The world did not return to unipolarity with the current US wars

The succession of international crises, the prolonged situation of turbulence, the wars, coups, interventions and blockades perpetrated by US imperialism and its lackeys, the Israeli Zionists, reveal that the course of world politics remains open and unpredictable. The saying that “everything solid melts into air” has never been more current. Amid regional conflicts, strategic disputes and tensions between nuclear powers, the perception is growing that the international system is going through a phase of prolonged conflicts, in which collective security is subject to unprecedented risks and even the survival of humanity is threatened.

This environment of uncertainty has fueled divergent interpretations of the balance of power in the world. In many analysis centers linked to US interests, with great influence in the media and academia, and power to co-opt forces considered “progressive” and “renewing Marxism”, the thesis that multipolarity had failed even before it was consolidated has become common. According to this view, the military supremacy of the United States, the dizzying increase in its war budget, the continuity of aggressive military interventions and actions and political pressures in different regions, would demonstrate that the global order remains essentially unipolar.

This reading maintains that the absence of direct military confrontations between the United States and other major rival anti-hegemonic powers in certain conflicts and crises, due to the wise prudence with which the latter conduct themselves, would confirm the permanence of undisputed hegemony of the United States. The implicit conclusion would be that the world still lives under a power structure similar to that which was consolidated after the end of the Cold War.

The interpretation that identifies international reality as unipolar is based on a simplifying assumption: that global power can be measured exclusively by North American military capacity. According to this reasoning, as long as the United States maintains the largest military machine on the planet, with bases spread across several continents and a strong capacity for intervention, the international situation would remain under its absolute hegemony. It is in the political interest of the United States to convey this image of impregnability. It is functional in spreading a spirit of resignation and capitulation among political and social forces whose mission is resistance and anti-imperialist struggle. For this very reason, the head of US imperialism proclaimed the ability to face all adversaries “forever”, in a new version of “infinite war”, announced a quarter of a century ago by another republican, George W. Bush.

Geopolitical dynamics, however, reveal a more complex scenario. Global power is not only expressed through military means, but also through economic, technological, diplomatic and institutional factors.

In this context, the rise of China has become one of the most striking elements of the ongoing transformations. In recent decades, the country has recorded accelerated economic growth, impetuous multidimensional development, consolidating itself as one of the largest economies on the planet and as a central power in trade and global production chains. At the same time, it expanded its diplomatic and political presence in several regions, strengthening its assertiveness and ability to influence on the international scene.

At the same time, Russia preserves a relevant strategic role, especially in the military field and in shaping security balances in Eurasia. After the period of fragility that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union, the country recovered a significant part of its international projection capacity.

The transformation of the global scenario is also manifested in the emergence of institutions and blocs that operate outside the traditional orbit of Western powers. The expansion of BRICS and the incorporation of new members represent one of the most visible examples of this process.

The reorganization of the international system also highlights the worsening of contradictions between traditional powers and countries in the Global South.

Initiatives such as the New Development Bank and the increase in commercial transactions carried out in national currencies reflect attempts to reduce dependence on the dollar and international financial institutions traditionally dominated by Western imperialism, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

These moves do not immediately eliminate the influence of the United States in the world economy, but they indicate the gradual emergence of alternative centers of economic and institutional power. Multipolarity, in this sense, does not present itself simply as a political proposal or a future expectation, but as a phenomenon that already manifests itself in different dimensions.

These factors indicate that the absolute monopoly of global power no longer belongs to a single power. In a truly unipolar system, there would be no other centers capable of limiting or balancing the dominant hegemony, a condition that no longer corresponds to the contemporary scenario.

Multipolarity does not mean absence of conflicts

The existence of several poles of power does not automatically imply a more peaceful or stable international system. History shows that multipolar structures often coexist with intense strategic disputes.

The European 19th century, for example, was marked by a multipolar system involving several empires and great powers. Still, this period culminated in large-scale conflicts that redefined the global balance.

The redistribution of power between states rarely occurs smoothly. In many cases, the transition between international orders produces prolonged tensions, economic rivalries and geopolitical disputes.

A world in transformation

The convergence of these factors points to a process of reconfiguration of global power, which does not mean that the change is consolidated nor that the emergence of the institutions that will shape the new global governance is abrupt. Only in mythology is Athena born ready, beautiful and armed from the head of Zeus.

Multipolarity, therefore, does not represent a scenario of automatic stability nor a fully consolidated system.

Thus, the current US military offensive, especially the war against Iran, would hardly make the United States a stronger superpower or capable of reversing the current dynamics of global multipolarity, because prolonged conflicts in the Middle East tend to generate high economic, military and political costs, in addition to increasing international resistance to North American hegemony. The ongoing war could destabilize energy markets, fray alliances and encourage even greater strategic rapprochement between powers such as China and Russia, which are already the pillars of multipolarity. Instead of restoring a unipolar moment, war can even accelerate the fragmentation of global power, strengthen alternative blocs and expand the role of regional organizations and partnerships, consolidating precisely the multipolar scenario.