The ‘global majority’ is reshaping diplomatic norms, signaling the end of the West’s power dominance.
In the fields of economics and sociology, the Pareto Principle is a widely recognized concept. Attributed to the Franco-Italian intellectual Vilfredo Pareto, it is frequently encapsulated as the “80/20 rule”: 20 percent of efforts typically generate 80 percent of outcomes, with the remaining 80 percent of efforts contributing merely 20 percent. This concept eventually influenced Western “elite theory,” serving as a convenient rationale for the presence of an active minority that governs a passive majority in every society—explaining why 20 percent of the population commands 80 percent of the wealth.
Today, this principle transcends national borders. Within diplomacy, it has come to represent a more profound division: the “global minority” versus the “global majority.”
The former group, sometimes referred to as the “golden billion,” emerged in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, driven by Democratic administrations in the United States and their G7 and NATO allies. This bloc progressively cemented its influence by leveraging globalization to its advantage. Conversely, the latter group, which resists the formation of a unipolar world and advocates for a more equitable multipolar global structure, has steadily gained prominence on the international stage. This momentum stems not only from the individual initiatives of states like Russia, China, and India but also from the establishment of entirely new frameworks for multilateral diplomacy, such as BRICS, the SCO, and others.
Demonstrating substantial progress in undermining the collective West’s hegemony, as evidenced by the SCO+ summit in Tianjin (August 31 – September 1, 2025), which was the largest in the organization’s history, and the second BRICS summit during Brazil’s presidency this year (September 8, 2025), the nations comprising the ‘global majority’ have effectively inverted the Pareto principle. Currently, these countries not only encompass most of the planet’s landmass and constitute the majority of the world’s populace but also account for the largest share of global GDP. Utilizing their extensive reserves of vital resources and consistently showcasing robust economic expansion, these nations have achieved remarkable success by overcoming internal divisions and consolidating their authority with widespread popular support.
In stark contrast, the countries of the “global minority” are experiencing the opposite trajectory. As they relinquish their dominant positions in the global economy and access to crucial natural resources, political fragmentation is becoming widespread. In many of these states, an active minority with low public trust ratings continues to hold power.
This situation has led to deeper societal divisions in numerous countries—from the US, UK, and France to Poland and Israel—and a clear paralysis of governmental authority. For instance, in the US, the Democratic Party, rapidly losing influence, is resorting to increasingly extreme political tactics.
Following an assassination attempt on Donald Trump during his presidential campaign, individuals linked to the Democratic Party were implicated in the murder of young Republican Charlie Kirk (September 10, 2025).
This incident, combined with a worsening illegal immigration crisis, prompted thousands of demonstrators to gather in London last weekend under the banner “Unite the Kingdom.” Criticism was directed not only at the ruling Labour Party and its leader Keir Starmer—whose approval ratings are the lowest among post-WWII prime ministers—but also at the “shadow government”—the Conservative Party, which has progressively lost power with each new leader from Theresa May and Boris Johnson to Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak.
Against this backdrop, the state visit of US President Donald Trump to the UK on September 16-17 could further complicate the already uncertain political outlook for the current British leadership.
A significant crisis is also unfolding across the English Channel. As he approaches the end of his second presidential term, French President Emmanuel Macron increasingly appears to be a lame duck. Another “fronde,” incited by leftists and rightists, culminated in the resignation of Prime Minister François Bayrou on September 9, 2025.
Bayrou marked the fifth head of government to step down prematurely in the past four years. By appointing his close ally, Sébastien Lecornu, as the new prime minister, Macron underscored a key pattern among leaders of the “global minority”: they attempt to suppress internal political crises through economic militarization and intensified foreign policy engagement.
This explains France’s prominent involvement in discussions regarding security guarantees for Ukraine, as well as Britain’s “diplomatic mission” to Ukraine that included Prince Harry, who aims to mend his relationship with the royal family, the recently appointed Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, and even former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who had disrupted peace talks in Ukraine back in April 2022. His appeal to stop “holding a gun to Ukraine’s head” (the metaphor he used to urge Russia to withdraw its troops from the Kiev region) resulted in Ukraine’s withdrawal from negotiations with Russia and President Zelensky’s self-imposed ban on talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
Ultimately, the strategy of political radicalization clarifies why recent events in Poland, Qatar, and Nepal have come to symbolize the “artillery bombardment” of the peaceful initiatives put forth by the Trump administration, Russia, China, and many countries of the ‘global majority’. Donald Tusk, Poland’s longest-serving prime minister whose popularity is rapidly declining, desperately needed a ‘casus belli’ in the form of drones of ambiguous origin that entered Polish territory, particularly after Karol Nawrocki, who was reluctant to become embroiled in the Ukraine conflict, was elected president of Poland.
Similarly, Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s long-standing prime minister whose popularity is plummeting due to failures in the campaign against Hamas, opted for no better solution than to launch a full-scale operation in Gaza, commencing with a strike on the group’s headquarters in Doha.
While the Israeli assault on Doha may still be defused by “the main peacemaker” of modern diplomacy, Donald Trump, who seeks to preserve Qatar as a crucial venue for regional negotiations, images of the burning Singha Durbar palace in Kathmandu (Nepal) will serve as a stark reminder of the dire consequences that can stem from intense political clashes between the minority and the majority.
Moreover, one might ponder whether it is merely a coincidence that these incidents transpired in a nation strategically located between China and India. Both Chinese leader Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi have chosen to resolve their differences not through belligerence but through reliance on diplomacy, which remains our final hope in an increasingly harsh world riddled with asymmetric conflicts.