A “multipolar” world ignores the “rules-based” order

In the battle for global influence, each side has its own jargon. The United States and its allies are talking about a “rules-based international order” (RBIO). Russia and China favor a “multipolar” world. Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, India’s brilliant foreign minister, recently divided opinion when he spoke of the need for a “multilateral rules-based international order.”

For the West, RBIO supports peace and stability. Demands respect for territorial integrity and international law, protection of ethnic minorities, small states, democratic norms, and the global trading system.

Russia (often supported by China) claims this is hypocritical. In the Kremlin’s view, the United States writes the rules, imposes them on other countries, and ignores them when it suits. From the Russian government’s perspective, other countries that value RBIO are essentially vassal states of the United States.

Russia and China believe that a decline in U.S. global power is necessary and inevitable, resulting in a more just world in which U.S. power is limited and multiple centers of power function. According to the Russians and Chinese, this would allow different civilizations to live by their own rules without having to follow Washington’s agreements.

For the United States and its allies, these arguments are disingenuous. The US and EU believe that while the idea of ​​multipolarity may sound appealing, it often ultimately requires authoritarian states such as Moscow and Beijing to have their own poles of influence. . That means imposing their will on democratic neighbors like Ukraine and Taiwan.

In various ways, the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, as well as tensions in the South China Sea and struggles of opinion in the Global South, all relate to this rhetorical struggle to shape the reality of world order and the powers that underpin it. ing.

For the United States and the EU, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine violates one of the RBIO’s most fundamental tenets: the prohibition against invasion of neighboring countries and annexation of their territory. In contrast, Russia’s justification relies heavily on the idea that Ukraine has been drawn into the Western civilized space and thereby become an instrument of the US-dominated world order. Russia insists that the attack on the pro-Western, pro-NATO government in Kiev was not an act of aggression or a violation of global rules, but an effort to protect Russia’s security interests and deal a blow to an increasingly multipolar world. ing.

Russia has not had much success in advancing this discussion. It was hit by economic sanctions from Western countries and experienced ostracism unlike anything Russia experienced during the Cold War. For example, Russian teams are excluded from sporting events such as the World Cup and the Olympics. President Vladimir Putin has been indicted by the International Criminal Court, making it difficult for him to travel.

Few countries have voted to defend Russia’s actions at the United Nations. However, important countries in the Global South, particularly India, abstained from voting to condemn Russia.

India’s UN vote reflects not only an interest in buying cheap Russian oil and weapons, but also sympathy with Moscow’s claims that the world order is too shaped by the legacy of Western colonialism. is also reflected. But India is increasingly wary of China, which has killed Indian troops on the two countries’ disputed border, leading New Delhi to step up military cooperation with Washington. Therefore, India supports both multipolarity and RBIO.

One of the countries that staunchly supports Russia is China. China’s economic aid has essentially kept Russia’s economy afloat, softening the blow from Western sanctions. During a visit to Moscow in 2023, President Xi Jinping told Putin on camera that Russia and China were working together to bring about fundamental changes in the world order. Although he did not elaborate, Mr. Xi had in mind the emergence of a multipolar world order and the collapse of American power. Some U.S. analysts believe that China has a vision of a new unipolar system, with Beijing as its polar region.

Putin and Xi’s exchanges in Moscow were much discussed in Western capitals, which are concerned that the Ukraine war could be the first major breach in the RBIO. The next one could happen in East Asia. If China uses its growing military power to invade or blockade Taiwan or further assert its sovereignty claims over large parts of the South China Sea.

But while many Western strategists see Asia as a hub of competition between rules-based and multipolar visions, wars in the Middle East continue to receive significant attention.

Western support for Israel’s attack on Hamas in the Gaza Strip greatly complicates the narrative battle. For many in the Global South, Western support for Israel in the Gaza Strip, when combined with Russia’s accusations in Ukraine, proves the hypocrisy of the Western RBIO narrative.

Western countries have responded that there are clear differences between the two cases. Israel is under attack by Hamas and is exercising its right of self-defense. Russia is waging a war of aggression. This does not mean that all Israeli actions in Gaza are justified. Western leaders have increasingly openly condemned the devastating levels of civilian casualties.

So far, the Gaza war is an embarrassment to the West, but there is little evidence that world opinion will tilt decisively in either direction in the battle of narratives. Countries that ally with Washington, Moscow, or Beijing typically do so based on rigorous assessments of their own interests.

However, those views are strongly tied to underlying values. Democrats are clearly more likely to support a US-led RBIO. What will happen to the RBIO if Donald Trump is re-elected is a major issue that will affect the world system.