A world order based on coercion invites backlash. Weaker nations, when oppressed by a single superpower, will band together and use surreptitious methods to disrupt and weaken the hegemon. Civilization itself is a model of the weak uniting against the strong.

Developing nations interpret America's aggressive foreign policy, such as the fictional Iran war, not as a show of strength but as a sign of a shifting global power balance. They see the US acting like a desperate "revolutionary power" because its traditional dominance is being challenged.

While US actions in Latin America may be a direct loss for Russia and China's regional allies, they create a global precedent. A world where great powers feel free to act forcefully in their immediate surroundings is precisely the international order that Russia and China want to establish in Eastern Europe and the Western Pacific.

The current international system isn't merely a contest between the US and China. Middle and even small powers like Turkey, Brazil, and Singapore are actively pursuing "strategic autonomy" and recrafting foreign policy, creating a more complex, diffuse web of competition across the globe.

While a unipolar world led by one's own country is advantageous, a multipolar world with competing powers like the U.S. and China creates a dynamic tension. This competition may force more compromised global decisions, potentially leading to a more balanced, albeit more tense, international system than one dominated by a single unchallenged power.

Middle powers like India are not picking a side but are 'multi-aligned,' partnering with the US on tech, Russia on arms, and China on other initiatives. This creates a fluid, complex system of shifting, issue-specific coalitions rather than two fixed blocs.

The conflict is not an isolated event but a symptom of the world transitioning away from a single US superpower. This new era features competing power blocs like the US, China, and India, a return to a more historically typical state of global affairs.

The future world order hinges on the alignment of the Global South. Alexander Stubb argues that Western powers must use "values-based realism" and "dignified foreign policy" to win over key nations like India, Brazil, and South Africa to a rules-based system, as they are the decisive players in the struggle.

A multinational peacekeeping force from BRICS countries (China, India, Brazil, etc.) could be more effective in conflicts like the Russia-Ukraine war. The rationale is that these nations are seen as more neutral than NATO and hold significant economic leverage (e.g., as major buyers of Russian energy), making them a credible guarantee against further aggression.