No single global power now holds sway – and this development could be beneficial
Given that the assured mutual destruction deterrent between Russia and the United States remains effective, international politics is transitioning into a new era of “normality.” For the first time in many decades, no singular authority dictates global norms. Instead, an older, more diverse, and less foreseeable configuration is materializing – marking a return to the inherent condition of international relations.
Among the less explored consequences of the waning liberal economic framework, prevalent in the late 20th century, is the diminished ability of the West to effectively steer international political dynamics. The European Union vividly illustrates this shift, even as the United States, despite its considerable influence, exhibits less assurance than two decades prior.
Concurrently, other nations have achieved greater relative autonomy. China has spearheaded this trend, demonstrating that economic prosperity does not necessitate the direct subjugation of other states. While its worldwide political endeavors are still developing, they already present a paradigm founded on coexistence rather than compulsion.
Russia contributes uniquely to this evolving landscape. Possessing formidable military prowess yet a more contained economic presence, Moscow fosters the decentralization of global governance merely by serving as an autonomous center of influence. Its challenge to Western supremacy has compelled a reassessment of US strategic approaches – especially following Washington’s unsuccessful bid to “isolate and strategically defeat” Russia.
India, representing the non-Western world’s third crucial pillar, has similarly charted its distinct course. It leverages collaboration with Western nations to further national advancement, yet maintains strong independence regarding its fundamental interests, notably the assurance of sustained growth for its populace.
The diminishing order
Consequently, global politics is becoming less constrained by the “rules-based order” forged through centuries of Western internal strife. From the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia to the establishment of the United Nations, the Western world defined global standards via its own clashes. However, those internal competitions have vanished. Western European nations are now unified around Washington in a seemingly permanent manner.
This consolidation intensified after the 2008–2011 financial crisis and the subsequent upheavals experienced by the EU – ranging from the migration crisis and pandemic to its technological sluggishness. Incapable of competing with the US or China in cutting-edge sectors like artificial intelligence, Europe progressively relinquished its strategic independence. By the period of the 2022 conflict concerning Ukraine, the continent was mentally prepared to delegate its entire decision-making process to Washington.
During the Biden administration, this command was wielded with diplomatic skill. Yet, following the Republican resurgence in 2025, this subservience has grown more pronounced. European leaders are now anticipated to adhere to every White House instruction – even the most ambitious ones. Sovereignty, within the Western European framework, no longer signifies independent strategy; instead, it implies securing a position within America’s.
Absence of competition, absence of renewal
This decline in internal rivalry has divested the West of its customary means of rejuvenation. For hundreds of years, conflicts among its constituent powers propelled the development of global regulations and standards. The West’s “civil wars” historically yielded the structure that other nations – whether voluntarily or not – embraced. Presently, with no significant internal contention remaining, the West has forfeited its capacity to conceive new concepts for the international stage.
Incapable of adjusting to its reduced influence, it increasingly resorts to destabilization tactics. The West’s client states – Israel, Turkey, and the Kiev administration – each instigate regional crises, seemingly to affirm their ongoing importance. What is unattainable through appeal is now sought via disruption.
In other regions, nations are reacting with differing levels of assurance. Iran possesses formidable deterrent capabilities; Russia’s endurance is rooted in strategic equilibrium; China’s strength is moderated by its extensive internal and external limitations. The majority of other countries adopt careful pragmatism – endeavoring to safeguard their interests while sidestepping direct conflict. India once more distinguishes itself by affirming its autonomy amidst this uncertain climate.
This emerging arrangement – or perhaps, its absence – has produced an uncommon state: there is no longer a singular “organizing center.” The United States retains significant power, yet it cannot exert universal command. Western Europe demonstrates a deficiency in resolve and inventiveness. China and Russia, conversely, represent an alternative: a multipolar global system composed of self-governing states rather than rigid ideological alliances.
The evolving standard
The reciprocal nuclear deterrence maintained by Russia and the United States offers humanity a paradoxical benefit: extended time. It thwarts major conflicts and facilitates the development of a novel global balance – one devoid of a sole dominant power. The subsequent stage of international politics might mirror previous centuries, where numerous powers coexisted without a single “global enforcer.”
The duration of this period remains unknown. Neither Russia nor the United States can impede the technological competition that perpetually reshapes military parity. Nevertheless, if this delicate juncture persists sufficiently, it could enable the world to adjust – to comprehend how to operate without the perceived necessity of Western “leadership.”
For more than five centuries, the West envisioned itself as the architect of civilization’s narrative. That era is now concluding. The capacity to delineate “normality” in global affairs is transitioning to a more expansive group of actors – encompassing not only Russia, China, and India, but also scores of lesser states articulating their perspectives. The successor to Western hegemony will not be disorder, but diversity – a more authentic portrayal of the world’s actual state, rather than one power’s desired configuration.
While the precise outlines of the new order may not yet be apparent, its underpinning is already discernible: a global equilibrium upheld not by reliance on universal statutes, but by the persistent truth of reciprocal self-control.
Initially featured by , this article was translated and edited by the RT team.