Over the past decade, shifts in the distribution of economic, military, and political capabilities have narrowed the power gap between the United States and other emerging forces within the international system. Economic blocs and international financial institutions have emerged, playing increasingly significant roles in managing global interactions and contributing to the governance of these dynamics and other functions within the world order. Nonetheless, a consensus among international relations scholars that the unipolar system's decline is a matter of time persists. This underscores the necessity of evaluating the current unipolar phase — a need that is both academic and political — as such an assessment lays the groundwork for understanding the extent to which a transition from this system is required.
Multiple indicators can be employed to evaluate the performance of the global system, with two primary metrics standing out. First is the system's capacity to achieve global stability and security. This pertains to the degree to which the international order is associated with the absence of conflicts and crises, both international and regional, or its ability to resolve any disputes and crises that have already arisen. Second is the nature of the prevailing global economic and trade system. This encompasses the stability of this system and its ability to meet the needs of emerging economies, including access to international markets, provision of funding sources — particularly for development — stability of international exchange rates, control over global inflation sources, and more.
It is important to note that the relationship between the global system and its security and stability is not unidirectional; divergent perspectives on this relationship persist, as evidenced by the evolution of international relations. Ultimately, this depends on the nature of the dominant power at the helm of the unipolar system and the international policies it adopts and advocates. This opens the door to evaluating the performance of the current unipolar system through the lens of the international policies implemented over the past three and a half decades.
In this context, it can be argued that the current unipolar system has entrenched some international policies that have exacerbated instability.
The War on Terrorism
Initiated in the aftermath of the September 2001 events, this policy led to a series of military interventions in several countries under the pretext of eradicating terrorism. It began with Afghanistan and soon led to varying levels of military involvement in Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, and other nations. Practically, this approach did not eliminate terrorism; instead, it culminated in the return of the Taliban to power in Afghanistan — the very stage where this policy was inaugurated — and the emergence of more extremist organizations compared to the landscape at the policy's inception.
Expansion of Military Intervention Under Various Pretexts
Beyond the war on terrorism, justifications included promoting democracy and reforming failed states by removing existing political regimes. However, in practice, this strategy did not successfully disseminate democracy within the targeted nations or their neighbouring regions, based on the assumption of activating the theory of emulation or the "domino effect." The practical outcome was ousting regimes without the capability — or even a genuine will — to establish stable or effective alternative systems.
Resurgence of Large-Scale Conventional Wars
The most prominent example is the Russian-Ukrainian war, which also entailed a proxy conflict between Russia and NATO. This war could have been averted if the global system had seriously addressed Russia's security concerns as a principal actor within this order and if NATO's expansion had not become a platform and tool for deepening Russian security apprehensions. A lack of understanding regarding the security concerns of numerous international and regional actors has also led to a state of security fragility in other regions and has contributed to the emergence of nuclear armament projects. Some have successfully developed and acquired nuclear weapons despite the non-proliferation regime, delivering a significant blow to this system, which is backed by the superpower leading the unipolar order.
Undermining Fundamental Principles of the Global System
This pertains not only to the moment of solidifying the current unipolar system but also to the foundational tenets established since the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 and the creation of international institutions following World War II, particularly the principles of respecting sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs — both essential conditions for global stability.
Policies that have undermined these principles have expanded. The United Nations and its specialized agencies and institutions have also been consistently marginalized. If international powers concur on this perilous course, this trajectory could erode the foundations of the global system in the medium term, whether during the remaining period of the unipolar phase or in the subsequent era.
Economic Policies Undermining the Global Economic and Trade System
In recent years, particularly since 2018, several policies have been instituted that have destabilized the global economic and trade framework. These include a return to protectionist trade measures and the expansion of economic and trade sanctions, which have established a reciprocal approach on the economic front.
While these are not the only policies enacted during the current unipolar phase, they represent — in my estimation — the most influential ones in assessing the performance of the global system during this period. Some of these policies are particularly linked to the transitional phase the international order has entered over the past five years. However, these policies could have taken a different direction had the dominant power adopted approaches aimed at preserving global security and stability. The pertinent question now is whether the unipolar era would have witnessed alternative policies if a different power assumed the apex of the system. Will these policies fundamentally change with the conclusion of the current unipolar phase? These questions are likely to remain open in the coming years.
Short link: