World-System (1960-2100) A New "Axis of Evil"?

 

On September 1, 2025, in the Chinese port city of Tianjin, Chinese President Xi Jinping held a summit in response to the Trump II Administration tariff policies that included leaders of Russia and India and other representatives from the Global South (here). Xi declared that "Global governance has reached a new crossroads," in the fight against US Hegemonic Power. Did Xi just announce the birth of the New Axis of Evil? And, what might this mean for the future?

The conclusion from my World-System models is that the future forecasts for the New Axis of Evil all lead to collapse of the system (except for one worrisome scenario).

In prior posts (see the Notes below), I have looked at the issue of US Hegemonic Dominance and the economic performance of Russia, India and China. In this post, I will look specifically at how the three countries (RU, IN and CN) could interact with the current World-System.

The Measurement Matrix (see the Boiler Plate for more information about Dynamic Component Models) is presented in the Notes below. In terms of overall growth, the first growth components for each country are relatively equally weighted (AXIS1). The historical feedback controller (AXIS2) is dominated by Russia. From the graphic above, Russia's dominance peaked before 1990 and then decline after the Fall of the Soviet Union.

--

For the late Twentieth Century, the system was dominated by the US. If that domination were to continue until 2100, the AXIS System would collapse--pretty strong motivation for eliminating US influence.

If the AXIS System were to align itself with the World-System (graphic above), the forecast for the future is also collapse.

If the AXIS System were to go it alone (as a BAU System), the countries could grow exponentially but it would involve the decline of the Russian historical feedback controller (AXIS2) -- a loss that would probably not be tolerated by Russia.

Unstable exponential growth will not minimize Environmental Damage from growth, so another option for an AXIS system not dominated by Russia is to stabilize growth (graphic above). Stability leads to a steady state after 2100 but would also probably not be tolerated by the AXIS participants.

In summary, none of the Geopolitical Alignments for the AXIS System look very promising. Either the system will eventually collapse or it's reason for existence (unending exponential growth) will not be consistent with World System Balance.

However, pursuing World System Balance does not seem to be a priority of any potential Hegemonic or Multipolar Leaders in the World-System.  In the Functionalist explanation, the AXIS System is necessary for the military-fueled expansion of all the participants .I will investigate the AXIS BAU scenario in a future post (here).

You can run the WL20_AXIS model here, the WL20_RU model here, the WL20_CN model here and the WL20_IN model here. 

You can run the AXIS_of_Evil models here.

Notes

Other relevant postings:

• Geopolitical Linkages: Canada, Mexico and the US
• US attempts to dominate India
• China and the Global South
• Six Futures for China
• India as a Small Regional Country
• Hegemonic Dominance Forecasts
• Globalization and Trump II Tariffs
• Five Futures for Russia
• Alternate Futures for the US
• How to Balance the World System

WL20_AXIS model Measurement Matrix:

World-System (2015-2100) US Attempts to Dominate India

 

Reuters is reporting (here) that the Trump II Administration is planning to impose 25% Tariffs on India and, not surprisingly, creating Political Chaos in India. My first question is "What is really going on here?" Trump's Trade War makes little economic sense and is opposed to conventional Republican Right-Wing Free-Market Ideology.

If Trump's Trade War isn't about Economics, what is it about? My best guess (and there might not be a rational explanation) is that the Trade War is about Political Power. Trump is intent on the Economic Domination of every country in the World-System and has decided that a Trade War is the way to do it. And, right now, he seems to be winning--most countries appear anxious to capitulate. How the Trade War helps Trump personally or the US Economy, if at all, remains to be seen.

Another (and maybe more important questions) is what kind of Geopolitical Alignment is best for India (or any other country, for that matter)? In terms of the models I have estimate, the World-System Linkage model (W)** is the best for India [-99.33, AIC=-60.09, -28.39]*** while in terms of predicted performance, the BAU model [-9.571, AIC=26.53, 57.61] is best (graphic above). In the long-run, US domination will lead to collapse of the Indian Economy (I would assume that the Trump II Administration isn't thinking this far ahead).

Russian domination (RU) is another interesting case. Russia is itself a cyclical economy (think of the Collapse of the Soviet Union) and that cyclicality would be transmitted Geopolitically to India. There would be periods of success and periods of failure.

In the end, my guess is that Indian (and any other country, really) would prefer the BAU model, that is, to be left alone to find their own attractor path. 

You can experiment yourself with the IN_LM_BAU model here. You can learn more about how the models were constructed in the Boiler Plate. For more discussion of the Indian Economy, see India as a Small Regional Economy.

Notes

** Other types of Geopolitical Alignments estimated in my models are discussed in the Boiler Plate.

***Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) Smaller is better.

The BRICS (of which India is a member) are actually an intergovernmental organization of ten countries but the name comes from just five: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. You can experiment with the BRICS BAU state space models on the following sites:

• Brazil (BR_20 Model) An unstable model that leads to collapse (stabilizing the model also leads to collapse). There are strong historical unemployment and environmental Controllers. See if you can find a steady state for this economy!
• Russia (RU_LM Model) An unstable model with strong Export-Employment historical controllers. Becomes cyclical when stabilized.
• India (IN_LM Model) A Malthusian Economy currently in collapse mode. Stabilizing the economy is beneficial.
• China (CN_LM Model) An unstable economy with strong historical Export-Employment controllers. Stabilizing the economy produces a steady state after 2100.
• South Africa (ZA_20 Model) An unstable economy with strong Globalization-Environmental historical controllers. Stabilizing the economy would lead to a steady state in the distant future (well after 2100).

The BRICS are not a uniform set of Semi-Peripheral countries. They have different dynamics and different historical patterns of development. Neoclassical Economics makes a mistake when applying the same Exogenous Growth Model to these countries.

Trump doesn't think much of either the Indian or the Russian economies (here) and calls them "dead economies". Obviously, the Trade War is not meant to help other countries in the World-System but rather to dominate them (read more about Trump's Trade War here from a World-System Perspective).

World-System (1950-2150) India as a Small Regional Country

 

A recent article in the New York Times (here) about the evident decline of US Hegemonic Power suggests that India (IN) might be one of the countries competing for world leadership once US dominance has passed. India might well try to resurrect the "... Indosphere, a zone of Indian cultural and linguistic influence that stretched far beyond the subcontinent in the period roughly between 250 B.C. and A.D. 1200..." Another article (here) suggests that India is in a difficult position, closer to the US than to Russia but unwilling to alienate other BRIC countries (see below in the Notes).

The question not being asked here is what would be the best Geopolitical Alignment for a country such as India and does that alignment involve Hegemonic domination of the World-System. This post investigates the question by estimating a state space model for India in the period (1950-2000) and then testing various Geopolitical Inputs to see the effect on the Indian Economy.

The graphic above shows the two state variables, IN1=(Growth) and IN2=(Q-N), with forecasts out to 2150. The best model (in terms of the AIC statistic, AIC=-6272.714 when compared to the BAU model AIC=-385.2805, smaller is better) to produce those forecasts (see the Boiler Plate for a description of the state space model and the data sources used) is the IN_LM_SC model (a Small Open Country) model. It shows that India would be approaching a steady state around 2150 with part of the Asia Region.

In another post (here), I look at alternative forecasts for World-System Hegemonic Dominance. India is one of the also-ran countries (in fact, the worst performer), not providing large growth stimulus to the World-System. In the upcoming period of Environmental Crisis and Hegemonic Chaos, maximum growth might not be the best choice for the World-System but it will be a Dynamic Attractor.

Notes

In term of Systems Theory, a Small Open Country is one that has no state variables. The state of the system is driven by the dominant Input Economy (the Asia Region in this case).  Here are the System Matrix (F) and the Input Matrix (G) for the IN_LM_SC model:

The small values for the coefficients in the System Matrix (e.g., -2.605049e-23) are effectively zero to within machine precision.

You can run the IN_LM_SC model yourself at the following Google Sites (here). You can also run the other BRIC country models:

• Brazil BR20 Model
• China CNLM Model
• Russia RULM Model
• South Africa ZA20 Model