Several states like Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Pakistan, Qatar, and the UAE have assumed active diplomatic roles in the ongoing US-Israel war on Iran, the Gaza war, and, to a more limited extent, in the Russia-Ukraine war.
These countries, commonly defined as middle powers or emerging powers, are apparently trying to fill the leadership vacuum created by the great powers. In doing so, they seek to provide stability to the ailing rules-based international order by reviving multilateralism.
Will middle powers be able to anchor the stability of the global order and revive and reform multilateral cooperation? To ponder over these questions, it is important to understand what is middle power?
Who are middle powers?
Middle powers are the countries that sit below the great powers or superpowers in the international power spectrum but exercise enough influence to shape international events.
The concept of the middle power is usually traced to the writing of Italian philosopher Giovanni Botero in the 16th century. In The Reason of State, originally published in Italian as Della Ragion di Stato in 1589, Botero described a middle-sized dominion in early modern Europe as the one which “has the forces and sufficient authority to maintain itself without needing the support of another” (in R. Bireley, editor/translator, 2017).
He also argued that the middle-sized states/dominions are more likely to endure because small states are more easily exposed to the forces and affronts of the large states, whereas large states stir up jealousy and suspicion in their neighbours and face greater internal and external pressures (in R. Bireley, editor/translator, 2017).
The term middle powers became popular during the Cold War, and gained renewed currency in recent decades, where it is used for a wide array of traditional (like Canada, Australia, and the Nordic countries) and emerging powers (like India, South Africa, Argentina, and Brazil). Many middle powers scramble for manoeuvring space and avoiding exclusive geopolitical alignment.
Reliance on diplomacy
Notably, the rise of middle powers, primarily from the Global South, has drawn scholars into debates over their identification. Some have attempted to identify middle powers by their military strength, geostrategic position, and leadership capabilities, while others have done so through their foreign policy behaviour.
Scholars like A F Cooper, et al., (1993), for instance, have focussed on the foreign policy behaviour of middle powers; that is, “their proclivity for seeking multilateral solutions to international problems”, as argued by Eduard Jordaan, an Assistant Professor of Political Science, in The Concept of a Middle Power in International Relations: Distinguishing between Emerging and Traditional Middle Powers (2003).
Their style of diplomacy has been described as “niche diplomacy” because their limited foreign policy objectives are determined by their capabilities, which are less than those of great powers or superpowers. They marshal their resources carefully to resolve particular global issues through multilateral cooperation and institutions.
Can middle powers stabilise the world order?
The US’s nationalist and transactional policy approach, alongside its reduced commitment to multilateral institutions, including the United Nations, has placed strain on the post-war order, or the rules-based international order.
Now, the question remains: are middle powers prepared to anchor the stability of the world order? Some examples appear encouraging: In November 2025, Brazil hosted over 190 nations for the thirtieth annual UN climate conference, which generated twenty-nine consensus agreements. The US was absent.
Similarly, at the G20 summit hosted by South Africa last year (boycotted by the US), middle powers from both the Global North and South adopted a joint declaration committing to “multilateral co-operation”. The declaration covered climate change mitigation and economic inequality.
Citing such examples, Stewart Patrick, a senior fellow and director of the Global Order and Institutions Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, says that these nations adopted what could be called the U2 Doctrine: moving forward “with or without you”.
But it remains to be seen if middle powers withstand pressures from great powers and translate their competing values and distinct visions for international order into a coherent strategy for addressing global turbulence.
Send your comments to ashiya.parveen@indianexpress.com.
Click Here to read the UPSC Essentials magazine for August 2026. Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.
Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi during G20 Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa. (PMO via PTI Photo) 
Share
