What they call "multipolar' today is simply the bastion on which international law was built after WW 2. That bastion was called "inviolability of sovereignty," based on the principle of the equality of nations.
The whole point of the UN Charter was to prevent wars that violated the sovereignty of nations--to prevent wars of aggression, such as the Hitler regime had been carrying out, triggering eventually WW 2.
And, with apologies to the brainwashed, we owe the mechanism for preventing war to . . . er . . . Stalin.
When the Security Council was proposed as the sole arbiter on decisions of war and peace and the allied powers were to be established as permanent members, Stalin, not trusting their peaceful disposition, insisted on the veto power to block resolutions. If one member alone voted NO, the resolution could not be approved.
This is how Stalin insured that the warmongering allies could not carry on in their jolly old warmongering way.
Since the War in Kosovo (1999), the right wing Clintonites in the Dem Party cobbled together a justification for going to war WITHOUT consulting the Security Council.
This justification was the bogus "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P), which was a violation of the spirit and the letter of the UN Charter.
R2P actually neutralized the monopoly power granted by the UN Charter to the Security Council, which alone could authorize war.
The Clintonites, therefore opened the Hitlerian stage of US wars of aggression, without Sec council resolutions..
"Multipolar," appears to be a term that came into currency after the Soviet Union's demise. I believe the term originated in Neo-capitalist Russia and was coined to erase the history of how much the world owed the Monster Stalin and the Soviet Union for trying to protect world peace.
The term "multipolar" is now dominant, and I have nothing against it. However, It should be noted that the word "multipolar" has a history and that within this word what gets buried is the contribution of the Soviet communists.
So, when a wiser Russia today champions "multipolarity," we should realize that this is new wine in old bottle. To champion "multipolarity" is simply to abide by the UN Charter and international law.
Which international law Russia and China are actually reviving from the ashes of the bonfire which Washington arsonists had lit to burn the principle of sovereignty, as a bedrock for preventing war, the principle of equality of nations, the whole principle and architecture of the post-WW 2 international law world order.
In fact, R2P--the "responsibility to protect" minorities supposedly under threat in a foreign country is entirely Hitlerian.
Under the argument that it was to protect German minorities, Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia.
Today, all the talk about violations of human rights in Xinjiang, for example, is nothing but the old Hitlerian stratagem of a benevolent intent to justify interfering and intervening in the sovereign affairs of an independent country.
So ok, call it "multipolarity," but it has nothing to do with "the world today." It was yesterday's world that invented it--and it was a socialist world.
