AI-generated from sources

The paradoxical utility of an existential threat: How geopolitical rivals are forced into temporary alliances

In Brief

  • Existential threats, characterized as indiscriminate forces of 'no-life' (analogized by the fictional drones), compel traditional rivals to suspend their conflicts and redefine allegiance.
  • The resulting collaboration is inherently fragile, forming temporary alliances based solely on the immediate imperative of collective survival, not genuine reconciliation.
  • Effective collective defense against continuous, evolving threats demands an 'ever ready defense' posture, constant technological adaptation, and psychological readiness, regardless of internal tensions.
  • Paradoxically, absolute destructive forces can serve a constructive purpose by compelling competing factions to recognize their shared vulnerability and common interest in existence.

Alliances in international affairs are frequently forged not from ideological alignment but from the pragmatic necessity of confronting a shared, overwhelming threat [1]. Historically, this has manifested as coalitions forming to counter a single state's expansionist ambitions, with the explicit goal of preventing any one power from gaining territory through war [2, 3]. This principle of collective security relies on a clear identification of an aggressor whose actions disrupt the established order. However, a different and more profound dynamic emerges when the threat is not a conventional rival but an entity perceived as an existential danger to all parties, compelling even the most bitter adversaries to find common cause [4].

Such a threat is often characterized as fundamentally alien, operating outside the established norms of conflict and driven by a logic of total annihilation rather than political gain [5]. Its presence forces a radical re-evaluation of identity and allegiance, where previous distinctions between rival factions dissolve in the face of a common peril. In this context, deep-seated enmities are rendered secondary to the primary struggle for survival, creating a temporary state where all forms of life are recognized as kindred against a force of "no-life" . This phenomenon transcends simple strategic calculation, touching upon an almost instinctive understanding that the threat must be collectively checked to prevent universal destruction .

The appearance of such a danger, whether a fictional swarm of autonomous machines or a real-world destabilizing force, inevitably poses a critical question: how does its emergence restructure global dynamics? It compels competing powers to suspend long-standing conflicts and adopt collaborative defense postures, even if this newfound unity is inherently fragile and predicated solely on the duration of the crisis [6, 7]. This shift reveals that the architecture of global rivalries, however entrenched, can be rapidly reconfigured when an enemy is perceived by all as wholly and irredeemably evil [8].

The Anatomy of an Existential Threat

An existential threat is defined by its qualitative difference from a traditional adversary. It is not a nation-state with whom one can negotiate or whose aims are politically comprehensible. Instead, it is depicted as an indiscriminate, self-propagating force that threatens to overwhelm and erase all existing life . This non-negotiable nature, framed as a conflict between life and "no-life," places it outside the realm of conventional diplomacy or warfare, casting it as a pure, elemental evil that must be eradicated rather than defeated or contained .

This concept finds a parallel in modern geopolitical shifts. The post-Cold War era, for instance, saw a reframing of primary threats away from a peer competitor like Russia, which was explicitly no longer deemed "the enemy," toward the unpredictable danger posed by "rogue states" . The core anxiety shifted from a rival power to an actor that does not share the same fundamental values or abide by the same rules, making its potential actions more catastrophically unpredictable . This fear of an irrational or ideologically absolute actor mirrors the narrative fear of the drones' blind, automatic propagation .

The technological dimension of this threat is often central to its terrifying nature. The fictional drones are described as a networked swarm of air and ground units, a diverse and overwhelming horde of coordinated machines [9, 10]. This imagery evokes contemporary concerns about the development and proliferation of autonomous weapon systems and the challenge of defending against them [11]. The perceived threat is not a singular, datable event but a continuous and evolving danger that demands constant vigilance, perpetual technological advancement, and a defense posture prepared for any eventuality [12, 13].

The Suspension of Rivalries

The most immediate consequence of an existential threat is the forced suspension of all pre-existing conflicts and norms . In the face of the drone menace, all prior laws are held in abeyance, and natural enmities cease to matter . In a stark illustration of this principle, ferocious predatory machines and their natural prey are compelled to form an unlikely alliance, sharing resources that, under normal circumstances, they would fight to the death to control . This demonstrates that the primal imperative for collective survival can override even the most ingrained rivalries.

This dynamic can be observed in the complex relationships between real-world geopolitical adversaries. The posture of the United States toward Russia, for example, is characterized by a mix of competition and cooperation. While strategic documents may call for measures to "counter Russia," there remains a simultaneous pursuit of cooperation in specific areas of mutual interest and a stated objective to de-escalate tensions [14, 15, 16]. This duality suggests that even in an adversarial relationship, channels for collaboration remain open, particularly when focused on a shared external problem, such as the threat from a rogue state .

However, this unity is fundamentally a strategic necessity, not a genuine reconciliation. The fictional alliance against the drones is explicitly temporary, forged under a pact that lasts only "till the evil is no more" . Once the external threat is neutralized, the expectation is that the old laws and conflicts will resume their force . Similarly, real-world cooperation between rivals is often transactional and pragmatic, aimed at managing specific crises rather than establishing a permanent, stable, and predictable relationship . The alliance is a tool for survival, to be discarded once its purpose is served.

The Doctrine of Collective Defense

An existential threat fundamentally redefines the boundaries of community, forcing a dramatic re-categorization of "us" versus "them." From a Russian perspective, for example, the West can be portrayed as a monolithic, hostile entity constantly seeking to weaken and dismember the nation, a narrative which serves to unify the population against a perceived external danger [17, 18]. This mirrors precisely how the drone threat collapses internal divisions among the warring machine peoples, uniting them as a single entity—"all life"—against an absolute other .

Effective collective defense requires more than just a shared enemy; it demands a common commitment to act and a willingness to integrate forces [19]. The fictional response to the drone hive is not a chaotic melee but a coordinated assault, with different factions like the "scorpions" providing heavy fire support in a combined arms operation born of battlefield necessity [20]. The paralysis of fear can only be overcome through organized, decisive action, where every component of the alliance is actively engaged in the fight [21]. This reinforces the doctrine that military readiness is the surest way to decrease the probability of an attack [22].

The imperative for an "ever ready defense" is a lesson derived from the historical failure to anticipate aggression . This state of readiness is not merely material but also psychological. It relies on the immense adaptability of individuals to take on new and unfamiliar roles in wartime [23]. The doctrine of sound military training emphasizes that teaching the correct use of weapons and preventive measures instills confidence and creates victory, fostering the will power and mental poise essential for success on the battlefield [24].

Fragile Peace and Paradoxical Purpose

The peace forged in the crucible of an existential war is inherently fragile. The alliance between the rival machine peoples is a temporary truce, marked by the formal declaration of peace only until the common enemy is vanquished . The underlying tensions and historical animosities are not resolved but merely set aside for the duration of the emergency . Once the unifying threat dissipates, the old world of conflict is poised to return, leaving the outcasts and individuals who transcended old boundaries in a precarious position . This highlights the tenuous nature of alliances of convenience, which often lack the deeper foundation needed for lasting stability .

Paradoxically, an existential threat can serve a constructive, if brutal, purpose. While the drones represent absolute destruction, their existence forces the warring peoples to recognize a fundamental, shared interest in survival . They act as a recurring cataclysm that reminds disparate and conflicting groups that "all life was one" in its perpetual struggle against annihilation . This suggests that even a wholly evil force can inadvertently produce good by compelling its intended victims to transcend their divisions and rediscover a common identity rooted in the simple fact of their existence [25].

The emergence of an absolute, existential threat—be it a fictional swarm of autonomous drones or a real-world destabilizing force—serves as a powerful catalyst for temporary geopolitical realignment . It compels rival powers to subordinate their immediate conflicts to the greater and more urgent imperative of collective survival, forging alliances that would be unthinkable in times of ordinary peace . This unity, however, is a pragmatic and fragile construct, born of immediate necessity rather than a genuine resolution of underlying disputes, and is therefore likely to dissolve once the common danger has passed .

Ultimately, these episodes of crisis reveal a paradoxical truth about conflict and cooperation. While such threats bring immense destruction, they also force a stark recognition of shared vulnerability and a common investment in existence . The fictional drones remind the warring peoples of their shared kinship in a way that peace never could . This raises a crucial question for the modern world: in an age of increasingly complex and escalating global threats—from rogue states and nuclear proliferation to pandemics and climate change—the capacity for bitter rivals to find common cause against a shared "evil" may be the ultimate test of civilization's resilience and its very foundation [26].