Geopolitics Updates November 15, 2025 : Global Order in Flux: Japan's Military Rise & Shifting Alliances

As a seasoned geopolitical analyst, I’m witnessing a world in rapid transformation. Over the past 24 hours, we’ve seen Japan accelerate its military resurgence, a direct challenge to regional stability. Simultaneously, the Middle East is being reshaped by a high-stakes diplomatic gambit between the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel, while the BRICS nations consolidate their challenge to the Western-led order.

These tectonic shifts are sending shockwaves through global markets, demanding our full attention.

---

A World on the Brink: Navigating Today’s Geopolitical Currents

In my decades of analyzing the intricate dance of nations, it’s rare to see so many critical threads pulling at the fabric of the global order at once. The last 24 hours have been a stark reminder that we are living through an era of profound and often unpredictable change. The post-Cold War certainties are gone, replaced by a multi-polar world grappling with shifting alliances, resurgent nationalism, and the ever-present shadow of conflict.

From the Pacific, where a once-pacifist nation is re-arming at an astonishing pace, to the deserts of the Middle East, where old enemies are contemplating a new future, the geopolitical landscape is being redrawn before our very eyes. These are not isolated events; they are interconnected, creating ripples that touch every corner of the globe, roiling financial markets and forcing investors and policymakers alike to rethink their strategies. Today, I’ll walk you through the most significant developments and what they mean for the delicate balance of global power.

The Pacific Pivot: Japan’s Historic Military Realignment

For over seventy years, Japan’s constitution has been a symbol of its post-war identity, a commitment to pacifism that has defined its role on the world stage. What we are witnessing now is nothing short of a paradigm shift, a nation quietly but determinedly shedding the constraints of the past to face what it perceives as a new and dangerous reality. The government of Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi is not just tweaking policy; it is forging a new strategic identity for Japan, one that is causing considerable unease across the region, most notably in Beijing.

Shedding Pacifism: The 2% Revolution

The clearest signal of this transformation is the accelerated push to increase Japan’s defense spending to 2% of its GDP, a benchmark famously used by NATO members. This isn’t just about bigger budgets; it’s a fundamental statement of intent. For years, Japan’s defense spending hovered around the 1% mark, a self-imposed ceiling that reassured its neighbors.

Doubling this commitment, and doing so ahead of schedule, is a direct response to the shifting security environment. The latest Japanese Defense White Paper explicitly names China as the nation’s “greatest strategic challenge,” a rhetorical escalation that is now being backed by significant financial and military muscle. This move realigns Japan with its Western allies, particularly the United States, but it also positions it as a frontline state in the escalating competition with China.

The Nuclear Question: A Taboo Broken

Even more startling are the discussions happening within the highest levels of the Japanese government about revising the country’s long-standing “three non-nuclear principles”: not possessing, not producing, and not permitting the introduction of nuclear weapons into its territory. While a full-blown nuclear weapons program remains unlikely for now, the very fact that these principles are being questioned is a seismic event. Prime Minister Takaichi has publicly questioned whether these principles remain realistic in the current security climate.

Furthermore, there are active considerations to develop nuclear-powered submarines. These vessels, with their extended range and stealth capabilities, would dramatically enhance Japan’s naval power projection. This flirtation with nuclear technology, even for propulsion, sends a powerful and, for some, a deeply alarming signal.

It tells the world that for Japan, all options are now on the table as it seeks to establish a credible deterrent.

Taiwan in the Crosshairs: A New Red Line

The most immediate flashpoint for Japan’s new assertiveness is Taiwan. Prime Minister Takaichi has made highly provocative comments suggesting that a conflict in the Taiwan Strait could meet Japan’s criteria for a “survival-threatening situation.” This is not just political rhetoric; it’s a specific legal term from Japan’s 2015 security legislation. Invoking this clause would permit the Japanese Self-Defense Forces to intervene militarily and exercise “collective self-defense” on behalf of an ally—in this case, implicitly, Taiwan and the United States—even if Japan itself is not directly attacked.

This move effectively erases the strategic ambiguity that has long defined Tokyo’s position. It draws a new red line for Beijing, making it clear that any military action against Taiwan would have to account for a potential and significant Japanese military response. This dramatically raises the stakes in what is already the world’s most dangerous geopolitical flashpoint.

An Arms Exporter in the Making?

Complementing this military buildup is a strategic shift in industrial policy. Japan is progressively loosening its post-war restrictions on arms exports. The goal is twofold: to bolster its domestic defense industry and to strengthen security ties with regional partners by providing them with advanced Japanese military hardware.

Countries like the Philippines and Australia are already deepening defense cooperation with Tokyo. This transition from a purely defensive posture to that of a defense industry player and security provider marks the final piece of Japan’s transformation into a major, proactive military power in the Indo-Pacific.

A New Middle East Order: Alliances and Anxieties

The Middle East, a region long defined by its intractable conflicts and rigid alliances, is in the throes of a dramatic and potentially historic realignment. The tectonic plates of power are shifting, driven by a confluence of American strategic recalculations, the ambitions of Gulf powerhouses, and the ever-present Israeli-Palestinian conflict. What emerges from this period of flux could either set the stage for a more stable regional order or unleash new and even more dangerous rivalries.

The US-Israel Relationship Reboot

The bedrock of regional security for decades has been the ironclad alliance between the United States and Israel. While the core of that relationship remains, its dynamics are undergoing a profound change. We are seeing a more assertive American posture, particularly concerning the Gaza conflict.

Washington is no longer content to simply provide diplomatic cover; it is actively shaping the endgame. The push for a United Nations Security Council resolution to authorize a multinational stabilization force in Gaza is a case in point. Historically, Israel has vehemently opposed UN involvement in its security matters, and the US has almost always deferred.

That this is now a centerpiece of the American plan signals a new willingness in Washington to impose its vision for post-conflict stability, even if it runs counter to the preferences of the Israeli government. This shift suggests the US is increasingly focused on regional de-escalation and is prepared to leverage its considerable influence over Israel to achieve it.

The Saudi-Israeli Normalization Gambit

The grand prize of this new diplomatic landscape is the potential normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islam’s holiest sites, and Israel. This is more than a peace treaty; it would represent a fundamental restructuring of the regional order, creating a powerful bloc to counter Iranian influence. The negotiations are a complex, three-way dance between Riyadh, Jerusalem, and Washington.

For the Saudis, the price of normalization includes a formal defense pact with the United States and access to top-tier American military technology, most notably the F-35 stealth fighter jet. For the US, it’s a legacy-defining diplomatic achievement that would stabilize the region and advance its strategic interests. For Israel, it offers formal acceptance by the most powerful Arab state, a long-sought goal.

However, the deal hinges on a crucial and highly contentious point: a credible pathway to a Palestinian state. This demand is causing a political firestorm within Israel’s far-right government, which is ideologically opposed to any such concession. The success or failure of this high-stakes gambit will reverberate across the globe.

The UAE’s Dual Strategy

The United Arab Emirates, a key architect of the Abraham Accords, exemplifies the complex, interest-driven foreign policy of the modern Gulf states. On one hand, the UAE continues to deepen its ties with Israel, with bilateral trade and defense cooperation expanding even against the backdrop of the Gaza conflict. This demonstrates a pragmatic commitment to the strategic and economic benefits of the Accords.

On the other hand, the UAE is facing a torrent of international condemnation for its alleged role in Sudan’s catastrophic civil war. Reports and evidence strongly suggest that Abu Dhabi has been arming and supporting the Rapid Support Forces (RSF), a paramilitary group accused of committing genocide and other horrific atrocities. This dual strategy—presenting itself as a modernizing force for peace through the Abraham Accords while simultaneously being accused of fueling one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises—highlights the often-contradictory nature of foreign policy in a region where strategic interests frequently override moral considerations.

South Africa’s Moral Tightrope

Further afield, the conflict has exposed fascinating contradictions in the foreign policies of other nations. South Africa, for instance, has taken a strong pro-Palestinian stance, bringing a case of genocide against Israel at the International Court of Justice and recently providing refuge to a group of undocumented Palestinians fleeing Gaza. This position is rooted in its own history of fighting apartheid.

Yet, at the same time, it has been revealed that South Africa approved significant arms sales to countries that are among Israel’s largest military suppliers, including the United States and Germany. This policy of walking both sides of the street—championing human rights on one hand while engaging in lucrative arms deals that may indirectly fuel conflict on the other—underscores the difficult balancing act many nations face when trying to reconcile their principles with their economic and strategic interests.

The Great Power Competition: A Global Chessboard

While regional conflicts flare, they are increasingly viewed through the prism of a larger, overarching competition between the world’s great powers. The actions of the United States, China, and Russia are shaping the contours of these disputes, turning local battlefields into arenas for global influence. This is the new reality: a world where the lines between regional and global are irrevocably blurred.

Russia’s War of Attrition and Eastern Pivot

In Ukraine, Russia has adapted its strategy. The initial shock-and-awe campaign failed, as did the subsequent strategy of massed frontal assaults. Now, Moscow has settled into a grim war of attrition.

Its new tactics involve smaller, more methodical engagements designed to systematically grind down Ukrainian forces. The brutal logic is that Russia, with its larger population and economy, can sustain losses that Ukraine cannot. This is a long, bloody, and cynical approach aimed at eventual victory through exhaustion.

Beyond the battlefield, this war has cemented Russia’s pivot away from the West. Sanctioned and isolated by Europe and the US, Moscow is aggressively courting new partners in Asia, Africa, and the Middle East, promoting its vision of a “multipolar world order” free from American dominance. It uses state-managed economic forums as platforms to signal its strategic intentions and build non-Western coalitions.

However, its influence has limits. The recent suspension of its much-touted plan for a naval base in Sudan, a casualty of that country’s internal chaos, serves as a reminder that even great powers can see their ambitions thwarted by regional instability.

China’s View from Beijing

From Beijing’s perspective, the global landscape is fraught with challenges, many of which emanate from what it sees as American-led containment efforts. Japan’s rapid military resurgence is viewed with extreme alarm, seen not as a defensive measure but as a direct threat and a revival of its 20th-century militarism. Tokyo’s new stance on Taiwan is a particularly sharp provocation, challenging China’s core national interest.

In Europe, China is warily watching the shift in policy from key economic partners like Germany. The move from a mutually beneficial, win-win relationship to a strategy of “de-risking” and strategic competition is seen as a concession to American pressure. China’s response is to double down on its own military modernization, secure its supply chains, and use its economic might through initiatives like the Belt and Road to build a sphere of influence that is resilient to Western pressure.

America’s Global Balancing Act

The United States finds itself in the difficult position of managing multiple, simultaneous crises. In the Middle East, it is attempting to de-escalate the Gaza conflict and broker a historic peace deal, all while containing Iran. In Europe, it is leading the coalition to support Ukraine and counter Russian aggression, a massive undertaking that requires sustained political and financial commitment.

And in the Indo-Pacific, it is engaged in a long-term strategic competition with China, a contest that spans the economic, technological, and military domains. Japan’s re-armament is a welcome development for Washington in this context, as it strengthens the anti-China coalition. However, it also brings the risk of entrapment in a regional conflict.

America’s grand strategy is a complex balancing act, requiring it to project power, reassure allies, and deter adversaries on multiple fronts, all while navigating a deeply polarized domestic political environment.

The Rise of the Global South: The BRICS Agenda

One of the defining trends of this new era is the growing assertiveness of the “Global South.” No longer content to be passive participants in a system designed by and for Western powers, major emerging economies are demanding a greater say in how the world is run. The most prominent vehicle for this ambition is the BRICS bloc, now expanded to include major energy and regional powers.

A Challenge to the Old Order

The recent BRICS summits have been unambiguous in their aims. The group is openly challenging the legitimacy of the post-World War II international order. Their declarations consistently call for the comprehensive reform of the United Nations, particularly the Security Council, to better reflect today’s geopolitical realities.

They are also demanding a greater voice in the Bretton Woods institutions—the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund—arguing that the current voting structures are outdated and unfairly favor the United States and Europe. The expanded BRICS, which now includes heavyweights like Saudi Arabia, Iran, the UAE, and Egypt, represents a significant portion of the world’s population, economy, and energy production. It is a bloc that can no longer be ignored.

De-Dollarization and New Financial Architecture

A key pillar of the BRICS strategy is to reduce their dependence on the US dollar and the Western-dominated financial system. The use of the dollar gives Washington immense geopolitical leverage through sanctions and control over global financial flows. In response, the BRICS nations are actively promoting the use of their local currencies for bilateral trade.

They are also exploring the creation of a common payment system and other alternative financial mechanisms. While a full-scale “de-dollarization” of the global economy is still a distant prospect, these initiatives represent a clear and determined effort to build a parallel financial architecture that is insulated from Western political pressure.

India’s Strategic Balancing Act

Within this shifting landscape, India is carving out a unique and influential role. As a founding member of BRICS, it is a leading voice for the Global South and a champion of a multipolar world order. However, India is not putting all its eggs in one basket.

At the same time, it is deepening its strategic partnerships with the West, particularly the United States, through frameworks like the Quad, which is widely seen as a counterbalance to China’s growing power in the Indo-Pacific. Furthermore, its strengthening defense and technology cooperation with Israel, driven by shared security concerns, highlights its pragmatic, issue-based foreign policy. This strategy of “multi-alignment” allows India to maintain its strategic autonomy, engaging with all major power centers to advance its own national interests.

It is a complex but increasingly necessary approach in today’s fragmented world.

Europe’s Strategic Crossroads

The war in Ukraine has been a brutal wake-up call for Europe. The return of high-intensity conflict to the continent has forced a fundamental rethink of security, energy, and foreign policy. The European Union and its member states are now at a crossroads, navigating a new reality where their prosperity and security are under direct threat.

Germany’s Cautious Pivot

As Europe’s economic engine, Germany’s policy shifts have enormous consequences. For decades, German foreign policy was built on the principle of Wandel durch Handel—change through trade—particularly with Russia and China. The invasion of Ukraine shattered the assumptions underpinning its Russia policy, and now its China policy is undergoing a similar, albeit more cautious, transformation.

Berlin has officially pivoted from a relationship based on partnership to one that recognizes China as a partner, a competitor, and a systemic rival. The new German strategy emphasizes “de-risking”—reducing its economic dependence on China in critical sectors like technology, raw materials, and pharmaceuticals. This is a delicate balancing act, as the German economy remains heavily reliant on the Chinese market.

On the security front, Germany has shed its post-Cold War reluctance to project military power, becoming one of the largest providers of financial and military aid to Ukraine. This represents a sea change in German strategic culture, though the transition is not without its internal debates and hesitations.

Impact on Investors and Markets

For global investors and market participants, this era of geopolitical flux is not an abstract concept; it is a tangible and ever-present source of risk and volatility. The clear separation between markets and politics has evaporated. Today, a drone strike on a distant oil facility or a shift in naval deployments in the South China Sea can trigger immediate and significant reactions in stock, bond, and commodity markets worldwide.

Navigating this new environment requires a level of geopolitical literacy that was once considered niche but is now essential.

The Geopolitical Risk Premium

The most direct impact is the repricing of risk. Markets are now forced to incorporate a “geopolitical risk premium” into asset valuations. This means that investors demand higher returns to compensate for the heightened uncertainty.

We see this in elevated market volatility indices and in the sudden, sharp market corrections that often follow unexpected geopolitical developments. The primary channel for this is through confidence; geopolitical shocks erode consumer and business confidence, leading to delayed spending and investment, which can slow economic growth. This uncertainty creates a challenging environment where traditional economic forecasting models can be rendered obsolete overnight by a single event.

Global Market Tremors

In times of high geopolitical stress, we typically see a predictable “flight to safety.” Capital flows out of riskier assets, such as emerging market equities, and into traditional safe havens like US Treasury bonds, the US dollar, and gold. This can create a self-reinforcing cycle of instability for developing economies. Commodity markets are particularly sensitive.

The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have repeatedly demonstrated how quickly supply chains can be disrupted, leading to price spikes in critical resources like oil, natural gas, and agricultural products like grain. These price shocks feed directly into global inflation, complicating the task of central banks and putting pressure on household budgets around the world.

The Indian Market Perspective

For India, a large, open economy deeply integrated into the global system, these geopolitical crosscurrents have a multifaceted impact. While its strong domestic fundamentals provide a degree of insulation, it is far from immune.

• FII Flows and Rupee Volatility: When global risk aversion rises, Foreign Institutional Investors (FIIs) tend to pull capital from emerging markets like India. These outflows put downward pressure on Indian equity markets and weaken the rupee. A depreciating rupee is a double-edged sword. It benefits export-oriented sectors like IT services and pharmaceuticals, as their dollar-denominated earnings translate into more rupees. However, it hurts companies that rely on imports, as it increases the cost of raw materials and imported components, potentially squeezing profit margins and fueling domestic inflation.

• Sectoral Winners and Losers: The impact is not uniform across the Indian economy. Sectors are affected differently based on their global linkages. As we’ve seen, rising crude oil prices due to Middle East tensions put significant pressure on oil marketing companies, airlines (due to higher fuel costs), and the automotive sector (due to lower demand and higher input costs). Conversely, global tensions and the focus on supply chain diversification can benefit Indian manufacturing and chemical companies as global firms look for alternatives to China. The defense sector is another potential beneficiary, as rising global military spending and India’s own push for self-reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat) create new opportunities for domestic defense firms.

• Long-Term Resilience: Despite these short-term headwinds, it’s crucial to maintain perspective. The long-term structural story for India remains robust. A young, dynamic population, a growing middle class, ongoing policy reforms, and strong domestic consumption create a powerful engine for growth. Historically, the Indian market has shown remarkable resilience, often rebounding from global shocks faster than its emerging market peers. For long-term investors, the key is to look past the immediate turbulence and focus on these underlying fundamentals, which remain a compelling reason for optimism.

Conclusion: A New Era of Vigilance

Stepping back to view the events of the last 24 hours, the picture that emerges is one of a world in a state of profound and accelerated transition. The tectonic plates of global power are shifting, creating a more fragmented, competitive, and unpredictable landscape. Japan’s military reawakening, the potential for a new security architecture in the Middle East, the consolidation of the BRICS bloc, and the persistent great power rivalries are not just headlines; they are the defining trends of our time.

The line between economic policy and national security has all but disappeared. In this new era, vigilance, adaptability, and a deep understanding of the complex interplay of global forces are no longer optional, they are essential for survival and success.