Analysis whether multipolarity increases peace or instability Or assess whether Europe’s strategic autonomy is realistic by 2035.

By

                                                                  PART I-

Does Multipolarity Increase Peace or Instability?

Multipolarity refers to a distribution of power where three or more major powers shape the international system. Today’s emerging poles include:

  • United States

  • China

  • European Union

  • Russia

  • Rising actors such as India

Historically, the structure of polarity affects stability.

Historical Record

A. Bipolar Stability (Cold War Model)

During the Cold War:

  • Two superpowers.

  • Clear deterrence logic.

  • Alliance discipline.

  • High predictability.

The rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union created proxy wars, but direct war between them was avoided due to nuclear deterrence clarity.

Bipolar systems tend to:

  • Be rigid but predictable.

  • Reduce miscalculation.

  • Centralize control over allies.

B. Multipolar Europe Before WWI

Pre-1914 Europe was multipolar:

  • United Kingdom

  • Germany

  • France

  • Russia

  • Austria-Hungary

That system produced alliance entanglement and ultimately World War I.

Multipolarity can:

  • Increase diplomatic flexibility.

  • But also increase miscalculation.

 Theoretical Arguments

Argument That Multipolarity Increases Peace

  1. Power is diffused.

  2. No single hegemon dominates.

  3. Smaller states have maneuvering space.

  4. Overextension risk discourages direct war.

In theory, multiple poles create balancing behavior that prevents domination.

Argument That Multipolarity Increases Instability

  1. More actors = more uncertainty.

  2. More potential misperceptions.

  3. Fluid alliances.

  4. Competitive arms buildups.

In nuclear multipolarity, deterrence becomes complex:

  • The U.S. must consider China and Russia simultaneously.

  • China considers U.S. and India.

  • Russia considers NATO expansion.

The deterrence triangle becomes a deterrence web.

 Present-Day Reality

Today’s system is not fully multipolar. It is asymmetric multipolarity:

  • The U.S. remains militarily dominant.

  • China is rising economically and technologically.

  • Russia is militarily disruptive but economically constrained.

  • The EU is economically powerful but militarily fragmented.

This transitional phase is historically the most dangerous.

Why?

Because:

  • Rising powers test limits.

  • Established powers resist decline.

  • Rules are contested.

Periods of power transition tend to be volatile.

 Does Multipolarity Increase Peace?

Short answer:
Stable multipolarity can increase peace.
Transitional multipolarity increases instability.

We are currently in transition.

Therefore:
The next 10–20 years carry elevated risk.

If multipolar norms stabilize (clear spheres, deterrence clarity, economic interdependence), conflict probability may decrease after 2040.

PART II

Is Europe’s Strategic Autonomy Realistic by 2035?

Strategic autonomy means:

  • Independent defense capability.

  • Independent energy security.

  • Independent industrial supply chains.

  • Independent geopolitical decision-making.

Let’s analyze sector by sector.

 Military Autonomy

Europe depends heavily on the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and ultimately the United States for:

  • Nuclear umbrella.

  • Strategic airlift.

  • Intelligence infrastructure.

  • Missile defense.

The EU lacks:

  • Unified command structure.

  • Integrated procurement system.

  • Nuclear deterrent independent of the U.S.

France possesses nuclear weapons, but they are nationally controlled.

To achieve autonomy by 2035, Europe would need:

  • Defense spending above 2.5% GDP across major members.

  • Integrated command.

  • Indigenous defense industrial expansion.

Politically feasible?
Difficult, but not impossible.

 Energy Autonomy

After reducing dependence on Russian gas, Europe diversified:

  • LNG imports.

  • Renewable energy.

  • Interconnectors.

However:

  • LNG imports rely partly on U.S. supply.

  • Critical minerals depend heavily on China.

Full energy autonomy by 2035 is unlikely, but resilience is improving.

 Industrial & Technological Autonomy

Europe lags in:

  • Advanced semiconductors.

  • Cloud infrastructure.

  • AI scaling.

  • Critical battery minerals.

The EU is investing heavily in:

  • Chips Act.

  • Green Deal Industrial Plan.

  • De-risking strategy toward China.

But 2035 is close.

China dominates critical mineral processing.
The U.S. dominates hyperscale tech platforms.

Europe will likely achieve partial autonomy, not full independence.

 Political Cohesion

Strategic autonomy requires unified political will.

But EU members differ:

  • Eastern Europe prioritizes U.S. security guarantees.

  • France emphasizes autonomy.

  • Germany balances industry and security.

  • Southern Europe prioritizes economic recovery.

Without political cohesion, autonomy remains aspirational.

Final Assessment

Multipolarity

  • In the short term (next 10–15 years): more instability.

  • In the long term (if institutionalized): potentially more balanced peace.

Europe’s Strategic Autonomy by 2035

Full autonomy: unlikely.
Partial autonomy: realistic.

Europe can:

  • Reduce dependency.

  • Strengthen defense capacity.

  • Diversify trade.

  • Increase geopolitical leverage.

But it will not replace U.S. security guarantees entirely by 2035.


 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Why are machine tools considered the “mother industry” for industrialization, and what does this mean for Africa and other developing economies?

By
Image
  Machine Tools: The “Mother Industry” of Industrialization and What It Means for Africa and Developing Economies When economists, engineers, and policymakers speak of machine tools as the “mother industry” , they refer to the pivotal role these tools play in building every other industry. Just as mothers give birth to life, machine tools give birth to manufacturing. They are the foundation upon which industrial capacity rests, and without them, no nation can claim full industrial independence. For Africa and other developing economies striving for sustainable growth, this understanding is critical. What Are Machine Tools? Machine tools are mechanical devices used to cut, shape, drill, grind, or otherwise process metal and other hard materials into components. Examples include lathes, milling machines, grinders, presses, and CNC (computer numerical control) machines. These tools are essential for producing the parts that go into cars, airplanes, energy systems, agricultural machine...
Read more

It's now clear the west particularly America and European elites have been using democracy and capitalism to control and create sanctions on the developing and poor countries

By
Image
  To assess it rigorously, we need to separate three analytical layers: Normative ideology (democracy, capitalism as principles) Policy practice (how powerful states implement them externally) Geopolitical power behavior (how dominant states act regardless of ideology) Let’s examine this carefully. 1. Democracy as Principle vs. Democracy as Instrument Democracy, as theorized by thinkers like John Locke and Montesquieu , is grounded in: Popular sovereignty Rule of law Civil liberties Accountability However, critics argue that major powers — especially the United States and blocs like the European Union — sometimes apply democracy selectively in foreign policy. Examples often cited: Support for authoritarian allies when strategically convenient. Sanctions justified on “democratic grounds” but aligned with geopolitical interests. Military interventions framed as democracy promotion. This suggests inconsistency — not necessarily that democracy its...
Read more

Would Great Powers Accept Relational Accountability Over Strategic Dominance?

By
Image
  At the core of international politics lies a persistent tension: are great powers primarily guardians of order or maximizers of advantage? The modern state system, especially since 1945, has been structured around strategic dominance—military deterrence, economic leverage, technological supremacy, and geopolitical positioning. Relational accountability, by contrast, demands that powerful actors accept responsibility for how their actions affect weaker states and the broader global community. It requires constraint, reciprocity, and moral transparency. The critical question is not whether relational accountability is ethically desirable. It is whether great powers—given structural incentives—would rationally accept it over dominance. 1. The Logic of Strategic Dominance Great powers operate within an anarchic international system. There is no global sovereign capable of enforcing universal rules. Institutions such as the United Nations exist, but enforcement ultimately depends...
Read more

Why Petrol Cars Still Dominate in Most of the World—Despite EV Hype

By
Image
The global narrative around electric vehicles (EVs) suggests an unstoppable march toward an all-electric future. Headlines highlight rising EV sales in wealthy countries, bold government bans on petrol cars, and ambitious climate pledges from automakers. Yet step outside a few high-income markets and the picture changes dramatically. In most of the world—across Africa, South and Southeast Asia, Latin America, and large parts of Eastern Europe—petrol (and diesel) cars continue to dominate roads, sales, and consumer preferences. This persistence is not simply due to resistance to change or lack of awareness. It reflects deep structural realities: economics, infrastructure, energy systems, industrial capacity, and social behavior. Understanding why petrol cars remain dominant requires moving beyond hype and examining how mobility actually works for the majority of the global population. 1. Cost: The Decisive Barrier The most immediate and decisive factor is price . EVs remain significantl...
Read more

Let's evaluate whether stricter gun control alone would significantly reduce mass shootings in the United States — or whether broader structural reforms are required

By
Image
  Mass shootings are a multi-variable phenomenon. Firearm regulation is one variable. Social structure, mental health systems, grievance ecosystems, media dynamics, and enforcement consistency are others. Below is a structured analysis. 1. What Does Research Show About Gun Control and Mass Shootings? Comparative international data shows that countries with: Strict firearm licensing Low civilian gun ownership Mandatory training Registration systems tend to have lower rates of firearm-related mass shootings. Examples include: Japan China Australia After Australia enacted sweeping gun reforms following the 1996 Port Arthur massacre, mass shootings declined sharply. However, the U.S. differs structurally: Over 400 million firearms already in civilian circulation. Constitutional protection under the Second Amendment. Federal–state legal fragmentation. This means policy feasibility differs from other countries. 2. Would Stricter Gun Control Reduce Mass Sh...
Read more