In Asia, one of the most drastic shifts in power is a significant transformation that is reshaping the continent’s geopolitics, driven by the expansion of globalization.
While Asia for a long time was geopolitically dominated by the American factor, the emergence in the Asia geopolitics of China, the resurgent factor of Russia, the greater influence of India, and the middle-ranking powers of Japan, South Korea, and the rising of South East Asian countries, most notably Indonesia, and Iran, leads to the emergence of a multipolar Asia.
There is greater geopolitical complexity and more opportunity for peace and stability, but do we have the ability as a world of nations in Asia and the Americas to collapse more of the age and history into greater rivalries and conflicts?
Basically in the first part of the Cold War, for an extended period, the world geopolitically dominating the Asia-Pacific was the USA, and with it was dominating the geopolitics of China, the largest economy in the world and an emerging power federally as a military power and as a global super power. At the same time India was a closed economy. The regional and global geopolitical conflicts and instabilities were dominated by the USA’s military presence and peace was a consequence of what was coined as the ‘military peace’.
Making sure that multipolarity becomes a source of strength rather than a trigger for crisis is the true challenge facing Asia’s leaders. For decades to come, the global order will be shaped by how it navigates this difficult and complex landscape
The peace of the post-Cold War period formed an emerging economy of China, which was at the time a vast superpower, having full military power to dominate the region. Russia was recovering and with it, it was dominating regional geopolitical conflicts and instabilities with its military presence dominating India in Asia.
In alliance with Japan and South Korea, the USA merged military with economy, and as a central power with dominant global military, dominating the geopolitics of Asia, and was military superpower. ASEAN member countries tried to balance relations among the great powers. The zone has several centres of power, and it’s a classic case of a multipolar order. The major question is, is this distribution of power a source of stability, or will it lead to conflicts?
According to many analysts, a multipolar Asia has the potential to create greater regional stability. The greater the power becomes, the more it is counterbalanced by several other powers, which helps reduce the potential consequences of unilateral expansion. For example, China’s rise is counterbalanced by India, Japan and the USA while the ASEAN collectively controls China’s influence in Southeast Asia.
Economically, Asia is the centre of the world, and trade, investments, and supply chains highly integrate the world with several states, including the USA and China, which, despite their rivalry, are major trading partners. India has trade relations with China, despite their border confrontations. Japan, South Korea and ASEAN countries are highly dependent on the region for their economic growth and therefore, stability in the region. Such economic interdependence increases the cost of conflicts and therefore discourages major wars.
Along with this, International and regional organizations such as ASEAN, RCEP, the SCO and infrastructure initiatives such as the Belt and Road, provide platforms of collaboration. Although such institutions are not always decisive in preventing conflicts, they help in the reduction of conflicts, and the management of dialogue to cope with the situations of crises.
In addition, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, Australia, and the Gulf States, as potential stabilizers, can promote equilibrium and curtail extreme forms of regional rivalry.
On the other hand, multipolarity can also intensify regional tensions. The sharpest fault line in global power is the Sino-US rivalry in the South China Sea and the order of global dominance by means of technology, economy, and military power. Such a rivalry tends to create regional blocs in tension with one another.
Secondly, contested and vulnerable regions in Asia include Taiwan, the South China Sea, the India-China border, Kashmir, the Korean Peninsula, and various maritime disputes. Multipolarity only serves to increase the number of potential actors that can instigate or raise the stakes in a conflict.
However, while Asia contains four of the world’ s nuclear states, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea, the balance of power becomes precarious with the potential for a number of very high risks, especially in a crisis situation.
Furthermore, Asia, unlike Europe, does not have killer mechanisms in place for its post-war systems. There is a limit to what ASEAN and SAARC do without major-power cooperation, and the entrenched rivalries dictate that the powers involved are likely to establish a multilateral framework, leading to weak mechanisms for enforcement.
Additionally, though middle powers are often stabilizing as well, they are just as likely to aggravate these tensions. Japan’s military normalization could escalate tensions with China. North Korea’s unpredictability poses acute threats to Northeast Asia. Iran’s influence affects the Gulf and the South Asia region. Multipolarity does not just increase the number of stabilizing actors; it also increases the number of destabilizing actors.
A multipolar Asia is neither automatically stable nor conflict-ridden. Its trajectory will depend on the political choices made, the degree of diplomacy exercised, and how the region is managed. Stability will ensue if: rival powers are able to manage their competition in an orderly manner, regional institutions are strengthened, economic cooperation is given precedence, middle powers are constructively engaged and crisis communication along with conflict prevention mechanisms are put in place.
Thus, Asia is already multipolar. Whether this new order will foster stability or conflict will depend on leadership, diplomacy, and strategic foresight. Power transitions, if left unregulated, have the potential to destabilize regions, and history provides lessons on this. However, it also shows that regions can be saved from disaster via careful management of power, economic integration, and regional cooperation.
Asia has the potential to become a role model for collective security, shared growth, and controlled competition.
Making sure that multipolarity becomes a source of strength rather than a trigger for crisis is the true challenge facing Asia’s leaders. For decades to come, the global order will be shaped by how it navigates this difficult and complex landscape.
