After reading this article you can solve this UPSC Mains Model question
“The contemporary international system is multipolar in structure but exhibits strong bipolar characteristics.”Critically examine this statement and discuss its implications for global stability and India’s foreign policy. (GS-2 International Relation)
Context:
Mr. Trump wants Europe to shoulder greater responsibility for its own security, reset relations with Russia and reassert American primacy in its immediate neighbourhood even as Washington prepares for a prolonged great power competition with China. The idea is to return to the classic ofshore balancing
What makes the world multipolar?
1. Distribution of “Hard Power”
To be a “pole,” a state must possess a comprehensive set of capabilities. Realist theorists like Kenneth Waltz argue that a pole needs:
- Military Strength: Not just regional, but the ability to project force globally (e.g., advanced navies, space programs, and nuclear deterrents).
- Economic Capability: A massive GDP (measured in Purchasing Power Parity) that allows for self-sufficiency and the ability to influence global trade.
- Resource Endowment: Control over critical minerals (like rare earths), energy, and food.
2. The Rise of “Middle Powers” and “Swing States”
In a multipolar world, power diffuses to states that might not be superpowers but are essential to global stability.
- Strategic Autonomy: Nations like India, Brazil, and Indonesia practice “multi-alignment.” They refuse to join a single bloc (like the US-led West or a China-Russia axis), instead making issue-based deals.
- The Global South: The expansion of BRICS+ (which now includes nations like Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, UAE, and recently Indonesia) creates an economic counterweight to the G7.
3. Complexity of Alliances
Unlike the rigid “us vs. them” of the Cold War, multipolarity is defined by:
- Overlapping Partnerships: A country might be a security partner with the US (like India in the Quad) while being an economic partner with China.
- Regionalism: Regional organizations (ASEAN, African Union, EU) take the lead in managing local conflicts rather than waiting for a global superpower to intervene.
Why does it show bipolar characteristics?
1. The Superpower Gap
While nations like India, Japan, and Germany are significant “poles,” there is still a massive quantitative and qualitative gap between the top two and the rest.
- Military Hegemony: Only the US and China possess the combination of global power projection, advanced nuclear triads, and massive defense budgets (the US budget remains the world’s largest, while China’s is the second largest and growing rapidly).
- Economic “Gravity”: The US and China are the only two economies that can unilaterally disrupt global supply chains or weaponize trade on a global scale.
2. The “New Cold War” Logic (Security Blocs)
A key characteristic of a bipolar system is the formation of two distinct camps
- Alliance Systems: We are seeing a return to rigid security architecture. On one side is the US-led network (NATO, AUKUS, Quad). On the other is the deepening “no-limits” partnership between China and Russia.
- Zero-Sum Competition: In critical regions like the Indo-Pacific, these two powers are engaged in a game where a gain for one is seen as a direct loss for the other, forcing third parties to eventually choose a side on specific issues like 5G technology or maritime security.
3. Bifurcation of Technology (The “Splinternet”)
One of the most distinct “bipolar characteristics” today is the split in the global technological ecosystem:
- Digital Sovereignty: The world is increasingly forced to choose between US-based tech (Google, AWS, Apple) and Chinese-based infrastructure (Huawei, AliCloud, ByteDance).
- Standards War: The competition to set the rules for AI, semiconductors, and green energy is primarily a contest between Washington and Beijing.
4. The Three-Dimensional Chessboard
Political scientist Joseph Nye describes this as a “three-dimensional game”
- Top Layer (Military): Remains largely Unipolar (US dominance) or becoming Bipolar (US vs. China).
- Middle Layer (Economic): Truly Multipolar (US, China, EU, India, Japan)
- Bottom Layer (Transnational): Power is diffused among non-state actors, hackers, and corporations
Implications for Global Governance:
1. Institutional Gridlock & The “Veto” Culture
In a bipolar-leaning world, global institutions like the UN Security Council (UNSC) and the World Trade Organization (WTO) become battlegrounds for the two superpowers.
- Paralysis: Any resolution perceived as favoring one pole is often vetoed or blocked by the other. This led to the “elusive peace” in conflicts like Ukraine and West Asia throughout 2025.
- Funding as a Weapon: As seen in recent trends, powers are increasingly hollowing out multilateral bodies by withholding funds or exiting agreements (e.g., the US “Liberation Day” tariffs and withdrawal from consensual spaces).
2. The Rise of “Mini-lateralism”
Because large, inclusive institutions (the UN) are failing, governance is shifting toward smaller, issue-based groups.
- Clubs over Consensus: Instead of global treaties, we see the rise of the Quad, AUKUS, BRICS+, and the G7.
- The Result: Governance becomes “fragmented.” Rules for the digital economy or climate tech (like DAC) are made in these small clubs, creating a “patchwork” of global rules rather than one universal standard.
3. Weaponization of the “Global Commons”
In this order, areas that used to be for the benefit of all—trade, technology, and the environment—are being weaponized.
- Geo-economics: Trade is no longer just about profit; it’s about “security.” This is evident in the 2025 surge of “friend-shoring” and “de-risking” as nations try to build supply chains that exclude their rivals.
- Technology Standards: The “Bipolar Characteristics” mean that governance of AI and Green Tech is split. We are moving toward two different “operating systems” for the world—one centered in Washington and one in Beijing.
4. The “Swing State” Influence
The editorial notes that India, Brazil, and Indonesia act as “governance stabilizers.”
- Strategic Autonomy: By refusing to join a rigid bloc, India prevents the world from slipping into a total Cold War.
- Rule Shapers: India is transitioning from a “rule-taker” to a “rule-shaper,” using platforms like the G20 and its leadership in the Global South to demand more equitable governance structures.
India’s Position:
1. From “Non-Alignment” to “Multi-Alignment”
While the 20th century was about staying out of blocs, India’s 2025 strategy is about being in every bloc to ensure no single power (specifically China) dominates the neighborhood.
- The Security Pillar: India deepens ties with the US and the Quad (Australia, Japan) to provide a counterweight to China’s maritime assertiveness in the Indian Ocean.
- The Continental Pillar: India remains a member of the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organisation) and BRICS+, ensuring it has a seat at the table where China and Russia are the primary actors.
2. Leading the “Global South” as a Third Pole
The editorial emphasizes that India is leveraging its role as a “Vanguard of the Global South” to prevent a total return to bipolarity.
- Johannesburg 2025: At the G20 summit in South Africa (Nov 2025), India was credited with preventing a collapse of consensus following a US-led boycott, focusing instead on debt relief and African development.
- Economic Sovereignism: India is pushing for the use of local currencies in trade (e.g., within BRICS) to reduce “dollar dependency,” which is a classic multipolar move.
3. The “Swing State” Dilemma
Being a “pole” in a world with “bipolar characteristics” creates what the editorial calls “Strategic Pressure”:
- The Trade-off: While India benefits from the “China+1” manufacturing shift (due to US-China de-risking), it also faces secondary sanctions and trade barriers (like the 50% US tariffs on certain Indian goods implemented in Aug 2025).
- Energy Security: India’s continued reliance on Russian energy and its strategic autonomy regarding the Ukraine conflict remains a point of friction with the Western “bipolar” camp
Way Forward:
1. Strengthening the “Internal Pole”
The editorial suggests that multipolarity is only sustainable if the “poles” are internally resilient.
- Strategic Self-Reliance (Atmanirbhar Bharat): Reducing critical dependencies—especially on China for APIs and electronics, and on the US for high-end technology.
- Economic Dispersion: Ensuring that India’s export engine is not reliant on just a few states or sectors (like IT and textiles) which are vulnerable to US “transactional tariffs” (e.g., the 25–50% surcharges seen in 2025).
2. Managing the “Sino-US” Seesaw
India must navigate the systemic gravity of the US-China rivalry without becoming a “vassal state” or a “frontline state” for either.
- Competitive Coexistence with China: Following the Border Patrol Agreement (Oct 2024) and the incremental progress in 2025, India should pursue “stabilization without trust.” This means restoring direct flights and pilgrim routes (Kailash Mansarovar) while keeping the military guard up at the LAC.
- Reliability Testing with the US: As Washington shifts toward more “extractive transactionalism,” India must diversify its strategic partnerships with the EU, France, and Japan to ensure it isn’t solely dependent on the US for security.
3. Leading the “Global South” as a Strategic Anchor
India should cement its position as the voice of the “non-aligned 2.0.”
- Multilateral Reform: India’s chairmanship of BRICS in 2026 will be a crucial opportunity to push for “deeper multilateralism” and a world order that isn’t just a duopoly.
- Digital Diplomacy: Exporting the “India Stack” (UPI, Aadhaar) to developing nations offers an alternative to the US and Chinese digital models, building a “Third Way” in technology governance.
Conclusion:
The contemporary world is multipolar because power is widely diffused across several states, regions and issue-areas, reducing the dominance of any single power. The rise of multiple economic and strategic centres, assertion of regional powers, and greater agency of the Global South together define this multipolar reality. For countries like India, this evolving order offers opportunities to pursue strategic autonomy, shape global norms and act as a stabilising bridge in an increasingly fragmented international system.
