There is a Second Cold War going on in the world. So says historian Neil Ferguson. In his opinion, the West should not be too self-confident about its outcome. Cooperation between China and Russia is a “real headache” for the United States

Scottish historian Neil Ferguson, who lives in the United States, published a column in Bloomberg, in which he argues that the world is living during a second Cold War. The United States and European countries are opposed by the unification of China, Russia and Iran, and the winner in this conflict is unknown. Moreover, unlike the last Cold War, China is a much stronger economic rival for the United States than the Soviet Union.

Neil Ferguson begins his column with a reminder of the events of John Ronald Reuel Tolkien’s epic novel The Lord of the Rings, where “only gradually does it become clear that the forces of darkness have united.” Tolkien – a veteran of the First World War – watched with alarm as the next great war approached, seeing Germany, Italy and Japan unite to form “Axis powers”. According to the historian, a new “axis” is also being formed and consolidated now.

It documents the disunity in the Republican Party, where, for example, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene threatened to resign Speaker Mike Johnson if he pushes through a US aid bill to Ukraine. In turn, Johnson said that the United States will not allow Vladimir Putin to “march through Europe” and must also show Russia, China, Iran and North Korea that Washington “will defend freedom.” Ferguson believes that for people like Greene and former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, the war in Ukraine is just “a quarrel in a distant land between people about whom we know nothing,” as British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain said in September 1938 year, commenting on Adolf Hitler’s plans to attack Czechoslovakia. They act as “useful idiots” for Putin, Ferguson believes.

The historian also notes the great support that China provides to Russia’s military industry. Despite claims that Beijing wants to act as a peacemaker, support from Xi Jinping has been decisive for “Putin’s survival” since Russian troops retreated from Kyiv in the spring of 2022.

The conflict between Iran and Israel cannot be considered separately. Tehran is supplying Russia with drones and missiles similar to those fired at Israel in mid-April 2024. And Russia is probably helping to strengthen Iranian air defense. In turn, China is one of the main buyers of Iranian oil, and the Chinese Foreign Minister did not condemn Tehran for the attack on Israel.

“Potentially the most dangerous scenario could be the creation of an “anti-hegemonic” coalition involving China, Russia and, possibly, Iran, which will be united not by ideology, but by complementary grievances. “This development may be reminiscent in scale of the problem that was once posed by the Sino-Soviet bloc, although this time China will most likely be the leader and Russia the follower,” Ferguson quotes the work of former adviser to US President Jimmy Carter Zbigniew Brzezinski , who wrote this back in 1997. Despite such forecasts, the Joe Biden administration has done a lot over the past three years (voluntarily and unwittingly) to make the coalition become a reality, the historian writes. He explains that the United States left the Afghans under the rule of the Taliban, and could not restrain Russia from attacking Ukraine, and Iran from escalating the conflict with Israel.

Both then and now, the causes of the Cold War were ideological. Some Republicans have returned to talking about defending freedom, but for Putin and Xi this is just a sign of CIA-backed “color revolutions.” It is also a technological race, inflation and internal division. The current unity between China and Russia is “a real headache for the United States and its allies,” Ferguson writes. However, there are a significant number of countries that would prefer not to join either side.

The difference is that China is a much stronger economic rival than the Soviet Union was. In addition, the West is economically connected to China through a huge supply chain in a way that it never was to the USSR. Western countries are also much weaker than China in terms of production capacity.

Another difference is that US fiscal policy is “on a completely unsustainable path.” As Ferguson notes, “running a 7% budget deficit at full employment is not what macroeconomics textbooks recommend,” and subsequent presidential administrations will “be hobbled” by the steadily rising US national debt. Already, economists say the Biden administration’s proposed 2025 defense budget is “woefully insufficient” and the Defense Department needs to increase spending if the United States is to deter its adversaries. Ferguson also notes that Western alliances may be weaker this time around than during the first Cold War. In his opinion, the West “should not be too self-confident about the outcome of the second Cold War.”

Ferguson said the Biden administration is following the Democratic approach taken by Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. It means de-escalation, not deterrence, and leads to cuts in the defense budget.

“Donald Trump, by contrast, oscillates between belligerence and isolationism, clearly preferring trade wars to the “fire and fury” of real wars. But he has the right temperament to be deterred, if only because our adversaries find him so unpredictable. And under Trump, defense spending has increased,” Ferguson says.

By launching drones and missiles at Israel, Iran unwittingly gave many Republicans the opportunity to take a “militant course” that cannot be called “isolationist.” House China Committee Chairman Mike Gallagher, a Republican, and former Trump adviser Matt Mottinger write in a column for Foreign Affairs that China is “supporting aggressive dictatorships in Russia, Iran, North Korea and Venezuela,” and stopping it will take “increasing differences in US-China relations and the rapid build-up of US defense capabilities.” Detente, they believe, will only strengthen China’s belief that it can “destabilize the world with impunity.”

“Will Trump himself listen to the advice of the hawks? If he decides to embrace isolationism, I suspect it could damage his chances of getting elected. But if he abandons this delusion, the atmosphere of the 1980s may suddenly reign in his life. <�…> Despite the fact that Biden pursued a policy of technological containment of China that was in many respects tougher and more effective than Trump’s policies, he now looks weak. Not only has he failed to contain America’s enemies. He can’t even force close US ally Israel to comply with his request. Thus, it is possible that the ultimate historical significance of an Iranian attack on Israel will be its impact not on the Middle East, but on Republican sentiment in the United States,” Ferguson concludes.