Opinion | Great power competition, multipolarity and war
By Tom Fowdy
Following the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, the British Empire had defeated its main competitor in Napoleon's France and established itself as the world's leading power, ushering in an era known as "Pax Britannia." Using its geographic and industrial advantages, Britain, with France now an allied accomplice, easily surpassed the competing powers of the time including the still feudalist Russia and the declining Ottoman Empire, establishing a globally spanning dominion annexing the Indian subcontinent, swathes of Africa, the lands of Australia and New Zealand, all while maintaining its hold in North America through Canada and subjugating China's Qing Dynasty.
But the advantages of British industrialism would not last forever. By the latter part of the century, the scattered former princely states of the Holy Roman Empire had united under the Crown of Prussia and established a new entity known as the German Empire. This new empire became a scientific and industrial giant which subsequently threatened Britain and France's hold on global dominance. Meanwhile, in the Far East, the once isolated feudal country of Japan underwent a huge political and economic overhaul known as the "Meiji Restoration" transforming it into a modern, industrialized empire.
By the end of the 19th century, the unipolar position Britain once enjoyed had transformed into a "multipolar" one, which describes an international system whereby there are many powers all competing for dominance, often across several alliance systems. The lessons of history, past and present, show us that multipolarity creates insecurity and war. It would after all, be the multipolarity that emerged following British dominance which proved to be a decisive factor in the outbreak of both World Wars, as new "emerging" powers challenged the status quo and sought to reshape the British "order" according to their own preferences, leading to sporadic arms races, distrust, and miscalculations.
If it has not been obvious already, we are now again living in a multipolar world. The unipolar dominance of the United States, which came in 1991 following the demise of the Soviet Union, is breaking down. The USA enjoyed several decades of being an unchallenged hegemonic state in an era known as "Pax America," that is until new powers rose, including the rise of China, the transformation of the post-Soviet Russia into the Putinist state hostile to the West, as well as India, Iran, amongst others. While the United States believed that its position as a hegemon was "destiny" as per "the end of history" theory and thus had a permanent right to shape international order, it ultimately faced the reality that is no longer the case.
For other countries, the weakening of unipolarity thus presents an opportunity, as it did in days of old, to attempt to "change the status quo" as it is subsequently easier to exploit multiple or differential alliance systems to take huge risks without repercussions. This is again leading to the outbreak of major wars between states across the world, once assumed to be history. Rejecting American dominance in Europe through the NATO institution, Russia subsequently invaded Ukraine on the calculation it could utilise multipolar relationship arcs such as China, India, North Korea, and Iran, to shield itself from repercussions. Even as the war did not initially go to plan, the latter part has been correct.
Similarly, Israel recognized that US anxiety about China and Russia in the Middle East, as well as its need to contain Iran, would allow it to get away with more hardline policies in changing the status quo to annex the West Bank. This led to the outbreak of a war, one year ago next week, as Hamas sought to unleash retribution against Israel through the October 7th massacre. Benjamin Netanyahu likewise calculated that his political survival can be attained through comprehensively changing Israel's security status quo and has expanded the country's operations to occupy the Gaza Strip, invade Lebanon and confront Iran. He has achieved such all without serious repercussions, this is multipolarity.
The world we subsequently live in is now more dangerous and uncertain than at any point since World War II, and resembles the pre-World War I world. It is absolutely possible a third major conflict could break out involving China, and it is the design of many US policymakers to hope for such. US foreign policy is geared towards attempting to salvage its unipolar dominance by aggressively attempting to contain the emerging rival powers, which leads as it did before 1914, to arms races, militarisation and thus, war. The only thing we can hope for is that the lessons of history have been learnt and people do not make the same mistakes, but the fact that we will end 2024 with two major wars, one in Eastern Europe, the other in the Middle East, there is little cause for optimism.
The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:
Opinion | Israel has launched an invasion of Lebanon
Opinion | American Opportunism in the name of 'National Security' strikes again
Comment