The multipolar world

The multipolar world. An interview with Giacomo Guarini

 
 I would talk about a multipolar system rather than a bipolar one. It is clear that there are more than only one country which are emerging in the world and looking for a more fair division of power, based on multiple centres of macro-regional influence, in juxtaposition with the unipolar configuration. We can make different examples of regional and international organizations (and, above all, we can mention the BRICS group) as tangible signs of general tendency towards a new multipolar system. Assuming all that, I would say that we should not focus on the hypothesis of a single power able to challenge the global hegemon but on a whole system of emerging powers, which has to demonstrate its will to put aside both the possible rivalries existing inside the block and the strategies based on short-sided nationalistic perspectives. The role of both China and Russia in this process is fundamental, both because of their political, economic and strategic potential and because of their position which makes them the most important obstacles to the run of the US aimed at the penetration and at the control of the Eurasian landmass.
 

Natella Speranskaya . Eurasia and Europe: Dialogue of “Big Spaces”

Carl Schmitt regarded the earth as a single whole and was looking for its global mission. This "whole" was formed by Schmitt in the concept of Nomos. He used the Greek word derived from the verb «nemein», which is identical to German “nehmen” - “to take”. Nomos comprises three acts of the drama: "taking", "division and distribution of the taken", "exploitation and use of the taken and distributed." According to Schmitt, Nomos of the Earth existed always. First Nomos is described as a "promised land" of ancient peoples. It is the Nomos of the ancient times and the Middle Ages. It ceased to exist after the exploration of the great oceans and the American continent. Thus began the Second Nomos, the Nomos of national sovereign states that had the Eurocentric structure. Events of the World War II led to its destruction, so that the land was divided into east and west, which were in a state of "cold war". It is not about mere geographic opposites, but a more original and profound contradistinctions. 

The multipolar world. An interview with Boris Nad

 

The collapse of the Soviet Union and the consequent triumph of the United States, and the attempt to impose the American model at the global level open a real Pandora's box: it was a prelude to two decades of permanent instability, social and economic, military intervention and brutal wars with millions of victims, from those in the Persian Gulf to the wars in the Balkans or in the Middle East, whether by direct involvement of the global hegemon or foreign agency, for American interests.

 

The multipolar world. An interview with Wagnão Correia

 

Bipolarity has always been present in modern world history, specifically in the mythic conflict between Land and Sea, where it materialized in the antagonist pole Russia-USA, and continues to be alive, although it is not the central point of international relations anymore. This possible return to bipolarity that some analysts show, can be dispute for global power among countries that defend multipolarity and those who are against or indifferent to it. But international bipolarity, as it existed in the Cold War won’t be, in my opinion, revived. This happens because of the appearance of other poles of power and because of the enormous difference of power between Russia and the United States.

The multipolar world. An interview with Alfredo RR de Sousa

 

There is much talking nowadays about the emergence of the People's Republic of China as the superpower thatwould restore the bipolar model in the context of global geopolitics. Nevertheless, I believe that such a viewpoint expressesan excessively ‘economicist’ approach of the matter.  China lacks the military capability needed to match American hegemony, and we all know that relations of power are defined ultimately by sheer force. Thus, I believe that theprogressive consolidation of the links established by the SCO-Shanghai Cooperation Organization (a mutual security treatysigned in 2001 between the governments of Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, involvinghigh level military cooperation between the signatory States ) soon will become one of the axes of gravity of global geopolitics, as opposed to the 'Atlanticist' block championed by the U.S.. We’ll have therefore a bipolar model integrated by multipolar actors. Observers States of the SCO, such as Iran and Pakistan, on one hand; and U.S. satellites at othercontinents besides Europe, such as Israel and Saudi Arabia, will continue to orbit around the power centers mentioned above.

The multipolar world. An interview with João Franco

 

I think it is very likely that a multi-polar system emerges in the next years. The weaknesses of the American society are showing day by day, and it can no longer be hidden that the liberal-capitalist system is not the panacea its propagators claimed for so many years. There are two powers that can pose a strategic challenge to America’s hegemony at the moment, and these are Russia and China. Unfortunately Europe, due to the illness of political correctness and masochism of its leadership is a dwarf in the international scene, and will never succeed whilst it maintains a subservient position regarding the United States, its major competitor for raw materials and fuels worldwide, items that Europe needs desperately for the survival of its economy.

 

The multipolar world. Interview with Sergio Gouvea (Brasil)

 

Natella Speranskaya: The collapse of the Soviet Union meant the cancellation of the Yalta system of international relations and the triumph of the single hegemon - the United States, and as a consequence, transformation of the bipolar world order to the unipolar model. Nevertheless, some analysts are still talking about a possible return to the bipolar model. How do you feel about this hypothesis? Is there a likelihood of emergence of a power capable of challenging the global hegemon?

 

Sergio Gouvea: I do not see the possibility of a return to the bipolar model as something likely to happen. No nation can match, or even challenge, America’s military or economic power and sphere of influence. Russia and China, which seem potentially dangerous to US’s hegemony, could not, in any way, overthrow its power. There is no global ideological basis to sustain an overturn of the situation. Globalized world has been shaped according to the United States ideal of Liberalism, since no other country has developed its own Liberal Way of Life to the extent of America, there is no serious danger of a change of actors (which would be totally meaningless, to replace a Liberal Hyperpower with another). It is already too late to try and indoctrinate the global community on a world-view other than liberalism. The very collapse of the Soviet Union shows us that such an attempt is completely out of time. 

The multipolar world. Interview with Raphael Machado (Brasil)

 

Natella Speranskaya: The collapse of the Soviet Union meant the cancellation of the Yalta system of international relations and the triumph of the single hegemon - the United States, and as a consequence, transformation of the bipolar world order to the unipolar model. Nevertheless, some analysts are still talking about a possible return to the bipolar model. How do you feel about this hypothesis? Is there a likelihood of emergence of a power capable of challenging the global hegemon?

 

Raphael Machado: Whenever the possibility of a return to the bipolar model is mentioned the major contender for the place previously occupied by the USSR is usually considered to be China, specially because of its rising economic and military capabilities. This is a possible scenario, but it isn’t really as desirable as we could initially think, because since Deng Xiaoping’s capitalist reforms China’s economic partnership with the United States has grown stronger, as have the diplomatic contacts between both countries. Hence, a bipolar world where the poles are represented by the U.S. and China possibly doesn’t offer a real anti-globalist alternative for the oppressed peoples of the world.

 

Pages