Connecting the Geopolitics of Three Theatres: A perspective from Vietnam

Can we live in a world where peace and prosperity can still prevail? Uncertainty and instability have continued to define the global geopolitical landscape. Even worse, regional and global rivalries intensified last year, involving more stakeholders, and profoundly affecting worldwide security and economy. Such tectonic geopolitical developments as Ukrainian forces’ incursion into Russia’s Kursk region, North Korean soldiers on the ground in the Ukraine conflict, Israeli strikes in Iran, Lebanon and Syria, and increasing Chinese military drills of encirclement in the Taiwan Straits region have hurled the world into uncharted waters. As a consequence of these developments, the three theatres, i.e. Ukraine, the Middle East, and East Asia, find themselves in the worst geopolitical environment since the end of the Cold War.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the conflict in the Middle East have entered a new and more transformative stage; meanwhile simmering tensions continue to characterize the Korean Peninsula, the Taiwan Straits and the South China Sea. None of these three developments show an obvious middle ground for compromise or even, less ambitiously, a way to lower the tension. Of the three regions, East Asia is still the place where players hopefully still have cooler heads.

In the Ukraine theatre, Kyiv has had a difficult time, notwithstanding some Ukrainian penetration into Russian territory in the Kursk region. Uncertain US support, public war weariness, a divided EU and the failure of its summer counteroffensive in 2024 have all left Ukraine vulnerable to sustained Russian pressure and strikes. The growing disinterest in the protracted war among various Western publics and leaders have lent a hand to Russian President Putin’s ambitions in Ukraine. Kyiv has come to realize that it must rely heavily on itself for survival. 

US President-elect Trump has promised to end that conflict, but the question remains on how he can achieve this while the Ukrainian and Russian visions of a peace settlement differ sharply. Indeed, Russia’s President Putin has demonstrated little to no interest in serious negotiations. Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Zelensky does not like the idea of bargaining “land for peace.” The most likely short-term scenario is that the new Trump administration may continue extending military aid to Kyiv, but while insisting that European allies step up their own military assistance.

The Middle East theatre is in deep chaos. Over the past year, the region has witnessed an increased outbreak of hostilities between rival powers. The shockingly brutal nature of the war in the Gaza Strip has rocked the whole region, putting to question the hopes for a lasting peace and solution to the conflict. Israeli leaders, unrestrained by the Biden administration, have been filled with confidence to step up the war in Gaza and expand conflicts with Iran and Hezbollah. Specifically, Israel launched military attacks on military and individual targets inside Iranian territory. In return, Iran responded by directly launching missiles into the territory of the Jewish State. In the wake of the collapse of President Bashar-al-Assad’s regime in Syria, a new regional order may soon be established, but it may not last long due to the meddling of regional and global powers who have sought to further their interests.

China remains steadfast with its interest on unification with Taiwan. China has frequently hosted large scale drills designed to send the message that Beijing has sufficient power to blockade the island and prevent US allies from coming to its rescue. The return of Trump to the White House may create ambivalence for the Taiwanese leaders this time since the returning US president has criticized the island’s success in becoming a semiconductor powerhouse, in his view, at the expense of the US. There are significant signs that Beijing is currently more preoccupied with uplifting its lacklustre economy rather than it is keen on any immediate conflictual adventure. Beijing is looking to improve relations with Japan as a way to strengthen trade relations amid a potentially impending tariff war with the incoming Trump administration. 

The outlook for the world in 2025 is rather bleak. The ideal of a rules-based order, painstakingly preserved since the end of the Cold War, is receding away from what is being practiced now. International institutions such as the United Nations have proved toothless as a platform to resolve disputes at flashpoints. Countries in the Global South have not yet clarified whether they will uphold the international law or maximize their national interests. Economic nationalism is on the rise wth a return of industrial policy in many places.  Global cooperation is at its low point. Ukraine and the Middle East may not find prospects for peace any time soon. 

Viet Nam, amidst the turmoil, has been trying to boost its position on the global stage. To some extent, Hanoi’s leaders have been successfully playing both sides of trade between China and the US, arguably following in the footsteps of India. Nevertheless, it is uncertain whether these actions will continue the rise of Viet Nam’s geopolitical influence, or if the country may fail to respond flexibly to the unpredictability of the world landscape when Trump returns to the White House. As it vies for both stability and power, Hanoi is nonetheless hopeful that it can positively contribute to the balanced security structure in East Asia.