You will shortly be re-directed to the publisher's website
Future historians will judge that the pandemic marked a fork in the road
Five years may seem insignificant in historical terms, yet January 2020 already feels like the distant past. The Covid-19 pandemic reshaped not only our daily lives but also the global socio-political landscape, marking the end of one era and the start of another.
The last Days of Peace
The 50th Anniversary Forum in Davos in January 2020 offered a snapshot of a world on the verge of transformation. Swedish teenager Greta Thunberg, then at the height of her fame, dominated the spotlight as a symbol of left-leaning environmental activism. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump, the quintessential anti-globalist, stood in stark contrast, delivering his “America First” message to a room of cautious listeners. European elites clung to the hope that Trump’s presidency would soon be overturned by a Democratic victory in the upcoming election.
Behind closed doors, however, the discussions revealed a different picture. Influential figures in politics, business, and culture privately admitted that global processes were increasingly slipping out of their control. Yet they still hoped that with collective effort and ingenuity, the course could be corrected.
Amid these musings, a growing shadow loomed – a new infection spreading in China. Few at Davos grasped the gravity of the situation, and most viewed the virus solely through the lens of its potential impact on China’s economy, which the world relied on.
Looking back, it was the last “peaceful” Davos. In the years that followed, the agenda was dominated first by the pandemic, then by a series of escalating armed conflicts, from Eastern Europe to the Middle East.
The Covid-19 pandemic abruptly halted globalization in March 2020. Borders closed, economies froze, and global supply chains ground to a halt. For the first time in decades, the foundational freedoms of global integration — movement of people, goods, services, and capital — were significantly disrupted. Only the flow of information remained unimpeded, paradoxically amplifying the scale of global panic.
The liberal world order that had thrived on globalization faced its greatest test. For years, globalization had been seen as an inevitable, almost natural process — beyond the control of individual states. But in a matter of weeks, it became clear that this interconnected system could be paused, challenging the assumption that globalization was an irreversible force.
For all the upheaval, however, the world did not collapse. States adapted, economies adjusted, and even the poorest countries found ways to endure. This resilience shattered the narrative that liberal globalization was the pinnacle of human achievement. It became apparent that this era, like others before it, was finite.
Pandemic as a catalyst
The pandemic served as a catalyst for preexisting tensions, exposing weaknesses in societies, governments, and international institutions. Countries faced unprecedented stress, while governments used the crisis to experiment with new forms of governance and control. Measures that might have faced resistance in normal times were justified in the name of public health.
The crisis also paved the way for strategic recalibrations. For example, Azerbaijan’s decisive victory in the Second Karabakh War and renewed tensions between India and China in Ladakh unfolded amid the global fog of the pandemic.
Perhaps most importantly, the pandemic demonstrated that the world could function without the established global order. This realization undermined the notion of a single, unified international system and laid the groundwork for a more fragmented, multipolar world.
The pandemic revealed the inefficiencies and lack of credibility of international institutions. The “every nation for itself” approach that dominated the early months of the crisis further eroded trust in global norms and fueled the legitimization of national self-interest as a guiding principle.
This shift towards national security and self-reliance accelerated the diffusion of global influence. The pandemic showed that smaller, nimbler countries with effective governance could outperform traditional great powers. As a result, the global balance of power became more diffuse, with no single pole exerting overwhelming influence.
This new reality raises questions about the term “multipolar world.” Instead of a few dominant poles, we now see a collection of significant players of varying strength, interacting in complex and situational ways.
The importance of neighbors
Another key lesson from the pandemic was the growing importance of regionalism and proximity. Shorter supply chains proved more resilient, and neighboring states became increasingly vital to each other’s political and economic stability. This trend is evident in regions such as the Middle East, the South Caucasus, and even North America.
As military and political tensions rise, neighboring states are playing a greater role than distant powers, reshaping the dynamics of influence.
In many ways, the Ukraine crisis that followed the pandemic mirrored the earlier disruption. Just as the pandemic severed global connections out of necessity, geopolitical decisions in 2022 further fractured the international order. Yet, once again, the world did not collapse.
Attempts to isolate Russia economically and politically have not succeeded in dismantling the global system. Instead, the system has adapted, becoming more fragmented and less rule-bound. The much-touted ‘rules-based order’ of liberal globalization has given way to a more pragmatic, albeit chaotic, approach to international relations.
This new era is characterized by ad hoc agreements and situational alliances rather than a unified set of norms and rules. While this may reduce the predictability of international relations, it also opens the door to greater flexibility and resilience.
Looking ahead
The pandemic stripped away the veneer of a stable, unified world, exposing the cracks beneath. While the immediate crisis has passed, its legacy continues to shape the global order.
The world is now in a period of transition, defined by uncertainty and competition. The liberal-globalist narrative that dominated the late 20th century has been replaced by a more fragmented, multipolar reality.
This is not to say that the future is bleak. The challenges of the past five years have also revealed the resilience of states and societies. The question now is whether the world can navigate this new phase without descending into greater conflict.
The pandemic was the catalyst for this transformation, but it was only the beginning. The next chapter of international relations will be defined by how states adapt to this new reality – and whether they can find common ground in an increasingly divided world.
This article was first published by the magazine Profile and was translated and edited by the RT team.
