Editorial – The paradox of change? Reading through the multiple crowd-sourced articles of the Weekly, what stands out is a perception of an acceleration of change. In itself, each flashpoint or problem is not new, and has been either underlined or monitored for months and even for years for some of them. Yet, when we look at all of them together, then it seems that they tend to become real, accumulate, or worsen in an accelerating way.

We may wonder if the acceleration – assuming it is not “just” a question of perception – does not come from the following phenomenon, among certainly others: despite stressing upcoming changes, these emphases may remain at a very shallow level when those changes are – consciously or not – equated with something undesirable. As a result, real assessment of situations and decisions taken are one step – to be optimistic – behind, done out of past habits. Then, refusal to consider properly ongoing changes ends up accelerating them, possibly in a way that is more adverse than what could have happened. Take, for example, the awareness of the end of the U.S. dominated unipolar world. It has been underlined for years, including in the U.S.:

“With the rapid rise of other countries, the “unipolar moment” is over and Pax Americana—the era of American ascendancy in international politics that began in 1945—is fast winding down.” (Global Trends 2030, Dec 2012 : x)

Yet, when those countries that were known to be part of the new poles of the multipolar world – among them, for example, Russia and China – act accordingly, then surprised outrage results, while complex explanations to crises recede (read for example Oliver Bullough “Stop forcing Ukraine into a narrative of Moscow versus Washington” The Guradian). This immediately puts everyone on an escalating path, considering the power available to all actors in this multipolar world, the aim of the ascending poles to see the changed world happening and the intrinsic escalating power of erroneous explanations and related misunderstandings.

Thus, when change is coming – and it always is – what would matter is not only identifying those changes but also the way actors truly perceive them. From this perception will follow action located on an spectrum ranging from resistance and fear, which will accelerate change and possibly make the result less favourable, to acceptation and ability to seize opportunities to bend changes to one’s advantage. Assuming this hypothesis is correct, then it pleads methodologically for an abundant use of scenarios, simulations and role playing.  At the level of analysis, it emphasises, if it still needed to be considering the existing literature on the topic, the importance of the role of perceptions in international politics.

Click on the image below to read the Weekly on Paper.lipolitical risk, international system, weak signals


Featured image: High speed by By Paolo Neo [Public domain], via Wikimedia Commons.

Published by Dr Helene Lavoix (MSc PhD Lond)

Dr Helene Lavoix, PhD Lond (International Relations), is the President/CEO of The Red Team Analysis Society. She is specialised in strategic foresight and warning for international relations, national and international security issues. Her current focus is on the war in Ukraine, international order and the rise of China, the overstepping of planetary boundaries and international relations, the methodology of SF&W, radicalisation as well as new tech and security.

Join the Conversation


  1. Thank you, very important insight the change perception of actors involved rather than the change itself is what really adds to acceleration and worsening of situations, since they ignore the unpleasant facts and forcastings until it is too late to do something about them preventing them from further worsening. I suggest maybe an important factor related to problems of false perceptions is the spread of ideas of societal differences among the top decesion makers as they are increasingly seeing things as we verse them thus increasing the likelyhood of lose all scenarios.

    1. Dear Huda, thank you so much for your comment. To build upon your first point, I also think that what they do, as they are still actually in a past framework intensifies and accelerates change. Your suggestion is excellent, as indeed the higher the level of escalation and feeling of threat, the stronger the tendency to perceive events through the lenses of in-groups versus out-groups, whatever the way to define them, what you call societal differences, and in themselves this distinction can be very polarizing.

    Luís Vaz de Camões (1524 // 1580), in “Sonnets”

    Changing up times, changing up wills,
    Changing up be, changing up confidence:
    The whole world consists of change,
    Always taking new qualities.

    Continually we see novelties,
    Different at all from hope:
    From evil are the hurts in remembrance,
    From well (if there was any) nostalgia.

    The time covers the ground with a green mantle,
    That was already covered in cold snow,
    And converts in weeping my sweet chant.

    And besides this is changing every day,
    Another change is major astonishment,
    Changing no more as before.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.