The European ship is just swaying...

At the Munich Security Conference held last weekend, it was admitted that the so-called rules-based, liberal international order is in a state of comprehensive collapse. This admission is not new. Last month, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney declared, in much more striking terms, that the end of the rules-based world order had arrived.

If we liken this rules-based order to a ship, the ship isn't actually moving. The engine room is in ruins, and the captains are playing the flute. The ship, going nowhere, just sways under the impact of the waves. This swaying, accompanied by the sound of flutes, gives the passengers the illusion that the ship is underway. Indeed, Carney, who has served in the upper echelons of the financial world of the liberal, rules-based order, asked his Western audience in his Davos speech to stop pretending that the old order is still functioning.

The Munich Security Conference, which began in 1963, is itself a product of the bipolar Cold War era. The Soviet bloc exited the game in the early 1990s, and its institutions, such as the Warsaw Pact and COMECON, were dissolved. The Warsaw Pact was the counterpart to NATO, and COMECON was the counterpart to the European Economic Community (EEC). Despite the end of the Cold War, both NATO and the EEC (as the European Union) continued to expand.

At the 2007 Munich Security Conference, Vladimir Putin, in a very harsh tone, signaled where things were heading, asking: "Who is this expansion aimed at? What happened to the assurances given after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? No one even remembers them anymore."

With the end of the Cold War, the US savored its unipolar historical moment. Of course, during this time, Russia, as the heir to the Soviet Union, saw its efforts to rapproche with the West thwarted by the West itself. Russia was once again left "out in the cold." Yet, post-Cold War Russian leaders, including Vladimir Putin, had even announced their readiness to join NATO.

After the Cold War, with the 'Soviet threat' gone, fundamental changes could have been made to the security architecture of Europe, which was under the wing of the US. However, developments unfolded in the opposite direction. NATO expanded right up to Russia's borders. Thus, instead of being won over to Europe, Russia was cast out as the "new enemy," distanced from Europe. For NATO, an institution founded on the basis of a security threat, a new 'threat', a new 'enemy' was needed to justify its continued existence—one that would make people forget the Soviets. It seems the Atlanticists found Russia suitable for this role.

Lord Hastings Ismay, the British first Secretary General of NATO, founded in 1949, once said: "NATO was created to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down." This dynamic didn't change much even after the Cold War. However, this began to shift when Donald Trump, elected US President in 2016, demanded that Europeans pay more than they had previously to remain under the US security umbrella. Trump stated that if his NATO 'allies' did not increase their military spending, Europe could no longer count on the US security guarantee.

Official, established, Atlanticist Europe promotes the narrative that Russia will not stop after Ukraine. Trump's America, however, which is trying to establish a new relationship with Russia, disregards this narrative. Last year at the Munich Security Conference, US Vice President JD Vance, who lectured Europeans on their domestic politics, had already clearly reiterated Trump's approach.

This year, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who attended the conference, did not stray far from the Trump-Vance position, even if his approach was softer and more conciliatory. Let us recall that Rubio, an establishment Republican, holds a more "Atlanticist" position compared to Vance. Rubio, who is considered a potential candidate for the 2028 presidential nomination, may have also been trying to signal that he is not on the same track as Vance.

Unless the regular attendees of the Munich Security Conference shift its function towards one based on seeking stability and peace, rather than security, no matter what they say, they cannot continue on the old path without the US. The American umbrella is not just a military one; it also acts as a shawl covering the historical, political, and geopolitical conflicts that Europeans keep hidden on their shelves. Europeans fear what would emerge if that American shawl were lifted. They know that the US knows this. And the US knows that they know. This is why Trump will always keep the payment bar high. As for the ship of the so-called rules-based liberal order... Was there really ever such a ship?