Seven Key Trends for 2025

The trends of the coming year will surprise, frighten, and inspire us. It promises to be a year that is simultaneously harsh, fascinating, and fleeting. The turbulence ahead will be unlike anything the world has seen since the early 1960s, a time when the planet teetered on the brink of nuclear conflict between the USSR and the United States. That era also saw rapid technological acceleration and the collapse of colonial empires. It’s highly likely we are witnessing similar processes today, albeit on a different foundation and with new “software” in the minds of politicians and societal leaders. Welcome to the new world, though we are, as usual, unprepared for it.

Artificial intelligence permeating every aspect of life, the dizzying spread of unmanned systems, a surge in the deliberate use of genetic engineering, the crystallisation of two antagonistic worlds—authoritarian and democratic—the expansion of the nuclear club, an explosion of social phobias in response to low-cost terrorism, and the rebooting of the EU are perhaps the most visible trends we can already discern on the horizon. These trends are not equally weighted, and some may fade or be postponed to future years.

Nevertheless, it is worth paying attention to these trends now. They generate risks as well as opportunities. It would be a mistake to think they are irrelevant to the average person. On the contrary, they are highly relevant, as Ukrainians can attest. Fate tests them. They stay in Putin's way as he seeks to restore the Russian empire. Of course, Ukrainians would have preferred to remain on the sidelines, but Russia, before its de-imperialisation, chose to sharpen its teeth on a “small victorious war” against Ukraine. This war has proven neither small nor victorious but horrifying and bloody.

There are also more grounded reasons to be interested in these trends. Artificial intelligence is displacing some professions, transforming others, and creating entirely new ones. This presents both challenges and opportunities for the average person who simply seeks to work for a living and afford a comfortable life. However, the metaphorical Skynet may have other ideas.

While few of us can significantly influence the pace of these developments, or the rise and fall of any trend, we can choose to ride the right wave or avoid the ones that pose danger.

Why are the trends listed in this particular order? Perhaps because we prefer to hear about the positives first, leaving the risks and challenges for later. So, here they are—let’s meet the future together!

Photo: Artificial intelligence is set to develop explosively and find increasingly broad applications. Source: Getty Images

Artificial Intelligence in Every Nook and Cranny

Anyone engaged in business or personal investment has likely heard of artificial intelligence (AI) and aspires to leverage the new opportunities it presents. Companies involved with AI enjoy significantly greater appeal — to investors, consumers, and just about everyone — much like the "dot-com" companies of 2000.

Indeed, AI tools offer additional capabilities, save money, accelerate business processes, enhance decision-making quality, make driving more comfortable, and expedite drug development. One could list these advantages for hours without exhausting the benefits AI offers humanity.

However, many are equally aware of the risks associated with AI usage. At present, AI's development is largely driven by the advent of Large Language Models (LLMs). These models utilise extraordinarily powerful computers to process immense amounts of data, regardless of its format — text, video, images, graphics, audio, or anything else. AI systems then attempt to generate new outputs based on the vast reservoir of information in response to user queries.

Currently, AI cannot tackle open-ended tasks such as "create something for me." It cannot generate answers to questions that have yet to be posed. When provided with a specific query, AI will attempt to respond, though there’s no guarantee that the answer will be useful, logical, humane, or even accurate. At this stage, AI still largely depends on existing human-created material — or, in some cases, on outputs generated by earlier AI systems.

AI remains imperfect when applied beyond its actual "abilities." Nonetheless, its capabilities are gradually expanding. 

The harshest critics liken modern AI to a vast colony of monkeys typing away on keyboards in the hope of accidentally producing a brilliant novel or play. Theoretically, it could happen, but this would require an extraordinary number of monkeys and keyboards. Nvidia’s meteoric rise, for example, is tied to the overwhelming demand for its ultra-powerful chips specifically designed for AI systems.

Currently, AI excels in tasks that are repetitive or easily replicable. It struggles, however, with activities requiring unprecedented creativity. Writing numerous sonnets in Shakespearean style? No problem. Operating a heavy lorry with the dexterity of a stunt driver? Easily done. Analysing medical monitor readings to support critically ill patients? Piece of cake. But inventing new artistic genres or scientific disciplines? Not yet. AI also struggles with predicting crises because the most impactful crises arise from unforeseen causes. The COVID-19 pandemic, a "black swan" event, serves as a prime example. Its economic ramifications persist even four years after its onset, and we are far from resolving the costly fallout.

Nevertheless, the coming year will witness a rapid expansion of tools and systems powered by AI. It will usher in a new era. AI will likely influence humanity as profoundly as the advent of computers did. Additionally, systems capable of distinguishing between original human-generated content and AI-generated material will flourish. The ability to differentiate and exclude AI-generated data from future AI training will become a cornerstone for advancing these technologies.

Photo: The rapid proliferation of unmanned systems lies ahead. Source: Getty Images

Without People, Yet They Move

The rapid advancement of microelectronics and energy storage technologies has led to a significant reduction in the cost of various unmanned systems. This has reached the point where aerial drones now play a pivotal role on the battlefield. The war in Ukraine is markedly different from past conflicts in that it has become predominantly a "war of drones." Of course, we would have preferred more peaceful incentives for the development of unmanned systems, but this is the reality we face.

However, these very drones have already brought about remarkable improvements in agricultural crop cultivation, logistics, and countless other areas. Routine processes are relatively easy for drones to master, and artificial intelligence is expanding the definition of "routine" to encompass an ever-growing number of human activities. For example, professions such as taxi drivers, street cleaners, supermarket cashiers, waiters in moderately priced restaurants, and delivery couriers are all at risk.

It is daunting to envision a world where fewer human hands and minds are needed to perform various tasks. 

Yet, this shift is inevitable due to two key reasons, which are advancing at almost the same pace and will steadily displace people from certain professions.

One reason is the rising cost of human labour. People are increasingly demanding higher wages to undertake monotonous or uninteresting work or are accepting such roles only when there are no other options, such as when language barriers or unfamiliar customs limit their choices. In essence, employers must either pay more for repetitive, low-interest jobs or recruit workers from poorer countries. However, the latter option is becoming less viable as individuals acquire skills and begin to aspire to better opportunities.

The second reason lies in the plummeting cost of unmanned systems, which is closely tied to advancements in microchip technology. Whenever the cost of human labour and the cost of an unmanned system intersect, the unmanned system prevails – often even earlier. This is because drones have yet to learn how to form trade unions, organise strikes, or suffer from Monday morning hangovers.

Photo: Humanity will soon have the opportunity to utilise breakthrough technologies in genetic engineering. Source: Getty Images

The Nobel Prize That Will Accelerate the Treatment of Severe Illnesses

The last decade has been highly productive in developing groundbreaking methods for treating severe illnesses. Central to this progress are treatments based on advances in genetics, particularly genetic engineering. However, 2025 promises to deliver a true breakthrough in this field.

In October 2024, Victor Ambros and Gary Ruvkun were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for their discovery of microRNA – a class of tiny RNA molecules that play a crucial role in gene regulation.

"Their revolutionary discovery uncovered a completely new principle of gene regulation, essential for multicellular organisms, including humans. Today, we know that the human genome encodes over a thousand microRNAs. Their remarkable discovery has opened a new dimension in gene regulation. MicroRNAs have proven fundamentally important for how organisms develop and function," stated the Nobel Committee.

In the early 1990s, Ambros made a critical discovery that laid the foundation for the work honoured with the Nobel Prize. Simultaneously, Ruvkun conducted similar research. Their subsequent collaboration yielded groundbreaking results, published in two papers in Cell in 1993. Interestingly, these works initially sparked little enthusiasm among their peers. Yet, the scientists persevered.

Their research employed one of the simplest organisms: a specific species of small worm. The choice was deliberate, as these worms could reproduce rapidly over successive generations and had a straightforward, well-studied genetic structure. Once Ambros and Ruvkun accumulated sufficient data on microRNAs, they identified a type that exists across the animal kingdom. This discovery led to the search for microRNAs in humans, revealing over 1,000 microRNA genes specific to the human body.

These findings pave the way for regulating gene activity, including in humans, with potential therapeutic applications. Simply put, this breakthrough could enable the treatment of severe illnesses by addressing their root causes in individual patients.

The Nobel Committee once again emphasized the importance of this discovery, as microRNAs have become a truly important source of knowledge about the development and functioning of organisms. The Committee believes that this research will give an opportunity to look at the process of gene regulation from a new perspective.

Pharmaceutical companies and medical researchers have long been interested in the work of these Nobel laureates, given their foundational papers published over a quarter-century ago. However, the Nobel Prize has solidified the scientific community's, pharmaceutical companies', and investors' belief in the immense potential of this technology.

This turning point is particularly significant, considering the scepticism that initially greeted Ambros and Ruvkun's work more than 30 years ago. Now, we can expect heightened interest, increased research efforts, and a surge in investments into these areas of medicine, pharmaceuticals, and biotechnology. 2025 is poised to be a landmark year, brimming with exciting and positive developments in this transformative field.

Photo: An axis of evil is forming around Russia and North Korea. The democratic world must respond to this immediately. Source: Getty Images

Two Worlds Divided Between Good and Evil

The era when a country could quietly stay on the sidelines of global politics appears to have ended definitively. Humanity enjoyed a brief respite of approximately 17 years – from 1991, when the Soviet Union ceased to exist, until 2008, when Russia openly annexed parts of Georgia. This was followed in 2014 by Russia's occupation of Ukrainian territory through a local hybrid war. The situation reached its climax in 2022 with the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, effectively marking the start of a hybrid Third World War. On 2024, North Korea had openly joined the conflict.

Why, then, should we consider that two opposing blocs of nations have crystallised only now? One might argue that this was evident as early as 2008, when Putin launched his imperial revanchist dreams in Georgia. His intentions were clearly stated in 2007 during the Munich Security Conference, where he delivered a speech outlining his vision. Putin raised the stakes further in 2022, emboldened by the reluctance of most world leaders to "look up," much like the characters in the eponymous film.

Not only ordinary people but also the leaders of major nations were unwilling to confront troubling realities. It was as if problems were being swept under the rug. Now, they are forced to publicly acknowledge the situation spiralling out of control. For instance, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte stated last week:

"By collaborating with North Korea, Iran, and China, Russia poses a threat not only to Europe but also to peace and security in other regions, including the Indo-Pacific and North America. Therefore, we must unite — Europe, North America, and our global partners — to ensure the safety and prosperity of our people."

This marked an open recognition of an "axis of evil" consisting of several authoritarian regimes.

Of course, some might argue that Rutte’s remarks reflect his role as a senior official in a defence alliance, and his statements are part of his job. However, this criticism misses the mark. For 14 years, Rutte served as Prime Minister of the Netherlands, a role that undoubtedly shaped his broad worldview. It would be unfair to accuse NATO’s new Secretary General of hawkish tendencies. Rather, he has simply articulated aloud what even leading European politicians previously dared not admit to themselves.

Rutte’s speech signals a shift among democratic nations – Western Europe, North America, Japan, Taiwan, Australia, South Korea, and others – away from attempts to address the issue by avoiding escalation.

Authoritarian regimes have tested the tolerance of democratic states for too long.

Donald Trump’s return to power would likely accelerate the realisation among democratic leaders of a simple truth: authoritarian regimes are on the brink of successfully hacking the established global order. They are close to dragging the world back 200 years to an era where disputes were resolved through force, and international treaties lasted only until one side amassed enough weapons and soldiers to break them.

In this context, 2025 will be a point of no return. Either the world will rein in this coalition of authoritarian regimes, or it will descend into a series of high-intensity large and small wars.

Photo: The club of nuclear states appears poised for accelerated expansion – yet another dreadful consequence of Russia’s war against Ukraine. Source: Getty Images

Welcome to the Club: Who’s Next in Line for the Bomb?

The expansion of the nuclear club has already taken place. Russia and China have possessed nuclear weapons since the 1950s and 1960s. North Korea presumably has operational nuclear warheads as well. Iran is halfway to acquiring an atomic bomb, and if not for the preventive actions of certain countries, it would likely already have one. This means that out of the four members of the so-called axis of evil, three already possess nuclear weapons, and the fourth is on the verge of obtaining them.

Additionally, we know that nuclear weapons are possessed by Pakistan and India. It is also likely that South Africa and Israel have such capabilities. From the outset of the nuclear arms race, the United States, the United Kingdom, and France have been part of the nuclear club. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, portions of its arsenal remained in Ukraine and Kazakhstan. However, under immense pressure from countries already in possession of nuclear weapons, these two nations surrendered their arsenals.

Although the Budapest Memorandum can be considered a weak document, it provided assurances of Ukraine’s territorial integrity in exchange for Kyiv’s renunciation of its nuclear weapons and delivery systems. These assurances were proven to be fictional in 2014, and even more so in 2022, when Russian forces stormed the outskirts of Kyiv.

The Ukrainian case has sent a clear and powerful signal to all nations in high-risk zones – those facing the threat of invasion by near or distant aggressors. The message is simple: "You must arm yourselves with nuclear bombs if you want potential aggressors to refrain from invading you."

Some countries in these high-risk zones enjoy strong alliances with nuclear-armed nations. For instance, Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea may count on the American nuclear umbrella, while Australia might rely on British support. However, a critical question remains: will these umbrellas open when the need arises? In 2014, not only did Russia fail to face a strong response from the signatories of the Budapest Memorandum, but it also avoided significant economic sanctions.

Nations in high-risk zones have received a transparent hint that their most reliable allies are themselves and that ultimate guarantees may only come in the form of nuclear weapons.

Even more potent signals have been observed by second-tier authoritarian regimes. They have noted that nuclear-armed Russia is seemingly free to act as it pleases. Meanwhile, democratic states have mostly watched from the sidelines, offering little more than expressions of "deep" or "profound concern." For autocratic regimes, the takeaway is straightforward: "If you want to do whatever you wish without regard for international law, arm yourself with nuclear warheads."

The existence of nuclear weapons in North Korea and Iran's relentless march toward nuclear status highlight the failure of the non-proliferation regime. The world is on the brink of a dangerous nuclear arms race, which can only be averted by decisive actions from democratic leaders – ranging from crippling economic sanctions to forcibly dismantling nuclear technology supply chains. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has proven itself both short-sighted and ineffective in this regard.

Once again, 2025 is likely to become a point of no return. Either democratic states succeed in reducing the number of nations aspiring to nuclear weapons, or nuclear ambitions will soon extend even to pirate bands in the Red Sea.

Photo: Russia has turned illegal migration into a hybrid weapon and is using it not only in Europe. Source: Getty Images

Illegal Migration Has Definitively Become a Hybrid Weapon

Since 2015, illegal migration has ceased to be a spontaneous phenomenon. That year marked the start of coordinated efforts by Moscow, in collaboration with Minsk, to facilitate organised flows of migrants from the Middle East and even North Africa. Nine years ago, organised criminal networks involved in human trafficking gained support from the Kremlin.

This cynical innovation – the weaponisation of illegal migration as a hybrid warfare tool – aimed to achieve at least three anticipated outcomes for EU countries:

• Exert pressure on EU social budgets to undermine their ability to finance defence and stimulate economic competitiveness.
• Establish intelligence and criminal networks to be used as instruments of destabilisation and terror at an opportune moment.
• Encourage the radicalisation of European voters' political sentiments, thereby undermining traditional and respectable political forces. The goal was to erode national political institutions and initiate the destabilisation of the European Union itself.

Much of this agenda has been realised by Putin and his partners. From the "Yellow Vests" movement in France a few years ago to the recent attacks on Israeli football fans in the Netherlands, from orchestrated illegal border crossings through Belarus to the Charlie Hebdo editorial office attacks – this is but a partial list of victories in this hybrid war against the stability and financial resilience of the EU.

Facilitating and managing illegal migration has effectively become a form of low-budget state terrorism for the Kremlin. European governments' ability to resist such hybrid attacks has been significantly weakened by excessive reliance on calls for tolerance. The combination of moral pressure on governments and external encouragement of illegal migration is at the heart of Putin's hybrid war against the EU.

Fortunately, immunity has not been entirely lost. Italy, France, and the United Kingdom are developing more effective strategies to combat illegal migration. The issue remains a key agenda item at every high-level meeting. The year 2025 is highly likely to become a turning point due to new favourable circumstances and the rising costs associated with the risks created by illegal migration.

A return of Donald Trump to the White House could assist European leaders in countering illegal migration. This constitutes one of the aforementioned favourable circumstances. The newly elected US president is not overly concerned about his image when it comes to his country's key interests. His approach to tackling illegal migration is expected to be not only effective but also quite radical. Trump's forthrightness and determination will undoubtedly foster a conducive environment in Europe for reducing tolerance towards illegal migration.

For EU countries and the United Kingdom, resisting illegal migration is, in effect, resisting not only the erosion of their identity but also hybrid attacks from Moscow. The clock is ticking, with time measured now in months rather than years.

Photo: The EU has encountered a systemic crisis, exacerbated by external pressure from authoritarian regimes. Source: Getty Images

The EU Must Reset Itself to Preserve Unity

Economic competition with the US and China for dominance in international trade, extremely severe security challenges – including those stemming from the Russian threat – the battle against illegal migration, recalibrating the "green transition" towards a more pragmatic approach, and resolving issues in agricultural policy are among the most significant threats shaking the EU as an institution. The departure of the United Kingdom from the EU continues to have long-term consequences.

Brexit, ultimately, created a precedent that poses a substantial risk to the integrity of the European Union. This precedent fuels the imagination of various Eurosceptic groups, although few among them fully grasp the real cost of Brexit for both the EU and the UK. The scale of the British economy renders it relatively self-sufficient. Beyond France and Germany, no other EU countries possess the capacity to independently fund significant military forces and major security projects.

Putin’s strategy for Europe is now quite apparent. It resembles the tactics of a weasel in a henhouse – eliminating victims one by one before they can unite and mount a coordinated defence.

The Kremlin is successfully exploiting "Putinverstehers" within the EU to promote disintegration and obstruct measures that could neutralise the Russian threat. Governments in Hungary, Slovakia, and Austria, with varying levels of enthusiasm, continuously exert pressure on both Brussels and Kyiv in pursuit of "business as usual" with Russia.

However, the winter of 2024/25 is beginning to put everyone in their rightful place. In November 2024, the Russian gas giant Gazprom ceased further gas supplies to Austria. Vienna announced that it had sufficient alternative gas sources for the upcoming winter. Slovakia, meanwhile, is preparing a contingency route in case Russian suppliers face sanctions from Ukraine. Bratislava is reportedly signing agreements for gas supplies from Azerbaijan. However, Azerbaijan lacks the necessary volumes of gas for export to Eastern Europe, making it likely that Russian gas will be rebranded as Azerbaijani.

Meanwhile, three major European banking groups continue operations in Russia: Raiffeisen Bank International (Austria), Unicredit (Italy), and OTP (Hungary). Listed in descending order of their involvement in facilitating Russia’s cross-border transactions, their activities significantly support the Russian economy, including its military-industrial complex. Maintaining economic ties with Russia directly correlates to the extent of Kremlin influence over a given country and, by extension, the success of Russia's disintegration efforts targeting the EU.

A political crisis in the EU’s largest economy, Germany, is also contributing to instability within the 27-member bloc. This crisis has two roots: a history of reckless economic ties with Russia and Germany's internal economic challenges, as it is the only major EU country currently experiencing negative GDP growth.

The political crisis currently gripping Germany is officially linked to a budgetary dispute between Chancellor Olaf Scholz and former Finance Minister Christian Lindner, representing the Free Democrats (FDP) in the coalition government. The dispute arose from stagnation in the German economy. Lindner proposed curtailing "green" expenditures and even defence spending, a stance deemed unacceptable amidst the growing Russian threat.

Germany is likely heading towards elections in February 2025. For now, Olaf Scholz's ally, technocrat Jörg Kukies, will serve as interim Finance Minister.

The troubled fate of the greenhouse gas emissions reduction project also demands attention, with the green transition requiring reformatting. The issue is not only about farmers’ demands regarding the pace and substance of the green transition. Robust solutions will also be needed to encourage businesses to adopt new technologies for reducing carbon footprints while avoiding financial burdens that could undermine companies’ capabilities through punitive fines.

Nonetheless, the EU has avenues to strengthen its capabilities, and these efforts began in autumn 2024 but are expected to intensify in 2025. The EU is now determining its destiny – either heading towards the disintegration of this complex structure and subsequent defeat in the face of the Russian threat or consolidating and strengthening itself.

The situation suggests that the largest European capitals and Northern European countries have already chosen the path of consolidation and capacity-building. How this will align with the EU's decision-making procedures, which require consensus, remains unclear for now. But more clarity is likely to emerge in due course.