What Is a āMultipolarā World? China Says Equality; Trump & Marco Rubio Say Imperial Rivalry
By Ben Norton – Feb 16, 2025
What is the meaning of āmultipolarityā? Donald Trump and Marco Rubio say āgreat power competitionā with imperial spheres of influence. China and much of the Global South have an anti-imperialist view: āequality among all countries regardless of sizeā.
It is now widely acknowledged that the world is multipolar. This is so uncontroversial that the Munich Security Conference chose theĀ title āMultipolarizationāĀ for its 2025 annual report.
However, there is not a common definition of āmultipolarityā. TheĀ Munich Security ReportĀ noted that, while āthe worldās āmultipolarizationā is a factā, the āinternational system shows elements of unipolarity, bipolarity, multipolarity, and nonpolarityā, in which āmultiple order models co-exist, compete, or clashā.
Governments have radically different understandings of the meaning of multipolarity.
The definition used by the United States, and especially by the Donald Trump administration, is the opposite of the idea of multipolarity advocated by China.
When China talks about a multipolar world, it means one without imperialism and without hegemony, with āequality among all countries regardless of sizeā, where all nations have an equal voice in multilateral institutions and can pursue their own independent path of development, without foreign intervention.
āRivalry between big powers had brought disaster to humanityā, warnedĀ Chinaās Foreign Minister Wang Yi. āEqual rights, equal opportunities and equal rules should become the basic principles of a multipolar worldā, he argued, calling for āgreater democracy in international relationsā.
This is a view shared by many Global South countries. Nicaraguaās President Daniel Ortega, the leader of the Sandinista Revolution, has anĀ anti-imperialist view of multipolarity. He argued that āa new order is being born in the world thatĀ buries imperialism, buries the colonialists, and opens the way to a democracy of nations, a multipolarism that is manifesting itself in various waysā, but he cautioned that, āon the other hand, we see North American imperialism trying to maintain its hegemony at all costs, even at the risk of sinking its own economyā.
The view in Washington could hardly be more different.
When US Secretary of State Marco Rubio talks about multipolarity, he means that there are now other great powers capable of challenging US dominance.
The conclusion of the Trump administration is that the US must re-assert its imperial āsphere of influenceā in the Western hemisphere. This is why Trump is so aggressivelyĀ threatening Greenland, Canada, Mexico, Panama, and other countries in Latin America.
In other words, China has an anti-imperialist view of a multipolar world, whereas Trump and Rubio believe it means a return to āgreat power competitionā and āinter-imperialist rivalryā.
Beijing sees multipolarity as a desirable step toward international cooperation and development that will encourage peace; Washington sees multipolarity as a threat to its hegemony that will foster further conflict.
From the unipolar moment to āgreat power competitionā
In the 1990s, the world was overwhelmingly dominated by the United States, which could impose its will on most countries. The overthrow of the Soviet Union and its socialist allies meant there was no longer a counterbalance to US hegemony.
Neoconservative pundits like the Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer declared this to be āthe unipolar momentā. Nevertheless, he warned in 1990: āEnjoy it now. It wonāt last longā.
When exactly the unipolar moment ended has been hotly debated. Some argue it was the North Atlantic financial crisis of 2007-09. Others say it was the conflict in Ukraine, which started with a US-backed coup in 2014 and escalated into aĀ Russia-NATO proxy warĀ in 2022.
Other important developments include the founding of BRICS in 2009, as well as the rapid economic growth in China, which becameĀ the āworldās sole manufacturing superpowerāĀ and in 2016 overtook the US as the biggest economy on Earth, when its GDP is measured at purchasing power parity.
It is too simplistic to say US unipolarity ended in one specific moment, but, regardless, by the 2020s, it was no longer debatable that the world was multipolar.
Neoconservative war hawks like Marco Rubio reluctantly recognized this reality, but they saw it as a tragedy ā and a threat.
Today, āwe do have near-peer adversariesā, Rubio lamented in aĀ Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in 2022. āWe didnāt 25 years ago; the United States lived in a unipolar world, where we were the only show in townā.
āNow, there are at least one unprecedented near-peer adversaryā, Rubio said. āThe Chinese Communist Party is a challenge to the United States unlike, greater even than what the Soviet Union was, because they are a commercial rival, a technological rival, a geopolitical rival, a diplomatic rival, and an economic and commercial one. And in addition to all of that, they are also a military threat to the country, as they continue to developā.
The US Department of Defense dubbed this āgreat power competitionā. The Pentagon warned in 2019 that the āUnited States enjoys a lead there now, but other nations are nipping at its heelsā.
China says āequal rights, equal opportunities and equal rules should become the basic principles of a multipolar worldā
China has criticized Washingtonās rhetoric about ācompetitionā. Instead, Beijing has promoted what it calls āmutual benefit and win-win cooperationā.
At an event in 2023, Chinaās ambassador to the United States, Xie Feng, emphasized, āPresident Xi Jinping has proposed the three principles of mutual respect, peaceful co-existence andĀ win-win cooperationā.
China has made it clear that it does not want to create an empire, and it is not seeking to replace US hegemony with Chinese hegemony.
When China talks about multipolarity, its means a world without imperialism and without hegemony.
This is a definition that is shared by many countries in the Global South, andĀ in BRICS in particular.
Chinaās Foreign Minister Wang Yi articulated his nationās view of multipolarity in aĀ speech at the Munich Security ConferenceĀ in February 2025.
The world is āheaded toward multipolarizationā, Wang said. āWhen the United Nations was founded 80 years ago, it had only 51 member states; today, 193 countries ride in the same big boatā.
āA multipolar world is not only a historical inevitability; it is also becoming a realityā, argued the Chinese foreign minister.
Nevertheless, Wang insisted that multipolarity should not ābring chaos, conflict and confrontationā, and it must not āmean domination by major countries and the strong bullying the weakā.
āChinaās answer is, we should work for an equal and orderly multipolar worldā, Wang said.
In Chinaās view, multipolarity should have four characteristics:
1- āequal treatmentā for all countries;
2- respect for international law;
3- multilateralism, centered in the United Nations;
4- āopenness and mutual benefitā.
The Chinese foreign minister explained (emphasis added):
Rivalry between big powers had brought disaster to humanity, as evidenced by the lessons of the two world wars in the not-so-distant past.Ā Whether it is the colonial system or the core-periphery structure, unequal orders are bound to meet their demise. Independence and autonomy is sought across the world, and greater democracy in international relations is unstoppable.Ā Equal rights, equal opportunities and equal rules should become the basic principles of a multipolar world.
It is in this principle thatĀ China advocates equality among all countries regardless of size, and calls forĀ increasing the representation and say of developing countries in the international system. This will not lead to āWestlessness,ā but will deliver more positive-sum results to the world. ā¦ Every country should have their voice heard. Every country should be able to find their place and play their role in a multipolar paradigm.
Chinaās understanding of multipolarity is the opposite of that promoted by the United States.
Returning to colonial Monroe Doctrine, Trump administration sees Western hemisphere as US imperial āsphere of influenceā
Marco Rubioās acknowledgment that the world is multipolar is by no means a sign that the United States is abandoning its imperialist ambitions. On the contrary.
The Trump administration has made it clear that it sees the Western hemisphere as part of the US imperial āsphere of influenceā, and it wants to forcibly impose US hegemony and minimize Chinese influence in the region.
This is whyĀ Trump has vowed to colonize Greenland, despite the fact thatĀ 85% of GreenlandersĀ do not want to be part of the United States, and just 6% do.
It is why Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of turning Canada into the ā51st stateā.
It is why Trump has been especially aggressive in Latin America, pledging to colonize the Panama Canal, deliberating plans toĀ invade Mexico,Ā attacking Colombia, and threatening Venezuela, Nicaragua, and Cuba.
In his inauguration speech, Trump invoked the colonialist idea of āManifest Destinyā, and heĀ promised to āexpand our territoryā.
At an event on January 25, the US president told supporters he wants a āvery substantially enlarged countryā:
We may be a very substantially enlarged country in the not too distant [future] ā isnāt it nice to see?
You know, for years, for decades, weāre the same size to the square foot ā probably got smaller, actually ā but we might be an enlarged country pretty soon.
Trump alliesĀ have frequently invoked the 202-year-oldĀ Monroe Doctrine, which treats Latin America as the colonial ābackyardā of the US empire. They have threatened Latin American leaders and told them to cut ties with China and Russia.
Rubioās first foreign tripĀ as US secretary of state was to Panama, where he successfullyĀ pressuredĀ the Central American nation to withdraw from Chinaās global infrastructure project, the Belt and Road Initiative.
The Associated Press summarized Rubioās message to Panama: āImmediately reduce what President Donald Trump says isĀ Chinese influenceĀ over the Panama Canal area or face potential retaliation from the United Statesā.
Rubio subsequently traveled to El Salvador, Costa Rica, Guatemala, and the Dominican Republic, where his threat was the same: minimize your relations with China, or else the US empire will attack you.
Marco Rubio sees China as main āthreatā to US empire
Marco Rubio did hisĀ first interview as US secretary of stateĀ in January, with the conservative talk show host Megyn Kelly.
Some Trump supporters pointed to Rubioās remarks to claim that he has supposedly moved away from his warmongering neoconservative past, and has instead become a foreign-policy ārealistā. But they took his comments out of context.
In the interview, Rubio stated:
Itās not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar powerā¦ That was an anomaly. It was the product of the end of the Cold War. But eventually you were going to reach back to a point where you had a multipolar world, [with] multi great powers in different parts of the planet.
We face that now with China, and to some extent Russia, and then you have rogue states like Iran and North Korea you have to deal with.
In context, what these remarks demonstrated is that Rubioās definition of multipolarity is totally different from that of China.Ā The secretary of state sees the US empire as in a āgreat power competitionā with China and Russia.
In fact, Rubio spent much of his interview with Megyn Kelly fearmongering about China. He mentioned the words āChinaā or āChineseā 65 times in roughly one hour.
Rubio framed his foreign-policy strategy as an all-encompassing attempt to weaken China.
āChina wants to be the most powerful country in the world and they want to do so at our expense, and thatās not in our national interest, and weāre going to address itā, Rubio declared.
The secretary of state falsely claimed that China controls the Panama Canal, echoing the rhetoric of Trump, who falsely stated in his inauguration speech, āChina is operating the canalā and āweāre taking it backā.
When asked why the Trump administration is targeting Greenland, Rubio said it is to counter China and to prevent Beijing from having influence in the Arctic region. His answer, according to theĀ official State Department transcript, follows (emphasis added):
Well, the Arctic, which has gotten very little attention, butĀ the Arctic Circle and the Arctic region is going to become critical for shipping lanes, for how you get some of this energy thatās going to be produced under President Trump ā these energies rely on shipping lanes.Ā The Arctic has some of the most valuable shipping lanes in the world. As some of the ice is melting, itās become more and more navigable. We need to be able to defend that.
So if you projectĀ what the Chinese have done, it is just a matter of time before ā because they are not an Arctic power. They do not have an Arctic presence, so they need to be able to have somewhere that they can stage from. And it is completely realistic to believe thatĀ the Chinese will eventuallyĀ ā maybe even in the short term ā try to do in Greenland what they have done at the Panama Canal and in other places, and that isĀ install facilities that give them access to the ArcticĀ with the cover of a Chinese company but that in reality serve a dual purpose: that in a moment of conflict, they could send naval vessels to that facility and operate from there. And that is completely unacceptable to the national security of the world and to the United ā to the security of the world and the national security of the United States.
So the question becomes: If the Chinese begin to threaten Greenland, do we really trust that that is not a place where those deals are going to be made? Do we really trust that that is not a place where they would not intervene, maybe by force?
In short, the Trump administration says it must colonize the Panama Canal, Greenland, and other foreign lands because of hypothetical threats that they imagine China could pose one day.
Ben Norton
Benjamin Norton is the founder and editor of the independent news website Multipolarista, where he does original reporting in both English and Spanish. Benjamin has reported from numerous countries, including Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador, Honduras, Colombia, and more. His journalistic work has been published in dozens of media outlets, and he has done interviews on Sky News, Al Jazeera, Democracy Now, El Financiero Bloomberg, Al Mayadeen teleSUR, RT, TRT World, CGTN, Press TV, HispanTV, Sin Censura, and various TV channels in Mexico, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia. Benjamin writes a regular column for Al Mayadeen (in English and Spanish). He was formerly a reporter with the investigative journalism website The Grayzone, and previously produced the political podcast and video show Moderate Rebels. His personal website is BenNorton.com, and he tweets at @BenjaminNorton.
