Analysis of Multipolarization in the 2025 Munich Security Report

I. Introduction

The Munich Security Report 2025 has been released. The Munich Security Conference (MSC), an annual high-level forum, gathers global policymakers, experts, and thought leaders to discuss critical challenges in international security. Its published reports often reflect the international community’s consensus and concerns regarding key security issues, significantly influencing related policy discussions . The 2025 Munich Security Report, themed “Multipolarization,” itself highlights the international community’s profound recognition of the ongoing and future transformation of the global order. Historically, the MSC was primarily dominated by Europe and the United States, but in recent years, the participation of actors from the Global South has significantly increased , indicating that understanding and responding to multipolarization requires incorporating a broader international perspective.  

The core issue of the 2025 Munich Security Report is the analysis of the far-reaching impacts of the multipolarization of the international order . The term “multipolarization” has become a common term in foreign policy debates , reflecting the widespread international perception that the global balance of power is undergoing a significant shift. The report aims to delve into the opportunities and risks associated with this power transition and may propose strategies to address these challenges, such as the concept of “depolarization” . Therefore, this report is not only a description of the current international situation but also an attempt to provide direction for thinking about how to navigate an increasingly multipolar world.  

The fundamental purpose of the report is to analyze the consequences of the ongoing process of multipolarization in the international order and to explore the potential opportunities and inherent risks associated with this trend. Furthermore, the report may also explore how to manage and guide this transformation, for example, by advocating for a strategy of “depolarization” . This analytical and forward-looking approach demonstrates that the report aims not only to understand the changes in the world order but also to provide the international community with ideas and frameworks for responding to these changes.

II. Definition and Description of Multipolarization in the 2025 Report

The report acknowledges that “multipolarization” is a widely used term in foreign policy discussions, but its specific meaning lacks universal consensus . The report points out that multipolarization is not just a process of global power being dispersed among more actors, but also includes the increasing polarization at both the international and domestic levels . This definition emphasizes the dual nature of multipolarization: the diffusion of power and the divergence of ideologies.  

The report argues that the “process of multipolarization” has become an undeniable fact, evidenced by the increasing number of actors with the ability to influence key global issues . At the same time, the shift in global economic power provides strong evidence for multipolarization. According to data from the International Monetary Fund, emerging markets and developing economies contributed 58.9 percent to the global GDP in 2023 . In addition, the BRICS countries (excluding Russia) hold significant shares in global trade and crude oil production and exports . These economic data clearly indicate that the center of global power is shifting.

The report further elaborates that understanding multipolarization cannot be limited to the diffusion of material power; ideological polarization is also a crucial component . The post-Cold War era, dominated by political and economic liberalism, is no longer the sole ideological mainstream. Developing countries have become more confident in exploring their own development paths , and nationalist populism has risen in many liberal democracies , all indicating that the global ideological landscape is undergoing profound changes. The liberal model, once thought to be the end of history, has been widely challenged .  

The report also analyzes the complexity of the current international system, arguing that it simultaneously exhibits multiple characteristics of unipolarity, bipolarity, multipolarity, and nonpolarity . This view avoids a simplistic division of the global order, acknowledging the coexistence of different power dynamics at different levels and on different issues. Nevertheless, the trend of power shifting towards more countries is evident , suggesting that the global order is undergoing a transition from a unipolar or bipolar structure to a more dispersed multipolar structure .  

III. Perspectives of Major Global Actors on Multipolarization

The 2025 Munich Security Report focuses on analyzing the roles and perspectives of eight major actors in a multipolar world: the United States, China, the European Union, Russia, India, Japan, Brazil, and South Africa . The report dedicates specific chapters to each of these actors , indicating that it considers these countries and regions to play crucial roles in shaping the emerging multipolar order and to hold unique perspectives .

United States: The chapter titled “Maga Carta” in the report suggests that under the slogan of “Make America Great Again,” US foreign policy may increasingly focus on domestic affairs and bilateral competition with China . The report notes that President Trump’s election has already shaken the post-Cold War consensus of liberal internationalism in the United States . The report even suggests that the US might abandon its historical role as a security guarantor for Europe, which would have significant consequences for the situation in Ukraine . Furthermore, the report anticipates that US foreign policy in the coming years will likely be dominated by the bipolar competition between Washington and Beijing; however, this may also accelerate the multipolarization of the international system . The report also mentions that Trump and many of his supporters believe that the US-created international order is a “bad deal” for the United States , implying that the US may seek significant adjustments to the existing international order. Under the Trump administration, US foreign policy may lean more towards realism, emphasizing the balance of power and spheres of influence, while potentially reducing the emphasis on democratic norms and human rights .  

China: The chapter on China in the report is titled “Pole Positioning,” intending to analyze China’s efforts to establish itself as a pole in the global multipolarization process . The report argues that China is the world’s most prominent and powerful proponent of a multipolar order . However, the report also points out that some view China’s efforts to promote a multipolar order as a “rhetorical cover” for its great-power competition with the United States . Despite China’s public advocacy for multipolarization, its underlying motives may be more about challenging US global dominance and seeking a more favorable position in the new international order, rather than solely promoting a more equitable distribution of power .

European Union: The chapter on the European Union in the report is titled “A Perfect Polar Storm,” suggesting that the EU faces severe challenges and a complex situation in a multipolar world . The report notes that as the United States may no longer actively promote the rules-based international order, the EU needs to redefine the position of liberal democracies in the emerging multipolar order . The report also argues that the EU represents the liberal international order; therefore, the increasing questioning of the core elements of this order poses a particularly grave challenge to the EU . The EU needs to maintain its own unity and influence while dealing with the different visions and ideologies of other major powers and finding its own position in an increasingly competitive global landscape.  

Russia: The chapter analyzing Russia’s role in the report is titled “The Czar’s Gambit,” implying that Russia may adopt strategic and risky tactics in response to the changing world order . The report describes Russia’s vision of multipolarization as an attempt to re-establish its sphere of influence in its surrounding regions . The report also points out that Russia has consistently worked to subvert the existing international order and has successfully disrupted efforts aimed at stabilizing it . Furthermore, the report mentions that Russia, along with China and other BRICS countries, has proposed an international order based on international law as an alternative to the US-led “rules-based order,” challenging the Western dominance in the interpretation of international law . This indicates that Russia is actively seeking to promote an international order more favorable to itself.  

India, Japan, Brazil, and South Africa: The report explores the roles of India, Japan, Brazil, and South Africa in a multipolar world in chapters titled “Modi-fied Status,” “A New Normal,” “Lula Land,” and “The Fate of Good Hope,” respectively . These titles suggest the unique situations and challenges faced by each of these countries. For example, the chapter title on Japan, “A New Normal,” may imply that Japan is adapting to the new international landscape, but public opinion polls show strong skepticism among the Japanese public towards a multipolar world . However, the provided information does not elaborate on the specific visions of multipolarization held by India, Brazil, and South Africa as presented in the report.  

The report emphasizes that the visions of multipolarization held by these major actors often diverge and even conflict with each other . These differences in vision make it difficult for countries to peacefully adapt to the existing international order and hinder the formation of common positions in addressing global crises and threats.

IV. Opportunities Presented by a Multipolar World

The report points out that a multipolar world may lead to a more inclusive global governance system . As power is no longer concentrated in the hands of a few countries, more nations will have the opportunity to participate in global decision-making, which may make international institutions more representative and better reflect the diverse interests and perspectives of the world . Countries in the Global South may benefit more from this , with their voice and influence in international affairs expected to increase .

Multipolarization also has the potential to impose more constraints on the United States, which has long been considered too dominant a power . The rise of other centers of power can counterbalance unilateral actions by the US, promoting a more balanced international relationship. This does not mean the end of US influence, but rather that it will need to coordinate and cooperate with other major powers in a more diversified world .

The report argues that multipolarization may foster multilateral cooperation and promote the reform of international institutions . To address common challenges such as climate change, pandemics, and economic instability, countries may need to strengthen cooperation within the framework of international organizations. At the same time, existing international institutions may need to be reformed to better adapt to the power distribution and needs of a multipolar world .

Emerging powers may play a more constructive role in providing global public goods, conflict prevention, and crisis diplomacy . As these countries gain strength, they have the capacity and willingness to contribute more to solving global problems. This may include providing development assistance, participating in peacekeeping operations, and mediating in international conflicts.

Multipolarization may also strengthen the role of international law . In the absence of a single hegemon, international law and commonly accepted norms may become important foundations for maintaining international order and managing relations between states. Countries may place greater emphasis on resolving disputes through international law to avoid conflict and uncertainty.

Furthermore, a multipolar world may show greater tolerance for the cultural and political diversity of the world . With the rise of different civilizations and political systems, the dominance of a single model may weaken, replaced by a more diverse and mutually respectful international environment. Countries in the Global South are advocating for equal exchanges, inclusiveness, mutual benefit, and mutual learning among civilizations , which also reflects the emphasis on cultural diversity.

V. Challenges and Risks Posed by a Multipolar World

The report also warns that multipolarization may increase the risk of disorder and conflict . In a situation where power is dispersed, if there is a lack of effective management mechanisms and common values, competition among major powers may intensify, leading to an increased risk of regional conflicts and even global confrontations .

Multipolarization may also undermine the possibility of effective cooperation . The deepening divisions among major powers and the competition between different order models may hinder countries from taking joint action to address global crises and threats . This will make it more difficult to solve global issues such as climate change and pandemics.

The report expresses concern that multipolarization may trigger new arms races, including nuclear and conventional arms races . To ensure their own security and position in a multipolar world, countries may increase military spending, leading to an imbalance of regional military power and further escalating tensions.

Tensions between major powers may make it more difficult to reach consensus and provide funding for peacekeeping missions . In a competitive multipolar world, major powers may prioritize their own interests over global peace and security, thereby hindering the role of international organizations such as the United Nations in maintaining peace.  

The report also raises concerns about the potential for a “global leadership deficit” . In the absence of a single hegemon, if no effective leadership mechanism and common goals are formed, global issues may lack effective responses.  

Multilateralism may accelerate its disintegration . With the rise of different centers of power, countries may be more inclined to establish their own alliances and partnerships, thereby weakening the existing global multilateral system.  

Multipolarization may also weaken universally applicable international rules and norms . In a world where power is dispersed, countries may be more inclined to interpret and apply international law according to their own interests, leading to the fragmentation and reduced effectiveness of international rules.

The report warns that multipolarization may lead more countries to seek special rights for themselves or result in different regional hegemons shaping their own legal systems . This will further exacerbate the chaos and uncertainty of the international order.  

Furthermore, multipolarization may be accompanied by efforts to weaken universal norms, leading to the continued existence of an “era of impunity” . If major powers are unwilling or unable to hold accountable those who violate international law, it will undermine international justice and fairness.

VI. Managing Multipolarization: Towards Depolarization?

The report observes that due to the increasing divisions among major powers, the negative impacts of multipolarization are gradually gaining the upper hand . This makes it increasingly difficult for the international community to cooperate in addressing common challenges and threats .

The report explores the possibility of initiating a “depolarization” process through international organization reform and ideological reform, hoping to steer multipolarization in a positive direction . This implies the need to adjust the existing international system to better reflect the reality of a multipolar world, while also striving to bridge the gaps between different ideologies to promote consensus and cooperation.

The report emphasizes the importance of building new consensus among major powers and rethinking the rules and norms of the international order . Only when major powers can agree on some basic principles and are willing to abide by common rules can the multipolar world maintain stability and order.

The report also warns that domestic polarization is hindering leaders from reaching the necessary global consensus, and building a more peaceful, sustainable, and just international order must start at home . This indicates that domestic political stability and consensus are crucial for a country to play a constructive role on the global stage.  

VII. Policy Recommendations and Strategic Considerations

The report emphasizes that in a multipolar world, cooperation between major powers and non-major powers must be strengthened . Faced with common challenges, no single country can cope alone; only through collective efforts can effective solutions be found.

The report warns that without commonly observed rules, multipolarization may lead to further chaos in the global order . Therefore, respecting international norms is crucial to preventing new tensions. The international community should jointly advocate for equal treatment, respect for international law, and the practice of true multilateralism .

The report calls on all countries to practice true multilateralism . This means that countries need to participate in international cooperation with a more open and inclusive attitude and seek mutually beneficial outcomes in international affairs.

The report emphasizes that major powers must lead by example, uphold credibility and law, and reject double standards and unilateralism . Only in this way can they set an example in the multipolar system and build a more civilized international order, rather than falling into power struggles.

The “depolarization” strategies proposed in the report, such as reforming international organizations and promoting ideological dialogue, also represent an important policy direction . Through these efforts, the international community may be able to guide multipolarization towards a more positive and stable trajectory.

VIII. Significance and Value of the Report

The report is viewed by some commentators as reflecting a “turning point” (Zeitenwende) in international relations . It marks a widespread recognition that the US-led unipolar era after the Cold War has ended, and the world is entering a more complex and competitive multipolar period .

The report effectively reveals the profound shifts occurring in the global balance of power . It analyzes the rise of emerging powers and the relative decline of traditional powers, providing important perspectives for understanding contemporary international challenges and predicting future trends .

The report also reveals the adjustments that the international legal order is undergoing, an adjustment driven more by geopolitical realities than by pure idealism . This means that the interpretation and application of international law are increasingly influenced by national strategic interests and power dynamics .

The report is considered to solidify a decisive shift in international legal discourse from the post-Cold War liberal order to a framework more focused on realpolitik . This shift suggests that international relations will place greater emphasis on national interests and power competition, while the emphasis on cooperation and multilateralism based on common values may weaken.

The report effectively raises awareness of the potential negative consequences if the trend of multipolarization is not effectively managed . It warns of the risks of disorder, conflict, reduced cooperation, and the erosion of international norms .

The concept of “depolarization” proposed in the report provides a valuable framework for thinking about how to promote cooperation and reduce tensions in a multipolar world . This concept helps to promote further discussion and exploration on how to manage the evolving global order.

IX. Conclusion

The 2025 Munich Security Report provides an in-depth analysis of the current global order’s “multipolarization” trend. The report points out that multipolarization is not only reflected in the diffusion of power but is also accompanied by increasing polarization. The report explores the different views of major global actors on multipolarization and elaborates on the potential opportunities and risks of a multipolar world. The report argues that the negative impacts of current multipolarization are gradually emerging, and therefore proposes strategies such as “depolarization” to guide the process of multipolarization. Overall, the report emphasizes the importance of cooperation, common rules, and true multilateralism in managing an increasingly multipolar world, and reminds the international community to be vigilant about the hindrance of domestic polarization to global consensus.

X. Summary of Core Arguments: Key Points on Multipolarization

• The 2025 Munich Security Report argues that “multipolarization” is a significant feature of the current global order, manifested in the diffusion of power to more actors and the increasing polarization between and within states.
• Major powers such as the United States, China, the European Union, Russia, India, Japan, Brazil, and South Africa hold different and often conflicting visions of multipolarization.
• Multipolarization presents potential opportunities such as more inclusive global governance and constraints on dominant powers, but also significant challenges such as increased risks of disorder and conflict, weakened cooperation, and the erosion of international norms.
• The report suggests that the negative impacts of current multipolarization are gradually becoming dominant.
• The report proposes promoting a “depolarization” process through reforming international organizations and fostering ideological shifts to effectively manage multipolarization.
• Cooperation, common rules, and true multilateralism are essential in a multipolar world.
• The report reflects a “turning point” in international relations, marking a shift from the post-Cold War liberal order towards a framework shaped by realpolitik.
• Domestic political polarization hinders the achievement of the global consensus needed to manage a multipolar world.
• Building a peaceful international order is fundamentally based on addressing domestic issues in each country.