Is the redrawing of the world order leading to multipolarity?

The Munich Security Report 2025 was prepared in anticipation of the 61st Munich Security Conference, which took place from 14 to 16 February 2025. The overarching theme of the conference was 'multipolarisation', a term denoting the transition to a multipolar world order, and the paper entitled 'Multipolarisation' provides an analysis of the implications of this process for the international system.
The document is structured into eight chapters, each dedicated to a specific nation or group of nations: the United States, the European Union, Japan, China, Russia, India, Brazil, and the Republic of South Africa.The conference witnessed the attendance of approximately 60 heads of state and government, along with 150 ministers and heads of international organisations. Notable attendees included NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, US Vice President J.D. Vance, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and President of the European Council António Costa. Notably absent from the conference since 2022 were Russian officials.
The Munich Security Report 2025, edited by Tobias Bunde, Sophie Eisentraut and Leonard Schütte, analyses the process of multipolarisation in today's world.The authors of the report observe that while many politicians and citizens see considerable promise in a multipolar world, recent trends demonstrate that the negative consequences of multipolarisation are prevailing. The authors observe that the growing rifts between major powers are impeding collaborative responses to global crises and threats, and that the competition among different models of global governance is hindering cooperative approaches.The report thus calls for the process of 'depolarisation' and underscores the necessity for substantial reforms to the prevailing international system.The authors undertake a thorough examination of the extent to which the contemporary international system is genuinely gravitating towards multipolarity, meticulously analysing the balance of power, ideological stratification, and the prospects for global governance.
The authors of the article posit that it has become an incontestable verity in contemporary foreign policy debates that the contemporary world is becoming increasingly multipolar. They observe that although the extent of the multipolarity of today's world remains a matter of debate, the very existence of this process is irrefutable.On the one hand, power is shifting towards a greater number of actors who are gaining the ability to influence key global issues. Conversely, the world is becoming more polarised both between and within states, which hinders cooperative approaches to solving global crises and threats.
The authors analyse the international system, noting that it exhibits elements of unipolarity, bipolarity, multipolarity and even non-polarity. However, they emphasise that the continuing shift of power towards more states competing for influence is evident. The authors further posit that the expression of multipolarity is not solely confined to the dissemination of material power, but is concomitant with the escalating ideological polarisation that is characterised by the rise of populism in liberal democracies. This ideological polarisation, they contend, supersedes the pre-eminence of political and economic liberalism, a hallmark of the unipolar era following the Cold War. The prevailing strand is being subjected to both internal and external criticism. Internal criticism is evidenced by the rise of nationalist populism in liberal democracies, while external criticism is manifest in the intensifying ideological confrontation between democracies and autocracies.
The authors of the study have highlighted the polarising nature of multipolarity, which is causing mixed feelings around the world. They argue that an optimistic view of the process emphasises the possibility of more inclusive global governance and increased constraints on Washington, which has long been seen by many as an overly dominant power. However, they also cite a pessimistic interpretation that argues that 'multipolarity increases the risk of unrest and conflict and weakens the effectiveness of international co-operation'. The authors cite data from the Munich Security Index 2025, which suggests that residents of the G7 countries are generally less optimistic about a multipolar world than respondents from the 'BRICS' countries.The authors also emphasise that national views of multipolarity are shaped by different assessments of the current international order and the desired future.
The authors analyse the impact of Donald Trump's victory in the US presidential election, arguing that this result shattered the post-Cold War US foreign policy consensus, which was based on the belief that a strategy of liberal internationalism was in America's best national interest. They explain that for Trump and his supporters, the international order created by the US represents a bad deal. The authors further predict that, as a consequence, the US may abandon its historic role as Europe's security guarantor, a development that would have significant implications for Ukraine.The authors also suggest that US foreign policy in the coming years is likely to be shaped by a bipolar rivalry with China, which in turn could accelerate the multipolarisation of the international system.
The authors of this study posit that China is the most influential and powerful proponent of the multipolar order, positioning itself as the defender of the Global South. However, they also note that many in the West perceive Chinese rhetoric about multipolarity as a cover for continued great power rivalry.The authors go on to point out that despite China's considerable success in mobilising countries dissatisfied with the existing world order, the country's economic and military development faces domestic difficulties. The authors further posit that under the Trump presidency, the US will intensify its efforts to contain China, while China may benefit from Washington reducing its international commitments or its relations with traditional partners deteriorating.
The authors then turn to an analysis of the European Union, which they argue embodies the liberal international order. They note that the growing rivalry between different models of world order poses a serious challenge for the EU. The authors highlight Russia's war against Ukraine and the rise of nationalist populism in Europe as key threats to the EU, and argue that Trump's re-election will intensify these challenges, as well as revive the debate on whether the EU should become an independent centre of power in international politics.However, they also emphasise that such a development could contribute to the rise of populist movements that deepen the EU's internal divisions and reduce its ability to deal with crises.
The authors undertake a thorough examination of Russian policy, positing that the nation has exerted considerable endeavours to redefine the international order. They observe that Moscow conceptualises a multipolar world as a system of 'civilisational states' and perceives itself as one of these entities. They underscore that Russia interprets smaller countries, such as Ukraine, as its inherent sphere of influence. Nevertheless, the authors observe that, despite the incongruity between Moscow's self-perception of its power and its actual capabilities, Russia has been successful in undermining efforts to stabilise the international order.Conversely, they posit that the country is grappling with economic challenges and the repercussions of its over-extension of influence.They contend that Russia's capacity to actualise its vision of multipolarity is contingent on the resistance of other states.
The authors proceed to analyse India's position in greater detail, highlighting the correlation between its support for multipolarity and its own aspirations to emerge as a dominant global power. They observe that despite its achievements in elevating India's international standing, the nation confronts challenges both within its borders and in the broader regional context. They underscore the escalating strategic presence of China in the region, emphasising its potential implications for India's domestic economy, which is afflicted by inherent structural deficiencies. Additionally, they draw attention to the fact that India's policy in multilateral groupings raises doubts about its readiness to assume a significant role in global peacekeeping endeavours.The authors of this study analyse Japan's approach, describing it as a state seeking to maintain the status quo. They note that Japan is deeply integrated into liberal internationalism and supports U.S. leadership, and they emphasise that Tokyo is particularly concerned about the end of the unipolar moment, the rise of China and the prospect of a multipolar world. However, they also find that Japan has been preparing for these changes longer than others and is taking steps to protect the order it supports.
The authors conclude that these factors engender considerable difficulty in adapting the international order, preventing an arms race, resolving conflicts and ensuring sustainable economic growth, and emphasise that cooperation between states will be critical, but that the world may need some 'depolarisation' to achieve this. They conclude their analysis by posing the question of whether 2025 will show a path to greater cooperation or lead to an even greater division of the global community.
Elbrus Mamedov

SR-CENTER.INFO