Globally, there is an increasing conceptual focus on multipolarity: a world where numerous/all countries can influence global affairs significantly, set in contrast to a unipolar (US) or future bipolar (US and China) world, characterised by hegemonic power. Multipolarity is often linked to countries aligning flexibly with other powers, rather than being forced into camps, or worse, becoming unwilling parties in a cold war or open conflict between superpowers.
On one level, multipolarity is a description of the emerging global landscape. It also reflects the justified dissatisfaction with the global economic and governance system that was designed, and has been dominated by, the West, led by the US. This system is neither fair, nor is it underpinned any longer by the support of the US, let alone of the so-called ‘Global South’.
However, multipolarity is not an ordering principle, especially if it lacks a clear plan for reformed and inclusive international organisations able to define jointly acceptable rules, allowing for the peaceful mitigation of conflict. Rather, multipolarity, as currently promoted by some emerging powers, relies on the capacities of individual countries, and as such amplifies ‘might is right’. In its demise, the current global system is thus not giving way to a new rules-based global framework. Global anarchy with shifting alliances will be detrimental especially to smaller countries, and will fail to protect the global commons – environment, peace and sustainable development. But it is hard to see a different trajectory with Trump in the White House.
Fabian Zuleeg is Chief Executive and Chief Economist at the European Policy Centre.
The support the European Policy Centre receives for its ongoing operations, or specifically for its publications, does not constitute an endorsement of their contents, which reflect the views of the authors only. Supporters and partners cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.