable COVID-19 crisis raises fundamental questions on a number of levels. It calls into question the current form of globalization, as well as the neoliberal ideology that has accompanied it until now. It casts doubt upon a system of global governance that has broken down and been overtaken by national egoism and the temptations of closed door policies. It calls for the mobilization of the instruments of resilience of democracies, and of a European Union that must fight for its future, and in particular for the confidence of its peoples.

COVID-19 acts as a catalyst in international relations. It accelerates and amplifies trends that were emerging before the crisis, such as the central and growing role of cyberspace, the normalization of surveillance capitalism, or the sharpening of Sino-American rivalry. Europe is becoming a major battleground between Washington and Beijing. Maintaining European sovereignty will require significant investments, particularly in 5G.

Trumpism takes the form of a presidency that is more demagogic than authoritarian, whose main dynamic is an exacerbated and personalized polarization. Such a development undermines the president's capacity to govern. Thus, Trump's legacy risks being reduced to the conditions that allowed him to come to power in 2016 and that remain palpable: the personalization of power, media omnipresence, the deregulation of campaign financing, and electoral apathy.

On the economic front, Donald Trump has kept his campaign promises. He has renegotiated international agreements, launched a major tax reform, and set about deregulating the US economy. This policy paid off: by early 2020, stock market indices were at record highs, gross domestic product continued to grow, and unemployment was at an all-time low. Then COVID-19 struck, reshuffling the cards and ushering in a period of uncertainty.

In 2016, Donald Trump ran as the candidate for change, and, once elected, he set about deconstructing the legacy of his predecessors. His vision of the world is based on the belief that the United States is being cheated by its allies and that multilateral institutions harm American interests. He has sought to cast doubt upon the international order, which he deems to be just another set of restraints on American power, and to launch the US into an era of geopolitical confrontation with China.

The results of the US presidential election in November 2020 are very uncertain. If Donald Trump is re-elected, he is likely to pursue a foreign policy consistent with that of his first term. In the event of a Democratic victory, we would see a partial return to the fundamentals of Barack Obama's diplomacy. The Sino-American confrontation will undoubtedly be the central issue of the next few years. On this matter, the Democrats would not totally abandon Trump's legacy.

The term “arms race” does not accurately reflect the events of the Cold War, let alone the multipolar logics that have followed it. This new nuclear multipolarity favors individual trajectories, in both quantitative and qualitative approaches to the development of arsenals, while running the risk of encouraging rivalries that could, in the long run, threaten strategic balances and the nuclear status quo.

The reform of the Franc Zone announced by Emmanuel Macron and Alassane Ouattara shakes up some of its foundations, while perpetuating others under another form of cooperation, whose terms remain to be defined. If this reform is to be truly far-reaching, it should be integrated first of all into an overall framework for the development of Franc Zone countries and, more broadly, into a process that includes other African countries.

By winning the December 2019 general election with a large majority, Boris Johnson gained a free hand to negotiate the terms of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. After being postponed several times, Brexit finally took place on January 31, 2020. A transition period then began, in which the terms for future relations between the UK and the EU must be set. The stumbling blocks will be numerous and the negotiations arduous.

The accident at the Fukushima Daiichi power plant in 2011 prompted Japan to reduce the share of nuclear power in its energy mix. The country then entered the “era of decommissioning.” The closure of nuclear power plants is a long and complex process. Some fundamental issues—such as radioactive waste management—have not yet been resolved. While other countries are moving toward decommissioning, the Japanese example deserves particular attention.

Japan maintains tense relations with its Asian neighbors. Those between Tokyo and Seoul are particularly strained, with the memory of the occupation of Korea during the Japanese imperial period still vivid. Tensions have crystallized in particular around the symbol of the rising sun, which is still used by the Japanese armed forces. This symbol is also displayed by some supporters in sporting competitions and could pose a problem at the Tokyo Olympics.

Several European countries are unwilling or unable to join the European Union (EU). The United Kingdom could become their ringleader by giving new impetus to the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). Proper linkages between the EU and the EFTA would allow a historic unification of the continent. Large states such as Ukraine and Turkey would be integrated into this system. Such a project would hamper Russian ambitions on the eastern margins of Europe.

Since October 17, 2019, anger has been brewing in Lebanon. Overwhelmed by taxes, inflation, government incompetence, social injustice, and corruption, the demonstrators have been giving voice to their revolt. Their determination, however, collides with a political class resolute on maintaining its hold on power. Is a political upheaval possible in Lebanon, given the country's history, the functioning of its institutions, and the composite nature of Lebanese society?