How the collapse of the Soviet Union will shape today’s geopolitics | UPSC Current Affairs News

In the previous article Collapse of the Soviet Union: A turning point in world geopoliticsthe internal and external factors that caused the collapse of the Soviet Union were discussed. This article analyzes the broader effects of the collapse that have shaped geopolitics more than three decades later.

The dissolution of the Soviet Union dismantled the ideological “Iron Curtain” and paved the way for a new world order characterized by the rise of great powers such as India and China, which exerted great influence on world politics.

But how did the collapse of the Soviet Union reshape the global balance of power, and what were its immediate political and economic consequences? conflict and tensions in the wider region?

“The end of history”

The dissolution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) in December 1991 created 15 new republics, but more importantly, it marked the end of an important era in history. The socialist framework that bound the Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies collapsed, the bipolar world order gave way to a unipolar world, and the United States became the sole superpower in the immediate post-Cold War era.

American political scientist Francis Fukuyama described this moment as “the end of history” and posited that it would be “the end point of the evolution of human ideology and the universalization of Western liberal democracy.” Famous. The collapse of the Soviet Union marked the decline of Western liberalism and the strong ideological contrast to market-based economies. Although countries such as China, North Korea, and Cuba continued to profess allegiance to communism, they too adapted to market forces in light of new global economic realities.

Globalization and “shock therapy”

The collapse of the Soviet Union was marked by the ideological victory of capitalism and the integration of Eastern European and former Soviet states into the world economy, accelerating the process of globalization. As communism was discredited and democracy was restored, most former Soviet states turned to Western and market-based economies, seeing capitalism as the solution to their economic challenges.

The United States, Western European countries, and the Bretton Woods institutions (such as the International Monetary Fund or IMF) extended financial assistance to these transition economies. However, this aid came with conditions such as free trade agreements, market deregulation, and privatization of state-owned enterprises, values ​​that were diametrically opposed to Soviet socialist policies. After an initial few years of indecision, these reforms were integrated into IMF-sponsored “shock therapy,” a strategy aimed at rapidly transforming from a command economy to a market-driven system.

While “shock therapy” expanded the influence of Western capitalism, it had a severe impact on domestic markets, as rapid economic liberalization led to hyperinflation, rising unemployment, and deepening inequality. Older generations, especially those without wealth or savings, lamented the dissolution of the Soviet Union. Each republic of the former Soviet Union charted its own course, but the process of globalization and integration into the world economy turned out to be much more difficult than initially expected.

Politically, this period also saw an uneven transition to democracy. In Eastern Europe, Poland, the Czech Republic, and Hungary transitioned to democracy. In contrast, many countries in Eurasia became authoritarian. Although the appearance of democracy was maintained by holding periodic elections, power remained highly centralized. In addition to economic difficulties and political contradictions, nationalist and ethnic tensions were also another serious concern in the post-Soviet era.

nationalistic and ethnic conflicts

In the late 1980s, the seeds of nationalist and ethnic tensions were sown in many republics of the Soviet Union under perestroika (reorganization) and glasnost (opening), which encouraged political expression and national self-determination. After the collapse of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia, these tensions escalated into ethnic conflicts and civil wars in the Balkans, Caucasus, Georgia, Moldova, Bosnia, Kosovo, Chechnya, and Tajikistan.

Many of these conflicts arose from long-simmering ethnic rivalries, unresolved territorial disputes, and struggles for power and identity in the vacuums left by the collapse of multi-ethnic states like the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. In some cases, these nationalist and nationalist conflicts are in response to ruling elites’ efforts to quell conflicts and rebellions by marginalizing or excluding certain groups from power-sharing arrangements. , intersected with terrorist groups such as al-Qaeda (e.g. in Tajikistan). In Chechnya and Uzbekistan, Muslim rebels were often labeled “jihadists” or “terrorists” and faced severe repression. These conflicts left deep scars on the affected areas.

geopolitical influence

This change in global power structures has enabled increased intervention by the United States, particularly in West Asia, such as the Gulf War (1991), the invasion of Afghanistan (2001), and the Iraq War (2003). These interventions reflected Washington’s strategic priorities in a world that no longer faces significant ideological or military opposition.

In fact, the chaos in Afghanistan and the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict are byproducts of the Cold War. The former has its roots in the Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989) and the proxy dynamics of the Cold War, while the latter resurfaced during the Soviet era. Union collapses. Meanwhile, the Russia-Ukraine war has clearly revived Cold War dynamics between Russia and the West.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), created to counter Soviet influence, expanded eastward. Russia views NATO’s eastward expansion as a strategic threat. As Russia recovered from the shock of the Soviet Union’s collapse, it began to consolidate its power and support Vladimir Putin’s Soviet-era ambitions. The invasion of Georgia (2008), the annexation of Crimea (2014), and the ongoing war in Ukraine reflect Russia’s ambition to reassert its status as a world power.

Russia-Ukraine war

For most of its history, Ukraine was part of the Russian Empire and then part of the Soviet Union. Ukraine declared independence in December 1991, in what was described as a “civilized divorce.” However, in the years following independence, Ukraine was caught between the competing geopolitical interests of Russia and the United States. Ukraine’s move into the Western sphere of influence and its desire to join NATO and the European Union were seen by Russia as a direct threat to its security and regional dominance.

In 2022, Russia invaded Ukraine in what it characterized as a “special military operation” aimed at “demilitarizing and denazifying” the country. But the invasion not only exhausted Russia domestically, but also tested its geopolitical influence. While Russia has pursued alliances and interventions in other regions, such as Syria, it has expanded its capabilities by focusing on Ukraine, including quietly withdrawing troops from its bases in Hmeimim and Tartus with a Turkish-backed advance. It’s causing frustration.

multipolar world order

Thus, the dissolution of the Soviet Union not only tore down the “Iron Curtain” but also marked the beginning of a new world era. It integrated previously isolated countries and regions into a new global economic and political system. However, this change also introduced significant uncertainty. The collapse of the Soviet Union created a power vacuum, particularly in Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and the Caucasus, leading to ethnic conflicts, civil wars, and prolonged instability.

Moreover, over the past two decades, Russia has reaffirmed itself as a major player in world politics. This era also witnessed the emergence of a multipolar world order, with countries such as China, India, Brazil, and Turkiye exerting significant influence at the global level. As such, Russia now operates in a world that is very different from that of the Cold War era.

The fluid power relations of this era are evident in conflicts like Syria, where multiple actors, including Russia, the United States, Turkiye, and Iran, have pursued overlapping and competing agendas. This highlights that the contemporary geopolitical situation is shaped by the complex interaction of regional and global actors. Although this multipolarity offers opportunities for cooperation, it also poses challenges as competing interests are fragmented and often lead to a conflict-prone world politics.

Post the question you read

How did the collapse of the Soviet Union reshape the global balance of power, especially the role of the United States as the sole superpower?

How did newly independent states struggle to establish stable political systems after the collapse of the Soviet Union?

How did international institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank influence the economic reforms of post-Soviet states?

How did the collapse of the Soviet Union shape the underlying factors of the Russo-Ukrainian war?

What impact did the collapse of the Soviet Union have on regional conflicts such as Chechnya, Nagorno-Karabakh, and Transnistria?

(Mohammad Reyaz is an International Studies PhD from Jamia Millia Islami and an Assistant Professor at Arya University, Kolkata.)

Please share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special Articles to ashiya.parveen@indianexpress.com.

Subscribe to UPSC Newsletter to stay updated with last week’s news.

Telegram Channel – Join IndianExpress UPSC Hub for latest UPSC articles and follow us on Instagram and X.