The New Global Paradigm: From Unipolarity to Multipolarity

By Sabrine Al Ajroudi, Department of Strategic Research and International Relations 05-06-2024

International politics is a dynamic and ever-evolving realm, with no fixed elements or tools that dictate its course or govern its processes directing it toward specific paths. The Cold War demonstrated this reality vividly, as the global order underwent a profound transformation across various dimensions. Parties involved have changed, resources are no longer the sole drivers of power and achievement, and The era of globalization has introduced a complexity in conflicts, where we find ourselves unable to predict the future with confidence due to the rapid pace of events and the multitude of factors to be analyzed.

These factors, whether positive or negative, overt or covert, peaceful or violent, economic or political, are shaped by international institutions that operate both openly and behind the scenes. These institutions often create contradictions that are challenging to understand or reconcile, making it difficult to grasp the logic behind these transformations and interpret international events without raising critical questions.

However, two traditional elements still dominate the international landscape, providing a framework for understanding the various contradictions and classifying them based on divergent and conflicting interests. These are represented by the “Warsaw Pact” and “NATO,” whose relationships are marked by ongoing power struggles. Despite the secrecy surrounding many aspects of these conflicts, which are often linked to intelligence agencies and their traditional techniques, the nature of these conflicts remains clear.

 Defining the Current International Order

What are the new actors and forms of conflict?

 Features of the New World Order

The concept of the international order encompasses several intertwined and interconnected elements, sometimes harmonious and at other times discordant, interacting based on numerous variables stemming from external or internal influences. Generally, it summarizes international relations with all their specific characteristics at a given period.

These elements occupy unequal and varying ranks within the system, often making conflict and instability prominent features. This conflict and change pose a direct challenge to the dominant element (the international system), as conflict implies rejection of this international approach, leading to the undermining of the dominant power’s interests. Consequently, the dominant power will adopt various strategies to maintain its position, which shapes foreign policy.

This is exemplified by the United States’ efforts to preserve its hegemony and ideological approach by establishing economic and political institutions and regional security organizations dedicated to its liberal ideology. Through these institutions, the U.S. constructs the international system, encircling its interests with these organizations that act as a shield protecting its objectives.

This means that current conflicts are essentially American endeavors to maintain influence by relying on diverse elements, including institutions, military bases, organizations, and technology, which impact state behaviors. Some reactions pose a clear challenge to the international system that supports unipolarity. The legitimacy of the international system is derived from the belief that participation ensures benefits. However, several factors can weaken a system, including economic, ideological, and social differences among its components.

The system is not homogeneous but consists of numerous subsystems with different levels and scopes, creating profound issues. The more elements and forms the system has, the more varied its impacts, leading to diverse challenges based on interests and goals. Consequently, U.S. foreign policies must align with each problem arising from every subsystem within the international order. To devise future policies that better meet its aspirations, the U.S. scrutinizes the effectiveness of past mechanisms and implements changes and reforms accordingly.

The issue of international hierarchy within the global system is historical, significantly impacting U.S. policies and their fluctuating paths. Despite this, certain enduring features remain, notably the “project of imposing hegemony” and promoting “unipolarity,” alongside the direction of “participating in shaping the international order and leading the world.” This is especially relevant given the profound shifts in global power balances, indicating the emergence of competing elements.

Elements Shaping the New World

Researcher and President of the Center for Arab-Russian Studies, Majed bin Abdulaziz bin Nasser Al-Turki, in his article “Vladimir Putin … and the Future of the New World,” highlights four main elements playing pivotal roles in shaping the new world:

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO): An international Eurasian organization integrating political, economic, and security dimensions, comprising six countries: China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan.

The Chinese Silk Road: Encompassing numerous international alliances either supporting its objectives or opposing its principles due to its adverse effects on unipolarity and its economic interests, especially after being incorporated into the Constitution of the People’s Republic of China in 2017.

BRICS: Consisting of six countries—China, Russia, India, South Africa, Brazil, and other nations aspiring to join by submitting requests to become part of this alliance.

OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries): Its goals are predominantly economic, focusing on regulating global energy market trends and ensuring a balanced equilibrium between supply and demand, ensuring fair prices for producers and consumers. However, some effects arise from the inconsistent positions of member states.

Al-Turki notes that the role of these organizations remains limited in bringing about radical changes unless they integrate into a comprehensive system with supreme sovereign decisions. Alone, they can only achieve minor and slow-paced impacts compared to the effectiveness of other traditional tools used in Western tactics.

Traditional Counter Elements

Traditional financial institutions, subject to the influence of Western powers, revolve around goals aimed at serving Western interests, thereby allowing the dominance of the dollar over international economic movements.

International institutions (such as the United Nations and the Security Council) are eroded due to their subjugation to Western dominance, diverting them from their natural course of achieving justice in favor of serving Western interests.

Legal institutions aligned with Western values ensure their continuity across various social, cultural, and religious agendas.

The exclusion of dissenting views opposed to the dominant ideology occurs due to the absence of oversight within a comprehensive “political-military-economic” system that ensures balance in confrontation.

Many political leaders fear and suffice with silently monitoring political and geopolitical changes on the international scene.

Subsidiary elements within the international system will not be immune to conflicts among major powers, as they will be influenced and produce other elements that, in turn, affect the relationships between these active elements. Therefore, achieving isolation is difficult in the current international system, where all dimensions and fields intersect. An example of this is the intersection between local and international dimensions, and the direction of conflict in the international system is not subject to the principle of system or coherence; it is broad in scope.

There is an inevitable relationship between three variables: continuous changes in the power dynamics and the acceleration of their spread globally, the transformation of conflict causes and hence its directions, and the possible transformation in international hierarchy. All these elements are not constant and are subject to change. The shifting of global powers will affect their areas of influence since interests, ideologies, and goals differ. Consequently, the contents of conflicts will also differ.

New Competitive Strategies

The dominant trend in the conflict between parties in the international system is the adoption of soft power, employing projects, combatting through relationships, alliances, bargaining, and threats, as well as resorting to sanctions and tightening, utilizing nuclear power for intimidation, incitement… rarely resorting to military force or direct warfare. This shift from using traditional to non-traditional power can be characterized by focusing on exploiting knowledge, finances, media, and other elements that play a significant role in influence.

The elements of power are no longer exclusive to certain countries or unattainable goals, but the flow of this power from one state to another has become possible, adding an element of change and instability to the international system. Today, the global system has moved away from the traditional shape of conflict into a “globalized” conflict, where there are no clear endpoints, and small powers can emerge in the international system at the expense of major powers due to the mismanagement of their power elements. This applies to the United States, as it previously focused on maintaining its military assets and provided opportunities for other countries like Russia and China to build their entities at that time.

Some small international powers have changed their course towards creating conflicting regional zones with the United States in major spheres of influence, leading to intensified conflict and the creation of a cold war. Consequently, globalization has significantly affected the international system due to the absence of fixed areas of conflict, leading to regional competition, which in turn affects the local domain.

In conclusion, conflict is no longer traditional, i.e., between two states; the global system now accommodates several different and varied elements. Competition transcends all fields, and traditional power elements no longer hold the same significance they once did. Other elements have emerged, possessed by limited-power parties, which they employ against major powers. This highlights the international system’s shift towards multipolarism and the emergence of entirely different power factors that have a vast capacity for dissemination. This leads to significant overlap between what is international, regional, and local due to the intersection of interests between different parties.