US Signals Shift from Multipolarity to Empire, Raising Global Security Concerns

Munich, Germany – February 16, 2026 – A stark shift in US foreign policy was signaled this week at the Munich Security Conference, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio appearing to abandon the prospect of a balanced multipolar world order in favor of restoring Western dominance. The address, delivered on February 14th, has sparked concern among international observers who fear a return to a more aggressive and unilateralist approach from Washington. The implications for global stability and the future of international cooperation are significant, prompting questions about Europe’s role and the potential for escalating geopolitical tensions.

This report draws from insights shared by Einar Tangen, a senior fellow at the Taihe Institute in Beijing and the Centre for International Governance Innovation, who offered a critical assessment of Rubio’s speech and its potential ramifications. Originally published on Professor Glenn Diesen’s Substack (Feb. 16, 2026), this edited version provides a deeper understanding of the evolving geopolitical landscape.

The End of Unipolarity and the Rise of a New American Strategy

For years, European nations have expressed growing concern over their dependence on the United States. A diversified network of partnerships, many argue, is crucial for maintaining a balanced international system founded on established rules. The assumption following Secretary Rubio’s interview with Megyn Kelly was that the US would adapt to a multipolar world, potentially forging agreements with major powers like Russia and China. This could have involved re-evaluating NATO expansion and seeking a new framework for coexistence.

However, Rubio’s address at the Munich Security Conference on February 14th signaled a dramatic departure from this expectation. Instead of embracing multipolarity, the US appears to be actively pursuing a revival of its global dominance, seeking to restore Western leadership. This strategy hinges on securing European alignment, with a clear implication that those who do not follow America’s lead will be left to navigate a turbulent world alone.

Einar Tangen paints a bleak picture, suggesting the US now views Europe as largely expendable. “For the US, Europe is no longer useful. It’s broken,” Tangen stated. He further contends that the US is prioritizing its relationship with China, viewing it as the primary strategic competitor, and is willing to disregard the interests of both Europe and the Global South in pursuit of this goal. This shift, Tangen argues, represents a resurrection of colonialist tendencies.

Appealing to the Right and Ignoring the Global South

Rubio’s speech, according to Tangen, was a deliberate attempt to appeal to right-wing factions across Europe, encouraging them to seize control. This strategy is fueled by a narrative prevalent in the US that blames immigration for domestic problems, despite the vital contributions of immigrant workers. The irony, Tangen points out, is that Rubio, himself of Hispanic background, appears to be aligning with groups that would traditionally reject him.

The reaction from global leaders was reportedly one of disbelief. Tangen believes that approximately 85% of world leaders watching the speech were shocked by the overt call for a return to colonial practices. This sentiment underscores a growing perception that the US is abandoning its commitment to the Global South, effectively discarding entire regions as pawns in its rivalry with China.

The US, Tangen asserts, is signaling a willingness to impose its will, regardless of international consensus. This echoes recent actions, such as Vice President JD Vance’s critical remarks towards European allies at last year’s Munich Security Conference (C-SPAN). Europe, meanwhile, remains in a state of indecision, caught between a desire for autonomy and a continued reliance on the US.

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s recent speech acknowledged the changing realities but lacked a clear vision for a more equitable world order. He emphasized Europe’s need for the US, but failed to articulate a compelling alternative to the current trajectory. This hesitancy, Tangen suggests, leaves Europe vulnerable and dependent.

A Disposable Europe and a New Cold War?

The US, according to Tangen, views both Europe and the Global South as disposable in its pursuit of dominance over China. This perspective is rooted in the thinking of figures like Elbridge Colby, who advocate for a “new American century” characterized by unwavering US hegemony. This approach, however, risks escalating tensions and potentially plunging the world into a new era of conflict.

Glenn Diesen notes the strangeness of Rubio’s appeal to Europe, given their reluctance to accept a diminished role in global affairs. Europeans, after decades of influence, are now being asked to become instruments of US power, rather than equal partners. The offer, Diesen argues, is essentially for Europe to act as a “henchman” in a potentially catastrophic effort to subordinate the world.

A more viable alternative, Diesen suggests, would be for Europe to embrace multipolarity, establishing a post-Cold War settlement that acknowledges the legitimate interests of Russia and China. This would allow Europe to thrive as a unified and independent entity, rather than a divided battleground. China, in particular, could provide Europe with a crucial alternative partner, reducing its dependence on the US.

Diesen draws a parallel to Adam Smith’s analysis of European colonialism, arguing that a more balanced distribution of power would foster peaceful economic ties and prevent one-sided exploitation. However, the US, rather than pursuing this path, has declared “war on” the emerging multipolar order.

What is particularly concerning, Diesen adds, is the resistance to acknowledging multipolarity within Europe itself, often being labeled as “treasonous.” This resistance stems from a reluctance to recognize the legitimate interests of other major powers. The reality, however, is that the ‘90s are over, and economic and military power is no longer concentrated in the West.

The US strategy, as outlined by Rubio, involves dismantling the existing international order and embracing a “rule of the jungle” mentality. This approach, coupled with the framing of China as a threat, is designed to rally support for a new Cold War. But is this a sustainable or desirable path forward?
What are the long-term consequences of prioritizing dominance over cooperation?

Frequently Asked Questions About the Munich Security Conference and US Foreign Policy

1. What is the significance of the Munich Security Conference in shaping global security policy? The Munich Security Conference is a crucial annual gathering of international leaders and experts, providing a platform for discussing pressing security challenges and shaping policy responses.
2. How does the US strategy outlined by Secretary Rubio differ from previous approaches to international relations? Rubio’s speech signals a departure from the post-Cold War emphasis on multilateralism and a return to a more assertive, unilateralist approach focused on restoring US dominance.
3. What are the potential implications of the US strategy for Europe? Europe risks becoming a pawn in the US’s rivalry with China, potentially facing increased pressure to align with US policies and sacrificing its own strategic autonomy.
4. What role does China play in the evolving geopolitical landscape? China is increasingly viewed by the US as the primary strategic competitor, driving a shift in US foreign policy towards containment and confrontation.
5. Is a new Cold War inevitable given the current geopolitical tensions? While not inevitable, the escalating tensions between the US and China, coupled with the dismantling of existing international norms, significantly increase the risk of a new Cold War.
6. What is the concept of multipolarity and why is it relevant to the current global situation? Multipolarity refers to a world order characterized by multiple centers of power, rather than a single dominant force. Recognizing and adapting to this reality is crucial for fostering stability and cooperation.