From unipolarity to multipolarity

Do you remember the early 90s? At that time, for a brief, almost blinding moment, the world seemed to have a clear direction. The Soviet Union had just collapsed and the United States had suddenly become the undisputed superpower on the global stage. Some even called it a "hyperpower". We seemed to be entering a unipolar era - where everything was decided by a single major player.

There was a big idea, the "Washington Consensus", promising a future in which everyone would embrace liberal democracy, free markets and basically follow the lead of global institutions led by the United States. To many in the West, it looked as if history had reached its final chapter. That was it. Game over. We had won.

But you know what? That "unipolar moment" is long gone. It's firmly in the rearview mirror. While the U.S. has certainly had a huge impact, that system just couldn't handle the insane complexity of our super-connected world. It also completely overlooked how strong nationalism remains and how much other big countries want their own influence.

So where are we now? We are clearly moving towards a multipolar world. This means that we have several centres of power and influence emerging and asserting themselves simultaneously, not just one dominant one.

Why is this happening? There are several main reasons:

Money and technology, China's economic rise is incredible and threatens the old Western dominance. Moreover, technological innovation - such as artificial intelligence, 5G and biotechnology - is no longer happening only in the US. They are spreading and creating new areas in which countries are competing and collaborating.

Geopolitics: regional powers are growing stronger and even in established countries nationalism is making a comeback. All this contributes to the fragmentation of global authority.

Institutions: Even places like the UN, which used to be heavily influenced by the West, are facing demands from emerging economies for greater influence and reform.

What does this change mean for us? It's a huge change. Gone are the days when one superpower could do virtually anything it wanted. Think about the big global problems we face - climate change, pandemics, nuclear weapons, economic crises.

These things require cooperation, which is difficult for one dominant power to enforce, and even more difficult now that more players are involved. We can no longer automatically assume that one country's interests are automatically best for all others. It is now more about conflicting national interests, overlapping spheres of influence and the constant need for negotiation, compromise and careful balancing.

Many people now portray this new world as a recipe for disaster - constant fighting between the great powers, endless instability. And yes, the risks are definitely higher. Miscalculations and proxy wars are real dangers. But a multipolar world is not automatically a bad place.

If we use it well, it can open up new possibilities. It makes us realise that no country has all the answers. It encourages dialogue and diplomacy - not only between great powers, but also involving smaller countries and regional groups. Having multiple centres of power can even lead to greater innovation and resilience as different nations try different approaches to solving problems, making the whole system more dynamic (if also more unstable).

So how to navigate this situation? It requires a real change in our thinking, especially for a country that used to be the only superpower. It means being more humble, really listening and understanding different views, and recognising that influence comes from working together and showing yourself to be a good partner, not just from being dominant.

For countries on the rise, this means taking responsibility, abiding by (and helping to shape) international rules, and focusing on long-term stability, not just quick profits.

Zaheer Alam, Pakistan Association of Journalists

gnews.cz - GH