The Order of the New Vienna Congress
- Pablo Díaz Gayoso
- 4 days ago
- 3 min read
Let's go back in time a few decades and place ourselves in the Europe of 1814-1815. At that time, the Old Continent was at a turning point. The French Revolution, which had broken out 25 years earlier, not only profoundly transformed the political and social structure of France, but also triggered the expansion of the Napoleonic Empire, whose traces could be found in practically every corner of Europe. From the gates of Cadiz to the city of Moscow, via the island of Sicily, Napoleon subdued, in one way or another, almost the entire continent in just a decade. However, his first defeats in Spain, together with successive losses on the Russian front, precipitated the collapse of his rule.
After the fall of Napoleon, the main absolutist powers of the time - Austria, Prussia, Russia and the United Kingdom - met in Vienna to design a new security system for Europe. Thus was born the Concert of Europe, a mechanism for balancing power, both internal and external, which initially involved four actors, but which in 1818 added France as a member.
The main objective of this system was to preserve stability and avoid direct confrontations between the great powers, while, in a coordinated manner, they fought against liberal and nationalist forces. To this end, they resorted to diplomacy as a tool for negotiation and influence sharing, especially in times of internal crisis among the smaller states. This scheme of territorial control anticipated, to a certain extent, the future processes of imperialist expansion in Africa and Asia, establishing a system of distribution between the strong and the weak.
The powers defined spheres of influence, delimiting the areas near their borders that they considered part of their “backyard” or “lebensraum”. Through this strategic dominance, they sought to preserve their hegemony and reduce the risks of conflict through agreements and alliances.
This system, which lasted approximately four decades, succeeded in channeling major continental conflicts toward cooperation. In a similar spirit, the Yalta Conference took shape in 1945. The victorious powers of World War II in Europe divided the continental security system into spheres of influence. The Western world, represented by Roosevelt and Churchill, was placed in one bloc, while Stalin led the other. These divisions would later evolve into NATO and the Warsaw Pact.
After 1945, the world was structured into two large blocs headed by two superpowers. Both the United States and the Soviet Union acted with relative freedom within their respective zones of influence.
Today, a new global security apparatus is taking shape that is powerfully reminiscent of earlier models. At this new Vienna Congress, the table is still being set. The full members are the United States and China, due to their economic, military and commercial weight. Russia, for its part, has been waging a brutal war in Ukraine since 2022 with the aim, among others, of reasserting its status as a major power vis-à-vis Washington. Other emerging powers, such as India, are seeking international recognition, and its position in the conflict with Pakistan can be interpreted as a strategy to position itself as a key player on the global stage.
The new US Administration, as discussed in The Geopolitics of Trumpist Imperialism, seems comfortable with the idea of territorial expansion and, even more so, with the global struggle against liberalism. In this ideological battle, the United States, Russia, China and India could find certain points of affinity, as did the great reactionary powers at the Congress of Vienna. Currently, the main internal enemies of this new order, according to statements by J.D. Vance, include illegal immigrants, Islamist terrorists, “woke” progressives, European socialists and sexual minorities.
On the other hand, the European Union represents an alternative model based on democratic principles, the rule of law, social welfare, pacifism, dialogue, secularism and the inclusion of minorities. However, these values are considered by some as signs of a decadent civilization. In contrast, majoritarian authoritarianism, which postulates the supremacy of ethnic, social, sexual and religious majorities over the rest, emerges as an alternative that seeks to impose itself both domestically and in the global order.
The old Congress of Vienna went down in history as a system that guaranteed peace in Europe for several decades, but was also responsible for bloody repressive interventions. The Russians put down the Polish nationalist uprisings, while the Austrians did the same to the Neapolitan revolutionaries in 1821. Today, power dynamics are reminiscent of those of yesteryear: just as Trump would be willing to allow Russia's annexation of half of Ukraine, or China's absorption of Taiwan, today's geopolitics raise questions about future strategic concessions. Panama? Greenland? Canada? Europe?
댓글