The term "New World Order" has long been associated with the notion of a unified global government, often perceived as either an inevitable outcome of globalization or a secretive elite agenda. However, as the world evolves, it has become increasingly clear that the New World Order may not be a monolithic entity, but rather a complex interplay of factions with differing interests and ideologies. 

As the world continues to grapple with globalization and the realignment of geopolitical power, the the current landscape suggests that the New World Order could be composed of two separate groups with distinct ideologies and leadership.

In this article, we will explore the characteristics of these two groups, the United States-led alliance and the BRICS-led alliance, and the implications for citizens within each group.

The Two Groups of the New World Order

1. United States-led alliance: This group is characterized by a strong belief in liberal democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. It consists of Western nations and their allies, which collectively aim to maintain their influence in global affairs and uphold the values and institutions of the liberal international order. The United States plays a pivotal role in this alliance, leading through its military, economic, and diplomatic prowess.

2. BRICS-led alliance: The BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) form an emerging alliance that seeks to challenge the existing global order and create a more multipolar world. This group is characterized by a more diverse set of political and economic systems, as well as a desire to increase their influence and assert their interests on the global stage. While they may not share a unified ideology, the BRICS countries are bound by their common goal of reshaping the world order to better reflect their growing power and ambitions.   As of January 2024, five further nations (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Ethiopia, Iran and Egypt) joined BRICS, expanding their potential influence even further.

Which countries are likely to join a BRICS-led alliance in due course?  Using our best assessment of relationships, global politics, historic allegiances and values alignments, the table below gives an indication of those nations likely to join:

What this table illustrates is that a scenario could arise whereby 73% of the global population sits within the BRICS-led alliance, and over half of the landmass and potential resources.

If you consider the long-term current demographic trends, overlaying fertility rates, the implications are even more intriguing. Many Western countries have fertility rates under 2.1, which means they are expected to have declining populations in the longer term. The current average fertility rate for the BRICS alliance countries above is just over 2.6, which means that potential BRICS nations will have an even greater proportion of the global population.  In fact our best estimates indicate that by 2100 this percentage will be between 85% - 90%.

With no single Global World Order, the expectation would be a period of instability, unrest and volatility accompanied by geopolitical tensions and increased risk of military conflict.

Implications for Citizens:

1. Economic Impact: Trade restrictions and reduced cooperation between the two alliances may lead to decreased economic growth, higher import costs, and potential job losses, especially in industries reliant on international trade.
2. Supply Chain Disruptions: Disruptions to global supply chains may arise as a result of the shifting alliances, leading to shortages and increased prices of certain goods and services. Citizens may face higher costs for essential items, and businesses may need to find new suppliers or adapt their operations.
3. Travel and Migration: Travel restrictions and limitations on migration between countries in the two alliances could impact tourism, business travel, and opportunities for people seeking to live, work, or study abroad.
4. Technological Innovation: The breakdown of relationships between the alliances might lead to reduced collaboration in scientific research and technological development. This could slow down the pace of innovation, affecting various industries and the overall quality of life.
5. Security Concerns: Heightened tensions between the two alliances may lead to increased military spending, cyber threats, and a heightened risk of conflict. Citizens in the US-led alliance may face uncertainty and potential threats to their security.
6. Cultural and Diplomatic Relationships: The decline in relationships between the two alliances could lead to a reduced exchange of cultural and intellectual ideas, limiting opportunities for collaboration and mutual understanding.
7. Environmental Cooperation: A breakdown in relationships might also hamper global efforts to combat climate change and address environmental challenges, as countries may prioritize their individual interests over collaborative solutions.
8. Challenges to personal privacy and civil liberties: In the pursuit of security and stability, citizens within this alliance may face increased surveillance and potential encroachments on their privacy and civil liberties.
9. Shifts in global power dynamics: As the BRICS-led alliance continued to grow in influence, citizens of these countries may experience a shift in their global standing and an increased role in shaping international norms and institutions. This newfound influence could bring both opportunities and responsibilities, as well as potential tensions with the US-led alliance.

Conclusion

The rise of a New World Order, characterized by two separate groups with no single hierarchy, presents a complex and evolving geopolitical landscape. As the United States-led alliance and the BRICS-led alliance continued to navigate their respective paths, citizens within each group would experience unique opportunities and challenges.