The End of the Trust-Based System: Towards a Zero Trust Global Order

Globalisation in the Shadow of Power

By A.K. Mehta

Globalisation was built on trust, on the belief that deep economic interdependence would make major conflicts too costly to sustain. That trust is now weakening. The world may not de-globalise, but the recent erosion of trust as the foundation of the global system may prove to be a historic turning point in the evolution of the global order.

From Russia’s war in Ukraine to the US-Israeli strikes on Iran that began on 28th February 2026 and the disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz that followed, events in the last few years suggest that globalisation is entering a harsher and more uncertain phase. The world will remain interconnected, but it will become less trusting. Trust may not disappear, but it will no longer be the foundation on which nations build their survival.

For many decades after the Second World War, the world attempted to build an international system rooted in respect for sovereignty, relatively free trade,  multilateral institutions, and belief that a rule-based order would prevail. This system did not eliminate conflict, yet it created a degree of predictability that allowed supply chains to function across continents, capital to move across borders, and energy to flow across oceans with confidence.

Technology connected the world in ways that were unimaginable in the last century.

That order rested on trust and was underpinned by power, above all American power. Sea lanes remained open because a dominant navy kept them open. Financial systems remained stable because dominant economies could steady them. Trade rules survived because major powers chose to honour them. Power, institutions, and trust reinforced one another.

That balance is now under visible strain. Interdependence, once seen primarily as a source of strength, is now increasingly seen as a source of vulnerability.

The systems that sustained globalisation were never neutral. They were networked systems of movement. Movement of energy, goods, money, data, and technology. The world has now learned that the ability to control networks is power, and so is the ability to disrupt networks.

Nearly a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz. When that narrow waterway is threatened, energy prices react instantly across continents. Shipping routes have

already been blocked or threatened, from attacks in the Red Sea since late 2023 to the far more serious disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz following the recent strikes on Iran. Vessel traffic has fallen, ships have been attacked or delayed, and rerouting has raised costs sharply.

The world has also learned that financial systems can be frozen, as Russia discovered when it was cut off from SWIFT and its foreign reserves were immobilised in 2022. Technology access can be restricted through export controls on semiconductors and artificial intelligence. Data networks can be sabotaged. Undersea cables that carry almost all global internet traffic can be cut or tapped. In a deeply interconnected world, almost every system can be weaponised if alternatives do not exist.

What was once celebrated as interdependence is now revealing the other and harsher face. The same interdependence that creates efficiency also creates vulnerability. And vulnerability can be converted into leverage.

This shift will change the meaning of power. In the twentieth century, power came largely from territory, raw materials, industrial capacity, and military strength. In the twenty-first century, power will increasingly come from controlling the networks that move resources, money, data, and goods.

Rare earth minerals may be mined in many countries, but processing is concentrated in a few. Oil may lie under one nation’s soil, but the tankers, insurance systems, and financing that move it are controlled elsewhere. A country may grow food, yet its ability to export still depends on secure shipping routes and willing buyers. Owning resource is power, but controlling the network is even greater power.

In the new landscape, large global corporations will themselves become strategic actors. The platforms, technologies, supply chains, and data ecosystems they control are now too important to remain purely commercial. Whether in semiconductors, cloud computing, artificial intelligence, social media, or logistics, these firms will increasingly align with the major powers that can protect them, regulate them, or pressure them. States, in turn, will treat corporate capabilities as extensions of national power. The line between economic power and national power will blur.

Globalisation will not end. But it will change character. For decades, the world optimised for

efficiency. Factories moved to the cheapest locations. Supply chains stretched across continents. Just in time inventory replaced safety buffers. This system produced prosperity and low costs. It also created fragile systems with dangerous single points of failure. The pandemic and the war in Ukraine exposed these weaknesses through shortages of semiconductors, pharmaceuticals, fertilisers, and basic goods. Efficient systems perform well in stable conditions. Resilient systems survive shocks. The coming era will reward resilience.

Resilience requires redundancy, diversification, and domestic capacity in critical sectors such as food, energy, technology, and defence. It requires strategic reserves, diversified supply chains, financial systems that can withstand sanctions, communication networks that can survive cyber attacks, and militaries that can operate when satellites or digital networks fail. The objective of statecraft is changing. It is no longer enough to optimise only for peace and profit. Systems must function in peace as well as war.

War is also changing. Future conflicts may not begin with armies crossing borders. They may begin with power grids failing, banks freezing, satellites going blind, communications collapsing, and supply chains stopping. A nation can be paralysed by disabling its systems.

The battlefield of the twenty-first century includes electricity grids, financial networks, undersea cables, satellite constellations, logistics hubs, and digital infrastructure. War is increasingly becoming a contest between systems, algorithms, and networks. Human resilience in such a scenario will become even more important.

Military power is changing as well. Old stealth meant hiding from radar and the human eye. New stealth may mean hiding from digital systems. Satellites, drones, sensors, and artificial intelligence can now track and predict movement with extraordinary precision. Forces that remain visible in the digital domain may be targeted even if they are physically concealed. The forces that will prevail are those that can still fight when GPS fails, networks collapse, and systems no longer function.

The global order is therefore not collapsing, but it is being rewritten with zero trust. The old order assumed that interdependence would create stability. The new reality is that interdependence can create vulnerability. The old order prioritised efficiency. The new order will prioritise resilience. The old order relied on trust. The new order will build systems that function even when trust fails.

Trust will not disappear. Nations will still trade, invest, and cooperate. But trust will no longer be the bedrock on which nations will structure their relationships.

The twentieth century world was shaped by control over territory and resources. The twenty-first century world will be shaped by control over networks and systems. Territory will define borders. Control over networks will define power.

The world will remain globalised, but it will be a different globalisation. One shaped not only by markets and efficiency, but by power, resilience, and control over critical systems.

The world will not become less connected. But it will become less trusting.

Globalisation will continue, but it will operate in the shadow of power.

For nations living in that shadow, the time to prepare has arrived. The next big war may be a war to restore trust as the world moves towards a zero trust order. The emerging global system will be defined by five shifts; from trust to resilience, from efficiency to redundancy, from territory to networks, from industrial power to systems power, and from wars of armies to wars of systems. Future readiness, equity and sustainability will depend on ability of nations to negotiate this shift.

Sovereignty in the twenty-first century will not be granted. It will have to be built and defended. Those who fail to build domestic capacity, diversify critical networks, protect digital infrastructure, and strengthen their societies will see their independence eroded quietly. Not through invasion, but through dependence. Not through war, but through systems controlled by others.