[Answered] Analyze the contemporary global order as a multipolar world with bipolar characteristics. Examine how the interplay between three great powers influences global governance and India’s strategic maneuverability in a landscape lacking a single center of authority.

Introduction

Global power is diffusing amid US–China rivalry and Russia’s strategic resurgence, reflected in defence spending, economic rebalancing, and alliance recalibration, signalling the end of unipolarity without a settled alternative order.

Nature of the Contemporary Global Order

1. Multipolarity: Power today is dispersed among multiple actors, with the US, China, and Russia as great powers, alongside influential middle powers like India, Germany, Japan, and Brazil.
2. Bipolar Characteristics: Despite diffusion, global politics is structured by a systemic US–China rivalry, resembling bipolarity in trade wars, technology decoupling, and military posturing in the Indo-Pacific.
3. Absence of a Central Authority: Unlike post-1945 institutions anchored in US leadership, global governance today reflects institutional fatigue, visible in WTO paralysis, UNSC deadlock, and fragmented climate negotiations.

Role of the Three Great Powers

1. United States: The US remains the pre-eminent military and financial power, but has shifted towards offshore balancing, retrenching from Europe while asserting primacy in the Western Hemisphere, echoing the Monroe Doctrine.
2. China: As the rising power, China converts economic strength into military capability, possessing the world’s largest navy by ship count, and pursuing regional hegemony through Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and South China Sea militarisation.
3. Russia: Though economically weaker, Russia’s nuclear arsenal, energy leverage, and coercive diplomacy sustain its great power status. It acts as a swing power, aligning tactically with China while leaving space for selective engagement with the US.

Impact on Global Governance

1. Institutional Fragmentation: Rival blocs undermine consensus-based governance, evident in sanctions regimes, alternative payment systems like CIPS, and competing technology standards.
2. Rules-based Order under Stress: As seen after Crimea (2014) and the Ukraine war, enforcement of norms is selective, reinforcing Realist anarchy, as described by Kenneth Waltz.
3. Issue-based Coalitions: Governance increasingly relies on minilateralism, such as QUAD, AUKUS, and BRICS, rather than universal institutions.

India’s Strategic Maneuverability

1. Strategic Autonomy: India leverages fluid multipolarity to avoid rigid alignments, maintaining ties with the US, Russia, and China, consistent with its historic Non-Aligned Movement ethos.
2. Multi-alignment: India participates in QUAD for maritime security, BRICS for Global South representation, and SCO for Eurasian engagement, maximising diplomatic flexibility.
3. Economic and Technological Leverage: With India projected as the fastest-growing major economy (IMF), it attracts supply-chain diversification under China-plus-one, enhancing strategic relevance.
4. Norm-shaping Role: India positions itself as a bridge between blocs, advocating reformed multilateralism, digital public infrastructure, and climate equity, as highlighted during its G20 Presidency.

Constraints and Risks for India

1. US–China Polarisation: Intensifying rivalry risks pressuring India to take sides, especially on technology and defence ecosystems.
2. Regional Instability: Russia–China proximity and unresolved border tensions with China limit India’s strategic comfort.
3. Governance Uncertainty: Fluid multipolarity reduces predictability, complicating long-term foreign policy planning.

Conclusion

Echoing Justice Radhakrishnan’s emphasis on balance and Kautilya’s Mandala, India must navigate power rivalry with prudence. As the Economic Survey notes, strategic autonomy thrives in uncertainty.