Towards Bi-Multipolarity

Andrew Korybko

Sanjaya Baru is an economist, a former newspaper editor, a best-selling author, and former adviser to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. He also happens to be one of the thinkers who most keenly understands the complexities of the contemporary world order. Baru proposed the concept of what he calls bi-multipolarity in his article titled ‘The Geo-economics of Multipolarity’. It was published in the book ‘Asia between Multipolarism and Multipolarity’ that was released last year by Manohar Parrikar Institute for Defence Studies and Analysis (IDSA). Baru is also a distinguished fellow at IDSA.

Bi-multipolarity, as he defines it, is an evolution of the late Samuel P. Huntington’s concept of uni-multipolarity. Baru’s article acknowledges the existence of three primary civilisations in Asia--the Chinese, Indian, and Islamic --which he notes have ‘existed alongside each other for centuries.’ In the present geopolitical context, ‘the US and China are the two dominant powers but their power is constrained by the presence of several “major powers”--namely India, Iran, Japan, Russia, Turkey, the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and the ASEAN.’ These countries actively work to balance the influence of that dominant pair in Asia.

The Indian expert elaborates that ‘While each of the major Asian powers would individually like the US to balance China within Asia, they would not join the US in an anti-China containment strategy. They would all prefer a multipolar Asia but recognise, like Huntington, that it will take time before Asia becomes truly multipolar.’ His concept is intriguing even if his assessment that India and Japan aren’t joining the US in an anti-China containment strategy is challenged by their participation in the Quad. Japan is solidly on the US’ side though India is still practicing a regularly recalibrated policy of multi-alignment between the US and Russia.

These details aside, which aren’t by any means insignificant, Baru’s bi-multipolarity concept deserves to be more widely discussed because it keenly identifies the trend of the major Asian powers balancing between the dominant American and Chinese ones through geo-economic and geopolitical means. He was given the opportunity to raise greater awareness of his strategic observations during his latest interview with the publicly financed Russian international media outlet Sputnik. His views were published alongside other experts in the article titled ‘An Unpredictable Ally: Does The AUKUS Pact Undermine The Quad’s Significance?’

Russia’s Balancing Act

It was actually this piece which brought Baru’s bi-multipolarity concept to my attention and inspired me to research more about it. I discovered that it very closely aligns with my own views that I elaborated upon in two pieces earlier this year. The first was for Pakistan’s Express Tribune and was a rebuttal to the globally renowned structural realism theorist John Mearsheimer published under the title ‘Why Structural Realists Are Wrong To Predict That Russia Will Help The US Against China’. I drew attention to what Baru might describe as Russia's bi-multipolar policy to balance China’s rise in a gentle way through its strategic partnership with India.

The second piece was for the Russian International Affairs Council (RIAC), a prestigious think tank in which Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov serves as the Chairman of the Board of Trustees. Titled ‘Towards Increasingly Complex Multipolarity: Scenario For The Future’, my analysis forecasts a future in which Asia’s major powers engage in complex balancing acts with one another with an aim to accelerate the emerging Multipolar World Order. Both pieces cited the academic article that I co-authored last year for Vestnik, the official journal of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations (MGIMO).

MGIMO is run by the Russian foreign ministry and train