Multipolarity In the World System

Eliciting provocative clues for psychosocial challenges
Tensegrity form-finding of relevance to integrative configuration of polarities
Psychosocial tensegrity as a necessarily mysterious collective blindspot?
Towards polarity containment -- psychosocial tensegrity in practice
Predetermination of tensegrity forms of relevance to integrative configuration of polarities
Matching sets of psychosocial polarities to tensegrities: case of the 10 Commandments?
Spherical tensegrity as "container" for polarization dynamics of global civilization?
Tensegrity torus as complementary framing of integrative psychosocial structure?
Matching sets of psychosocial polarities to tensegrities: case of Axes of Bias?
Matching sets of psychosocial polarities to tensegrities: case of Sustainable Development Goals?
Tensegrity as a key to psychosocial polarity reversal in practice?

1648 Vestfalya düzeniyle inşa edilen modern ulus-devletler sisteminde 18. ve 19. yüzyıllarda görülen klasik güç dengesine dayalı çok-kutuplu bir uluslararası yapı söz konusuyken, Soğuk Savaş döneminde iki kutuplu uluslararası yapı hâkim olmuştur. Soğuk Savaştan bu yana geçen süreç ise küresel sistemde ortaya çıkmakta olan yeni çok-kutuplu uluslararası yapının “embriyo dönemi”dir. Zira 1648’den bugüne değin
uluslararası sistemin yapısındaki değişim-dönüşümler ve kurulan uluslararası düzen sistemde savaş(lar)ın hüküm sürdüğü yaklaşık 30 yıl süren “geçiş dönemleri” sonrasında ortaya çıkmıştır. Başka bir deyişle, nasıl ki 1618-1648 Otuz Yıl savaşları Vestfalya düzenini ve çok-kutuplu güç dengesini, I. ve II. Dünya Savaşları (1914-1918
ve 1939-1945) Soğuk Savaş düzenini ve iki-kutuplu yapıyı ortaya çıkarmışsa, 11 Eylül’den bugüne dek yaşanan savaşlar da çok-kutupluluk ekseninde şekillenen 21. yüzyıldaki küresel sistemi ve düzeni doğuracaktır. Buradan hareketle bu çalışmanın amacı 1990 sonrasında ortaya çıkan ve çok- kutuplu uluslararası yapıya evrilen söz
konusu geçiş döneminin sistemik ve yapısal parametrelerini analiz etmektir.
Anahtar Kelimeler: Küresel Sistem, Çok-Kutuplu Uluslararası Yapı, Uluslararası Düzen, Geçiş Dönemi
Abstract
While a multi-polar international structure, based on the classical balance of power which has been seen in the 18th and 19th centuries, has reigned in the modern nation-states system constructed by Westphalia 1648 Order, the bipolar international structure became dominant during the Cold War. The process passed since the
Cold War is the “embryonic period” of the new multi-polar international structure that is to be emerging in the global system. The changes and transformations in the structure of the international system and the international order occured from 1648 to the present emerged after 30 years of “transitional periods” during which the war(s)
has prevailed/occured. In another words, while 1618-1648 Thirty-Year Wars lead to the emergence of Westphalia Order and multi-polar power balance, I. and II. World War (1914-1918 and 1939-1945) created Cold War Order and bipolar structure. The wars that occured from September 11, will also form the global system and order in the 21st century, which is shaped in the axis of multi-polarity. From this point of view, the aim of this study is to analyze the systemic and structural parameters of the stated transitional period that emerged after 1990 and evolved into a multi-polar international structure.
Keywords: Global System, Multi-polar International Structure, International Order, Transitional Periods

This paper examines the spread of the international use of the renminbi (yuan), with particular focus on, the multipolarisation of the international monetary system. Additionally, the study addresses the question of how the spread of a new currency in international financial markets influences the external financing opportunities of small open economies (e.g. Hungary). The author sets out two possible scenarios in relation to the spread of the Chinese renminbi (yuan) and, in terms of the development of the entire international financial system, he points out that over the next years it will be of crucial importance which model the Chinese economic policy will move toward, and if there is a road that leads from the one to the other.

Fifty years after Nixon's visit to Beijing humanity is in front of a new rigid and dangerous bipolar system. A new opening to China can mitigate the tensions of the new Cold War and create a more flexible and adaptable multipolar system instead of a the rigid forthcoming fierce antagonism between the Euroatlantic World and the unified Eurasia.

Throughout the article, it's intended to investigate the evolution of the global order from a bipolar structure to a temporary uni-polar and then to the actual multi-polar constitution in sequence. That's why this article aims to focus primarily on the question of " If the international system has evolved to a multi-polar system in terms of power relations or not? " , and then the question of " If the evolution process has been completed or not " ? By using a descriptive methodology, the recent international conflicts ongoing especially in the Middle East region and affecting Turkey are investigated with a perspective depending on the evolution of the power balances and the changing character of the war and conflicts. It is asserted that the current conflicts in the region have converted the asymmetric warfare to a new and supra-asymmetric type which can be named as asymmatrix warfare. After this investigation it is supposed that the current governance system and its institutions are not able to satisfy the overall requirements of both the global and regional balance system. Starting from this assumption, the minimum basic requirements of a possible global total governance system, which should meet the prerequisites of a multi-polar, multi-dimensional and multi-layered global and regional balance, are discussed. Finally it is concluded that a glocal integrated governance system requires a mechanizm, which respects and preserves all cultural diversities in every aspect, by applying a facilitating regime, that supports a real multiform and rich culture composition instead of a top-down coercive one, which has tried to create a uniform but poor culture. So the focus of integrated governance model should rely on harmonization instead of uniformity.