Το Καζακστάν, ομοσπονδοποιημένο στην κρατική δομή της ΕΣΣΔ, χώρα της Κεντρικής Ασίας, υπέφερε επί σαράντα χρόνια (1949-89) από τις πυρηνικές δοκιμές της πάλαι πότε κραταιάς Σοβιετικής Ένωσης. Η τότε Σοβιετική Σοσιαλιστική Δημοκρατία του Καζακστάν φιλοξενούσε, έκουσα άκουσα, στο Σεμιπαλατίνσκ, πεδίο δοκιμών πυρηνικών όπλων της Μόσχας. Το Σεμιπαλατίνσκ βρίσκεται στα βορειονατολικά της αχανούς χώρας: το Καζακστάν έχει έκταση εικοσαπλάσια αυτής της Ελλάδας. Είναι όμως χώρα αραιοκατοικημένη, με πληθυσμό γύρω στα είκοσι εκατομμύρια – διπλάσιο μόνο του αντίστοιχου Ελληνικού. Τα Ρωσικά εξακολουθούν να επικρατούν ως επίσημη γλώσσα (μαζί με τα Καζακστανικά) και γλώσσα συνεννόησης των εθνικών ομάδων της χώρας. Μολαταύτα η χώρα βρίσκεται σε μεταβατικό γλωσσικό στάδιο: το κυριλλικό αλφάβητο σταδιακά εγκαταλείπεται μέχρι την πλήρη κωδικοποίηση και επισημοποίηση της χρήσης του λατινικού. Η Ρωσική μειονότητα εξακολουθεί να αποτελεί το 17 τα εκατό του πληθυσμού.

Στα σαράντα χρόνια της μεταπολεμικής ΕΣΣΔ, το Πόλυγον, όπως το Πεδίο Δοκιμών Semipalatinsk στα βορειοανατολικά της χώρας ήταν γνωστό, γνώρισε 450 πυρηνικές δοκιμές, δηλαδή περίπου μία δοκιμή κάθε μήνα. Ο όγκος και η ένταση των πυρηνικών δοκιμών άφησαν σοβαρά σημάδια στη χώρα: σοβαρή περιβαλλοντική και ως εκ τούτου ανθρωπιστική καταστροφή. Για σκοπούς σύγκρισης αναφέρουμε ότι περισσότερες από 2.000 πυρηνικές δοκιμές έχουν πραγματοποιηθεί παγκοσμίως τα τελευταία 80 χρόνια. Αν και οι εκρήξεις ήταν στιγμιαίες, οι επιπτώσεις τους – στην ανθρώπινη ζωή, στο περιβάλλον και στη γεωπολιτική σταθερότητα – εξακολουθούν να επηρεάζουν γενιές. Οι δοκιμές αυτές συχνά πραγματοποιούνταν σε απομονωμένες περιοχές, όμως οι επιπτώσεις τους είναι κάθε άλλο παρά περιορισμένες.

Έχοντας πληρώσει βαρύ τίμημα στην ανθρωπο-περιβαλλοντική καταστροφή, μετά την ανεξαρτησία η Αστάνα οικιοθελώς αποποιήθηκε του πυρηνικού οπλοστασίου της χώρας – το τέταρτο μεγαλύτερο στον κόσμο – και έκλεισε το Πόλυγον.

Κατά τα τελευταία χρόνια η Αστάνα επιδεικνύει ηγετικό ρόλο στην προώθηση της απόσυρσης των πυρηνικών όπλων. Το 2023 προήδρευσε της Επιτροπής Αφοπλισμού του ΟΗΕ συντονίζοντας τον διάλογο για την αντιμετώπιση αναδυούμενων απειλών.

Αναμφισβήτητα, το τρέχον έτος αποτελεί χρονικό ορόσημο. Εν μέσω σοβαρών γεωπολιτικών αναταράξεων – μεσούντων των πολέμων στην Ουκρανία και στην Μέση Ανατολή – λαμβάνει χώραν εντός του μηνός στη Νέα Υόρκη η Διάσκεψη Αναθεώρησης της Συνθήκης Μη Διάδοσης των Πυρηνικών Όπλων (Non Proliferation Treaty Review Conference 27 Απρίλη – 22 Μάη 2026).

Η Συνθήκη Μη Διάδοσης (ΣΜΔ) τέθηκε σε ισχύ το 1970. Μέχρι και σήμερα αποτελεί τον ακρογωνιαίο λίθο στο παγκόσμιο νομικό καθεστώς μη εξάπλωσης των πυρηνικών. Έχουν προσχωρήσει σε αυτή 191 κράτη συμπεριλαμβανομένων της Κύπρου, της Ελλάδας και της Τουρκίας και των πέντε αναγνωρισμένων πυρηνικών δυνάμεων (Βρετανίας, Γαλλίας, Κίνας, ΗΠΑ και Ρωσίας). Τέσσερεις μη αναγνωριμένες πυρηνικές δυνάμεις δεν συμμετέχουν στην ΣΜΔ: Ισραήλ, Ινδία, Πακιστάν και Βόρεια Κορέα. Η τελευταία αποσύρθηκε απο την συνθήκη το 2003. Δεν συμμετέχει επίσης το Νότιο Σουδάν.

Πρέπει να τονισθεί ότι η ΣΜΔ βασίζεται σε τρεις ίσης σημασίας πυλώνες:

1. Πρόληψη της διάδοσης των πυρηνικών όπλων και της συναφούς τεχνολογίας.
2. Προώθηση της συνεργασίας στην ειρηνική χρήση της πυρηνικής ενέργειας.
3. Επίτευξη παγκόσμιου πυρηνικού αφοπλισμού.

Στα πενήντα πέντε χρόνια της ισχύος της συνθήκης NPT τα αποτελέσματα είναι δυστυχώς απογοητευτικά: όχι μόνο οι πέντε αναγνωρισμένες πυρηνικές δυνάμεις δεν έλαβαν μέτρα για τον αφοπλισμό τους αλλά ο αριθμός των πυρηνικών δυνάμεων σχεδόν διπλασιάστηκε – σήμερα είναι εννιά.

Από πλευράς ισχύος έχουμε εκτιμήσεις για το 2024 που δείχνουν περίπου 12.500 ενεργά πυρηνικά όπλα παγκοσμίως, εκ των οποίων περίπου 3.700 είναι σε επιχειρησιακή ετοιμότητα. Στην πρωτοπορία της κούρσας των πυρηνικών εξοπλισμών βρίσκεται η Ρωσική Ομοσπονδία  με 5.900 πυρηνικά στην φαρέτρα της ακολουθούμενη από τις ΗΠΑ με περίπου 5.200. Τα υπόλοιπα επτά πυρηνικά κράτη έχουν μικρότερα οπολοστάσια με εκτιμώμενο αριθμό πυρηνικών κεφαλών ως εξής: Κίνα 500, Γαλλία 290, Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο 225, Πακιστάν 170–190, Ινδία 160–170, Ισραήλ 80–90, Βόρεια Κορέα 40–70.

Με μια αύξηση της τάξης του 11 τα εκατό σε σχέση με το 2023, οι εννιά πυρηνικές δυνάμεις υπολογίζεται ότι το 2024 δαπάνησαν 100 δις δολλάρια για το πυρηνικό τους οπλοστάσιο. Η εξοπλιστική αυτή δαπάνη είναι υπετριπλάσια του Κυπριακού ΑΕΠ ($30 δις). Η βραβευμένη με Νόμπελ Ειρήνης διεθνής ΜΚΟ ICAN σημειώνει ότι τα 42 δις από τα 100 δις επωφελήθηκαν συμβαλλόμενες μεγάλες ιδιωτικές εταιρείες στα πλαίσια των πυρηνικών εξοπλιστικών προγραμμάτων.

Τον περασμένο μήνα, το Καζακστάν προήδρευσε της Τρίτης Συνεδρίας των Κρατών Μερών της Συνθήκης Απαγόρευσης των Πυρηνικών Όπλων. Την ίδια στιγμή, εν τη σοφία του, ο ΥΠΕΞ Κωνσταντίνος Κόμπος απαντώντας σε κοινοβουλευτική ερώτηση του ηγέτη των Κυπρίων Πρασίνων υπέδειξε ότι η λιλιπούτεια Κύπρος θα παραμείνει εκτός της ως άνω σύμβασης στο παρόν στάδιο. Καθόν χρόνο η ανησυχία του Κυπριακού πληθυσμού για την (κατά)χρήση των Βρετανικών Βάσεων από σειρά πυρηνικών δυνάμεων σίγουρα δεν μειώνεται.

Ενώ η Κύπρος σέρνεται από τις βουλές των πυρηνικών δυνάμεων, η Αστάνα πρωτοστατεί αν όχι στην εξάλειψη η οποία όντως φαίνεται χείμερα, στον δραστικό περιορισμό της πυρηνικής απειλής σε ένα μεταβαλλόμενο κόσμο ο οποίος γίνεται όλο και πιο επικίνδυνος με την έξαρση των περιφερειακών συγκρούσεων οι οποίες αποκτούν όλοένα και περισσότερο παγκόσμιο χαρακτήρα.

*Ο Δρ Γιώργος Λεβέντης, Διευθυντής του International Security Forum Κύπρου, συμμετέχει στο Ευρωπαϊκό Δίκτυο Ειδημόνων για την Μη Διάδοση των Όπλων Μαζικής Καταστροφής.

The 2025 EU Non-Proliferation & Disarmament Conference was organised by the Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI) of Rome. Remarkably, this year, the IAI celebrates its 60^th anniversary of existence. The Istituto Affari Internazionali (IAI), an important think tank in Italy focused on international affairs, receives funding primarily from the Italian government through various budgetary allocations. As of 2025, its annual funding from the Italian state is approximately €4.2 million.

In sharp contrast, the International Security Forum Cyprus has, in the seventeen years of its operation, received zero funding from the Cypriot government. Nevertheless, ISF raises the security and foreign policy-oriented research flag of the Republic of Cyprus where there is no presence otherwise.

The Brussels EU Disarmament Conference is the annual flagship event that brings together experts from governments, international organizations and research institutions worldwide to discuss all aspects of the EU’s non-proliferation and disarmament agenda. Invariably, this agenda, includes arms control, chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, space security and emerging technologies. Over two days, participants engaged in open and substantive discussions aimed at advancing global non-proliferation and disarmament objectives. The Conference also seeks to support the implementation of the EU Strategic Compass. It formulates policy recommendations to strengthen the EU’s role in these fields.

As these lines are drawn the 20th Central Committee of the Communist Party of China sits in its fourth plenary session (20-23 October 2025). Beijing’s brand of diplomacy has made extensive achievements in the process of reform and opening up despite the tangled and complex domestic and international situations.

It has earnestly sought to achieve progress through stability, promote reform through openness, and raise the capacity of openness to expand international cooperation. China’s diplomacy also pursues an unparalleled “firm and resolute” independent peaceful policy, and pushes to build a community of common destiny based on respect and application of common values. Therefore, Chinese diplomacy has put forward the four global initiatives namely development, security, civilization, and governance with the aim of achieving international multilateralism on the basis of fairness and justice and respect for the rights and sovereignty of all countries to achieve peace and sustainable development.

Hence, it is necessary to pay attention to reform and openness by uniting efforts, mobilizing forces, achieving progress in all seriousness and vitality, and then completing the construction of a modern and strong system.

The Importance of Success of Chinese diplomacy

Beijing put forward a set of initiatives and ideas that are in harmony with the spirit and aspirations of international law to resolve most international issues. The importance of this lies in the reconsideration of the current international system to work on a sound and just basis, doing away from strengthening the control of one or some parties over the international decision-making process in order to achieve special interests, or reduce respect for the sovereignty and rights of states or interfere in their internal affairs of others. For China every state is equal under the international law in rights and duties.

Chinese diplomacy has come through with a series of initiatives towards the most outstanding international issues. These initiatives offer actual solutions in line with local and international aspirations and laws. Beijing did not impose solutions in order to build alliances against any party, nor did it seek to compliment one party at the expense of the rights of others. China’s aim has been of one of re-activating international institutions to resolve fundamental issues. The absence of multilateralism in international governance means the formation of groups and alliances in order to strengthen control away from the Rule of Law, Justice and international consensus.

Therefore, the importance of supporting the success of the goals and principles of Chinese diplomacy is a collective responsibility that everyone bears by cooperating with China to solve vital international issues, especially since the success of the goals of that diplomacy concerns not only the Chinese, but also others with the goal of achieving sustainable peace and development. The world is going through complex challenges and circumstances, and this requires strengthening cooperation and joint action from all parties in order to achieve collective and common benefit in maintaining international peace and security, as well as sustaining the effectiveness of the two international covenants on human rights in 1976, the International Covenant on civil and political rights and the International Covenant on economic, social and cultural rights.

2013: Landmark Year: Belt and Road is Launched

In 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping launched the Belt and Road Initiative, which the Chinese leadership considers a successful attempt to strengthen regional and international communication to embrace a more stable, open and prosperous future on the basis of equality among all without exception, based on mutual respect and benefit. Between 2021-2025, Chinese President Xi Jinping also launched the Four Global Initiatives for:

1.Development 2. Security 3. Civilization 4. Governance  

in order to collectively confirm that all of humanity has a historic opportunity to promote unity, sustainable cooperation, human solidarity, and civilized exchanges.

Accordingly, Chinese diplomacy is seeking to support and strengthen the work of the United Nations to be more effective to solve various international core issues. Multilateralism is at the core of Beijing’s foreign and security policy.

Effectiveness of Chinese diplomacy in the international system

The United Nations Organization was founded in 1945 after the Second World War. The Charter of the United Nations specified that the purpose of its establishment is to protect international peace and security, and the development of international relations between states on the basis of mutual respect for all regardless of the size, wealth and power of each state, as well as respect for the principle of equal rights. In this context, Chinese diplomacy aims to strengthen the role and status of the international system by emphasizing the international consensus. In Beijing’s frame of mind domination by any strong member state must be ruled out.

The Middle East region has been living in a state of instability as a result of the continued absence of a solution to the Palestinian issue, eroding international peace and security.

The root cause of the ME instability is the disregard of influential countries to abide by international law. Chinese diplomacy seeks through effective cooperation with the countries of the region to promote Arab and regional unity and solidarity in order to arrive at inclusive stability and prosperity.

The Global Governance Initiative, recently launched by President Xi Jinping, coinciding with the anniversary of Victory Day in September 2025, emphasizes the importance of the governance of the international system to be more powerful and effective in solving all international issues. Salient among these is the governance of the Middle East through the resolution of its outstanding issues.

Primary task is to address the Palestinian issue on the basis of justice, equity and the rule of international law. This is the only way to achieve security therefore peace, stability and prosperity.

The Workshop of Young Researchers on Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy was held at the Songjiang campus of SISU on 30 September 2025. The conference was organised by the School of International Relations and Public Affairs (SIRPA) of SISU and the Study Center on Diplomacy of the Shanghai Universities.

Professor Yang Jiemian, former president of the Shanghai Association of International Relations and Chairman of the Academic Advisory Committee of the Shanghai Institutes of International Studies, delivered a keynote address entitled My vision of the Systematic Construction and Academic Interpretation of Xi Jinping’s Diplomatic Thought.

The workshop was attended by young SIRPA graduates, as well as current graduate students keenly interested in mainstream theoretical research. Participating graduate students came from no less than eight country wide institutions as follows:

Shanghai Jiao Tong University

East China Normal University

Shanghai Academy of Social Sciences

Shanghai Institute of International Studies

Jiangsu University

Jiaxing University

Tongling University

Gansu University of Political Science and Law.

The workshop was chaired by Professor Guo Shu Yong, Party General-Secretary of SIPRA at SISU, and the leading expert of the Xi Jinping Thought Institute of Diplomacy. Professor Chang Can from the Department of research results and platform management of the Research Office at SISU, and Professor Liang Kun, Director of the Institute’s Office, also shared their practical experiences.

In his closing speech, Professor Guo praised the brilliant speeches delivered by the graduates, noting that the Chinese Communist Party committee of SISU, the university leadership, and its bodies attach great importance to academic research of Xi Jinping’s Diplomatic Thought, the practice of the “three progressions”.

Co-Authors: Dr. Morris Mottale & Dr. Yiorghos Leventis

At the end of the Cold War, in Washington and Western Europe there was a consensus that a new world order was coming around. Overlooked was the fact that an Islamic revolution in Iran led by an octogenarian Ayatollah brought a series of upheavals in the Islamic world that saw radical terrorism, revolutions in Africa, and civil wars that continue to this day. These events were capped years later by conflicts in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, North Africa, and Sub Saharan Africa and eventually a radical Islamic takeover in Afghanistan. In short, the end of the Cold War brought an endless list of conflicts of which the two outstanding ones are the war in Ukraine and the war within the Gaza Strip. There are at least fifty other wars in Africa and Asia but they do not make the news, including conflicts in Somalia, Central Africa Republic, Ethiopia, Sudan, Southern Sudan, and The Republic of Congo among many others.

The preeminence of international news networks such as CNN and the BBC along with social media brings the focus solely on the Arab-Israeli conflict and American politics. By the year 2000, there was a consensus that the new International System would see antagonism between China and the United States. By 2025, Chinese commercial trade preeminence was challenging the European Union and the North American free trade area. From 2000 onward, the Chinese set out to create a new economic block known as BRICS which is composed of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, and by 2025 they included Egypt, Ethiopia, the UAE, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. The direct challenge to the US in many areas of the International System began with the challenge that Radical Islam, shaped and manipulated by the Ayatollah, posed against the US, France, and Great Britain. The outstanding tool for Islamic expansion was the Arab-Israeli conflict and more specifically the Palestinian issue. Within a few years of the establishment of what appeared to be peace treaties between Israel and some of its neighbors (Abraham Accords), the Islamic world and the Global South saw antagonism to the existence of the Jewish state, with regional conflicts in which conflicting parties took sides in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Interestingly, the same parties, with some exceptions including India, are also members of BRICS.

The preeminence of the United States – however much challenged by China, Russia, and Iran – did not decrease the importance of the United States presidential elections of 2024. For the world, the US election was bound to be a defining moment in international politics, regardless of the outcome. The outstanding elements in the International System are the resentment and imitation of American cultural trends, including US mass media. What passes for American soft power is affirmative action and the woke ideology. The US stands out as an agent of cultural change. The anti-women movement in Islamic society has been influenced by the globalization of American culture and the preeminent role of women in American and European society. Misogyny has become a political ideology in the Islamic world. The competition between the major powers is compounded by the rise of new technologies, shaped by electronic communication, artificial intelligence, and cyber technology.

In 2013, China proposed changes to global currency to bypass, if not outright abolish the US Dollar. The original BRIC group was dubbed very loosely the “BRICS,” including Brazil, China, Russia, India, and South Africa. In time, other countries also joined. Venezuela and Turkey are seeking entry to the trade group, which has gained momentum.

The official members of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization are primarily Asian, Arabic and nations within the former Soviet Union, but growing interest across the Middle East and South America is notable. In 2004, the SCO officially established relations with the United Nations as an observer, in addition to other international bodies.

Two principle international conflicts, the Gaza War and Ukraine, along with conflicts in Africa and Asia have sped up the process of this new world order, where the Anglo-American ideal of a rule-based system is being challenged on the grounds that it is fundamentally pro-American, pro-Liberal, and pro-Capitalist. The rise of conflicts within the Islamic world and the widespread anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish and anti-Semitic positions of many countries from Latin America to Asia to Africa are adding another dimension to this new world order yet to come.

Rise of Islamic Politics in the West

The rise of Islamic politics in France, Germany, Belgium, Holland, Canada the United States and the United Kingdom has influenced domestic electoral politics. In Europe, for example, the rise of the so-called extremist parties like AfD (Alternative for Germany) or the Rassemblement National in France have given new weight to the idea that liberal democratic order, which has characterized the development of Western Europe and America in the post-war period, is not accepted by large portions of the population. Similar trends are evident across Europe, with the rise of Vox from Spain, 5 Stelle in Italy, and BNP in the United Kingdom.

Speaking of the latter, let’s take a closer statistical look at the upsurge of Islamic politics in the UK. There is an array of hard political facts: Muslims count for four million in a total population of 66 million in the UK. Yet they elect Muslim mayors in no less than nine major urban centres in the country, including the mayor of the capital, London, of the second largest city Birmingham and of the world-renowned liberal university city of Oxford. The other six Muslim-led municipalities are: Blackburn, Leeds, Luton, Oldham, Rochdale, Sheffield. There are now 3,000 mosques, (one mosque per 80 square kilometres roughly) 130 Sharia Courts and 50 Sharia councils in the UK. Seventy-eight per cent of Muslim women do not work and receive state support, 63 per cent of British Muslims are out of work and receive state support. UK Muslim families on the receiving end of state support and free accommodation have on average six to eight children. Every school in good old Christian England is required to teach about Islam. Under such circumstances, guess which is the most common name given to British boys nowadays. You guessed right: it is Mohammed!

Greece: Demographic Collapse

At the other end of the Old Continent, Greece, an ancient nation reborn in 1830, lying at the southeastern fringes of the European Union, has been in deep trouble for the past two decades. Endemic corruption and leadership incompetence brought up mounting external foreign debt. Greece’s government debt hovers around 160 per cent of the GDP. The country’s economic woes are compounded by the hordes of irregular migrants. Periodically, vulnerable segments of Hellas’ 15,000 kilometres long coastline get awash with hundreds of mainly sub-Saharan and Middle Eastern unsolicited destitute visitors. The Hellenic Republic currently hosts a large number of immigrants accounting for over a million or approximately ten per cent of the total population, a considerable proportion of whom are Muslim. Pew Research and other international reports estimate there are 520,000 additional Muslims in Greece who are refugees, regular or irregular migrants, or asylum‑seekers. This number is in addition to the indigenous recognized Muslim minority in Western Thrace numbering around 140,000 people. Sharia law applies for this minority, which enjoys a special status in terms of religious and cultural rights, in derogation to the Hellenic Civil Law, in compliance with the Treaty of Lausanne of 1923 governing its status.

Greece’s Muslim immigrants are in the most part Albanians (over 0.4 million) who are not particularly devout Muslims given their socialization for over 50 years in a totalitarian communist regime banning religion. In fact, a number of them, in their everyday life, adopt Greek names – either ancient or modern.

However, what should be underlined, is that the rise in the incoming Muslim population in the Hellenic Republic comes on the sharp backdrop of the flight of an impoverished indigenous Greek Orthodox population. Young Greeks are forced to become economic migrants themselves in the more affluent countries of the northern tier of the EU, the UK, the US and Canada. A rough total figure of migrant Greeks for the first quarter of the 21st century is estimated to be around 1.3 to 1.5 million! This is definitely a generation lost for the country. Brain drainage ad nauseum.

To make things worse, Greek birth rates are falling rapidly. Though a small nation, or perhaps because of this, the sharp demographic decline of Greece, has not escaped the attention of Elon Musk. The flamboyant billionaire businessman reposted, on 2 September 2025, an article that reported over 700 schools in Greece were closing due to falling student numbers. He captioned the post: “The death of Greece.” The actual number of Greek schools shutting down because of failing to reach the threshold of fifteen pupils is 721. Conclusively, in the first quarter of the current century, the Hellenic Republic lost well over a million of highly qualified young Greeks only to be replaced by half a million of unskilled Muslim immigrants.

Development of communication technology, social media

The causes of such new developments have to be found in the development of communication technology and what we used to call rising expectations, which characterized the study of development in the 50s and 60s. Social media and international visual communications have fueled rising expectations in the 21^st century. This New World Order has also been characterized by large numbers of so called “illegal” immigrants from Africa, Asia, and Latin America moving to North America or into Western Europe.

In the case of Germany, for example, the growth of “extremist” parties has been fueled by the presence of illegal immigrants and the ease with which the German government has allowed real and imaginary refugees to move and enjoy the benefits of a welfare society in Germany under Angela Merkel. In fact, by September 2024, Germany had imposed passport controls on its borders, irritating some of its neighbors because this policy is against the idea of an integrated, borderless Europe. Both in Europe and North America, the rise of Chinese exports and the decline of local industries, ranging from the car industry to chemicals and steel, has led the traditional working classes to support nationalist and protectionist parties. American elections have seen both parties talking about protecting American industry. This also seems to be the case in Canada.

This new world order has also been propelled by the so-called “Woke Business,” the rise of racial identification, which has added to racial and identity politics all over the world. In Islamic countries, ranging from Pakistan to North and West Africa, this has meant the persecution of Christians and Jews, to the extent that women who do not wear the hijab face persecution. Paradoxically, Islamic society is also being threatened by radical Islamic societies. Al Qaida and violent subversive groups are propagating across Africa and Asia.

Leadership in Western Europe and North America has sometime faced this issue in response to radical terrorism such as 9/11 and Bataclan. More immediate political concerns and challenges see democratic political systems concentrating on jobs, education, human rights, immigration and, last but not least, climate change. Historically, from the Napoleonic period onward, world orders and balances of power never lasted more than a generation. For example, the Peace of Versailles world order lasted twenty years. The Cold War order in Europe lasted from 1947 to 1989. The relative peace that followed the fall of the Soviet Union lasted fifteen years at most, as NATO expanded into Eastern Europe and the rise of a new Russia set off a renewed arms race and added more weight to the developing BRICS.

The spectacular victory of the Ayatollahs in the Middle East and the rise of radical Shiite politics saw Iran waging ideological and international antagonism against Israel. This was historically due to the fact that Ayatollah Khomeini and his followers were violently opposed to the existence of a Jewish state and Zionism. The war in Gaza, while carried out by Hamas, has been instigated and pushed by the Ayatollahs of Iran, unhinging any attempt by the United States and Europe to bring some degree of a peaceful order in the Middle East.

An interesting facet of this new world order was how India, China, and even some Islamic countries such as the United Arab Emirates became interested in a race to the moon. The increasing competition for status and prestige saw an explosion of international sports. Countries such as Saudi Arabia and Qatar bought themselves international competitions and famous European players to attempt a change in global perspective towards them, with mixed success.

One approach to studying these new developments would focus on the idea of cultural and political resentment by non-European countries, which for the last two centuries have seen France, Britain and the United States shaping the international order and cultural and political values, ranging from the status of women to economic protectionism and the assertion of secular Euro-American values. For example, the decline of Indian socialism has meant the rise of a new Indian identity which focuses on Hinduism, and the reassertion of Indian heritage against Islam, creating further violent conflict with Pakistan. Cultural trends from the United States, such as radical feminism, transgenderism, the acceptance of homosexuality and homosexual marriages have added even more contentious issues characterizing this new world order. In Russia, Putin’s government has made clear that homosexual values and marriages will not be accepted, and this has of course been the case in countries in Africa and Asia.

An insight into the cultural and economic context of the rise of BRICS and the New World Order should not overlook the fact that many of the conflicts in the world are of cultural origins. At one time, one could have employed the term “ideological,” but culture and ideology overlap each other, as do religious attitudes. While Islam began as a religion, after centuries of theologically based governance, it has also become a foundational cornerstone of the political ideology of the Middle East. In today’s world order, Islam has taken on heavy political connotations and has been used by radical groups to unhinge societies in European and American states.

Trumps administration in Washington in 2025 was attempting to enhance American power and control conflicts in the name of an American regulated international system. Whether that idea was feasible remains to be seen. As it was of May of 2025, India and Pakistan were on a threshold of war in Kashmir. It added even more to the notion of civilization and religious conflicts that characterized the Islamic world. From the Atlantic to the Indian Ocean and from North Africa to the Cape.

Global Stability in Focus: Disarmament, UN Reforms, and Pathways to Peace

The interview will also be published in the magazine Chinese Views on Non-Traditional Security. The full text of the interview can be found in the following link: 

https://www.spcis.org/post/yiorghos-leventis-global-stability-in-focus-disarmament-un-reforms-and-pathways-to-peace

Αμέτρητοι μύθοι γύρω από τη σπηλιά του Αγίου Μιχαήλ στο βράχο του Γιβραλτάρ. Κυριαρχεί όμως ο μύθος που υποστηρίζει ότι το συγκεκριμένο σπήλαιο ήταν οι πύλες του Άδη. Άρα και η είσοδος για τον Κάτω Κόσμο. Ακόμη ένας μύθος αναφέρει πως εκεί υπήρξε η μια από τις Ηράκλειες Στήλες, οι οποίες αποτελούν ίσως τις παλαιότερες φρυκτωρίες της Αρχαιότητας.

Οι αρχαίοι Έλληνες, πίστευαν ότι οι Ηράκλειες Στήλες βρίσκονταν στην Ιβηρική χερσόνησο, στο σημερινό Γιβραλτάρ. Εκεί θεωρούσαν ότι ήταν η άκρη του κόσμου. Δεν είχαν και άδικο.

Ο έλεγχος του Γιβραλτάρ αποτελεί και στη νεώτερη εποχή, κατά τους τελευταίους τρεις αιώνες, το Μήλον της Έριδος μεταξύ δύο αποικιακών δυνάμεων της Ισπανίας και της Βρετανίας. Η πρώτη έχει αποδώσει ανεξαρτησία σχεδόν στο σύνολο των αποικιών της. Η δεύτερη όμως, η κραταιά Μεγάλη Βρετανία εξακολουθεί να ελέγχει δεκαεπτά Υπερπόντιες Κτήσεις μεταξύ των οποίων και τις δύο πύλες της στρατηγικής Μεσογείου Θαλάσσης. Στο μεν δυτικό άκρο, τις Ηράκλεις Στήλες, στο δε ανατολικό άκρο την διαμελισμένη μας πατρίδα. Η Κύπρος ελέγχεται από το Λονδίνο όχι μόνο μέσα από την αμφιλεγόμενη – από το Διεθνές Δίκαιο – κυριαρχία των Βρετανικών Βάσεων αλλά και δια μέσου των εκτεταμένων διευκολύνσεων τις οποίες απολαμβάνει εκ γενέσεως της κολωβής Κυπριακής Δημοκρατίας.

Η εξέλιξη του Γιβραλτάρ ως υπερπόντιας Βρετανικής κτήσης χρήζει προσοχής μιας και παρουσιάζει κοινά στοιχεία με την περίπτωση της Κύπρου. Υπάρχουν βέβαια και διαφορές.

Θα κάνουμε παρακάτω μια πρώτη απόπειρα παρουσίασης του σύγχρονου πολιτικού καθεστώτος του Γιβραλτάρ στο ελληνικό αναγνωστικό κοινό. Ο Βράχος όπως είναι γνωστός στην αγγλική βιβλιογραφία (The Rock) περιήλθε υπό Βρετανική κυριαρχία με την συνθήκη της Ουτρέχτης το 1713. Το Λονδίνο διατείνεται ότι η κυριαρχία του επί του χερσαίου χώρου του Γιβραλτάρ αφ’ εαυτού εξυπακούει και την άσκηση κυριαρχίας επί των εκτεινομένων χωρικών υδάτων.

Απεναντίας η Μαδρίτη θεωρεί ότι με βάση το άρθρο 10 της Συνθήκης της Ουτρέχτης, έχει παραδώσει στη Βρετανία μόνο την πόλη, το κάστρο, το λιμάνι και τα οχυρωματικά του έργα. Η διένεξη είναι πολυεπίπεδη και πολυδιάστατη. Η Μαδρίτη οπλισμένη με το σύγχρονο Διεθνές Δίκαιο όπως αυτό διαμορφώθηκε με την ίδρυση του ΟΗΕ, προβάλλει το επιχείρημα ότι δικαιούται κυριαρχία επί του νοτιώτερου άκρου της Ιβηρικής Χερσονήσου. Ο λόγος είναι προφανής:

Το Γιβραλτάρ έχει περιληφθεί στον Κατάλογο των Μη Αυτοκυβερνούμενων Περιοχών του ΟΗΕ ήδη από το 1946 – ουσιαστικά δηλαδή από την εποχή έναρξης εφαρμογής του Καταστατικού Χάρτη του ΟΗΕ. Η διελκυστίνδα, δηλαδή, Βρετανίας – Ισπανίας βαίνει να κλείσει αισίως ογδανταετία: όσο υπάρχει ο ΟΗΕ, υπάρχει και το άλυτο ζήτημα του Γιβραλτάρ. Το ίδιο ισχύει και για την Κύπρο, όπου η αυτοδιάθεση δεν εφαρμόστηκε επαρκώς δηλαδή αδιαιρέτως, με αποτέλεσμα το νησί ουδέποτε να αποαποικιοποιηθεί συνολικώς παρά μόνο μερικώς – πράγμα το οποίο αντίκειται στο πνεύμα του Καταστατικού Χάρτη του ΟΗΕ (1945) αλλά του πρωιώντος Χάρτη του Ατλαντικού (1941).  Σύμφωνα με την τελευταία έκθεση της Ειδικής Επιτροπής ΟΗΕ Για την Εφαρμογή της Διακήρυξης Παραχώρησης Ανεξαρτησίας στις Αποικιοκρατούμενες Χώρες και Λαούς της 9^ης Μαρτίου 2023 (παρ. 8):

Το Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο εξακολουθεί να πιστεύει ότι ως αναγνωρισμένη ξεχωριστή Μη Αυτοκυβερνούμενη Περιοχή, το Γιβραλτάρ απολαμβάνει τα … συλλογικά δικαιώματα τα οποία απονέμει ο ΚΧ του ΟΗΕ. Το ΗΒ πιστεύει επίσης ότο λαός του Γιβραλτάρ έχει δικαίωμα στην αυτοδιάθεση.

Ακόμη και στην χερσαία μικροέκταση ανήκουσα στην Υπερπόντια Κτήση του Γιβραλτάρ υπάρχει διαφωνία. Το Λονδίνο υποστηρίζει ότι είναι 5,8 τετραγωνικά χιλιόμετρα. Αντίθετα η Μαδρίτη υποστηρίζει ότι είναι ένα τετραγωνικό χιλιόμετρο λιγότερο, δηλαδή 4,8. Αξίζει να αναφερθεί ότι το Γιβραλτάρ, η στενή αυτή λωρίδα της στρατηγικής χερσονήσου, ενώνεται με την Ισπανία με ένα ισθμό 1600 μέτρων περίπου, ο έλεγχος του οποίου είναι επίσης διαφιλονικούμενος. Η Αφρικανική ήπειρος απέχει μόλις 32 χιλιόμετρα προς νότο.

Με βάση απογραφή του 2016 ο πληθυσμός του Γιβραλτάρ ανέρχεται σε 34,000 κατοίκους. Βρετανικός νόμος περί Υπερποντίων Περιοχών του 2002 παραχωρεί Βρετανική (Υπερπόντια) υπηκοότητα στους Γιβραλταριανούς.

Κατά την τελευταία σύνοδο της εικοσιεννιαμελούς επιτροπής του ΟΗΕ για την αποαποικιοποίηση τον Ιούνη του 2023 ο Πρωθυπουργός του Γιβραλτάρ Fabian Picardo δήλωσε εμφαντικά: Το Γιβραλτάρ Ανήκει στους Γιβραλταριανούς τελεία και παύλα για να προσθέσει σε όποιον δεν αρέσει, θα το ανεχθεί και θα πει κι ένα τραγούδι.

International news agencies reported that at least ninety Afghan civilians and thirteen American soldiers were killed in the two explosions outside Kabul airport. Video shot by Afghan journalists showed dozens of bodies strewn around a canal on the edge of the airport. The death toll may rise as dozens of severely wounded have been hospitalized. ISIS, the English acronym for the Islamic State (Daesh), took responsibility for the double attack, claiming that one of its suicide bombers targeted “translators and collaborators with the American army”. Surely, the jihadists target ‘collaborators of the West’, however they kill indiscriminately. The severity of the situation prompted Antonio Guterres, the UN Secretary General, to express his ‘grave concern’ and to call an emergency meeting of the Security Council.

What is really worrying is the prospect of more deadly terrorist attacks. U.S. commanders are on alert for more attacks by ISIS, including possibly rockets or vehicle-borne bombs targeting the airport, where Western powers’ hectic evacuation operations have been forced to come to halt. General Frank McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command, appeared apologetic in saying that ‘some intelligence is being shared with the Taliban’ which led him to believe that the latter ‘thwarted some of the [Daesh-planned] attacks’. In other words, at this dire juncture, the US military intelligence is engaged in an operation of damage control. A horrified and distressed American President vowed for revenge saying: “We will not forgive. We will not forget. We will hunt you down and make you pay.” Joe Biden has already ordered the Pentagon to draft operational plans on how to strike ISIS-K, the ISIS affiliate which claimed responsibility for the carnage at Kabul airport.

But is it not too little too late? Any lessons learnt from the most costly and deadly US foreign and security policy operation in the 21^st century? The numbers speak volumes. The twenty-year long American ‘War on Terror’ in Afghanistan has had mind-boggling costs and huge negative results as the new carnage adds up to an already abominable record. The figures in economic cost and human suffering and loss of life (published in Forbes) are phenomenal!

The US spent a total of two trillion dollars on the two decades long war terror. This figure translates to $300 million per day or $50,000 per Afghan citizen – in a country with a population of forty million people. American governments have been financing this war on loans. Researchers at Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, have calculated that $500 million in interest has already been paid. Their estimate is that by 2050, the interest cost on the Afghan War debt alone will reach $6.5 trillion, equivalent to $20,000 for every US citizen.

About $800 billion related to direct war fighting costs. In addition, Washington spent $750 million per year for Afghan soldiers’ salaries.

Furthermore, eighty-five billion dollars were spent on training the Afghan military and security forces. The latter folded and surrendered to the Taliban in the weeks following the closure of the Bagram US Air Force Base in July. The closure of this important airbase effectively signaled the beginning of the end of the US-backed regime in Afghanistan: Afghan government armed forces could no longer count on decisive US air support to win the battle against the Taliban.

In comparative terms, as we are speaking about the world’s leading military power but also the world’s leader in corporate capitalism, let us remark that successive American administrations from George Bush to Joe Biden have spent more on the failed attempt to defeat the Taliban than the net wealth of Jeff Bezos (Amazon owner), Elon Musk (Tesla), Bill Gates (Microsoft) and the thirty richest billionaires in the US.

Sadly, the human cost of the War on Terror Operation is also phenomenally high: 47,000 Afghan civilian deaths; 69,000 Afghan security forces deaths 3,500 Coalition troops died of which 2,500 American military personnel; 4,000 US contractors’ deaths; 51,000 is the estimate of deaths of opposition fighters.

Moreover, three hundred billion dollars is the cost so far for medical treatment of about 20,000 wounded American soldiers and civilians. As one can imagine, this medical care cost is expected to shoot up to $500 billion in the years to come.

All in all, the Afghanistan affair amounts to a debacle: a huge failure of US foreign policy burdened with huge costs that American people will still be paying for years to come…

Two years back, in September 2019, Ankara first raised the issue of Kashmir at the United Nations General Assembly. What prompted Ankara to do so?

Since the British colonialists’ withdrawal and the partition of the Indian subcontinent in two states in 1947, part of Kashmir has stayed under Indian sovereignty. New Delhi had granted autonomy and a special status to the predominantly Muslim populated Kashmir. (In 2003, the percentage of Muslims in the Kashmir Valley was 95 percent and those of Hindus four percent). However, in August 2019, India passed a constitutional amendment revoking the special status and autonomy for Indian-administered Kashmir and absorbed it into the country’s governance mainstream. Since then, tensions with Pakistan remained high. (Note the parallel with Makarios’ failed attempt in 1963 to strip the Turkish Cypriot Muslim minority from its prerogatives through a raft of sweeping amendments of thirteen articles of the Republic of Cyprus constitution). Within a month after the Indians devested the Kashmiris of their autonomy, Ankara raises the issue at the foremost international forum.

Nine months later, on the 17^th of June 2020, the United Nations General Assembly elects Volkan Bozkir of Turkey, as President of its seventy-fifth session (Sep 2020 – Sep 2021). The seventy-year-old Volkan Bozkır is a veteran diplomat and politician. He served as Minister for European Union Affairs from November 2015 to May 2016 and previously held the same office from August 2014 to August 2015.

At the heels of his UNGA top job election – the first ever Turkish national to strike such a success – Volkan Bozkir visited Pakistan (August 2020). The following year, he paid a second three day long visit to Islamabad (26-28 May 2021) as president of the UNGA.

Erdoğan himself visited Pakistan in February 2020. Addressing the parliament in Islamabad, the Turkish president said the Kashmir issue was as important to Turkey as it was to Pakistan, recalling the help of the Pakistani people during Turkey’s War of Independence and stating that Kashmir would now be the same for Turks.

According to recent Indian intelligence reports the Turkish government has been trying to radicalize Indian Muslims and recruit fundamentalists. “Fronts for the Turkish government or the outfits it supports – some of them directly linked to Erdogan and his family – appeared to have made deeper inroads in India than assessed earlier,” the Hindustan Times reported. Much of the effort is directed via Turkish state media, educational institutes, the nonprofit sector, the NGOs.

The Indian daily reports that “Turkey has been providing lucrative scholarships and running exchange programmes for Indian Kashmiri and Muslim students to study in Turkey through state-sponsored NGOs. Once the students land in Turkey, they are approached and taken over by the Pakistan proxies operating there.” Moreover, Indians “who serve Ankara’s agenda are being sent to Turkey by the embassy on exposure trips and encouraged to speak against India.”

It is highly likely that the Turkish leadership in lending a helping hand to Pakistani claims on Kashmir is expecting the return of the favour by Islamabad on the Cyprus front. Indeed, in international diplomatic corridors, it is rumoured that Pakistan may well be the first country – save for Turkey itself – to establish formal diplomatic relations with the breakaway Turkish Cypriot state.

We need to guard against such a negative development as well as draw the necessary lessons learnt from our failed campaign to get our own top diplomat Andreas Mavroyiannis elected president of the UNGA five years ago in 2016. Though the vote was close – Mavroyiannis lost for only four votes – the fact that he lost to the candidate of Fiji, a light weight in international affairs (who would doubt that?) is telling.

Fast forward four years, we witness the Turks winning the top seat we failed to secure in the biggest global multilateral organization. Incidentally, second largest after the UN, inter-governmental organization, is the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), (formerly Organization of the Islamic Conference) where we do not even have a say whereas Turkey in tandem with Pakistan may exercise much more leverage …