With the fall of the Iron Curtain, the world left behind the relative stability of a bipolar geopolitical structure and entered into what some call "multipolar madness". Certainly this is a time of transition. Many observers consider this a unipolar situation - with the United States as the sole remaining "superpower" now that the Soviet Union is no more. Others consider the "new world order" an inherently unstable situation - in post-(Cold) war trauma, so to speak - as the U.S. staggers away from victory as damaged as the former U.S.S.R.; in the power vacuum that is currently underway, the argument goes, the United States steadily loses ground while new power entities compete for position and dominance. This last scenario would certainly fit into a geopolitical model based on Modelski's theory of cycles. Short-term predictions are chancy, however, since the geopolitical map is often too close to see in its entirety. Rather than being caught up in the details of the contemporary moment, trying to sort out the nuances of the status quo, one might be better employed looking ahead twenty years.
What will be the balance of geopolitical power in twenty years? It is the prediction of this writer that it will resemble the multipolar balance-of-power situation that prevailed in Europe during the 1800s - although with different players. Before proceeding to support that prediction, it is necessary to elaborate on the situation in the 19th century as I interpret it to have been.
Stability is the first word that comes to mind when thinking of Europe in the 1800s. After the turbulence of the Napoleonic Wars, the "Peace of Metternich" brokered in 1815 held until the outbreak of World War I in 1914. True, there were "small" wars: Britain and Russia in the Crimea in the 1850s and the Franco-Prussian War in the early 1870s. There were strains in the social fabric: the uprisings in 1848, the Paris Commune in 1871. Still, t...