1: How many superpowers are there in today’s global politics?
In today’s global politics, the most common perception is that there are two primary superpowers: the United States and China. This dyad is often referred to as a ‘bipolar’ world order, where these two nations are considered to have the greatest influence over global affairs, both economically and militarily. The United States, as the world’s largest economy (measured in terms of GDP at market exchange rates) and a leading military power, has long been considered the sole superpower since the end of the Cold War. However, China’s rapid economic growth and increasing international influence have brought it into contention for the status of a superpower. The label of ‘superpower’ is not formally defined, and the term can be subjective. Other countries, such as Russia, the European Union, India and Brazil, have significant international influence and can be considered major powers or emerging powers, but they are not typically classified as superpowers in the same league as the United States and China. The dynamics between these two superpowers and other major powers are shaping the contemporary international system, leading to a more multipolar world where power is distributed among several influential nations. This multipolarity is characterised by complex interactions and rivalries, as well as cooperation on certain issues.
Frankly, I am no longer convinced that the old polar concepts by themselves are sufficient for describing geopolitics. 1. Territoriality is still important, but it has been extended and now overlaps with other concepts and processes that change its nature. 2. Networks and network power are important extensions and developments of territoriality, especially when it comes to global trade, communications and cultural exchange. This feature of interconnectivity is increasing even during periods of openness and closure and as represented through the growth of the digital economy and culture. The global digital system permits economic, political and symbolic networks and flows that modify territoriality in dramatic ways. 3. The next layer is system rivalry, in this case, between the US and China indicates how networks can reconfigure power in nonpolar ways. Power is a network that is more diffuse and pervasive and less directed. While this three-layered theory is a system approach to the geopolitics of territoriality and may not change the material order or ranking of ‘powers,’ it provides a better contemporary and comprehensive analysis that recognises ‘network power’ and how it can work to endorse existing power structures or against them.
2: What are your thoughts on the current polar structure of global politics?
The current polar structure of global politics is characterised by the rise of two major poles of power: the United States and China. This shift is often described as a transition from a unipolar world, where the United States was the sole superpower after the end of the Cold War, to a bipolar world, where the power dynamics are more evenly balanced between the two countries. The emerging polar structure is driven by various factors. 1. The rapid economic growth of China, particularly its integration into the global supply chain and its emergence as the world’s second-largest economy, is challenging the economic dominance of the United States. 2. Both countries are investing heavily in their military capabilities, with China modernising its armed forces and the United States maintaining its global military presence and technological superiority. 3. The race for technological superiority, particularly in areas such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and cybersecurity, is a key aspect of the emerging polar structure, with both countries seeking to lead in critical technologies. 4. There is increasing competition between the two countries in various regions, including Asia, the Middle East and Europe, as they seek to advance their strategic interests and influence. 5. The two poles represent different ideological systems – democratic capitalism in the United States and authoritarian socialism in China – which adds a normative dimension to the polar structure. 6. Both countries are actively building alliances and partnerships to support their positions. The United States has traditional allies in NATO and is expanding relationships in the Indo-Pacific region, while China is pursuing its BRI and fostering closer ties with countries in Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. The two countries are competing for influence in international organisations, such as the United Nations, World Trade Organisation and International Monetary Fund, as well as in setting global standards and norms. While the United States and China are the two major poles, other countries and regions also play significant roles in the global political landscape. For example, European countries, Russia, India and Brazil are among the other major players whose actions can influence the emerging polar structure. The global political environment is complex and dynamic, with power dynamics shifting continuously. The theoretical system of territoriality as an aspect of geopolitics is one-dimensional.
3: What are your thoughts on the durability of unipolar international order?
The concept of a unipolar international order refers to a period in global politics when one nation, typically the United States after the end of the Cold War, holds preeminent economic, military and diplomatic power. The durability of such an order is subject to debate among scholars, policymakers and analysts, and several factors suggest that a unipolar world is not indefinitely sustainable. The emergence of new economic powers, most notably China but also including India, Brazil,and others, is challenging the traditional distribution of power. These rising powers are seeking to increase their influence on the global stage, which can lead to a more multipolar world where power is more evenly distributed. The economic rise of these new powers is translating into increased competition for resources, markets and influence, which can undermine the economic dominance of the traditional superpower. While the United States maintains its military superiority, other countries are investing in their own military capabilities to ensure they can protect their interests and project power regionally and globally. The rise of non-state actors, such as terrorist groups, transnational criminal organisations and major tech companies, can challenge the traditional state-centric international order, as these actors can impact global security and economic dynamics. The unipolar order is often associated with Western liberal democratic values, which may not resonate with all nations. The spread of alternative political systems, such as China’s model of authoritarian capitalism, can lead to a clash of ideologies and a desire for alternative international orderings. Many nations are increasingly asserting their sovereignty and pushing back against what they perceive as unilateral actions by the dominant power. This can lead to a shift towards multilateralism and the creation of alternative international frameworks. The challenges of globalisation, such as climate change, pandemics and economic inequality, require collective action that may be difficult for a single nation to lead or control. This can necessitate a more distributed approach to global governance. The domestic politics of the leading power, including economic inequality, political polarisation and public opinion, can affect its ability to maintain a unipolar order. While the unipolar international order has been the dominant feature of global politics since the early 1990s, the trends mentioned above suggest that it may not be durable in the long term. The shift towards a more multipolar or bipolar world is driven by a combination of economic, military, ideological and political factors, which are reshaping the international system. The unipolar system is ending very quickly and will disappear in 50 years or less. The Soviet collapse happened quickly. The US will occur, but not without desperation. I link it to the end of oil.
4: How do you perceive the current balance of power among great powers?
The balance of power among great powers is a dynamic and complex issue that is influenced by a multitude of factors, including economic strength, military capabilities, diplomatic influence, technological innovation and strategic alliances. Considered the world’s leading superpower, the US has significant economic, military and diplomatic influence. It maintains a global network of allies and partners, and its military is technologically advanced and operationally deployed worldwide. However, the US faces challenges such as economic debt, political polarisation and competition from other great powers. China’s economic growth over the past few decades has been remarkable, positioning it as the world’s second-largest economy. It is investing heavily in military modernisation and expanding its global influence through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). China’s authoritarian political system and its approach to intellectual property and technology transfer have raised concerns among Western democracies. Russia is a major power with significant military capabilities, particularly in the realm of nuclear weapons. It has maintained a presence in international affairs, though its economic size is smaller than that of the US and China. However, its invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has led to widespread international condemnation and economic sanctions that have weakened its global position. While not a single country, the European Union collectively represents a significant economic powerhouse. Its member states have strong diplomatic and economic influence, and the EU is a major player in global trade and climate policy. However, internal challenges such as Brexit, migratory crises and varying degrees of economic performance among member states can affect its unity and global influence. As the world’s second-most populous country, India is a rising power with a growing economy and a robust military. It is seeking to increase its influence in international affairs and has been expanding its strategic partnerships, including with the US and Japan. However, India faces challenges such as poverty, internal security threats and border disputes. Japan is a major economic power and a technological leader. It has a strong military relationship with the US and is increasingly active in regional security matters. However, its military role is constrained by its constitution, and it faces demographic and economic challenges. As Europe’s largest economy, Germany plays a central role in the EU and global economic affairs. It has significant diplomatic influence and is a leader in renewable energy and environmental policy. However, its foreign policy is often constrained by its historical context and the sensitivities of its neighbours. Post-Brexit, the UK’s global influence is evolving. It remains a major economic power with a strong military and a seat on the UN Security Council. The UK is expanding its global reach and seeking new alliances, but its future role as a great power is subject to debate. The balance of power is constantly shifting due to changes in economic performance, political leadership, technological advancements and international events. It is important to note that the perception of the balance of power can vary greatly depending on the issue area and the perspective of the observer.
5: What is the existing polar structure of global politics?
The existing polar structure of global politics refers to the increasing division and polarisation among different countries, regions, or political blocs on various issues, leading to a more confrontational and competitive international situation. This structure is influenced by a variety of factors, including differences in political systems, economic development, cultural backgrounds and values, as well as geopolitical interests and power struggles.
One of the main aspects of the current polar structure of global politics is the competition between the United States and China, which is considered the world’s two largest economies and influential countries. The US has defined China as a strategic competitor, which has led to a series of confrontational policies and actions, such as trade wars and political suppression. This has, in turn, led to a more confrontational relationship between the two countries and even affected the global situation. There is also a growing divide between Western countries and non-Western countries, as well as between developed and developing countries. These differences in political, economic and cultural systems, as well as historical experiences and development levels, have led to increasing scepticism and confrontation between countries, making it more difficult to reach consensus and cooperation on global issues.
Furthermore, the rise of populism and nationalism in many countries has also contributed to the polarisation of global politics. These political movements emphasise national interests and sovereignty, which can lead to a more confrontational approach to international relations and a decline in the importance of global cooperation and multilateralism. The existing polar structure of global politics is characterised by increasing confrontation, competition and division among different countries, regions, or political blocs, which has led to a more uncertain and volatile international situation. Declining superpowers, rising superpowers, rising great powers; new principles of partnership, alliance, etc. These factors make it difficult to predict.
5: What factors do you believe contribute most significantly to shaping the existing polar structure of global politics?
The existing polar structure of global politics is shaped by a complex interplay of various factors. While it is difficult to pinpoint a single factor, several contribute significantly to the current international landscape. The rise of new global powers and the relative decline of traditional ones have led to shifts in the balance of power. The competition between the United States and China, as well as other power dynamics such as the European Union, Russia and India, has created a multipolar world where strategic interests often clash. The global economy is interconnected but also marked by fierce competition. Economic interdependence can lead to cooperation but also to conflict as countries vie for markets, resources and investment opportunities. Trade wars and protectionism can exacerbate these tensions. The spread of different political ideologies, such as liberal democracy and authoritarianism, can lead to ideological clashes. The promotion of certain values by one country can be seen as a threat by another, leading to political polarisation. The rapid development of technology, especially in areas like artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and communication, has created new frontiers for international competition and cooperation. Countries often view technological superiority as a key factor in maintaining or gaining geopolitical advantage. The finite nature of resources and the growing threat of climate change can lead to competition, especially in regions where access to resources is critical. Environmental degradation can also create shared challenges that require international collaboration, often amidst differing priorities and levels of commitment. The rise of populist and nationalist movements in many countries has led to a shift towards more inward-looking policies, prioritising national sovereignty and interests over international cooperation. This can lead to a more confrontational approach to global politics. Terrorism, weapons proliferation and transnational crime pose security challenges that require international responses. However, differences in approach and priorities can lead to disagreements and even conflicts among states. The role and effectiveness of international organisations and the norms they promote can influence global politics. The perception of whether these institutions are fair and representative can lead to either cooperation or pushback, contributing to polarisation. Population movements, whether due to conflict, economic opportunity, or environmental factors, can create challenges for recipient and source countries, leading to policy responses that can increase international tensions. The ability to control and influence information flows, as well as the rise of disinformation and fake news, can manipulate public opinion and political discourse, contributing to polarisation and distrust among nations. All these factors are interconnected and often feed into each other, creating a dynamic and often volatile international environment. The polar structure of global politics is a reflection of these complex interactions, where the actions of one country can have far-reaching effects on the international system.
Greater attention needs to be paid to the international finance system, which is based on the US dollar dominance. After Bretton Woods and the settling up of WB and IMF, the gold standard faltered to be replaced with the dollar system which gives the US huge advantages. The global financial crisis, which reached its peak in 2008, exposed significant weaknesses in the international financial system, including the role of the US dollar as the world’s primary reserve currency. Prior to the crisis, the US dollar enjoyed a dominant position in global finance. It was not only the primary currency for international trade but also the major reserve currency held by central banks. This meant that many countries needed dollars to conduct trade and finance their balance of payments. The crisis raised questions about the trustworthiness and stability of the US financial system, which had been considered one of the safest and most reliable in the world. The collapse of major financial institutions like Lehman Brothers and the government’s rescue of others like AIG called this perception into question. As the crisis unfolded, trade and investment flows were disrupted. Global trade volume contracted sharply, and cross-border lending dried up. Since trade is often denominated in dollars, the stability of the dollar was crucial for the recovery of global trade. The Federal Reserve’s response to the crisis, particularly the implementation of quantitative easing (QE), was unprecedented. By purchasing large quantities of financial assets, the Fed aimed to lower interest rates and encourage lending and investment. While this was necessary to stabilise the US economy, it also raised concerns about the dollar’s value and long-term inflation prospects. The crisis led to a significant fall in commodity prices, including oil, which is priced in dollars. This deflationary trend put downward pressure on the dollar’s value against other currencies as investors sought shelter in perceived safe havens like the Swiss Franc or gold. The crisis prompted a reevaluation of the global financial architecture. There was increased discussion about the need for a more diversified reserve currency system, less dependent on the dollar. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other international financial institutions have been pressured to consider the role of other currencies, such as the euro or renminbi, in the global reserve system. Over time, the US economy recovered, and the dollar has remained the dominant reserve currency. However, the crisis did lead to a partial decentralisation of financial markets and a shift in liquidity provision, with central banks around the world playing a more active role in managing their domestic economies. The crisis also contributed to the rise of non-bank financial institutions, such as money market funds and shadow banks, which play a significant role in the financial system but are less regulated than traditional banks. This has raised concerns about financial stability in the long term. Although the US dollar’s role in the international financial system has remained robust, the global financial crisis did expose vulnerabilities and prompt a reevaluation of the system’s reliance on the dollar. This has led to a more nuanced approach to global financial governance, with a gradual shift towards a more balanced and diversified international monetary system and the increasing practice of BRICS countries trading in local currencies.
The shape of the existing polar structure of global politics must be understood in terms of the long-term shift from the end of the age of colonisation and the rise of independent states especially populous countries like India and China that have large populations and also domestic markets. Colonisation and globalisation are the twin long-term processes that have been responsible for the existing structure of global politics, sometimes referred to in the grossly simplified notion of Global South and Global North, or even South-South relations. I think here we need a theory of capitalism that embraces both historical phases and interprets the decline of the West – the colonisers – with the rise of the East – the colonised. After the end of the colonial era – the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s – globalisation, while a source of inequalities both within and between countries, also enabled China and other countries more recently to lift large sections of the population out of poverty. Globalisation allowed a form of export open trade to enable competition and, while not equal, provided the basis for development with BRICS countries but not all. Many suffer from excessive IMF debt loading and from little debt relief even though the population is at starving point (e.g., Sri Lanka). Globalisation allowed a foot in the door, and, during the first modern waves, it provided a means for some countries to step aside from general poverty. Now many developing countries are riding the latest wave – India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Uzbekistan. At a certain level investment in education becomes a critical variable, not only universal but also university education, especially in the STEM subjects that lead to digital benefits of larger-scale global markets. Now that AI comprises the latest unicorn investment strategy, with billions invested in the last year we are facing the AI race focus on bots and the US’s active strategic control of the chip supply line to slow China’s development. This is an added complication for Taiwan as the TSMC company makes 90% of the most advanced chips contributing to the Taiwan question of reunification with China. Nvidia’s Blackwell superchip is a game changer, especially with twinning, which is changing the future of industrial capacity coming online.
6: What are the potential consequences of maintaining or attempting to shift the existing polar structure of global politics?
Maintaining or attempting to shift the existing polar structure of global politics can have a range of potential consequences, both intended and unintended, which can affect global stability, economic growth and the lives of ordinary people. A polar structure can lead to heightened tensions and competition between major powers, potentially escalating into proxy conflicts or direct confrontations. This can increase the risk of military conflicts and nuclear brinkmanship, endangering global security. The current structure may lead to a decline in multilateralism and the weakening of international institutions, making it harder to address global challenges such as climate change, pandemics and international security threats through collective action. The polar structure can result in economic blocs and trade barriers, leading to economic fragmentation and reducing global trade and investment flows. This can hinder economic growth and development, especially for smaller and less powerful countries. As major powers compete in technology and strategic capabilities, there is a risk of technological arms races and the development of new weapons systems that could increase the risk of accidental escalation and the spread of nuclear weapons. The promotion of different ideological systems can lead to polarisation and a lack of dialogue between countries, making it difficult to find common ground on issues of mutual concern. The polar structure can influence social and cultural dynamics, leading to the spread of nationalistic and xenophobic sentiments. This can negatively impact migrant and minority communities and lead to social divisions within countries. Developing countries can find themselves caught between major power rivalries, making it harder for them to determine their own political and economic futures. They may also face reduced assistance and increased conditionalities from major powers. The polar structure may hinder global cooperation on environmental issues, leading to a lack of effective action on climate change and other environmental challenges that require collective effort. The structure can impede effective global health responses to pandemics and other health crises, as national interests may be prioritised over a collective approach to health security. Countries may engage in diplomatic and soft power battles to shape international norms and narratives, which can lead to a more nuanced and subtle form of competition that still has significant implications for global politics. The consequences of maintaining or shifting the polar structure of global politics are not deterministic and can be influenced by a wide range of factors, including the actions of individual countries, international events and the emergence of new global issues. Efforts to address these consequences and promote a more cooperative and stable international order are ongoing, involving diplomatic negotiations, international cooperation and the development of new norms and institutions. Many countries walk the line between not offending the US and trading with China, like NZ as a traditional ally, but diplomacy has limits, and regional conflicts are likely to persist at the margins, especially for those states like Myanmar and Tajikistan that are not well integrated into either the global market economy or regional security networks. We will have to remember that the US has approximately 750 bases worldwide and an annual military budget of nearly $800 billion. While AI, satellite surveillance and drone warfare are changing the shape of modern conflict, the notion of control of territories still has a dominant place in geopolitics, and, ultimately, it is an international system that is backed by military force, whether it be border protection, control of the sea, peacekeeping or enforcement of sanctions.
7: How do you see the increasing hegemony of Russia, India and China (RIC) in regional dynamics?
The rise of Russia, India, and China (RIC) as major players in regional and global dynamics is a significant shift in international politics. Each of these countries has its own unique strategic position, economic potential, and geopolitical ambitions. The rise of RIC contributes to a more multipolar world, where power is distributed among several major states rather than being concentrated in the hands of a few. This can lead to a more balanced international system, with no single country able to dominate global affairs unilaterally. Each of these countries is a regional power with significant influence in their respective neighbourhoods. China is a dominant player in Asia, Russia in Eurasia and the Middle East, and India in South Asia. Their growth can lead to a more balanced distribution of power within these regions. Together, RIC represents a significant portion of the global economy. China is the world’s second-largest economy, Russia has significant natural resources, and India is one of the fastest-growing major economies. Their economic strength translates into increased leverage in international trade and investment. All three countries are investing in their military capabilities. Russia has long been a major arms supplier and has a robust military, particularly on land. China is modernising its military and expanding its naval capabilities, while India is increasing its defence spending and seeking to enhance its own strategic autonomy. At the same time, all three are active in space technology and looking to cooperate more closely. RIC countries have shown a willingness to engage with multilateral institutions but also to lead or participate in alternative platforms that align with their interests, such as the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) grouping, recently expanded to ten countries with Thailand also wanted to join, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), and China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
Each of these countries is developing strategic partnerships with other nations. For example, China’s BRI seeks to enhance connectivity across Eurasia and beyond, India is engaging with the United States and other Quad partners to balance Chinese influence, and Russia maintains complex relationships with various countries in Europe, the Middle East,and Asia. RIC often align on issues related to the Global South’s interests, such as reform of the United Nations Security Council, voting rights in international financial institutions, and opposition to what they perceive as Western imperialism or hegemony. While RIC countries have different political systems (China is a single-party state, Russia has a mixed democratic-authoritarian regime, and India is a democracy), they share a common interest in promoting their own models of development and governance as viable alternatives to Western liberalism. Despite their rise, each of these countries faces internal and external challenges. These include economic restructuring, political stability, regional conflicts and international sanctions. These constraints can limit their ability to project power and influence globally. The increasing influence of RIC is likely to shape the competition for global leadership. As these countries continue to grow and assert themselves on the world stage, they will challenge the traditional leadership of Western countries and could lead to a more competitive, and possibly confrontational, international environment. The interplay between RIC and other major powers, such as the United States, European Union and Japan, will be a key driver of international politics in the coming decades. How effectively RIC can coordinate their policies and interests, and how they manage their respective relationships with other global actors, will be crucial in determining the nature of the international system and the balance of power in the 21st century. China and Russia are now strategic partners with ‘no limits’; India is supposedly a democracy and is comfortable with the West, although also a member of BRICS and SCO but strongly aware of its colonial past and the excesses of British imperialism.
8: Can you discuss the key factors contributing to the rise of new powers in the international arena in contemporary global politics?
The rise of new powers on the international stage is a complex phenomenon influenced by various factors. One of the primary drivers of the rise of new powers is rapid economic growth. Countries like China, India and Indonesia have experienced unprecedented economic expansion, which has increased their resources and capabilities, allowing them to play a more significant role in international affairs. The process of globalisation has facilitated the integration of economies and the flow of goods, services, capital and information across borders. These flows have enabled countries to benefit from global supply chains, attract foreign investment, and increase their exports, thereby boosting their economic power. The rapid pace of technological innovation has provided new tools for economic development and military modernisation. Countries that invest in education, research, and development are able to leapfrog traditional economic and technological barriers, enhancing their competitiveness and influence. The size and composition of a country’s population can be a significant source of power. Countries with large, young populations can potentially enjoy a demographic dividend, which can lead to a larger workforce and consumer market, provided they can invest enough in education and healthcare.
Countries rich in natural resources have the potential to generate significant economic revenue and influence, especially if they can manage their resources effectively and diversify their economies to avoid the resource curse. Stable political environments and effective governance are crucial for attracting investment, fostering innovation and maintaining the rule of law. Countries that can achieve these conditions tend to grow economically and politically. Investing in military capabilities can enhance a country’s power and influence. New powers often seek to modernise their armed forces to protect their interests, deter potential threats and project power regionally and globally. Effective diplomacy and the ability to build alliances and partnerships can amplify a country’s influence. By engaging with other nations and multilateral organisations, new powers can advance their interests and shape international norms and policies. The strength of a country’s national identity, social cohesion and cultural appeal can also contribute to its international influence. Soft power, which includes cultural exports, educational institutions and the attractiveness of a country’s values, can win allies and friends. A country’s position within its region and the dynamics of regional politics can significantly affect its rise as a global power.
Strategic partnerships, rivalries and conflicts in the region can either propel or hinder a country’s growth. The relative decline of traditional Western powers and the shifting balances of power in the international system have created vacuums that new powers have sought to fill. These shifts can be due to a variety of factors, including economic challenges, political transformations and military restructuring. The perception of a country’s power and influence, both within the international community and by the country’s own population, can contribute to its rise. This recognition can lead to invitations to join global governance structures and the formation of international coalitions. The interplay of these factors is complex and often interacts with each other in unexpected ways. As new powers continue to rise, the international system will likely experience further shifts in power dynamics, affecting everything from economic cooperation to geopolitical competition. Economic growth and development as flowed from globalisation even though it has been deeply criticised by the Left. In a real sense, the end of the colonial era with historically self-determining states is strongly linked to an international trading economy in which increasingly new BRICS and South-South partnerships take place at the economic and diplomatic levels, such as the recent China-Arab summit where President Xi calls for a peace conference and an end to the ‘tremendous suffering’ in Gaza. Xi also backs Palestinian statehood and announced that China will host a second summit in 2026. The summit ended with the Beijing Declaration that reviewed ways to promote the building of a shared China-Arab community and boost bilateral cooperation to resolve regional crises, address climate change, and cooperate on infrastructure and AI. To me this is significant for the way it signals a different style of global leadership and diplomacy by China that might prove to be an extremely important element in avoiding any clash with the US that might lead to war. This summit is put forward as a model for world peace and stability which is a critical issue when a superpower is declining and another is rising. How does Beijing read and cope with Washington’s defensive policy trajectories when they become more intensively directed at China, such as Biden’s 100 tariffs on Chinese EVs and high tariffs on other Chinese clean tech? After years of promoting clean tech and coping with climate change, Biden contradicts his own policies with protectionist measures that may well backfire on American consumers.
9: In what specific ways do you see these rising powers (China, Russia and India) challenging the dominance of the US-led unipolar international order?
The rise of China, Russia and India as major powers is challenging the dominance of the US-led unipolar international order in several ways. China and India are emerging as major economic powers, challenging the economic dominance of the United States. China, in particular, has become the world’s second-largest economy and is rapidly expanding its global influence through investments and trade. India is also growing rapidly and is poised to become one of the world’s largest economies in the coming decades. Russia and China are challenging the US-led order by modernising their military capabilities and expanding their diplomatic influence. Both countries have invested in advanced weapons systems and have formed alliances and partnerships with other countries to counterbalance US influence. India, Russia and China are promoting a multipolar world order where power is distributed among multiple countries rather than being concentrated in the hands of a single superpower. They are pushing for reforms in global governance institutions such as the United Nations, World Bank and International Monetary Fund to reflect the changing distribution of power. Alternative Development Models: China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and India’s Act East Policy are examples of alternative development models that seek to promote connectivity and economic cooperation across regions. These initiatives challenge the traditional Western-led development models and promote alternative approaches to globalisation. China, in particular, is emerging as a leader in technology, particularly in areas such as artificial intelligence, 5G networks and quantum computing. Its technological advancements are challenging the US lead in critical areas of strategic importance. China, Russia and India are promoting alternative ideological frameworks that challenge the liberal democratic values upheld by the United States. China’s model of state-led capitalism, Russia’s version of ‘illiberal democracy,’ and India’s Hindu nationalist ideology all offer different perspectives on governance and international relations. The rise of these powers is leading to a more multipolar and contested international system, where the US-led unipolar order is being challenged on multiple fronts.
Mostly, these challenges can be seen in economic trade and development, although also the development of strategic technologies – AI, genomics, biotech, space tech, quantum tech, materials science, clean technologies – which are likely to lead to hyperdevelopment in the next generation, is also a critical concern. RICs and BRICS can demonstrate new levels of international cooperation, including alternative financial institutions, e.g., a New Development Bank, to tackle the pressing global issues facing humanity within an international or global goods framework currently utilised by the UN system.
10: How do you perceive the role of new rising great powers in shaping new polar structures in global politics?
The rise of new great powers, such as China, India, and, to some extent, Russia, is a significant development in global politics that has the potential to reshape the existing international order. The rise of these new powers contributes to a shift towards multipolarity, where power is distributed among multiple centres rather than being concentrated in the hands of a few. This challenges the previously dominant unipolar or bipolar systems and could lead to a more balanced global power structure. As these nations grow in influence, other countries may choose to balance against or bandwagon with these powers. Balancing involves aligning with other states to counteract the influence of a potentially threatening power, while bandwagoning involves aligning with a rising power to gain benefits from its ascendancy. The new great powers have the potential to influence the norms, rules and institutions of global governance. They may push for reforms that better reflect their interests and those of their regions, which could lead to a more inclusive and legitimate international order. These powers often drive economic integration and trade agreements that can create new poles of economic activity, influencing global economic dynamics and potentially reducing the influence of established economic powers. The rise of new great powers can lead to increased military spending and the development of new security partnerships. This can create new points of tension or conflict, as well as opportunities for cooperation on issues like counter-terrorism, non-proliferation and cybersecurity. Great powers also shape the global discourse through cultural exports, educational exchanges and ideological persuasion. The new great powers are investing in projects that enhance their cultural soft power, which can influence global perspectives and values. In the realm of technology, these powers are increasingly players, with China in particular leading in the development of new technologies and standards, which can become a new source of global influence. The new great powers will play a crucial role in addressing global challenges such as climate change and environmental degradation. Their approach to sustainable development could either lead to a more aggressive stance against these issues or exacerbate them due to their significant contributions to global greenhouse gas emissions. The rise of new great powers can also lead to increased geopolitical rivalry, as existing powers may feel threatened and respond by safeguarding their interests and status. This can lead to strategic competition, arms races and proxy conflicts. Many of these rising powers come from the Global South and may align with other developing nations to promote south-south cooperation, offering an alternative to traditional north-south development assistance and conditionalities. The new rising great powers are pivotal in shaping the new polar structure in global politics. Their growth and influence are creating a more complex international system with opportunities for cooperation and competition alike. The outcomes will depend on the policies and strategies of these powers, as well as the responses of the existing great powers and the wider international community.
11: How have the rising powers challenged the unipolar international order despite the US being a superpower state in the world?
Rising powers such as China, India and Russia have experienced significant economic growth, which has increased their influence in global trade and investment flows. They have become important destinations for foreign direct investment and have also increased their investments abroad. These nations have been modernising their military forces and increasing their autonomy in military operations. They have been more willing to use their military forces in international operations, sometimes in contradiction to the interests of the United States. Rising powers have pursued more multipolar foreign policies, engaging with multiple actors and avoiding exclusive alignments. This has reduced the United States’ ability to dictate outcomes in various regions and international issues. Rising powers have also increased their cultural soft power through exports of culture, education and language. This can shape global perspectives and challenge the dominance of Western culture, which has been a significant aspect of the unipolar order. Many rising powers come from the Global South and have aligned themselves with other developing nations. They promote south-south cooperation, offering an alternative to traditional north-south development assistance and conditionalities. In the realm of technology, some rising powers are becoming leaders, with China, in particular, leading in the development of new technologies and standards. This can become a new source of global influence and challenge the dominance of Western technological paradigms. Rising powers have sought to reform or create new international institutions that better reflect their interests and those of their regions. This challenges the dominance of institutions that were created or influenced by the United States during the unipolar period. The rise of new powers can lead to increased geopolitical rivalry, as existing powers may feel threatened and respond by safeguarding their interests and status. This can lead to strategic competition, arms races and proxy conflicts, challenging the stability of the unipolar order. The rising powers have challenged the unipolar international order by increasing their economic, military and cultural influence, pursuing multipolar foreign policies, and working to reform international institutions. These developments have reduced the United States’ ability to unilaterally shape the international system and have led to a more balanced and complex global power structure.
12: To what extent has the latent military power of rising countries emerged as a challenge for the United States?
The latent and military power of rising countries has indeed emerged as a challenge for the United States. Rising powers like China and Russia are investing heavily in advanced military technology, including hypersonic weapons, cyber capabilities and anti-access/area denial (A2AD) systems. These developments could potentially offset the traditional technological advantage enjoyed by the United States, forcing the US to adapt and invest more in its own military capabilities. Both China and Russia are expanding their nuclear arsenals and developing new delivery systems, which could complicate US strategic planning and increase the risk of nuclear escalation in any potential conflict. Rising powers have been more assertive in their regional policies, challenging US allies and partners. For example, China’s Belt and Road Initiative and its actions in the South China Sea, Russia’s interventions in Syria and support for separatists in Eastern Ukraine and India’s expanding regional influence are all seen as challenging US dominance in their respective regions. Rising powers have been involved in proxy conflicts and power struggles, often in areas where the United States also has interests. These conflicts can limit US influence and complicate its foreign policy objectives. Rising powers have developed strategies to counter US intervention and military presence in their perceived areas of interest. This includes the development of A2AD capabilities, which aim to prevent the US from projecting power into certain regions. The rise of China, in particular, has raised concerns about intellectual property theft and forced technology transfers, which can undermine US technological leadership and economic competitiveness. Rising powers are working to strengthen their alliances and partnerships, which can create a multipolar network of states that may be more aligned against US interests. China’s efforts to modernise its navy and develop advanced aerospace capabilities challenge the US Navy’s traditional superiority in the Pacific and could limit the US’s ability to project power in key maritime regions. While the United States maintains a significant lead in overall military capabilities, the latent and military power of rising countries has necessitated a shift in US strategic thinking and a reevaluation of its security priorities. The US has had to focus on maintaining its technological edge, adapting to new forms of military competition and managing the complex geopolitical dynamics of a multipolar world.
13: How has the United States responded to the challenges to its superpower status posed by rising powers?
The United States has responded to the challenges posed by rising powers to its superpower status through a combination of strategic adjustments, diplomatic efforts and military modernisation. The US has been working to strengthen existing alliances such as NATO and expanding partnerships in the Indo-Pacific region, including through the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (QUAD) involving the United States, India, Japan and Australia. The US Department of Defense has emphasised the need to modernise its forces to maintain technological superiority. This includes investments in hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and other advanced technologies. The US has been encouraging domestic innovation and investing in research and development to maintain its technological edge. It has also pressed for stronger international agreements and partnerships to protect intellectual property rights. The US has expressed concerns about China’s infrastructure projects abroad and has proposed alternative initiatives, such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), to promote more transparent and sustainable development. The US has engaged in diplomatic efforts to address concerns with rising powers, such as participating in talks with China on economic and security issues, and working with international organisations to promote shared values and interests. Recognising the importance of the digital domain, the US has been enhancing its cybersecurity posture and working to set international norms to protect critical infrastructure and data. The US is investing in space technology and infrastructure to maintain its lead in space exploration, military operations and satellite communications, which is crucial for global leadership and security. The US has recognised the importance of education and workforce development to maintain its competitive edge in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) fields. The US has maintained or increased its military presence in key regions to ensure it can respond quickly to emerging threats and to signal commitment to allies and partners. The US has been reviewing its nuclear strategy to ensure it can maintain a strong deterrent while working towards arms control agreements that reduce the risk of nuclear proliferation. The US has recognised the importance of narrative and information competition, especially in the context of strategic communication, to shape public opinion and counter disinformation campaigns by rival powers. Through these measures, the United States aims to maintain its position as a global superpower, adapt to the changing international landscape, and ensure it can effectively address the challenges posed by rising powers. However, the effectiveness of these responses and the ability to manage competition without escalating tensions remain key issues in US foreign and defence policy.
14: What potential scenarios do you envision for the future of the international order in light of these challenges?
The future international order is highly uncertain and can take several paths depending on a multitude of factors, including geopolitical choices, economic developments, technological advancements and societal changes.
As China, India and other emerging powers continue to grow economically and militarily, a more balanced multipolar world could emerge where the US share of global power is diluted. This could lead to a more cooperative multipolarity where major powers engage in strategic partnerships or a more competitive environment with spheres of influence and potential conflicts. The US and China could engage in a more explicit rivalry for global influence, with potential flashpoints in areas like technology, trade, the South China Sea and space. This could lead to a more divided world with alignments along technological and economic blocs. International institutions could evolve to accommodate the rise of new powers, potentially leading to more inclusive global governance structures. Alternatively, a breakdown in trust and cooperation could lead to the erosion of existing institutions and the creation of new, more exclusive blocs. The nation that leads in critical technologies such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and biotechnology could gain significant economic and military advantages. This could lead to technological Cold Wars, with nations seeking to protect their technological advantage and restrict access to key innovations. As the world faces climate change and increasing resource scarcity, international cooperation on environmental and sustainable development issues could become more critical. This could lead to new global alliances focused on addressing these challenges or competition over resources and strategic influence. The digital domain and space are becoming increasingly important areas of competition. The US and other powers could engage in aggressive cyber operations and space militarisation, leading to new arms control treaties or widespread disruptions in critical infrastructure. Internal social, political and economic pressures could lead to significant changes in the international order. For example, a breakdown in social cohesion in major powers could weaken their global influence, while more stable and adaptable societies might be better positioned to navigate challenges and maintain their status. The future could see increased economic integration among some countries while others engage in trade wars and economic nationalism. This could lead to a more fragmented global economy with multiple trading blocs and varying levels of economic integration. The use of force and diplomatic engagement could coexist in the future international order. Conflicts, whether conventional or hybrid, could occur, testing the resolve and ability of nations to manage tensions without escalation. The response to global health threats like pandemics could lead to increased international cooperation on health security or to more nationalistic approaches to health governance. The future international order will be shaped by the choices of leaders, the actions of nations, and the dynamics of global events. It is a complex and interactive system where the actions of one country can have profound effects on others. The path forward will likely be influenced by a combination of strategic planning, reactivity to changing circumstances and the emergence of unforeseen events
15: Which countries do you consider as emerging power centers in future from the current global landscape?
Emerging power centres in the global landscape are those countries that are experiencing significant economic growth, increasing their political influence and expanding their military capabilities. While it is difficult to predict the future with certainty, based on current trends and developments, several countries are often cited as emerging power centres:
China: Already the world’s second-largest economy, China is rapidly modernising its military and investing heavily in technology and infrastructure as part of its Belt and Road Initiative. Its influence in international organisations is also growing.
India: With one of the world’s fastest-growing economies, a large population, and a nuclear arsenal, India is increasingly seen as a key player in global affairs. It is also expanding its strategic partnerships, particularly with the United States and Japan.
Brazil: As the largest economy in Latin America, Brazil is a rising power in the region and has aspirations to play a more significant role in global governance. It has been increasingly active in multilateral organisations and is working to expand its influence in international trade.
Russia: Despite economic challenges, Russia remains a major power in terms of military capabilities and geopolitical influence. It has used its energy exports to gain leverage over European countries and has projection forces in Syria and other parts of the world.
Germany: As Europe’s economic powerhouse and a leading member of the European Union, Germany is increasingly setting the agenda for European politics and economics. It has also taken on a more significant role in international security affairs.
Japan: While technically a developed nation, Japan’s economic prowess and technological innovation continue to make it a key player in the Asia-Pacific region. It is also working to expand its military role, particularly in response to the threat from North Korea and China.
South Korea: Another advanced economy with significant technological capabilities, South Korea is also an important player in the region due to its proximity to North Korea and its relationship with the United States.
Indonesia: As the world’s fourth-most populous country and a growing economy, Indonesia is a rising power in Southeast Asia. It is working to enhance its diplomatic and military capabilities to project influence within the region.
Turkey: With a dynamic economy and a complex political system, Turkey is a key player in the Middle East and a NATO member state. Its recent foreign policy has focused on expanding its influence in neighbouring countries.
Saudi Arabia: As a major oil producer and a leader in the Arab world, Saudi Arabia has significant economic and political influence. It is working to diversify its economy and enhance its military capabilities.
It’s important to note that the rise of these power centres is not without challenges, both domestically and internationally. Issues such as political stability, economic inequality, and international relations will all play a role in determining the future global landscape. Additionally, the actions of established powers, such as the United States and Russia, will significantly influence the rise of these emerging power centres.
16: How might the rise of new emerging power centres influence the distribution of power within the international system?
The rise of new emerging power centres is likely to have profound effects on the distribution of power within the international system. The most significant impact may be the transition from a largely bipolar world ( dominated by the US and Soviet Union during the Cold War) to a multipolar world, where power is more evenly distributed among several nations. This means that no single country can unilaterally dictate international outcomes, and decisions will require broader consensus. As new powers emerge, existing powers may seek to form new alliances or adjust existing ones to maintain a balance of power. This could lead to a realignment of strategic partnerships and a recalibration of military and diplomatic strategies. Emerging powers may push for changes in international norms and rules that have been established by the traditional Western powers. This could lead to a more inclusive and representative international order, or it could result in clashes over values and interests. There may be a push for reform of international institutions such as the United Nations, World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and others to better reflect the new power dynamics. This could lead to increased influence for countries like China, India and Brazil in setting global agendas. Emerging powers often have strong economies that can influence global trade and investment patterns. They may establish new economic blocs or agreements that alter the flow of goods, services and capital, potentially undermining the influence of established economic powers. Countries that lead in technology and innovation can gain significant leverage in global affairs. For example, countries like China and the United States are investing heavily in artificial intelligence, quantum computing and other emerging technologies, which could become a source of power in the future. The rise of new power centres can lead to changes in security dynamics, with traditional alliances being tested and new security challenges emerging. This could include competition over resources, increased great power rivalry, or the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Emerging powers may also seek to increase their influence through cultural exports, education and foreign assistance, which can shape global perceptions and win allies. The rise of new power centres could lead to the splintering of alliances as established powers may find it difficult to maintain unity against a more diverse and fragmented set of emerging powers. The distribution of power among emerging and established powers can lead to both increased conflict, as interests clash, and greater cooperation, as countries find it necessary to work together on common challenges such as climate change or global health crises. The rise of new emerging power centres is likely to lead to a more complex and dynamic international system where power is shared among a wider array of states. This shift will require careful management to prevent conflicts and to promote cooperation on global issues.
17: What strategies do rising countries employ to transform the existing power structure?
Rising countries often employ a variety of strategies to transform the existing power structure and increase their influence on the global stage. Rising powers often focus on expanding their economic influence through trade agreements, investments, and the development of economic partnerships. By increasing economic interdependence, they can gain leverage over other countries and shape global trade rules. Building infrastructure, such as ports, roads and energy networks, can improve a country’s connectivity and attract foreign investment. China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a prime example of how infrastructure development can be used to extend influence. Investing in research and development to lead in key technologies, such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology and renewable energy, can provide a competitive edge and increase a country’s strategic influence. Rising powers may pursue a more active diplomatic agenda, working to establish relationships with a wide range of countries to build a network of allies and partners. Strengthening the military capabilities of a country can serve as a deterrent and increase its influence in international security affairs. This can include the development of new weapons systems, cyber capabilities and strategic forces. Cultivating soft power through culture, education and international assistance can shape global perceptions and win allies. This can be done through exporting popular culture, offering scholarships for international students, and providing foreign aid. Using multilateral organisations as a platform to advance their interests, rising powers can work to reshape existing institutions or create new ones that are more aligned with their goals. Countries rich in natural resources can use their strategic position to influence global energy markets and geopolitics. Rising powers may promote alternative normative values and ideologies that resonate with other countries, offering an alternative to the existing order. Effective communication strategies can shape narratives and counter negative perceptions. This includes using social media, public diplomacy and international broadcasting. Investing in the education and training of its citizens can produce a skilled workforce that can drive economic growth and innovation, as well as contribute to the country’s soft power. Rising powers may be more assertive in defending their national interests, which can sometimes lead to conflicts or competition with established powers. Using international law and legal mechanisms to assert rights and challenge the actions of other states can be a peaceful yet effective way to reshape the international order. Building coalitions of like-minded countries on specific issues can enhance the influence of a rising power and help it shape international norms and policies. These strategies are often pursued in combination, and the effectiveness of each strategy can vary depending on the specific circumstances of the rising power and the existing power structure it seeks to influence.
18: What kind of polar structure is emerging in global politics?
The emerging polar structure in global politics is characterised by the rise of two major poles of power: the United States and China. This shift is often described as a transition from a unipolar world, where the United States was the sole superpower after the end of the Cold War, to a bipolar world, where the power dynamics are more evenly balanced between the two countries. The rapid economic growth of China, particularly its integration into the global supply chain and its emergence as the world’s second-largest economy, is challenging the economic dominance of the United States. Both countries are investing heavily in their military capabilities, with China modernising its armed forces and the United States maintaining its global military presence and technological superiority. The race for technological superiority, particularly in areas such as artificial intelligence, quantum computing and cybersecurity, is a key aspect of the emerging polar structure, with both countries seeking to lead in critical technologies. There is increasing competition between the two countries in various regions, including Asia, the Middle East, and Europe, as they seek to advance their strategic interests and influence. The two poles represent different ideological systems – democratic capitalism in the United States and authoritarian socialism in China – which adds a normative dimension to the polar structure. Both countries are actively building alliances and partnerships to support their positions. The United States has traditional allies in NATO and is expanding relationships in the Indo-Pacific region, while China is pursuing its BRI and fostering closer ties with countries in Africa, Latin America and elsewhere. The two countries are competing for influence in international organisations, such as the United Nations, World Trade Organisation and International Monetary Fund, as well as in setting global standards and norms. While the United States and China are the two major poles, other countries and regions also play significant roles in the global political landscape. For example, European countries, Russia, India and Brazil are among the other major players whose actions can influence the emerging polar structure. The global political environment is complex and dynamic, with power dynamics shifting continuously.
My belief is that the US-based world system will continue to wither and slowly break down. Much will be determined by the responses of those in power in the White House and how they respond to the rise of China and the bifurcation of the world. Currently, the US indicates two nominations whose policies are very different, but both strongly protectionist and driven by a conception of ‘strategic competition’ that makes increasing use of sanctions and subsidies and, ultimately, trade and economic war. There is a possibility that China’s diplomacy, while resilient, might take the long game approach and wait for the appearance of obvious weaknesses in the US hegemonic system like the loss of competitive edge, decreasing trade, uncoupling of the market with world production, the greater success of other forms of trade-based capitalism with different modes of government. What can China do the ease the transition? It needs solid support from ASEAN, from Asia as a center of manufacturing. Can war over Taiwan be avoided? Yes espec ially if the US is constrained from military and economic overreach. Can the UN system be strengthened? Gaza is an interesting case.
Are there any additional insights or perspectives you would like to share on this topic?
I have already said far too much, but your questions seemed to hit the right buttons for me, so I enjoyed responding, especially since I have just finished writing a book entitled Multipolarisation: System Rivalry at the Dawn of a Multipolar World, and I am still thinking about these issues that to a large extent will determine the success or otherwise of the human race only 10,000 years old (or since we split from other hominins as Homo sapiens 40,000 years ago). The evolutionary perspective is also useful to understand. My thought is to try to develop a more viable model of geopolitics that includes overlapping systems as outlined above, comprising territoriality, networks and networked power, and rival systems that constitute more of a political ecosystem with flows and interactions. The evolutionary elements provide a framework that guides us through various stages of change from colonial to global, from the colonial political system to the political and economic system of globalisation. This is where I am putting some of my intellectual energies.