The International Institute for Middle-East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1], from Ljubljana, Slovenia, is renowned for its insightful and comprehensive analyses of global developments, with a particular focus on the Middle East, the Balkans, and other strategically significant regions worldwide. Among its distinguished contributors is Dr. J. Scott Younger, President Commissioner at Glendale Partners and a member of the IFIMES Advisory Board. In his article titled “Unpredictable World, cont’d,” Dr. Younger expands upon his ongoing analysis of contemporary global dynamics, addressing not only the situations in Gaza and Ukraine but also those in Sudan, Afghanistan, and other regions marked by instability and conflict.
It is October now and there seems to be no end to the wars in either Ukraine or -Palestine, both of which should have finished. President Trump had boasted what he was going to do beforehand, but he has found that the situation is far more complicated than he first thought and allows his friendships for the main protagonists of the two war-torn areas, Putin and Netanyahu, to get in the way of robust responses. He has been called a megalomaniac with a streak of paranoia and intellectual emptiness, although he would not admit at all to these assertions, since he sincerely believes that he has Nobel prize-winning gifts which should be acknowledged. He does not listen and, if he disagrees violently with what he is told, it could be a firing offence!
Of immediate concern is the situation in Gaza. PM Netanyahu speaks regularly to Trump, by his own admission, and must have persuaded him to continue his support for the PM’s efforts to take over the whole of Gaza. This, despite the IDF generals telling him to agree to a ceasefire to stop the war, a negotiated plan by concerned parties such as the Qataris to which Hamas had agreed with hostage release included. A fractious cabinet meeting took place a few days ago from which the extreme right-wing view to continue the war to the end prevailed. Trump acquiesced to the cabinet decision, despite strong opinion from the rest of the world. He then proposed that the US would provide management for the strip for ten years after the war ended, and see its rehabilitation. Of course, this would allow his plan to build the Riviera of the Middle East to proceed. Any remaining Palestinians would be housed in specially built communities. Shades of apartheid, which the S Africans already rejected several decades ago. It is a grossly unfair if not cruel system, particularly as the Palestinians have lived on the land for generations. The recent UN meeting, which voted unanimously against Israel’s continued actions, was not passed, because the US used its veto; one against! And so the murder by the IDF continues’ which the US could stop.
Meanwhile, on the west bank the far-right Israeli settlers press ahead with taking chunks of land from the Palestinians with the approval of the far right, even ones who are armed and unwittingly – or knowledgably – kill in confrontation the local people. There is no punishment for these settlers but, if the locals, many of whom have looked after the land for generations, show angry resistance, they can be jailed in poor conditions without trial for many months even years. This move by the settlers has been going on, relatively unknown by the rest of the world, until the current disturbance. Israel, thanks to a few self-interested, extreme parties with far right views, have made the country into a pariah state for which judgement will surely come. It doesn’t help today’s Palestinians. When will the rest of the world help? The end game seems near but there are several outcomes possible, much depending on which way Trump brings in the US, none of which can realise a satisfactory solution for the Palestinians. The 2-state solution, which most of the rest of the world, as well as a good number of Israelis would buy into, is not on Trump’s agenda. There is an air of despondency that the solution that will be tabled will be unsatisfactory and there will be continuing arguments, perhaps worse.
With regards to the Ukraine war, there was some expectation that the meeting that took place in Alaska between Trump and Putin would lead to a breakthrough towards a ceasefire and peace negotiations. It has become clear that, whatever Putin pronounces, he is not looking an early halt to the fighting. He is quite comfortable with the status quo with small gains being made on land and his ability to procure some success across Ukraine with the aerial fight with drones, of which he seems to have a vast number, more than the number that the Ukraine air defence can cope. Trump is showing signs of exasperation and is threatening to hit Russia with more sanctions. But Putin only responds to actions, not just threats. Will Trump take some force against his friend, Putin? Or will he dither much as before?
The Europeans, including the UK, have been meeting, having discussions, on the role they expect to play, once a ceasefire is in place. They are waiting to see if Trump carries out his threat of sanctions and Putin steps back because he feels there is nothing to be gained by carrying on the war. He will negotiate hard, believing that he has Trump ‘tied up’ from past misdemeanours. Will the Europeans stand firm with Ukraine? It is an unsatisfactory situation, unfortunate even, because of an unpredictable president and a rather weak Europe.
While these two events have been dominating the media, there are other conflagrations taking place elsewhere, most notably Sudan, which has been torn by a civil war between the government and a strong rebel force, each being supplied by rival Middle East states. The deaths in the civilian population and starvation caused are overwhelming even the endeavours of the UN. Neighbouring countries must be encouraged to step in, put an end to the fighting, and bring peace about. Support to form a new government and assistance towards it, under the jurisdiction of the UN, will be required for quite some time until the country has been stabilised.
Problems remain with the extreme Islamic Taliban government of Afghanistan, brought to a head recently by a Richter 6.0 earthquake in a remote area to the east of Kabul where there were a few isolated, poor villages. The death toll was over 1,000 and it has taken time to recover bodies, sometimes or usually access being only possible by helicopter.
Myanmar, since the elected government of Aung San Suu Kyi was toppled by a military coup some four years ago and Suu Kyi put under house arrest, has been a country in constant turmoil. The people have not taken kindly to the coup and there is an ongoing struggle between the military and the people to the north, in particular, with no end in sight. The issues are more complicated than this and one has to take into account the history of Burma, as it was, its length of 2,500 km and seven different peoples with differing customs, values living there in separate states.
Other unrest can be found in Haiti in the Caribbean, for instance, which touches on the southeast US, and S. America with countries which are ‘ruled’ by drug cartels.
Finally, though, there is the upcoming BRICS bloc, which was founded in 2006 by Russia with a membership of Brazil, Russia, India, China and S Africa and to which has been added since several other countries, particularly from the Middle East and recently Indonesia. The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which has its origins in 1996 and include much of BRICS membership, recently, gave a considerable show of strength. In the past month, China exhibited, for the first time in a number of years, a full parade of its military strength.
However, the SCO and BRICS main pursuit is growing economic strength through trade. They are both primarily Eurasian based but with BRICS taking in Brazil and S Africa. In short, these are new significant expanding blocs which are intended to compete with the western nations. They include many resources. Trump recently learned that Modi of India was taking a lot of oil from Russia thus reducing the effect of his sanctions on Russia. Furiously, he slapped tariffs of 50% on India which has understandably annoyed Modi, and turned India’s sights away from the west and look more closely to Eurasia. India is growing steadily and is forecast to be one of the leading nations of the world as the century unfolds. More anon!
About the author:
Dr. J. Scott Younger, OBE, is a professional civil engineer; he spent 42 years in the Far East undertaking assignments in 10 countries for WB, ADB, UNDP. He published many papers; he was a columnist for Forbes Indonesia and Globe Asia. He served on British & European Chamber boards and was a Vice Chair of Int’l Business Chamber for 17 years. His expertise is infrastructure and sustainable development and he takes an interest in international affairs. He is an International Chancellor of the President University, Indonesia and Honorary Senior Research Fellow of the Glasgow University. He is a member of IFIMES Advisory Board. Lived and worked in Thailand from 1978 to 1983 and visited Burma, Bangladesh and Nepal for projects.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect IFIMES official position.
Ljubljana/Glasgow, 6 October 2025
[1] IFIMES - International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has a special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN in New York since 2018, and it is the publisher of the international scientific journal "European Perspectives."
