The concept of a post-Western world is neither ephemeral nor new to
political literature. But it has appeared in the arena of elite political
debate at least since Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov’s speech at
the Munich World Security Conference in February 2017, when he called for
a just multilateral world order not subject to Western domination and
influence.

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-721967

Although the concept has disappeared from the political debate, it has
remained in the minds of experts and pundits.

The escalating struggle for power and influence between China and the US
will eventually lead to a complete change in the strategic balance of
power and a restructuring of the existing world order, which has been
centered on American leadership since the collapse of the former Soviet
Union.

Destabilization of the rules of this system became apparent in 2020 with
the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic and there was talk of a
post-pandemic system after American influence declined in favor of the
role of China, which had managed to seize the opportunity to manifest its
global leadership identity.

The transformations of the world order throughout history have certainly
not taken place in a few years.

It is also difficult to resolve the dispute over the decisive elements of
this conflict, be it economic power, around which most expectations are
that China will lead the world due to its rapidly growing economic power,
be it technological and knowledge power (a matter of economic power), or
be it military power, as the US is still at the center of command in
military terms.

But in any case, a return to the idea of comprehensive national power
seems an appropriate way out of this debate. This fuels the expectation
that the transitional phase of the global order will be relatively long
and could last a decade or two, given the overlapping roles and limits of
power factors among the main contenders for leadership of the global
system.

A multi-headed world order?

The notion of a multi-headed or multi-polar world order is quite ideal. It
is hard to believe in light of today’s experience. A hegemonic superpower
like the US finds it difficult to accept being on equal footing with
another rival power.

Moreover, the experience of multilateralism in the international
institutions of the Security Council is a complete failure. It has been
synonymous with chaos and the weakness of mechanisms for effective
international action.

But multilateralism can be a compromise, a gateway that ends with the rise
of any power to the top of the pyramid of power and influence in the world
order, as happened between the end of World War II and the collapse of the
former Soviet Union, where bipolarity was a transitional phase in the
world order.

Some expect this to repeat in later phases under a bipolar system in which
the US and China share power and influence. Fierce conflict and sharp
polarization now revolve around economics and trade, not ideologies, as
was the case during the Cold War era. The power rise of China should not
distract attention from other factors that will inevitably affect the
world’s future.

Foremost among these is the ascent of other rival powers, such as India
and Russia, which rest to some extent on the outcome of the conflict in
Ukraine.

WE ALSO cannot turn a blind eye to how molding the next world order ties
in with the Taiwan challenge, how China can manage it and emerge from it
with the fewest possible losses, and how it can avoid being drawn into a
conflict that saps its strength and capabilities.

The only bona fide truth in the world today is that we are looking at an
anarchic order; the locus of leadership suffers from a vacuum explains
many of the crises that a number of regions and countries are
experiencing. No country is as powerful to lead the world as, for example,
the US was two decades ago.

Another point is that the future of world order will be largely defined by
the consequences of the conflict in the Indo-Pacific theater. The
escalating geostrategic conflict involves the US and its allies on one
side and China on the other.

As a personal point of view, as long as the end of the war in Ukraine is
uncertain, it is difficult to draw accurate conclusions about the contours
of the next phase of the world order. The war seems to be far from over
and the conflict can change at any time, especially since the West keeps
trying to embarrass and humiliate Russian President Vladimir Putin, who
threatens to use nuclear weapons.

Above all, we need to know what is the position of China, whose president
promised a boundless alliance with Russia at the onset of the crisis. In
addition, we must get a grasp of some other indicators. These include,
foremost, the results of the ongoing trade war between the US and China.

This is a war whose outcome will largely determine the course of the
post-Ukraine world. Will it be a world without the West, or will the West
remain a partner in it, and what role will major blocs such as the BRICS
and others play in steering world affairs and determining strategic
directions in the decades and years ahead?

Indeed, multilateralism is gradually making its way into the international
arena. The world is no longer aligned with American leadership. There are
even increasing leanings, especially in Africa and the Middle East, toward
China and Russia.

And there are signs of splintering in the European bloc, having just as
much difficulty getting out of the war in Ukraine. We are likely to see a
new geostrategic reality to match the state of play in this historically
significant war.

US anger at Saudi Arabia over OPEC+’s decision to cut oil production and
the fact that Western influence in a number of countries on the African
continent is being pushed back in favor of China and Russia also come to
mind. All of these factors reflect rapid changes in the global landscape..
Just a few years ago, no one would have imagined that Russian flags would
be flying in Burkina Faso and Mali.

No one would have expected the global energy landscape to turn toward a
revival of the oil age and a prolonging of its use, after many had taken
part in burying it and singing the praises of new energies, and for oil to
return to the forefront of strategic conflicts. The coming months and
years are peppered with rapid events and changes, many of which are
difficult to predict.

What is certain, however, is that the world is moving in a different
direction from all that is trumpeted in the political literature about
globalization, free trade, etc., and with it comes the collapse of such
famous theories as “the end of history,” put forward by the American
scholar Francis Fukuyama in 1989, in which he proclaimed the final victory
of western liberal values, and “the clash of civilizations,” posited by
Samuel P. Huntington, which advocates a conflict based on civilizational
differences, identity and culture.

### - interesting ideas heh ;)