Global security outlook for 2026: Back to the jungle?
Kim Won-soo
This year has dawned with a thunderbolt-like U.S. operation to capture Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in Caracas. Its aftershocks are still being felt. U.S President Donald Trump is ramping up pressure not only against the leaders of states like Cuba and Iran, but also toward NATO allies. His doctrine makes many leaders across the world nervous about its ramifications, anguishing over their own safety.
Trump is fixated on setting a new tone for U.S. foreign policy, creating something fundamentally different from the post-World War II liberal international order. He is trying to turn to an isolationist posture focused on the Western Hemisphere, but with an aggressive flavor. He is eager to flex his muscles whenever he sees fit. He is not shy, openly displaying territorial ambitions toward his neighbors, including Canada and Greenland.
Trump has made clear his preference for refocusing on the Western Hemisphere as the "backyard" of the U.S. This poses critical questions for the two pillars of the post-WWII U.S.-led order — namely the trans-Atlantic and trans-Pacific alliances. Sending the wrong signal may weaken the credibility of the U.S. commitment to its other allies beyond the Western Hemisphere. that region.
Dark clouds are being cast over the global security landscape. In 2026, it will get darker and move closer to peril. The danger is bound to grow exponentially for global public good, including peace. The main cause is the U.S. retreat from global leadership and overseas security commitments. Uncertainty and volatility on the security horizon will rise sharply, reinforcing geopolitical shifts.
Here is my forecast: First and foremost, realpolitik will show more of its cold-blooded face in international relations. Compliance with international law and norms is fading away. Instead, the law of the jungle, backed by power and national interests, is ascending. Global institutions for collective security, symbolized by the United Nations Security Council, have become irrelevant in the face of major security breaches. Global governance is drifting back to the status quo before WWII. Increasingly, the strong will prey upon the weak. A sense of impunity for the use of force will set in.
Secondly, a world divided by major powers into their respective spheres of influence will not stabilize nations. It is likely to be a recipe for disorder. Global instability will emerge along the fault lines of geopolitics in the spheres-of-interest. The competitive interests of major powers may collide, leading to confrontations. Smaller states or even nonstate actors may be tempted to exploit perceived power vacuums to change the status quo.
Lastly, realpolitik tends to widen deficits in crisis management through mistrust, miscommunication and misunderstanding among interested parties. This brings the danger of inadvertent escalation of minor incidents into major conflicts. The consequences will be unpredictable and unbearable given the horror of weapons of mass destruction like nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and weapons of mass disruption like cyberattacks and artificial intelligence. Humanity will fight the next war with all weapons in its possession, marking the beginning of the end of human civilization. This horrific scenario must be avoided. But it is harder to avoid in the absence of the rules-based international order.
Korea must take these developments in the global security landscape seriously. What happens in the Western Hemisphere is not something like a fire across the ocean, remote to Korea’s interests. It is a fire carrying direct and serious security implications. Nothing should be taken for granted. A moment of truth may come for the Korea-U.S.-Korea security alliance in the event of a real crisis. That alliance can be cast aside like an old shoe.
Korea stands at a precipice and must go back to the basics, preparing for the worst and working for the best. The country must remind Washington of the strategic value of Korea as an alliance partner ready to stand alongside the U.S. in the volatile world. At the same time, efforts for self-reliance and hedging against risk must be pursued to mitigate the damage of the worst-case scenario.
Priority must be given to strengthening coordination and solidarity with partners in alliance with the U.S., including in particular Japan. Political leaders in Korea must translate their rhetoric of consensus-building foreign and security policy into reality. Korea’s current political divisions will only weaken its voices with the four major powers surrounding the Korean Peninsula. Domestic political consensus on diplomacy and security must be engineered with utmost urgency for a safer Korea.
Kim Won-soo is the former under-secretary-general of the United Nations and the high representative for disarmament. He is now the rector of the Global Academy for Future Civilizations and chair professor at Kyung Hee University.