Interconnectivity E-Book

J-G MATUSZEK

• Herausgeber: BoD - Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch

Seitenzahl: 598

Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024

Beschreibung

INTERCONNECTIVITY or what should be done in international politics, economics, science, from the knowledge of psychology, philosophy and management calibration to social attitudes. The idea of interconnectivity is central to the discussion of international politics, economics, science and social behavior. It is based on the insight that all actors and systems in the world are interconnected and that isolated approaches are hardly effective in a globalized world. The key to promoting interconnectivity lies in an integrative approach that utilizes the strengths and perspectives of different disciplines. Through collaboration, exchange and a shared understanding of global challenges, effective solutions can be developed that promote the well-being of all.

Leseprobe

Contents

1. Terminology

2. The logic of interconnectivity

3. Security in international politics

4. Interconnectivity of geography

5. And civil prevention?

6. What does civil society consist of?

7. Interconnectivity of language and thought

8. Shaping cultures

9. Intercultural philosophy

10. Interconnectivity in sport

11. Interconnectivity in international politics

12. Dictatorship and authoritarianism in the interconnectivity

13. Interconnectivity of wars

14 Democracy in the traffic circle of liberal and illiberal forces

15. Threatening party politics

16. Psychology of international relations

17. Content and communication

18. Next-generation alignment

19. Interconnectivity of thought and belief

20. Interconnectivity of “good” and “evil”

21. Charisma and power

22. The importance of assessments

23. Key concepts of evaluation

24. Interconnectivity of rationality and its implementation

25. The interconnectivity of issues

26. Effects of the interconnectivity of the economy

27. Clean growth and sustainability

28. Interconnectivity of future dreams and their necessity

29. Interconnectivity of the dumbing down of a society

30. Errors of neutrality

31. Mistakes in foreign policy decision-making

32. Assessment of the media landscape

33. European politics in a global context

34. Interconnectivity of the management of politics

35. Interconnectivity of democracy

36. Interconnectivity of the positive and the negative

37. Interconnectivity of tension and relaxation

38. Dangers for interconnective foreign policy

39. Conclusions from interconnectivity

1. TERMINOLOGY

Since definitions are necessarily selective in that they emphasize certain aspects and exclude others, the limits of understanding should also be recognized here. Since we do not want to be satisfied with too narrow a definition, we will recognize the complexity of phenomena and consider different perspectives. The topic of interconnectivity is about the interpretation of networking phenomena. Interconnectivity is more than just the ability to exchange data between systems. It is a fundamental principle that shapes society and extends into philosophy and spirituality. In a world where everything is connected, the way we use these connections not only helps to increase efficiency, but also has far-reaching implications for our knowledge, our ethics and ultimately our understanding of existence. In this sense, interconnectivity is not just a technical phenomenon, but a reflection of the fundamental structure of our reality. Its aim is to create synergies, make better use of individual and social resources and achieve a more comprehensive integration of information and services. This is becoming an important factor for innovation and overcoming complex challenges. In social media, interconnectivity looks like a digital cocktail party where everyone is in contact with everyone else via different platforms. At this party, groups gather to share different impressions and quickly jump back and forth in discussions. Interaction is spontaneous, with people reacting to posts one way or another, commenting on them or forwarding them. Within minutes, the chatter spreads across the various platforms. At the same time, people participate in a wide variety of conversations without going into any particular depth. People simply network, the interactions are short-lived and based on quick likes or short comments. The viral nature of content is one of the most striking aspects of these artificial conversations. In a very short space of time, a single tweet can spread from a small group to a global audience. Cross-platform interconnectivity amplifies the effect that it seems as if everyone is in contact with everyone else. Just like at a noisy party, where people often misunderstand or drown each other out, clear messages are lost on social media. While on the one hand this creates opportunities for exchange and creativity, it also harbors risks. These include misunderstandings, being overwhelmed by the flood of information and the formation of so-called echo chambers.

If technology makes it possible to network household appliances with each other, this should also apply to the sociological fields of knowledge. It is not all about entertaining gaming, but about serious knowledge management. As networking and exchange in the digital media are often misleading, there is an increasing need for portals with scientific evaluation, which should be as free from errors as possible, and above all free from corruption. In the social environment, reading self-assessments, however entertaining they may seem, provides too little objectivity. The factual issues are simply distorted.In an increasingly digitalized world, the ability to network is becoming more and more conspicuous. Companies and institutions that are able to communicate efficiently with partners from different fields of knowledge and exchange data increase their productivity and innovative strength. This is particularly crucial in interdisciplinary projects, where bringing together experts from different fields leads to new insights and breakthroughs. One example of this is the collaboration between medical researchers, software developers and data scientists. By sharing information in real time, new therapies and medicines can be developed more quickly. In industrial production, too, the networking of machines and systems via the so-called “Internet of Things” enables greater efficiency and flexibility. At the planning level in interdisciplinary projects, interconnectivity is crucial when experts from different areas are brought together and new findings are identified. But interconnectivity is not just limited to practical applications. In cognitive research, which deals with the foundations of knowledge and truth, it opens up completely new perspectives.

By networking different knowledge systems, complex problems are viewed from different angles in order to gain deeper insights into the nature of reality. This interconnectedness extends into philosophy, where questions about reason, consciousness and existence are posed. Philosophers such as Martin Heidegger and Emmanuel Levinas have emphasized how our existence in the world is shaped by relationships and connections. Interconnectivity is thus understood as a metaphysical principle that reflects the structure of reality itself. In many spiritual traditions, the idea of the interconnectedness of all things is seen as a central principle. In this context, interconnectivity is not just a scientific term, but an expression of the deeper unity of being. Even in Eastern philosophies such as Buddhism or Hinduism, the world is seen as a network of relationships in which everything is interwoven. In Western traditions, this idea is expressed in mysticism, for example, where unity with the divine is achieved by perceiving the interconnectedness of all creation. Interconnectivity also raises important ethical questions. If everything is connected, what does this mean for our responsibility towards others? How does global connectivity influence our decisions regarding the environment, war and peace? These questions are of existential importance and show that interconnectivity goes far beyond technical aspects. Paying attention to interconnectivity requires a rethink in many areas. It is important to take advantage of the opportunities offered by increased connectivity while at the same time taking possible risks into account.

Through interdisciplinary approaches and the linking of different areas of knowledge, innovative solutions are being developed in every type of management for complex challenges. The emergence of hybrid learning formats is expanding access to educational opportunities across institutional and geographical boundaries by linking face-to-face and online elements. People who were previously excluded from educational opportunities due to physical or organizational barriers can now participate in programmes worldwide. This promotes the inclusion of many people and enables broader participation in educational processes. With the help of new technologies, interactive and collaborative learning environments are being created that promote interactive learning. Learners can interact with others in real time, work together on projects and benefit from a wider range of learning opportunities.

These opportunities also support the concept of lifelong learning by providing continuous access to learning resources. But who really takes advantage of these great opportunities? Probably the guy who already has three degrees and is taking his 17th online course on Coursera to finally learn Mandarin. Or the motivated colleague who secretly surfs a learning platform in the middle of a Zoom session because multitasking is supposedly so efficient. And the rest? Well, they prefer to scroll through TikTok during their lunch break and click on clickbait articles with titles like “These five tricks will make you look smarter without learning”.

After all, there are plenty of opportunities to continue your education beyond your job, learn new skills and adapt to changing labor market requirements. If networking in the education sector offers new forms of learning and skills development and leads to a completely different understanding of holistic problem solving, this also brings with it uncertainties that need to be carefully weighed up. The future will show how well the balance between networking and control can be maintained in order to make the most of the advantages of interconnectivity.

However, there is also a tendency to ignore or even suppress perspectives that are unfamiliar, resulting in the loss of valuable insights and ideas. A kind of negative spiral influences the unsuccessful action patterns of networking. Chronic negative intervening can undermine joint success and take away the strength to tackle new projects or make changes. It is therefore important to grasp the overall situation and consciously counteract misguided tendencies. Deterioration of mutuality must be avoided if the diverse perspectives are to bring innovative solutions.

Effective interconnectivity is based on clear, respectful and open channels of communication. As soon as destructive argumentation patterns get in the way, these channels are blocked. This leads to misunderstandings, false assumptions and a general deterioration in the quality of communication. In an environment where destructive argumentation is the norm, people tend to withdraw and fragment into smaller, like-minded groups. This leads to an isolation of ideas and reduces the interconnectivity of different groups, which in turn weakens social cohesion as a whole.

Unfortunately, global networking also makes it possible for destructive ideologies, fake news and hate speech to spread and scale quickly. Digital connectivity creates new touchpoints for cybercrime, which expands the destructive potential in society. Interconnectivity, fostered by modern communication tools and technologies, has an impact on the way societies deal with diverse tendencies, including destructive ones. The anonymity offered by many online platforms encourages negative behavior such as bullying, hate speech or extremist statements. The toxic climate in online communities usually rubs off on social coexistence. The result is a polarized society in which the ability to engage in dialogue is dwindling and extreme movements, whether political or ideological, are gaining ground. Civil disobedience, which used to be a form of peaceful protest, can easily turn violent under the influence of disinformation and radicalization. Because when reality is distorted and replaced by lies, any constructed illusory truth appears justified, even if it breaks the law or threatens human lives.

In any case, information, whether positive or negative, is disseminated in real time. This means that both constructive and destructive messages reach a wide audience quickly. Networked societies should be able to defend themselves collectively and react quickly to negative events or threats. A calibration of reason is necessary so that different systems, disciplines or actors harmonize in their activities. In an interconnected context, it is required that the parts involved work towards common goals and coordinate via interfaces and communication channels. Even in scientific research, different experts such as biologists, economists or engineers must coordinate their approaches in order to achieve a beneficial result. Without clear coordination, systems and their teams work extremely inefficiently. Malfunctions are the result. Only interconnectivity clarifies how the different parts of a system or several disciplines are linked together in a meaningful way. Interconnectivity occurs when the individual elements are related to each other and their functions and objectives complement each other.

In technical systems, this refers to the logical connections between different modules and components. Each component of a network must be clearly connected to the others so that data or information can be exchanged correctly. In the technology sector, this can be described very simply, whereas in social systems the links are more complex. If interconnectivity comes to nothing because the links are unclear or ineffective, it will not bring any useful benefits.

A clear hierarchy and structure must exist in a company, including in politics, to ensure that decisions can be coordinated and implemented centrally. Allocation refers to the clear definition and distribution of tasks, functions or resources within the system. Each part of a networked system must know what role it plays and what resources or information are assigned to it. These basic principles are the prerequisite for effective and stable interconnectivity in complex systems, organizations or interdisciplinary projects. It is only through the close interlocking of concepts that the complexity created by increasing networking becomes visible and productive.

If these connections are missing or weakened, the system loses its integrity and falls apart. Without a flow of information, the individual elements cannot interact. Most system properties arise from the interaction of the individual components. If interconnectivity is missing, emergent phenomena do not appear in the first place. In social networks, the loss of connections results in the isolation of individuals or entire groups. In the economy, this occurs in supply chains in such a way that an interruption at one point or otherwise in communication channels results in disruptions throughout the entire system. In ecosystems, the loss of key species that have many connections to other species can lead to effects that destabilize the entire system. However, systems with high interconnectivity of responsibility are also more resilient to disturbances. They can better compensate for failures of individual components by using alternative connections. This explains why robust systems have convincingly redundant connections.

This means that multiple interdependencies result in greater efficiency, but also carry the risk of system failures and dependencies. In any case, a technical problem or an attack on a critical infrastructure has far-reaching effects on the entire structure. The situation is even more critical in social systems, which consist of specific cultures, values, beliefs and behaviors. As they are dynamic, they change over time and can be influenced by internal factors such as conflicts or external developments and technological changes. To protect against this, risks can be managed objectively by developing contingency plans. These precautions ensure that the overall system can still be maintained if one element fails.

The fragile beauty of interconnectivity: it really is a marvel how all these little puzzle pieces, whether in social networks or in complex systems, come together to form an impressive picture. But woe betide us if one piece of the puzzle is missing or simply refuses to go into place! Suddenly we not only have an incomplete picture, but also an existential crisis in the system. As connections dwindle, the network quickly becomes a place where everyone feels like they are in their own bubble of loneliness. Where are the creative ideas, the dynamic discussions and the unexpected collaborations? They have all fallen by the wayside, lost in the digital desert of isolation.

Health systems and logistics in particular have set themselves the goal of building up resilience. This is achieved through decentralized systems and back-up solutions that can quickly step in if a system fails. Interconnectivity offers immense benefits, but it requires careful and balanced strategies to manage the associated security risks. Cybersecurity, crisis management, critical infrastructure protection and proactive healthcare systems are crucial factors in ensuring that interconnectivity does not become a vulnerability in society. It requires continuous vigilance and adaptation to keep pace with rapid technological developments and the associated risks.

Alliances, arms control agreements, military peacekeeping missions and above all, early warning systems are among the security modules of networking in military policy. Unfortunately, networking across national borders also makes it possible for cyber criminals to launch attacks at an international level. Such threats are often difficult to track and even more difficult to combat as their actors appear in different countries. External threats to a country's internal security increasingly come from targeted disinformation campaigns spread via social media or other digital channels. Responding to this threat requires measures such as media literacy, stronger regulation of platforms and international cooperation. States, organizations and individuals are faced with the task of taking advantage of global networking while ensuring a high level of security. They must constantly adapt and often even cooperate with very different sectors.

The threat of disinformation is usually due to various factors that intentionally or unintentionally encourage the spread of false or misleading information. When political leaders deliberately use disinformation, they either want to influence public opinion, discredit political opponents or consolidate positions of power. They see the spread of disinformation as a form of political warfare or manipulation. There are numerous examples of this during elections or in times of crisis. In this way, narratives are spread in order to mislead public opinion. Companies use disinformation to improve their reputation and weaken that of their competitors. However, if it is exaggerated or clumsy, it can lead to reputational damage and legal consequences if the disinformation is uncovered.

The media and social networks are particularly vulnerable to the spread of misinformation, whether due to a thirst for sensationalism to generate more clicks and attention, or because of a lack of editorial oversight. Social media platforms have become a "Wild West" for misinformation, where content can go viral before its truthfulness is verified. These platforms take the risk of spreading misinformation when they prioritize algorithms focused on engagement rather than on content reliability. Misinformation has almost become an art form. One might think we live in an era where the fight for truth is already lost. Ironically, one could ask why newsrooms should bother spreading well-researched facts when a headline alone brings in more clicks. The algorithm loves it, and the readers? Well, they click out of curiosity, share accidentally, and suddenly, misinformation spreads faster than a summer news filler.

Ideological beliefs that spread virally reinforce distorted, unconscious viewpoints. Conspiracy theories are shared, even if objectively false, because they fit into some people’s worldview. "Hacktivists" or cybercriminals intentionally use misinformation to sow chaos, erode trust, or discredit certain players. Their goal is to create uncertainty or destabilize economic and political structures. The general public unwittingly participates in the experiment of spreading misinformation when they share unreliable sources or misinformation without thoroughly checking them. This is especially common in times of crisis or political instability, as emotions and uncertainties run high, and people quickly react to information that aligns with their fears or prejudices.

Editorial supervision? To journalists, that sounds like something from the 20th century. Today, it’s all about being first, whether the information is accurate or not. Mistakes can always be corrected afterward - if at all. Meanwhile, we’re surfing through a world full of half-truths, conspiracy theories, and clickbait culture, where anyone can become an expert with enough likes. In the end, the question remains: have social networks lost control over misinformation, or did they perhaps never really intend to control it in the first place?

2. THE LOGIC OF INTERCONNECTIVITY

The logic of interconnectivity characterizes the interdependence of systems, concepts or elements in complex structures. The relationships between the individual components are becoming increasingly important. Their principles are increasingly based on interaction and feedback. Actions or changes in one part of the system often have unpredictable effects on other parts. In a biological ecosystem, for example, the extinction of one species can have dramatic consequences for the entire ecosystem. Instead of analyzing isolated elements, the system needs to be considered as a whole, but the whole is more than the sum of its parts.

Nonlinear connections appear everywhere in the network, so small changes have large effects, while major interventions may have only minor consequences. Interconnectivity occurs at different levels and scales, that is, it can be observed both within a unit and globally – and with different effects. The collective intelligence of these systems results from the connections and interactions of individual components.

Networks can be both, robust and vulnerable. On the one hand, connections provide stability by balancing the system. On the other hand, interconnectivity can also lead to errors, faults or attacks that propagate faster and further. The impact is obvious. A network of millions of servers, computers and other devices that distribute information across the world in fractions of a second determines markets, supply chains and policy decisions.

Every species in an ecosystem depends in some way on other species and the environment. All parts are in constant exchange, healthy isolation is hardly possible any more. Thus, a far-reaching interdependence develops between different social fields of action, which influence economic upheavals and political decisions. Social change leads to the emergence of new positions, life situations and lifestyles This development contributes to the increasing complexity of modern societies.

It is possible for logical considerations or conditions that appear valid at one point in time to change in a different environment. In many areas, whether in science, technology, business or society in general, new information and perspectives can mean that a previously valid logic suddenly no longer applies. One example is economic situations. A company that is in a booming market could experience a sudden reversal of conditions due to economic crises, technological disruption or social changes.

In science, it often happens that new discoveries challenge existing theories or add further nuances. Flexibility and a willingness to question established assumptions are essential as soon as new knowledge becomes available. However, this logic of interconnectivity could, under certain circumstances, also be disrupted, suggesting that the interplay between coordination, context, organization, and mission could become unstable at any time, with potentially negative consequences. In complex, interconnected systems, small disruptions or errors can have far-reaching effects that throw the entire structure off balance. This is inherent to the system; failures due to system instability cannot be ruled out.

If the breakdown of interconnectivity logic becomes inherent to the system, it means this potential instability is an intrinsic part of interconnected systems. In any highly connected system, the possibility of disruptions or malfunctions is built in, as the close integration of various elements inevitably leads to dependencies and potential vulnerabilities. If ecological or economic conditions can collapse, then security positions are also continuously threatened. How, then, can a sense of security in policy be reconciled with appropriate measures? When the actions of one element in interconnected systems directly or indirectly affect others, such mutual dependencies are not only a strength but also a weakness, as they can amplify disruptions. This suggests that in a system with high interconnectivity, there is always the potential for a chain reaction, where a small problem can systemically expand and lead to a broader failure.

When systems become too complex or too tightly linked, it becomes difficult to manage each individual element effectively. Small disruptions in one part of the system can quickly spread to other areas due to the close connections. Redundancy means that a system must contain safeguards or backups to absorb failures in time. However, when everything is fully interconnected and optimized, the flexibility needed to deal with unexpected effects is often lacking. Without sufficient redundancy, the entire system can collapse as soon as a single element fails. For example, in a highly automated production system, disruptions at a single node can bring the entire production to a halt. Similarly, an entire social network can be destabilized if coordination between different actors or systems no longer functions effectively. This condition is exacerbated by poor communication, unclear decision-making structures, or a lack of coordination. In companies, this leads to inefficient processes or a fragmentation of the organization, while on a political level, mismanagement can lead to poor decisions that ultimately result in collective failure.

It’s as if Information Technology had assembled a grand orchestra where every musician is perfectly in sync, until the first violinist decides to play their part in a 5/4 time signature while the rest stick to the classic 4/4. Suddenly, we no longer have a symphony of efficiency but a discordant concert driving even the most patient listeners to the edge. In reality, it’s often as if we have a parachute so tightly linked to the rest of our gear that we can’t even reach it when we’re in free fall. The problem is that we are so focused on optimization and perfection that we forget life - and the systems we create - are unpredictable.

Once interconnectivity intensifies dependency among systems, risks accumulate without immediate visibility. A current example is the semiconductor shortage, affecting numerous industries worldwide and exacerbated by dependence on a limited number of suppliers. In poorly networked political systems, form could become so rigid that it lacks the flexibility to respond to sudden changes or crises. This would mean that a system in a changing environment ceases to function because it cannot adapt quickly enough. This applies to both technical and social systems. A company overly reliant on a particular technology or market could find itself in trouble if the market or technology shifts-something the European auto industry has recently struggled with.

In highly interconnected systems, feedback loops emerge, where problems reinforce each other. In the economy, this self-reinforcing process occurs when negative expectations lead to a downturn, which in turn leads to further negative expectations. In technology, faulty feedback in interconnected IT systems can lead to a complete crash. In such cases, balance is lost, and the system fails because it can no longer self-regulate. Although we understand how these systems operate, predicting the detailed outcomes of their interplay is challenging. These complexity traps are not avoidable but are a direct result of interconnectivity itself. Since interconnectivity generates numerous feedback loops, it can result in the system losing control at critical moments—a phenomenon rooted in the very nature of networking and feedback mechanisms. Precisely because interconnected systems tend to become more efficient through optimization, they also increase their potential vulnerability with interdependence. This system immanence is evident in technological networks like the internet. The internet is highly interconnected and efficient, but this interconnectivity also makes it vulnerable to cyberattacks, where a single weak point can disable entire sections of the system. An attack on a central, critical node can impact large parts of the network. When software is disabled by cyberattacks, interactive planning and all support systems are paralyzed.

Interactive planning processes rely on the continuous capture and real-time processing of data. A cyberattack blocks access to this data or compromises its integrity. Many companies rely on automated systems to make data-driven decisions, such as in production control or resource allocation. However, if the software fails, these processes come to a halt, resulting in significant efficiency losses. In many cases, cyberattacks aim to steal, alter, or destroy data. When critical planning data is corrupted or deleted, planning can no longer be based on reliable information, leading to poor decisions and project delays.

Another example of damaged interconnectivity is the management of global supply chains. Once these networks are at risk, global goods flows come to a halt. The Covid-19 pandemic showed how quickly these systems can collapse when a single link in the chain fails. A disruption in one location, such as production facilities in China, had massive global repercussions, clearly demonstrating how interconnectivity itself can become a vulnerability. Even financial systems are inherently susceptible due to their interconnectivity. The 2008 financial crisis illustrated how the failure of a relatively small component, namely the mortgage market in the US, could plunge the entire global financial system into a crisis. The strong linkage of financial institutions and markets meant that risks spread rapidly worldwide.

Is interconnectivity therefore related to volatility? In highly interconnected financial systems, interconnectivity can amplify volatility. Banks, investment funds, and other financial institutions are linked through loans, investments, and derivatives. When one part of the system, for example, comes under stress due to a financial crisis, the problems can spread through these connections, leading to even greater fluctuations. In technological networks such as the internet or power grids, high interconnectivity can increase the risk of large-scale outages. If one node fails, it can lead to additional failures due to the interconnection, causing volatility in the performance or availability of the overall system. Cyberattacks on highly interconnected IT infrastructures can trigger global disruptions, resulting in uncertainty within the affected systems.

Clear allocation of resources, responsibilities, and tasks is a key factor for functional interconnectivity. However, if oversight and control over these allocations are lost, it can lead to chaos. For example, a lack of clear responsibilities within a company results in inefficient work and poor decisions. In politics, it is fatal when different elements obstruct each other instead of cooperating, as will be described in the concrete chapters that follow. On the other hand, when necessary information is collected in a targeted manner and processed appropriately, decision-making and the efficiency of a system can be greatly improved.

Similarly, in interdisciplinary research, where experts from various fields collaborate, complex problems can be solved that a single discipline alone could not address. One example is climate research, which combines knowledge from meteorology, oceanography, ecology, economics, and sociology to understand the impacts of climate change and develop measures to address it. Another example is biotechnology, which provides an interface between biology, chemistry, computer science, and engineering. Through the interconnection of different disciplines, progress is made in fields like medicine, biology, and environmental technology, progress that would not be possible without interdisciplinary approaches. In addition to the scientific and economic aspects, interconnectivity also plays an important role in social and cultural contexts. Globalization has led to cultures and societies being more intertwined than ever before. This is evident in how ideas, values, and norms are spread across national and cultural borders.

Although the risk of tipping is inherent to interconnected systems, there are numerous approaches to mitigate the negative effects. By introducing buffer zones, systems can be made more resilient to disruptions. While this might reduce efficiency, it increases stability by providing alternative pathways and backup mechanisms. Systems that are adaptable and flexible can better handle unpredictable disruptions. With dynamic organization and decision-making structures, crises can be detected early and resolved quickly. To prevent invisible risk accumulation, companies and organizations must develop proactive risk management strategies to identify and continuously monitor potential vulnerabilities.

In addition to centralization, decentralization also plays a crucial role, though often overlooked. Decentralized systems are less prone to tipping because they do not rely as heavily on central nodes. In decentralized networks, individual nodes can fail without causing the entire system to collapse. The fact that risks are inherent to interconnected systems shows that absolute safety or stability in highly complex, interconnected networks is impossible. These networks resemble a group of overzealous jugglers tossing balls to each other. When everything goes smoothly, it’s an impressive show. But if they drop a ball, it suddenly rains juggling balls from all directions! The dynamic nature of these systems is both their superpower and their Achilles’ heel. They adapt instantly, learn, and optimize themselves—fantastic! But this same adaptability also makes them as unpredictable as a teenager with mood swings. The dynamism of these systems is both their strength and their weakness. To leverage the potential of interconnectivity, systems must be designed to react to unforeseen events while remaining flexible, resilient, and adaptable.

Interconnectivity thus offers enormous opportunities but also presents risks if not carefully planned and monitored. The interlinking of systems, people, and processes requires a careful balance between efficiency and flexibility, security and adaptability. When this balance is disrupted, interconnectivity can cause more harm than good. Effective risk management that incorporates redundancies, creates flexible structures, and defines clear responsibilities is essential to maximize the benefits of interconnectivity while minimizing its risks. In highly complex, interconnected systems, it is therefore vital to ensure the presence of buffer zones to absorb disruptions. Systems need both the flexibility and resilience to respond to unforeseen crises.

3. SECURITY IN INTERNATIONAL POLITICS CHALLENGES INSIDE AND OUT

The increasing interconnectivity of systems, disciplines, and technologies has fundamentally transformed our world and will continue to be a key driver of innovation and progress. It is up to modern society to harness the opportunities this development offers while responsibly managing the associated challenges. While there are enormous opportunities for innovation, increased efficiency, and global collaboration, significant security challenges also arise—both internally, within individual organizations and states, and externally, in the international context. The connection between interconnectivity and security is becoming increasingly important as risks from cyberattacks, system disruptions, and geopolitical instability grow.

Everything that's happened also means that things can't go on as before. There are important and beneficial periods of thirst to overcome.The difficulties facing societies today underline the profound need for change. These periods of thirst can be interpreted as periods of scarcity or necessity, which are often used as opportunities for transformation and progress. Historically, many social and political changes have taken place during periods of great challenge. In such periods, people have often found sensational solutions to cope with events. Education and awareness-raising are an important part of this process, enabling people to make informed decisions and actively participate in social change. Ultimately, such thirsts serve as a starting point for deeper reflection and fundamental changes in society's values and priorities.

The theme is dramatic developments caused by decisions with serious consequences. So-called peace formulas, as used in Russia, China or Europe by the AfD and BSW in Germany, are proving to be engines of dictatorship for the brutal overturning of the world order. At the root of these processes are always concrete people, like Putin, Xi Jinping or, in the West, Sarah Wagenknecht or Victor Orban. Their fellow travelers always have the opportunity either to dilute and weaken the fatal ideological virus in the long term, or to accelerate the looming catastrophes. The question will be how to curb such engines of world peace disruption, which have considerable negative repercussions on the maintenance of society.

A security concept for global politics must take account of the multidimensional and dynamic nature of modern international relations. An effective approach to global security requires a blend of vision and pragmatism. It must be flexible enough to adapt to new challenges, while having a sound moral basis to foster trust and cooperation. To achieve this, governmental and non-governmental actors, technological developments, social inequalities and environmental challenges have a decisive purpose. Cooperation must be multi-level, flexible and offer a combination of prevention, protection and response. Security alliances that go beyond the framework of large regions, such as NATO, ASEAN and the AU, are disarmament agreements and regular negotiations aimed at reducing tensions, thus building mutual trust.

A sound security concept must also accelerate the transition to a sustainable economy in order to minimize environmental disasters and resource-related conflicts. A high-level objective must be the equitable distribution and sustainable use of natural resources such as water, land and energy sources. This makes it easier to control emerging conflicts. Protection against cyber-attacks on critical infrastructures, government networks and economic systems is part of a global concept, as are global standards for artificial intelligence or biotechnology technologies, to avoid abuse and dangerous escalations. The space arms race must also be prevented in good time by international regulations.

If we look at interconnectivity, some interesting constellations emerge. Politics suddenly takes on the allure of rational management, or the flow of music influences cognition, or conversely, economics applies to the content of the art form. Cross-referencing facilitates the creative process in a hitherto unknown enterprise. We find the interconnectedness of what needs to be done optimally. Thinking in terms of interconnectivity is ultimately an invitation to go beyond rigid categories and understand the interaction between man, culture, technology and nature at a higher level.

Politics as rational management can be enriched by incorporating cultural and artistic elements. Music, for example, offers a universal language that speaks directly to emotions and thus connects across cultural and linguistic barriers. In political contexts, this could be used to promote dialog between different groups. Artistic forms of expression, such as theater, painting or literature, have often addressed social problems and injustices and thus triggered political change. They enable a perspective on the world that facts alone cannot provide. Political satires in literature and film stimulate discussion and sensitize people to complex issues.

If military protection and civil defense are discontinued, no one should be surprised that security collapses. Without military protection, which protects against external attacks or wars, and without civil defense, which helps people in the event of disasters or even social crises, a country could quickly become vulnerable to instability and threats. If these protection mechanisms are abandoned, important structures that save lives and protect society in times of crisis will be missing. Without sufficient internal and external protection, countries are vulnerable to external threats such as invasions or terrorist attacks. In such moments of danger, well-developed emergency plans, communication strategies and social support systems are essential to mitigate the impact of attacks and strengthen the resilience of society. A proactive approach that combines both military and civilian security strategies is therefore necessary. The modernization of military technology and cyber security plays a crucial role in the current security debate. States are increasingly investing in digital security infrastructure, which brings with it both new opportunities and challenges in the area of defense.

Early warning systems play a crucial role in military interconnectivity by promising early detection of potential threats. The use of modern technologies such as satellites, radar, sensors, and artificial intelligence enables the early identification of enemy missile launches, air or sea attacks, and cyberattacks. This brings several important advantages. Political and military decision-makers gain more time to respond to potential threats. Interconnectivity allows for the consolidation and exchange of data from various sources, including satellites, radar systems, sensors, and other surveillance technologies. By aggregating these data within alliances, decision-makers receive a comprehensive picture of the current threat landscape. This ensures a quicker and more coordinated response to attacks, avoiding delays in decision-making. Fast data transmission and precise coordination are essential to mitigate threats before they can cause damage. Interconnectivity fosters collaboration among military, intelligence agencies, civilian authorities, and international partners. A joint early warning system that connects various actors improves efficiency and coordination in times of crisis.

The networking of systems enables faster analysis of collected information. With the help of artificial intelligence, threats can be identified and assessed in real-time, significantly shortening response times. This gives military decision-makers the necessary time to initiate appropriate countermeasures, such as intercepting missiles or mobilizing troops. Ideally, these systems are interconnected across national borders to provide a global picture of the threat situation. Without much media attention, this approach significantly influenced the situation at the onset of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. This creates a significant opportunity to save what can still be saved.

Allied partners must collaborate closely on cybersecurity issues in order to share information about threats and attacks effectively. International agreements and joint defense strategies can prevent vulnerabilities from being exploited unilaterally. In the event of a missile attack, even a few minutes of additional warning time can be crucial for initiating countermeasures or placing one's armed forces on high alert. Response times are drastically reduced. Continuous monitoring of airspace and other potential attack vectors reduces the risk of surprise attacks through early warning systems. This is especially important in the context of nuclear deterrence, where staying informed at all times makes sense. The main function of these systems is to detect potential threats in a timely manner, thereby gaining response time. By recognizing threats early, the credibility of nuclear deterrence is more likely to be maintained, and the risk of suffering a first strike is reduced. When reliable information is provided, such interconnected systems also help avoid miscalculations and hasty reactions.

Military interconnectivity thus plays a significant role in addressing threats at different levels through the integration of various systems. Modern early warning systems are part of network-centric military strategies, combining information from different sources - air, space, and ground. This not only enhances the efficiency of military responses but also supports strategic decisions at the political level. The exchange of information and collaboration in threat detection fosters a safer global environment. Furthermore, false alarms or misunderstandings that could lead to unintended conflicts are minimized through precise and transparent communication channels.

Countries today are more interconnected than ever, whether through trade, international financial systems, technological infrastructures, or the Internet. This interconnection also renders them vulnerable to transnational threats, such as cyberattacks or the influence of disinformation campaigns, which can jeopardize political stability. There is thus an undeniable interconnection between internal and external security. The result-oriented components differ only in the instruments applied. The orientation of actions unfolds in parallel; otherwise, all forces risk colliding with one another. The strict separation between internal and external security is therefore outdated. New threats are often hybrid and cannot be clearly classified from the outset. In the context of exhaustive exploration, targeted external interventions in internal affairs, internationally operating terrorist organizations, and the consequences of transnational dangers such as climate change, pandemics, or military threats are examined.

The active involvement of local communities in security issues is essential, as many challenges arise and can be solved at the micro level. From crime prevention to the promotion of social cohesion, communities are often the first actors to respond to security risks. The security debate spans all levels, from strategic leadership at national or international level to local communities. Each of these levels plays an essential role and it is crucial to involve all stakeholders in security issues in order to develop a holistic and effective strategy. At the strategic level, the focus is on establishing basic policies, laws and international partnerships. Issues such as cyber security, counter-terrorism, climate protection as a security factor and national defence are among the core tasks at this level. This is where the guidelines are created that form the basis for operational measures. Nevertheless, a security policy that is managed exclusively ‘from above’ is often not enough, as it does not always take adequate account of the specific needs and circumstances of the population.

Modern security strategy must integrate all areas. Internal protection is considered part of liberal security. The aspects of external and internal security, as well as civilian and military, must be closely linked. Proactive international cooperation is necessary, as many external challenges to internal security inevitably have an international dimension. Institutional conditions must be gradually adapted to this new reality to develop coordinated action concepts based on jointly established threat analyses. The threat of cyber warfare, where state actors like Russia and China or isolated cyber terrorists attempt to attack the critical infrastructure of another country, such as electrical grids, water supply systems, or the financial system, must bring together the entities concerned through international cooperations to improve security levels. By pooling resources and expertise, different units will be able to promote technological innovations and develop better protection mechanisms. Ultimately, international cooperation is key to minimizing the impacts of attacks of any kind.

Fortunately, the reflection on security is a deeply ingrained human instinct that cannot simply be switched off. Especially in times of global uncertainty and complex international relations, the desire for security remains ever-present. However, when the global principles of a free world, such as justice, cooperation, and freedom, serve as a foundation while being entangled in contradictions, tensions inevitably arise. These contradictions can lead to the dissolution of the expected outcomes of international politics and threaten to plunge the world order into chaos. On the one hand, national security, that is to say security within a country, is considered essential and rigorously defended. On the other hand, global security aspects are often insufficiently considered or neglected. In such a scenario, measures aimed at protecting internal interests become increasingly fragile. The resulting instability could have dangerous consequences. If the security aspect is legitimately demanded internally but simultaneously taken lightly externally, the dykes ultimately give way.

Two opposing developments are conceivable: on one hand, chaotic states could arise if the global security balance is broken and each major state attempts to protect itself independently, which would lead to a fragmentation of the international order. On the other hand, we could witness an increasing hardening towards dictatorial structures, where authoritarian regimes strive by any means necessary to maintain internal security at the expense of freedom. Consequently, it is crucial to find a balance that guarantees state security while respecting and harmonizing the global principles of a free, open, and cooperative world. Only by doing so can long-term stability and peace be assured. An uncontrolled fragmentation of the international order carries significant risks. The erosion of established security structures inevitably leads first to regional conflicts and then to global instability. Fragmentation drastically affects strategic sectors such as technology, innovation, and knowledge exchange. At the same time, authoritarian approaches pose serious dangers to internal security.

For global trade, division into geopolitical blocs is not the ideal solution, but it sometimes proves necessary in desperate situations. Developing resilient and diverse supply chains, particularly in critical areas such as semiconductors, energy, and medicine, strengthens both economic stability and political security. However, the emphasis on administrative security interests must not neglect human security needs. In addition to the physical and economic security of the population, aspects such as social justice, access to education and healthcare, as well as the protection of personal freedoms, must also be considered. If these needs are ignored, inevitable social tensions will arise, ultimately undermining the internal stability of several entities. Investments in key technologies and secure supply chains enhance security everywhere without breaking global innovation networks. These measures allow countries to reduce their dependence on potentially unreliable partners or geopolitically fragile regions while ensuring access to essential goods and technologies.

The painful experiences of the war in Ukraine have considerable repercussions on the architecture of international security. This defines the so-called turning point of the ages. It puts the established world order to the test and leads to a reorientation of geopolitical alliances. Tensions between Russia and the West have resulted in a hardening of bloc formation. When international actors focus on "taming" existing dictatorships, i.e., pacifying or controlling them through cooperation and concessions, rather than holding them accountable or restricting their power, this can lead to greater problems in the long run.

The more the focus is placed on the domestication of existing dictatorships rather than combating them, the greater the danger of further escalation and the spread of conflicts beyond various regions. The idea behind this is that, instead of resolving conflicts, the dangers are exacerbated. Strengthening dictatorships implies condoning their aggressive policies or repressive methods. This escalation destabilizes new regions and further expands the threat to global security. The war in Ukraine has profoundly altered the European security landscape. NATO has become more united in response to the military invasion and Russia's threats towards Eastern Europe. Countries like Finland and Sweden, which were previously neutral, have joined NATO. This indicates that Europe’s defense policy has sharpened significantly due to the Ukraine conflict. Through sanctions and counter-sanctions, Europe has felt compelled to explore alternative energy sources, which destabilizes global energy markets and drives prices up. Countries like Germany had to drastically reduce their dependency on Russian energy sources, leading to an accelerated energy transition and increased efforts to diversify energy supply.

Millions of Ukrainians have fled due to the war, many of whom have moved to Europe. This has caused a short-term humanitarian crisis and created long-term challenges for integration, social services, and labor markets. At the same time, the war has triggered economic disruptions, ranging from rising living costs to supply chain problems. Other seemingly unaffected countries have maintained a neutral or more economically oriented position, demonstrating that the geopolitical landscape is extremely complex, and not every actor responds to the same threats with the same priorities. Nevertheless, even states outside the Western alliance are feeling the economic and political impacts of the conflict. The disruptions in the global economy, rising energy prices, and the increasing arms race have ushered in a new era that forces many nations to fundamentally rethink and reformulate their security and economic strategies. The dispatching of North Korean mercenaries into the crisis region naturally triggers reactions from democratic entities in the Pacific region. Global alliances are being reconfigured. Even though China officially declares neutrality for now, it maintains industrial relations with Moscow, thus supporting the regime there both directly and indirectly. The strengthened bond between these two great powers increases tensions in Asia, particularly regarding Taiwan, where the threat of a Chinese invasion is steadily growing.

As a result of the Ukraine war, the USA feels divided in its military presence. Relationships with Australia, Japan, and other Pacific states have been intensified to form a counterweight to China. The AUKUS alliance of Australia, the UK, and the USA, as well as the Quad alliance between the USA, India, Japan, and Australia, have gained strategic importance, demonstrating that the concept of BRICS states is not necessarily firmly established. Since the war disrupts global supply chains, particularly regarding grain exports, many South Pacific states that rely on food imports are experiencing rising prices and supply gaps. Countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, which import large quantities of wheat from Ukraine, are significantly affected.

The interconnectivity of armed conflicts confirms that regional conflicts and crises cannot remain isolated but can quickly have worldwide repercussions that extend across continents and thematic areas. The dynamics that begin in Europe, such as in Ukraine, indeed influence distant geopolitical theaters. The shifting of tensions to other regions, such as the South China Sea, illustrates the dimension of global security risks. Territorial disputes and displays of power in the Indo-Pacific region increasingly raise the potential for conflict. The rivalry between the USA and China exacerbates the risk of escalation due to misunderstandings or miscalculations stemming from the consequences of the Ukraine situation. A holistic approach that combines military, economic, and diplomatic tools is necessary. International cooperation mechanisms must be strengthened, with the intention of containing crises and preventing escalation. Resilience and adaptability become more significant, as they must respond to unforeseen developments. The growing interconnectivity of global threats necessitates a continuous recalibration of security policies. Instead of isolated considerations of individual hotspots, a systemic understanding of the overlaps of various risks and regions is essential. Only in this way can effective strategies for maintaining peace and stability in an increasingly complex world be developed.

The various forms of vulnerability at the international level are becoming a central theme of modern geopolitics. They describe a situation in which states or coalitions of states are forced, through threats or the use of violence, to change their political, economic, and military decisions to avoid serious consequences. States that possess resources, food, and infrastructure in key industries are increasingly facing economic and political pressure. In this tension field, freedom becomes a precious commodity that requires significant investment and often sacrifices. Responsibility and caution to reduce such vulnerabilities are essential. The willingness to fight for this freedom in case of emergency and to strengthen alliances underscores the complex balance between sovereignty and global interdependence. Geopolitical vulnerability can be mitigated through self-responsibility and strategic foresight, but it also requires the courage not to yield to threats, even if the price may be high. Freedom is not free; it demands its price, whether in the form of responsibility, willingness to sacrifice, or even the need to fight for it. It continually emphasizes the importance of historical lessons. Past mistakes must not be repeated to ensure the preservation of freedom and peace.

The emphasis on strength underscores that freedom and peace cannot simply be achieved through words or negotiations alone. Strength - whether physical, moral, or institutional - is seen as a necessary foundation for secure living. It conveys the demand that only a fortified position allows successful advocacy for freedom and peace during discussions and negotiations. As a last resort, military strength serves to support dialogue and peace. This reflects the realpolitik understanding of international relations. This approach emphasizes that diplomatic negotiations and peaceful solutions should always be preferred; however, without the foundation of military strength, they lose their effectiveness.

This resembles the requirement that only a strong position can effectively defend freedom and peace in discussions and negotiations. As a last resort, military reliability serves to support dialogue and peace. This reflects a realistic understanding of international relations. This approach emphasizes that, while diplomatic negotiations and peaceful solutions should always be favored, they lose their effectiveness without the foundation of military credibility. Diplomacy is a complex process, requiring both strategic thinking and empathy. It's about trying to strike a balance between the interests of all parties. But this becomes very difficult when there is no power to back it up.

Diplomacy is not just a game of negotiation, but also an instrument of power. Without a certain amount of power, be it economic, military, cultural or moral, it is difficult to succeed in this field. This power is essential to give credibility to negotiating positions and to exert real influence. Even if diplomacy aims for peaceful solutions, the possibility of military intervention remains an effective and concrete lever of pressure. Without power, it becomes ineffective, as it has no credible basis for negotiation. Strategic reasoning is needed to use this power in such a way as not to sabotage positive objectives.

However, when one party has too much dominant power, diplomacy can become a tool of oppression rather than a means of balancing interests. This leads to resistance, as the dominated party is forced to use other means to defend its position. But is it only cowardice that leads to such situations, or is it boundless stupidity that drives the most uncivilized bangs of extremism in Europe forward? Especially when the extermination of a people is proclaimed, when murders are perpetrated, civilian infrastructures are destroyed, and kindergartens, schools, hospitals and homes are bombed in Ukraine?

There is hardly anything worse for a society’s infrastructure than its destruction to the point where essential resources are stripped away: no electricity, no heat, no connection to the world through digital communication - only darkness and isolation. This devastation affects not just buildings or technology but shatters the hope and lives of the people on the ground. The response from the global community of nations to such horrors is often disheartening. Many world leaders act with alarming restraint, seemingly blind to the severity and inhumanity of such acts. Instead of taking a firm stand against atrocities like those of Putin’s regime, economic or political support continues to flow - directly or indirectly - into the hands of dictatorships. Whether driven by fear of economic consequences, geopolitical instability, or sheer opportunism, decisive resistance is lacking. This stance is not only morally questionable but also fosters the impression that the international community tolerates violence as long as it remains far enough from their own borders. As long as the world fails to stand united for the principles of human dignity and freedom, such acts will remain the norm rather than the exception. The real question is, how long can we afford this blindness without ultimately breaking ourselves?

Passivity in german politics under the chanceller Scholz, whether due to fear, ignorance or other reasons, can lead not only to contempt for crimes against humanity, but also to direct complicity with the perpetrators. Ignoring such aggression can perpetuate a dangerous cycle of violence and injustice. Resolute resistance to these trends is necessary not only to tackle current conflicts, but also to prevent any future escalation. It is the responsibility of decision-makers, both within institutions and civil society, to take a clear stand and recognize the often dire consequences of inaction.

This is one of the greatest moral and political challenges facing Europe today. Indifference or ignorance of diabolical violence, whether due to cowardice, ignorance or a mixture of the two, opens the door to a possible Armageddon. Discouragement undoubtedly plays a part in the lack of firm condemnation of crimes against humanity or targeted violence, such as the attacks on civilians in Ukraine. Given the mysterious nature of the German Chancellor's approach, there could also be a hidden partisan sensitivity that could perhaps be clarified in socialist history. One more reason to gradually allow traditional parties and their ideologies to disappear from the field of vision of modern political management. This topic is discussed in more detail under the heading “Disastrous Partisan Politics” (Chapter 15). To believe that major conflicts can be resolved by silence, complacency or collaboration and sabotage in the European Parliament is to minimize the threat.

Europe itself is at a crossroads. The values of freedom and human dignity are being put to the test. Half-hearted sanctions or weak declarations are not enough when humanity is at stake. Europe must muster its moral and military strength to confront such crimes. It is up to Europe and the international community to draw a clear line at such times, and to defend the principles of civilization against barbaric attacks. Europe must coordinate and mobilize its resources, both diplomatic and military, to counter a real failure to respect human dignity.

Military strength is viewed in this context as a deterrent that creates and maintains space for dialogue and diplomacy. Countries that are well-prepared militarily have greater negotiating power and can exert more effective pressure to resolve conflicts diplomatically. Historically, this has often led to peaceful negotiations becoming genuinely effective only after the military balance of power was clarified. For example, the dialogue between the USA and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, such as disarmament negotiations, might not have occurred without the military equilibrium. It was not until NATO responded in the 1980s by deploying intermediate-range missiles in reaction to Soviet SS-20s - an act of deterrence - that the first step towards arms control and ultimately the end of the Cold War was taken. Who knows whether the NATO double-track decision in 1979 wouldn't have unleashed a third world war as a nuclear inferno? If the positive effect of a decision is not immediately evident, it is often overlooked or unappreciated. "What is not seen is quickly forgotten."

In the current context of the Ukraine war, the role of military strength as a supporting factor for negotiations is being discussed, with both Ukraine and Russia using their military capabilities as leverage. Military strength serves as a deterrent to dissuade potential aggressors from violent actions. A credible military defense capability always signals that an attack would incur significant costs. The larger the military budget, the greater the diplomatic bargaining power and its credibility. This helps quash violent conflict in its infancy or provides sufficient space for peace negotiations. When a state or alliance is unable or unwilling to defend itself, it offers an incentive for authoritarian regimes to expand their power. Without credible deterrence, a power vacuum emerges that will be filled by unscrupulous actors who pay no heed to international norms or human rights. A prominent example is World War II, where the initial policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany did not prevent conflict but rather encouraged dictator Hitler to pursue his aggressive expansion plans further. This historical lesson demonstrates how the absence of military strength against tyrannical regimes leads to an inevitable and often more brutal conflict.

Tyrants always exploit the weaknesses of others, and a world without deterrence would give them the freedom to expand their power unchecked. The outcome would be a battlefield not only in the physical sense but also in the moral and political realms, where the rights and freedoms of people are systematically violated. Interestingly, extremist ideologies pursue the same concept. In such an environment, fundamental values such as freedom, justice, and peace are at risk. Dictators and authoritarian leaders, who are not constrained by deterrence or international sanctions, ruthlessly utilize domestic and foreign repression and violence to secure their power.

Although the renunciation of violence is a noble goal, complete disarmament in a world that is not free from power struggles and tyranny can have dangerous consequences. A consistent pacifism could quickly lead to a situation where the imbalance of power is exploited, and peace turns into a coerced peace dictated by the stronger. A robust defense capability is therefore always necessary to rein in these forces and send a clear message that aggression will not be without consequences.