Amid what the Institute for Economics and Peace calls “Great Fragmentation” and U.S. policy shifts under Trump, the article argues that small states such as Sri Lanka face sharply reduced room for manoeuvre and that traditional non-alignment has become an unrealistic survival strategy.

Former Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed is cited as urging an “India First” approach: small Indian-Ocean neighbours cannot safely bypass their largest neighbour without risking sovereignty, and abstract multipolar balancing is no substitute for alignment with core interests.

The piece concludes that Sri Lanka’s geographic proximity to India is a strategic fact that must shape policy; an “India First” stance is presented not as preference but as necessity if Colombo is to avoid repeating past miscalculations with both India and China.

Global politics is moving in an increasingly unpredictable direction, unlike anything witnessed in recent decades. What the Institute for Economics and Peace has described as an era of “Great Fragmentation” appears to capture the current state of the international system. Policy shifts undertaken by the United States during President Donald Trump’s second term have further unsettled the global outlook, raising fundamental questions about the future of alliances and partnerships that have long underpinned the international order.

Canadian prime minster Mark Carney recently captured this climate of uncertainty in a New York Times interview. He revealed that, over the past year, he had prepared for the “extreme tail risk” that President Trump might order military action against Canada. Such remarks illustrate just how dramatically the global political landscape has changed. For the first time in more than a century, Canada is contemplating how it would respond if faced with a direct threat from its closest ally and neighbour.

The broader question is what role the United States intends to play in the future international order. Is the world merely passing through a transitional phase? Or is Washington attempting to fundamentally restructure the global system? One could continue listing such questions, yet definitive answers remain elusive. What is clear is that the world is entering a period of profound uncertainty.

Equally unclear is who, if anyone will safeguard the existing global order. In this context, Professor Bari Bhushan’s observation that the world is experiencing a vacuum of leadership appears........

© Eurasia Review