When will the world be finished?

U.S. century “is setting. At least that is the consensus of most international policy analysts. Whether they attribute the decline of the US to internal dysfunction, or the growth of China and other developing powers, observers tend to agree that sooner or later “Unipollar” will pave the way for an international system, populated by more than a superpower. It is unclear, however, how we will know when the unipolar world will end.

How long will it take for another global power to even or exceed the United States? What is the threshold for proclaiming unipolarity as something of the past? Most of the efforts, to answer these questions, include the granting of existing international power measures.
From this point of view, the meaning of the U.S. decline is a matter of the moment's prediction, in which a contestant can surpass America in aggregate terms. However, the unipolar world is not just a summer of relative military budgets. It is also determined by a geographical distribution of power and influence. Both go hand in hand. The military and the economy may allow the United States to support major commitments abroad, but it is not the material power that defines the United States as hegemonic. What matters more than anything else is the external establishment of American military and political power. The Cold War ended either in 1989 (when depression in Eastern Europe began to cool off) or in 1991 (when the Soviet Union completely ceased to exist).

But what exactly caused the end of bipolarity? Was the Soviet withdrawal from Eastern Europe, the final collapse of the Soviet Union, the breakup of the Warsaw Pact, a change in the attitudes and priorities of Soviet or Russian leaders, or something else? According to political scientist Harrison Wagner, bipolarity was never determined by the existence of two powerful states in world politics, nor by the size of their nuclear arsenals, nor by the number of allies that each could boast. On the contrary, the <x0.0st feature of power distribution during the Cold War” was that <x2nd) one state, the Soviet Union, took on peaceful terms a dominant position near the Eurasian continent, a position that in the past has been able to achieve only after a series of military victories”.
In other words, bipolarity during the Cold War has been a geopolitical condition a continuing struggle carried out by the Western bloc to protect itself against the overall dominance of some geographic spaces, especially in Europe and East Asia.

The age of bipolarity ended, when internal transformations within the Soviet Union meant that Moscow was no longer a threat to the security of these regions. The end of bipolarity did not require the complete collapse of the Soviet Union, nor did it even reduce its considerable material power.

All that was required was a reconfiguration of interests and influence, in such a way that the geopolitical race over Eurasia was replaced by a different group of international interactions. What does this mean for its past, present, and future? First, if the bipolarity of the Cold War era was characterized by a race for supremacy in Europe and East Asia, then it turns out that unipolality is also a group of geopolitical circumstances.

It is determined by the favourable geostrategic position inherited from the United States at the end of the Cold War: at a nearly-hegemony in Europe and East Asia. Simply put, the U.S. currently holds a geopolitical position similar to what the Soviet Union enjoyed in 1945.

In Europe, the US-led alliance extends from the Atlantic to the Gulf of Finland and the Black Sea. In Asia, the United States boasts a series of coalitions and informal partners that surround almost entirely its main geopolitical challenge, China. If bipolarity is determined by a constant race over the control of the Eurasian continent, the unipolal moment is dictated by the relative lack of active geopolitical rivalry.

Of course, this is how the unipolar world looks to America's main rivals. For strategists in Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, and elsewhere, the international Cold War system has been characterised by the permanent invasion of territories that the United States put under control during World War II and the Cold War, and from which they have not yet left, despite the supposed restoration of peace.

The U.S. Army is exercising a secret control in all oceans of the world. Leaders in Moscow and Beijing are angry by the US dominant position in Europe and Asia Pacific, but they know that the expulsion of America from Eurasia will not be an easy task.
For most Americans, the establishment of its US military power in Europe, Asia and the Middle East is entirely justified in the name of international security, as well as national interest.
But, for foreign opponents, “Pax Americana” is an unfair and inlerable distribution of power and influence. It is a geopolitical configuration, which comes from a kind of historical species, which must be reversed in favor of something more just and sustainable.

Just as bipolarity ended when the Soviet Union withdrew its forces from Eastern Europe and began to exercise an important military presence in East Asia, so the unipolar world will end when the U.S. Army is no longer dominant along the two critical wings of Eurasia: The European Peninsula, and the maritime states of East Asia.

And that can happen in two ways. First of all, it is possible that an international rival or challenge group can expel the United States from Europe, Asia or both. For example, this could happen if Russia provoked a land war in Europe that would expose US commitments to its allies in Eastern Europe as empty promises.

China, on the other hand, can lure the allies of the United States into East Asia, or it has managed to force its neighbours to abandon the regional American regional regional regional regional regional security architecture. Another option is a Euro-Asian alliance, which would strategically make it inappropriate for the United States, maintaining a large military presence abroad.

However, today's unipolar world will end only when the United States loses its almost hegemonic status in Europe or East Asia. Geopolitical circumstances on the ground will have to be reversed. And the pressure from foreign competitors is just one of the ways this can happen. /Mapo/