FROM THE OUTSIDE | What now?

Por

José Carreño Figueras

Compartir

Publicado: 3/3/2025 · 4:35 p.m. MX | Actualizado: 3/3/2025 · 4:35 p.m. MX

The aftermath of the highly publicized clash between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky has sent shockwaves across the globe, shaping what could become a very different world.

A world in which the new U.S. administration has “incinerated” 80 years of postwar leadership and doctrine, turning into what the Financial Times bluntly described as a “brazen predator,” aligning itself with Russia and other nations once considered U.S. adversaries.

The situation has become increasingly complex for Ukraine. The Trump administration’s reluctance to commit to Ukraine’s security, despite obligations dating back to 1994, coupled with efforts to force a peace agreement brokered between the U.S. and Russia without Ukraine’s participation and impose an unfavorable deal to make Kyiv pay for U.S. military aid, paints a bleak picture for the war-torn nation.

Sigue leyendo:

Trudeau responde a Trump sobre imposición de aranceles: “Canadá tendrá una respuesta extremadamente fuerte”

Donald Trump ha ratificado la imposición de impuestos para este martes 4 de febrero

For Europe, the implications are dire. With Russia’s war in Ukraine still ongoing, the Baltic states—Latvia, Estonia, and Lithuania—watch nervously, fearing the resurgence of a powerful neighbor that forcibly controlled them until 1991.

And they are not alone. Poles, Romanians, Albanians—all have legitimate concerns about Russia’s apparent attempt to rebuild its security sphere by surrounding itself with a “buffer zone” of aligned nations.

The ripple effect extends across the entire European continent. While opinions on handling Ukraine’s defense vary, there is broad consensus on growing distrust toward the U.S. and its unpredictable political shifts.

This transatlantic drift was evident during French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to Washington on Monday and again on Thursday when British Prime Minister Keith Starmer met with U.S. officials.

However, the most evident sign came Friday, with the disastrous Trump-Zelensky meeting at the White House.

At first glance, the biggest winners appear to be Russia and China. Their positions have remained consistent for decades; unlike the U.S., they have not alienated their allies.

In practical terms, Trump’s global strategy seems to reshape the geopolitical landscape into a system dominated by three central power poles, each surrounded by aligned nations—whether by choice or force.

It remains to be seen what kind of world this will create and how stable such an arrangement might be.

The invasion of Ukraine has already demonstrated that new technologies can temporarily level the battlefield, significantly impacting military strategy and conflict development.

But beyond that, we live in a world in transition—one whose destination no one can reasonably predict.

José Carreño Figueras