The New Global Disorder In The Age Of Economic Nationalism – OpEd
In a world long guided by the principles of multilateralism and liberal trade, the contemporary global landscape is rapidly slipping into what observers now call the “New Global Disorder.” This disorder is not the product of a singular event, but rather the convergence of multiple crises; a resurgence of protectionist trade policies, geopolitical realignments, wars, weakened global institutions, and economic volatility. What once appeared as momentary shocks are now systemic features, signaling a deeper structural transformation in the international order.
At the forefront of this global realignment is the intensifying economic confrontation between the United States and China, the world’s two largest economies. Recently, President Donald Trump introduced sweeping tariffs targeting Chinese imports, raising duties as high as 145% on a wide range of goods, including steel, semiconductors, and electric vehicles.
China’s response was swift and calculated; 125% tariffs on American goods ranging from agricultural exports like soybeans to industrial equipment, coupled with targeted restrictions on U.S. firms operating in China, including revoking licenses and delaying customs processes. These actions signal more than economic retaliation – they are geopolitical postures in a contest for influence over global trade norms and technological supremacy.
The immediate impact on global markets was jarring. Within a week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped over 3.5%, while the S&P 500 and Nasdaq experienced their worst performances since late 2022. Bond markets also reacted strongly, with yields on 10-year U.S. Treasuries surging to 4.35%, their highest level since early 2024, as investors demanded higher returns amid mounting fiscal uncertainty. The volatility reverberated globally, with European and Asian markets shedding trillions in value, reflecting fears of a deepening trade recession.
The ripple effects of the tariff war have exposed vulnerabilities in supply chains that had, until recently, been optimized for cost and efficiency rather than resilience. According to a recent report by the World Trade Organization (WTO), global trade volumes in the first quarter of 2025 shrank by 1.2% compared to the same period in 2024. This contraction marks the third consecutive quarter of declining trade, driven largely by tariff-induced bottlenecks, disrupted shipping routes, and declining consumer confidence.
Meanwhile, the United Kingdom finds itself caught in the crosscurrents of this disorder. Already grappling with post-Brexit economic uncertainty and sluggish growth – GDP expanded just 0.6% in 2024 – the UK now faces added pressure from global financial instability. The Bank of England, in its latest Financial Stability Report, warned that global economic shocks could precipitate a rapid unwinding of leveraged positions held by hedge funds and other shadow banking entities. The central bank expressed concerns that such a scenario could trigger a broader credit squeeze, particularly as corporate debt levels remain elevated in the UK and across much of Europe.
Symbolic of this economic vulnerability is the recent move by the British government to explore nationalizing the Scunthorpe steel plant, one of the country’s last remaining steel producers. The decision comes amid fears that the collapse of British Steel could lead to thousands of job losses and a further erosion of the country’s industrial base. The company, like many others, has been caught in a vice of high energy costs, global price volatility, and now, restricted access to markets due to U.S.-China decoupling and disrupted trade flows.
Across the Atlantic, Wall Street titans are increasingly vocal in their criticism of Washington’s confrontational stance. Jamie Dimon, CEO of JPMorgan Chase, warned in a recent investor call that the tariff war could “unravel decades of cooperation and trust that have underpinned global economic growth”. While some industries may benefit in the short term from protectionist policies, the broader consensus among financial institutions is that long-term consequences include inflationary pressures, reduced investment, and weakened alliances.
Beyond trade and finance, geopolitical instability continues to erode the predictability of international relations. The war in Ukraine, now in its third year, shows no signs of abating. The conflict has drained European resources and pushed NATO to its limits. Meanwhile, tensions in the Middle East have escalated, with conflict between Israel and Iran drawing in regional powers and threatening energy supplies. Attacks by Houthi on shipping vessels in the Red Sea have forced rerouting of cargo traffic away from the Suez Canal, increasing transportation costs by over 30% and adding weeks to delivery times.
The situation in Africa also remains dire. In Sudan, a brutal civil war has displaced over 8 million people and killed more than 500,000 since April 2023, according to UN estimates. The violence has spilled over into neighboring Chad and South Sudan, creating a humanitarian crisis and putting pressure on already fragile borders and governance structures. These conflict zones serve as a stark reminder that instability in one region can quickly transcend borders, affecting supply chains, refugee flows, and global health security.
Amid this instability, international institutions appear increasingly paralyzed. The WTO, once the bedrock of a rules-based trade system, is struggling to mediate disputes in a climate where major economies ignore its rulings. The United Nations Security Council remains deadlocked on key crises due to veto politics, while the G7 and G20 struggle to produce unified responses to emerging threats. The rise of regional blocs, such as BRICS+, now including countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran, underscores the fragmentation of global consensus and the shift toward multi-polarity.
In response, many companies are pursuing risk mitigation strategies once considered drastic. Nearshoring and friendshoring – relocating manufacturing to politically aligned or geographically closer nations. Mexico, for instance, has seen a 15% year-over-year increase in foreign direct investment from the U.S., while Vietnam and India are emerging as alternative manufacturing hubs. Yet this transition is not seamless. Infrastructure deficits, labor market mismatches, and regulatory inconsistencies in these new destinations present fresh challenges.
The private sector is also accelerating the adoption of advanced analytics and AI to model supply chain disruptions and predict geopolitical risk. However, these tools are not immune to the fundamental unpredictability of the current moment. In a world where trade routes can be blocked by drones, tariffs imposed overnight, or economies throttled by sanctions, traditional models of business planning and investment are being rendered obsolete.
The New Global Disorder represents more than a departure from global integration – it marks the end of a predictable world system and the beginning of a fragmented, uncertain age. While globalization once promised prosperity through interdependence, the new reality demands a recalibration toward security, resilience, and strategic autonomy. Policymakers, businesses, and citizens alike must navigate this new landscape with caution, adaptability, and a renewed commitment to preserving the institutions and norms that still hold the promise of cooperation.
