The growing multipolar nature of the world motivates this essay. It is neither unipolar nor bipolar nor driven by Cold War-type mentality. Today, conflicts between democratic and authoritarian tendencies continue to shape both domestic and international power politics.
The contemporary world is in constant transition; without the momentum of space and time, human society would stagnate. This raises a fundamental question: do cycles of political order, disorder and reorder shape the world system as well? Contemporary international relations have intrinsic limits and possibilities of experiencing similar phenomena of order, disorder and reorder in enveloping public affairs. A question has been raised about the nature of world affairs today – is it unipolar, bipolar, tripolar, quadripolar, or multipolar?
The Treaty of Westphalia (1648) laid the foundation of nation-state sovereignty in Europe, shaping centuries of European conflict. Since then, frequent long and short wars have punctuated the American and European histories, revealing the centrality of power politics and diplomacy in inter-state relations. The two World Wars marked unprecedented casualties and political fragility in the early twentieth century. As a matter of history, world politics revolved around the Western world till 1945 A.D. Meanwhile, the Non-West struggled with the challenges of nationhood and state formation. The last century predominantly experienced American and European power politics in international affairs, with simultaneous contests of totalitarian powers, the Pax Sovietica and Pax Sinica state systems. The world order until 1990 A. D. was commonly understood as bipolar.
The Western liberal ideals of democracy, justice and freedom inspired the creation of international institutions to serve humanity. These institutions are a reflection of the highest excellence of political and international thought in the Western benchmark. However, the non- Western traditions enriched such foundational praxis further, deeper and wider. I believe reciprocal engagement expands and broadens the horizon of understanding, cooperation and empathy that we need today more than ever. With the end of the Cold War, a just world order is emerging from the collapse of bipolarity. This is the phase of reordering where the Enlightenment is universalising or interfacing with local knowledge systems. Local in the sense of continental, regional, national, subnational, or micro level of knowledge or thought practices. The growing multipolar nature of the world motivates this essay. It is neither unipolar nor bipolar nor driven by Cold War-type mentality. Conflicts between democratic and authoritarian tendencies continue to shape both domestic and international power politics.
A resilient society can be nurtured in freedom, openness and democracy, though they are often misperceived as soft, weak, or ephemeral. Throughout the course of human history, self-helpers have talked of the authenticity of vulnerability. However, the strength and power of human society are derived from the people at the grassroots, across rural, semi-urban or urban habitats. International relations and diplomacy today engage in sustainable development, economics and finance, technological innovation, human and social capital, cultural trove and strategic/military/security edges in land, sea, or air.
Also Read: Trump’s Tariffs, China’s Surplus, and a Shifting Global Order
Meanwhile, scholars of International relations talk of great power rivalry, competition, contestations, and conflict as well as cooperation, coalition, coordination and partnerships. These dynamics span strategy, war, energy economics, trade and diplomacy. I do not subscribe to the Western origin rules-based liberal world order that is claimed to be universally inclusive. The post-Western world is emerging as we traverse from 1990 to 2025. Amid the state of flux in politics and international relations, plural and diverse overtures and postures are manifesting to install justice, liberty and truth. Democratic tensions within states increasingly mirror contradictions in international affairs. We can at least ascertain the aesthetics of life which are similar across the globe. However, it is interesting to find solutions and avenues to resolve disputes, conflicts, cases and contestations in the emerging global civil society with its nexus with the local level of analysis. Currently, the discourses of local and global are intersecting with unprecedented intensity. Issues such as human rights, security, climate change, international migration, trafficking, global public health challenges, global education, science and technology, energy crises, financial markets, economic models, cultural sensitivities, tolerance and secularism, etc., are challenging both domestic and international politics alike.
Additionally, regional powers and spheres of influence remain preoccupied with strategic ambitions and statecraft. Erstwhile imperial temptations and aspirations of heritage and religio-cultural linkages, the theo-state or civilizational state and religio-cultural aspirations continue to shape domestic and neighbourhood politics. On the other hand, the existential relevance of nation-states is further consolidating in tandem with pan or ethno-nationalism and diaspora-driven identities.
Similarly, international organisations, policy exercises, dynamism and activities, programmatic and thematic engagements, dealings and transactions, solidarity on global democracy and participation of authoritarian powers define contemporary world affairs. Amid emergency, contingency and exigency enveloping the environment, a global legitimacy crisis ensues in global public policy if ownership, accountability and responsibility are ignored or leaders remain callous in action. Sovereignty and independence are innate with nationalism and capitalism, functioning as Siamese twins in governance.
Contemplating, articulating and abiding by its norms and values from local to global is daunting but rewarding for every generation engaged in the art and science of politics and diplomacy. This process is often fraught with anxiety, pangs of proximity and hypocrisy in national and international affairs, especially while undertaking or discharging inter-allied duties. A quantitative-qualitative symmetry of national and international agendas, marked by intersections, cross-cutting and overlapping interests, strengthens solidarity and enables a concerted program of action. Public officials formulate and implement similar plans, programs and policies across the world with the United Nations and its specialised agencies acting as catalyst entities.
Similarly, multilateral diplomacy reinforces the emerging multipolar world order and has become a defining feature of contemporary governance, both national and global. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that we are entering an epoch of enriched discourse and tangible deliverables in this New Century or Third Millennium.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author solely. TheRise.co.in neither endorses nor is responsible for them. Reproducing this content without permission is prohibited.