Russia, China and the Rise of a Multipolar World Order

Abstract

The international system is changing towards a more multipolar world order. Accelerated by a series of global events that have occurred in the past decades, a new era of international relations, increasingly driven by Russia and China, appears to be emerging. 

Introduction

The summit held in Beijing on May 19-20, 2026, between Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping may be seen as a historic moment in contemporary global politics. The presidents of the Russian Federation and the People’s Republic of China issued a joint statement advocating for a multipolar order and a new type of international relations. A multipolar world is generally understood as a global system in which economic, military and diplomatic power is distributed among three or more major powers, rather than concentrated in one or two.

“Firmly guided by the spirit of mutual respect, equality, honesty and justice, as well as mutually beneficial cooperation, we are making a great contribution to protecting international justice and shaping a new type of international relations. This is the key permanent factor in conditions of the largest transformation in centuries,” Xi Jinping stated during the press conference following Russia-China talks in May. 

This shift has not occurred in a vacuum. Rather, it has unfolded alongside the growing influence and expanding membership of BRICS, which is increasingly positioning itself as an alternative to the Western-led global order centered on the U.S. dollar. Alongside it, China’s dramatic rise as an economic and geopolitical power, the emergence of other influential economies such as India, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, as well as Russia’s remarkable resurgence following the turbulent post-Soviet decade. 

It has also coincided with the growing importance of multilateral organizations among non-Western countries such as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), ASEAN, the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU), and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), the world’s largest free-trade agreement.

This transformation is further reinforced by the relative decline of the United States and European countries in terms of global economic share, and by a series of geopolitical setbacks, most notably the apparent failure of U.S. strategic objectives in Iran, where the regime change effort failed and instead strengthened and united the Iranian population and the non-Western community, as reflected in the roughly 20 million people who attended the recent funeral of Iranian Ayatollah Khamenei, along with 100 state representatives.

That could be considered another critical signal of a profound transformation in the global balance of power, as well as strengthening solidarity and unity among countries outside the Western bloc. Iran, which has strong strategic partnerships with China and Russia, is proving that foreign interference in sovereign nations has become increasingly difficult to sustain in an era of military advancement and strong cooperation among non-Western countries.

This shift is also reflected in the war in Ukraine, where the Kyiv government and its NATO allies are in a disadvantageous position on the battlefield, with prospects of a Western victory looking increasingly unlikely. Such an outcome would represent another major strategic setback for the West, further reinforcing the position of those states advocating a transition toward a multipolar world order.

Corpus

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the United States saw a major opportunity to strengthen its influence eastward, especially into the Eurasian region and the Middle East. Henry Kissinger, former U.S. Secretary of State, said during the Budapest summit in 1994 regarding NATO expansion that “If we are reluctant to antagonize the Russians today when they’re weak, it is an illusion to think that somewhere three, four years down the road, we can suddenly move in that direction when they’re stronger.”

In the years that followed, NATO expanded eastward, despite promises of not moving “one inch” in that direction, as James Baker (U.S.) promised to Mikhail Gorbachev (Soviet Union) in February 1990 during the final talks about German reunification: “We understand the need for assurances to the countries in the East. If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.”

Nevertheless, its enlargement proceeded without regard for Russia’s red lines, broader geopolitical dynamics, and promises made during the reunification of Germany. This, together with the unlawful Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022, contributed to the conditions that ultimately led to the current war, which is now deepening the difficulties facing the Western military and geopolitical bloc.

Alongside this, the United States undertook several wars in the Middle East and Africa over the past decades, as stated by former U.S. General Wesley Clark in 2003: “We’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” 

These foreign interventions have mostly proven to be counterproductive for American objectives of strengthening its position as the sole unipolar power, and the international community has slowly taken a critical stance against such actions, as China and numerous other states have repeatedly called for a new international order, condemning unilateral interventions in foreign state affairs.

Russia and China have been strengthening their economic and political relations since Vladimir Putin’s first presidency. Today, bilateral relations have reached their “highest levels in history,” as stated by Xi Jinping in May, with both sides continuing to reach new agreements and plan expanded cooperation aimed at forming a multipolar world order and a new type of international relations.

More recently, on June 17, China urged the international community to show greater unity, trust, and concrete action to improve global governance. The Information Office of the State Council of China released the white paper “Establishing the Most Fair and Equitable Global Governance System: China’s Concepts, Proposals, and Actions.”

Foreign Minister Wang Yi said that global governance issues affect the well-being of all humanity, and that the post-World War II international system is facing converging pressures. He stressed that the Global Governance Initiative (GGI) rejects the “law of the jungle,” according to which might prevails over law, and is committed to promoting democracy and the rule of law in international relations, adding that the initiative has gained the support of nearly 160 countries and international organizations.

This transformation is also visible in Africa, where numerous states are gradually reducing the influence of former colonial powers and pursuing greater strategic autonomy. Countries such as Burkina Faso, Mali, and Niger have expelled French military forces, renegotiated or terminated cooperation agreements with Western partners, and strengthened relations with new international actors, particularly Russia and China. This trend has also been reflected in the establishment of the Alliance of Sahel States (AES), a confederation designed to enhance regional cooperation and strategic autonomy.

China, in particular, has significantly expanded its influence on the continent through the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), having signed cooperation agreements with 53 African states.

Speculative hypothesis

“They (the U.S.) need conflicts to retain their hegemony,” Putin said during a speech in Beijing in May 2026. “The era of the unipolar world order is nearing its end,” he stated. 

Chinese state media reported that during the latest meeting, Xi said to Putin: “The tide of unilateral hegemony is running rampant.”

In fact, historical documentation suggests more than 100 foreign interventions, including wars and regime change attempts carried out by the U.S. all over the world after 1947, in order to maintain its geopolitical power and influence, which is proving to have had the opposite effect now, after several decades of successful dominance.

Powerful new state actors are more willing than ever to play an increasingly active role in this transformation of international power dynamics, driven by China and Russia’s joint international commitment. However, the European Union, one of the most important economic and geopolitical actors, appears reluctant to participate in this change, with few exceptions such as Spain. 

The absence of sanctions against Israel, together with what critics view as an insufficient response to violations of international law and human rights, may be interpreted as reflecting the European Union’s continued alignment with U.S. strategic objectives. The same can be said of the political support and, at times, military participation of several European states in American-led interventions in the Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere. As well as, more recently, the backing shown toward American intervention in Venezuela, alongside the European Parliament’s recent resolutionon Cuba, which does not acknowledge the role of U.S. policy. 

All of this points to the EU’s limited willingness or ability to move beyond a Western-led international order.

So What

This lack of clear and constructive cooperation from Western state actors is unlikely to halt the creation and consolidation of a new international system. The election of a new Secretary-General of the United Nations next autumn could bring to power a leader capable of facilitating this shift and reshaping the structure of the UN system, which remains anchored in the post-World War II balance of power.

Taken together, the previously mentioned Iranian unity and solidarity from more than 100 countries, the Global Governance Initiative (GGI), China’s growing diplomatic engagement and influence, political changes across several African states, and the increasing cooperation among non-Western countries suggest that the transition toward a multipolar order may already be underway, pending corresponding reforms of international institutions.

This major change might be supported by a restructured United Nations, endowed with greater authority, together with broader institutional reforms that reflect current global economic realities and geopolitical shifts, rather than a system still rooted in that same postwar order, based on the advantages of the victorious powers.

Best-Case Scenario

The best-case scenario would be that the aspirations of a large portion of the international community are accommodated through a restructuring of the international system, facilitated by the new UN Secretrary-General working in that direction.

In this scenario, a broader range of state actors would participate in and contribute to shaping a new framework for international relations based on the principles of equality, justice, and mutually beneficial cooperation. 

If current trends continue, including the strengthening of cooperation between China, Russia, and other emerging powers, a more multipolar international system would gradually become a reality.

Worst-Case Scenario

The worst-case scenario is that, despite the ongoing shift in global economic weight and geopolitical influence, efforts to establish a more representative and equitable institutional framework fail to secure the participation or support of all major powers. In such a scenario, strategic competition between states could intensify, leading some actors to rely increasingly on unilateral actions, proxy conflicts, or covert operations to preserve or expand their influence while disregarding the principles of reciprocity. 

At the same time, the growing availability of advanced technologies, including cyber capabilities, artificial intelligence, autonomous weapons systems, and potentially biotechnology, could further complicate international security dynamics. 

Without timely adaptation of international law and governance mechanisms, the regulation, accountability, and prevention of the misuse of these technologies by both state and non-state actors could remain insufficient, increasing the risk of instability and making the emergence of an effective global governance framework significantly more difficult.

Conclusion

The spread of the internet and the acceleration of globalization have facilitated the economic rise of many previously developing economies while also strengthening connections among political actors across the globe. Increased technological connectivity and deeper economic interdependence have enabled states that were once fragmented and geographically distant from one another to engage more effectively in diplomatic relations, economic cooperation, and the creation of new multilateral institutions.

In fact, beyond their growing economic capabilities, an often-overlooked factor behind this shift is their increasing ability to coordinate, cooperate, and pursue common strategic interests. 

As a result, Western dominance is gradually being challenged by the emergence of new centers of power. The coming decades will therefore be defined not by the replacement of one order with another, but by the complex adaptation of the global system to a more diverse and competitive distribution of geopolitical and economic influence.