2024 was a year of elections, spanning countries with a collective population of more than four billion people – about half the world. But these elections do not appear to have ushered in a period of stability, rather 2025 looks to be a year of conflict and turbulence. The attacks in New Orleans and Las Vegas on New Year’s Day, which do not appear to be linked, only illustrate this further.
In the coming months, we will see the continuation of major wars, threats to shaky Middle East ceasefires, Chinese aggression in the Pacific, the collapse of Western governments, and the results of political scandals in countries allied with the U.S. All of this will occur as Donald Trump returns to the White House on 20 January.
How will the U.S. approach these conflicts and crises under the incoming Administration? What challenges do they pose and what outcomes might we expect? Here are some major points of global turbulence for 2025.
Ukraine and Russia
As the war enters its third year, observers are looking to see whether Ukraine and Russia might begin ceasefire negotiations. The countries’ populations appear to have lost their enthusiasm for the conflict, with more than one million casualties in this war overall. This conflict has also had a devastating effect on the two nations’ economies.
While both sides have publicly expressed hope for an agreement, major obstacles exist. Russian President Vladimir Putin has demanded the Ukrainians adopt major changes to their military and government as well as ending diplomatic and defense negotiations with the West. He has even insisted on major cultural changes to Ukrainian life, such as accepting Russian as the country’s official language. Whatever Russia and Ukraine can eventually agree upon, any deal must include: (1) Kyiv ceding some territory to Moscow and (2) a security guarantee for Ukraine to deter future Russian aggression. The first requirement will be difficult to obtain. The second may be impossible.
President-elect Trump has emphasized his desire for this war to end – though Russia has already rejected his expected peace proposals – and he will likely pursue this objective aggressively. But what will the long-term effect be of forcing Kyiv to negotiate from a position of disadvantage? We are also witnessing the Russian economy, military, and government begin to deteriorate because of the brutal sanctions imposed upon Moscow and societal pressures. What choices will the Kremlin make to stabilize its war economy, sustain popular support, and maintain its status as a global superpower?
Israel and Gaza
The Biden Administration worked diligently to hammer out a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas and free the remaining hostages. They have been unsuccessful, as Israel continues to conduct airstrikes in Gaza – killing at least 28 people on New Year’s Day. Ongoing talks continue to hit obstacles, making it increasingly unclear whether the two sides can negotiate a viable ceasefire agreement.
Israel must soon formulate plans for post-conflict political stability in Gaza, however, or it will be confronted with a protracted occupation and an insurgency that could last for years. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has achieved tactical success in Gaza and Lebanon. Whether that can now be translated into a long-term strategic success that reorganizes the region’s geopolitics is less certain.
Netanyahu knows he cannot throw up diplomatic roadblocks forever. The Trump Administration will be eager for an international win soon after returning to office, and he has sought to be closely aligned with the president-elect. He also knows that the war has had a dramatic effect on the Israeli economy and population. Furthermore, an agreement could also serve as the basis for the normalization of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which could bring broader peace across the Middle East and further isolate Iran.
Iran
At the onset of 2025, Iran finds itself in an extremely vulnerable position. Its proxies (Hezbollah and Hamas) have been decisively defeated and no longer serve as a regional deterrent to an Israeli attack. The cost to rebuild Hezbollah will be enormous, particularly for an economically weakened Iran that is experiencing energy shortages and social unrest.
As Trump returns to the White House, Tehran appears to have two choices: (1) begin negotiating an agreement with the West that would limit its nuclear weapon program in exchange for the removal of some economic sanctions or (2) accelerate the acquisition of a nuclear weapon to create a minimal deterrent against Israel and the United States.
But if Iran continues to accelerate the enrichment of active material, will this encourage a preemptive strike by the United States and Israel? For decades, Washington has resisted hawkish voices calling for a strike against Iran’s nuclear capabilities. But the argument against military action is now less persuasive, as Tehran has continued to expand its nuclear program – potentially with the help of Russia – and there appears to be an opportunity to pressure, if not topple the regime.
Syria
After 13 years of civil war, Bashar al-Assad was finally deposed as Syrian president and forced to flee to Russia. His efforts to remain in power resulted in 12 million Syrian refugees and approximately 600,000 dead. Assad’s fall is a cataclysmic event for the region and a strategic disaster for his two patrons – Iran and Russia.
Syria is referred to as the “hub of hubs” for the Middle East so what does this portend? Can Hay'at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an Islamist rebel group that was instrumental in Assad’s collapse, govern effectively? Can HTS, which was designated a terrorist group by the United Nations and the United States, generate popular support and organize free elections? If not, Assad’s fall could result in a second civil war between HTS and groups supported by either Turkey or the United States.
While Syria is far from the U.S., the Pentagon has approximately 2,000 troops there to combat the threat of ISIS in the region. After the terror attack in New Orleans, this mission will gain renewed interest and cause some to question whether the instability in Syria may benefit ISIS’s ability to wield power and influence globally.
Europe – Germany and France under new management? German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has managed a three-party coalition led by his center-left Social Democrats (SPD), for three years. But after a lengthy dispute over the country’s 2025 budget, Scholz fired his finance minister – a leader of one of the parties in his coalition – causing the government to collapse. Germany will now hold elections in February, and it will likely result in Friedrich Merz, leader of the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), becoming chancellor.
But there are many open questions, particularly after a 20 December attack on a Christmas market in Magdeburg left five dead and more than 200 injured. The attack was allegedly committed by a Saudi-born assailant with right-wing sympathies, but the incident has sparked numerous rumors and conspiracy theories that could benefit the country’s burgeoning far right.
Tech billionaire Elon Musk has even waded into the upcoming German election. He has openly backed the Alternative for Germany (AfD), a right-wing populist party with links to modern Nazi ideology, leading German leaders to accuse him of trying to “influence the federal election.”
France faces a comparable situation. French President Emmanuel Macron has admitted his decision to call a snap election last year backfired and created greater political instability. He currently leads a brittle minority government and is forced to work more closely with his political rivals in the national assembly on future spending and taxation plans. France’s budget deficit stands at 6.1%, and national debt has risen to 112% of GDP. Consequently, the country faces major economic obstacles and an increasingly powerful far-right party that seeks to replace Macron.
Instability in northeast Asia – Japan and South Korea
South Korea is in political turmoil following the declaration of martial law by President Yoon Suk Yeol on 3 December. The Korean National Assembly has since voted to impeach him, and a South Korea court has issued a warrant for his arrest. He has vowed to “fight to the end” against “anti-state forces,” and police officers who attempted to arrest him were frustrated by his supporters and presidential security detachment. The nation is witnessing massive demonstrations either in Yoon’s defense or calling for his departure from office.
The effort to oust him continues. The assembly – controlled by the opposition party – has also voted to impeach acting President Han (who was serving as prime minister) leaving the nation in total political disarray. Facing growing pressure, the deputy prime minister, Choi Sang-mok, has succumbed to the assembly’s demands regarding Yoon’s impeachment, but it could take more than six months for new elections to be held.
Meanwhile, Japan also faces political uncertainty after the 27 October election produced a hung parliament. The ruling party suffered major losses over recent scandals, while opposition parties gained significantly. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba's position is precarious in a minority government. This threatens critical policy decisions, blocks domestic reforms, and imperils Japan’s international standing. President Biden’s decision to block the sale of US Steel to Japan’s Nippon Steel may further complicate relations between Washington and Tokyo.
These events are concerning to Washington. The Biden Administration negotiated expanded defense relationships with Seoul and Tokyo to deter future threats from China and North Korea. Can this trilateral relationship survive this political upheaval? Will Washington be able to depend on its friends in the Pacific?
China
President Xi Jinping made it clear years ago that he had no intention of giving up power, but he made a rare acknowledgment on New Year’s Day that the world’s fastest-growing economy has begun to flag. He vowed that his government was working to usher in a new phase of growth and emphasized that “everyone should be full of confidence,” but he continues to rely on old worries of Western infiltration, corruption, and austerity as the true culprits of economic stagnation. To get through this hardship, his policies appear to be the same as always – centralize more power in the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Xi has a contract with the Chinese people: He denies them political freedom but delivers ever-improving economic conditions. He has been failing on his side of that bargain, and his prospects are not good in 2025. Xi has recently pledged to increase public borrowing, spend more, and cut interest rates to stimulate consumer spending. But the economy is still dragging as it continues to recover from the pandemic, with challenges in real estate markets and falling prices.
Trump’s threats of a dramatic increase in tariffs are also a worrying economic challenge for China. But future relations between Beijing and Washington are not solely dependent on trade, but also tensions over technology, Taiwan, and influence across the Pacific. The U.S. Treasury Department recently disclosed a large-scale hack by a Chinese state-sponsored actor that only further underlined existing tensions.
Conclusions
Trump has ambitious plans as he returns to the White House, but he could be hamstrung by the geopolitical challenges described here. But we have yet to mention the largest humanitarian crisis on the planet – Sudan – and numerous other hotspots that could suddenly erupt and lead to greater global uncertainty.
Leaders in the U.S. and abroad must also be aware of so-called “black swan” events. These are incidents we cannot anticipate but must have the resilience to formulate a response. They are on the horizon and could also dominate the agenda for the incoming administration – even if this White House pursues isolationist policies. Oftentimes, the world forces your hand.
The 2024 “year of elections” clearly showed a global desire for change, but voters remain unsure what they want change to look like. Of the nine G20 democracies that held national elections in 2024 the party in power lost vote share in seven. Time will tell where this period of political unrest leads, but across the globe, the status quo appears precarious.
