Subject to an international scenario that celebrates the logic of modern imperialism and reshapes a multipolar dynamic, fearing the escalation of a world war seems minor when we are under the threat of something far more dangerous: the gradual, silent collapse of our international system, once designed to prevent it.
The aggravated conflict between Iran and Israel, marked by veiled threats, cross-border anxiety, and detrimental military strikes, raises urgent questions about the current state of global diplomacy. The ripple effects of missiles, no longer confined to Middle Eastern grounds, are felt across nations. And yet, regardless of the immense gravity of the moment, inertia is the concept that best describes how the international community responded to a failed attempt at immediate coordination.
Reshapes a multipolar world
Diplomacy, at its core, arose from the creation of international institutions designed to impose order and pave a common ground for dialogue, the very same that today stand not as pillars of peace but as hollowed-out shells. Collective security and law feel distant from what is currently experienced. With empty, unweighted words, what the world is witnessing cannot be reduced to geopolitical dysfunctionality: it is the materialization of the obsolescence of diplomacy itself.
Economic interdependence, once championed as the antidote to war, has turned into a double-edged sword. While it once incentivized cooperation, it now acts as leverage for coercion. Sanctions, trade barriers, and the weaponization of supply chains reflect a world where economics serve confrontation more than connection. As nations retreat into strategic autonomy, the trust required for any multilateral framework slowly dissipates.
The true danger is not that diplomacy will fail, but that the world has already ceased hoping it can work
Iran and Palestine are engaged in ongoing conflicts that reverberate through the decades. Since the late 2010s, society has experienced the rise of unilateralist and populist governments, undermining the essence of multilateral engagement. Donald Trump’s presidency signaled a turning point in the international scenario, when diplomacy began to serve domestic narratives rather than function as a tool for international cooperation. With the abandonment of important agreements, norms are being deliberately violated, and institutions are defunded. Institutional decay accumulated over time; no single act triggered collapse.
AI-driven manipulation
In parallel, the digital battlefield has emerged as a central arena of geopolitical rivalry. Cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and AI-driven manipulation are reshaping how states confront one another. These tools erode public trust from within, bypassing conventional warfare and challenging the sovereignty of democratic systems. While missiles may dominate headlines, algorithmic influence is quietly redrawing the borders of influence and allegiance.
Adding to this complexity is the resurgence of ideological blocs under new disguises. While the Cold War binaries have dissolved, coalitions are reemerging not around ideology per se, but around transactional interests and regional dominance. From the BRICS to the AUKUS, the alphabet soup of modern alliances reflects not shared values, but shifting calculations. Loyalty is fluid, and the architecture of alliances is increasingly defined by immediacy rather than longevity.
The idea of security today is politicized and polarized. Defining it through the lens of collective well-being remains a distant, nostalgic dream. Weaponized and subject to widely varying interpretations across cultures and geopolitical contexts, security is ignored by many and taken for granted by others. This persistence of incoherence makes global consensus impossible. From Washington to Tehran, Gaza to Brussels, it becomes difficult to even discuss which measures to take when the world exists in complete dissonance, barely speaking the same language about what the threat even is.
The logic that justifies military aggression abroad is increasingly reflected in how states regulate their populations. The semantics of force, whether in domestic policy or international intervention, share an alarming number of similarities. When the tools of war and the tools of governance become indistinguishable, the signal is not merely policy failure, but systemic moral drift.
2025 is not 1939
It is crucial to resist comparisons to past World Wars. In a context where lines are blurrier than ever, actors more diffuse, and consequences more unpredictable, 2025 is not 1939. We are witnessing not a sudden rupture, but extended deterioration. The structures that once ensured global order now scream for renovation.
Most countries are reluctant to commit directly to the Iran-Israel conflict, not out of pacifism, but because they no longer view diplomatic mechanisms as entities capable of fostering meaningful engagement. In the absence of decisive leadership, public perception becomes policy. Outrage is no longer global; it becomes selective, shaped by linguistic, cultural, and media biases. What angers one government becomes irrelevant to another. This moral fragmentation further erodes the potential for a collective response.
What defines this moment so treacherously is not the violence in the Middle East, but the global quietness that surrounds it. The true danger is not that diplomacy will fail, but that the world has already ceased hoping it can work.
Maria E. Smarrito is a multilingual Italian-Brazilian emerging political journalist with experience as Project Coordinator for a USA Today special report on Romania and as Communications Lead at the Diplomatic Coalition, contributing to global engagement and public diplomacy initiatives. With a Dual Bachelor’s in International Relations & Business Administration from IE University.
Juan Ignacio Lorente is a Spanish entrepreneur and founder of the Diplomatic Coalition, Head of the UN-accredited Diplomatic Council in Spain. He leads global trade missions and builds strategic alliances across Europe, Asia, and Latin America. Through initiatives like Diplomatic Ladies of the World and Humanitarian Diplomacy programs, he has helped deliver over €4 million in aid. His work bridges diplomacy, business, and philanthropy with a focus on global impact.
Be First to Comment