The Rise of the Swing States: How Six Powers Could Decide the Future of the Global Order

 Global politics today is more contested, confrontational, and uncertain than at any time since the end of the Cold War.

China seeks domination in Asia and beyond, while Russia remains aggressively revisionist in Europe. Together with Iran and North Korea, they form an axis of upheaval determined to resist a Western-dominated world.

Yet the West is hardly in retreat. America’s allies in Europe and the Indo-Pacific are stronger and more unified than at any point in decades. Still, doubts persist—about the future of the U.S. role, about the durability of the rules-based order, and about whether Washington can maintain the vision that has underpinned global stability since 1945.

Inside Washington, policy debates reflect this uncertainty. Some leaders continue to see the international order as the foundation of U.S. security, prosperity, and liberty. Others argue the order is a mirage—serving mainly to enrich foreign economies at America’s expense.

But the decisive players may not sit in Washington, Beijing, or Moscow at all. Increasingly, the future of the international order depends on six pivotal nations: Brazil, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Türkiye.  

The New Deciders

These “global swing states” share key traits. Each is multi-aligned, maintaining ties with the U.S., Russia, and China. Each is a regional heavyweight whose choices reverberate worldwide. Collectively, they are G20 members, large economies with strategic geography, and active participants in groupings such as BRICS, the Quad, NATO, ASEAN, and the African Union.

What unites them most is their refusal to fit neatly into the Western bloc or the axis of upheaval. None sanctioned Russia after its invasion of Ukraine. China is a top trade partner for all. And each has enduring but complicated relations with the United States.

Brazil: Active Nonalignment

Brazil, Latin America’s largest democracy, champions multilateralism but insists on reforming global governance. It depends on Russia for fertilizer, partners with China as its largest trading partner, and maintains robust though sometimes strained ties with Washington. Brasília’s constitution enshrines sovereignty and equality of states, reflecting its cautious stance toward sanctions and use of force.

India: Balancing Giants

With 1.4 billion people and the world’s fifth-largest economy, India is indispensable. It remains a top buyer of Russian arms and oil, even as it deepens defense and trade partnerships with the U.S. India shares American concerns about China but avoids full alignment. Its democratic backsliding and refusal to condemn Russia reveal its determination to pursue strategic autonomy.

Indonesia: Rowing Between Reefs

Straddling the Indo-Pacific, Indonesia is a natural swing state. China dominates its trade and investment, Russia sells it arms, and the U.S. courts it as a strategic partner. Jakarta avoids taking sides, preferring to “row between two reefs.” Still, rising Chinese incursions in the South China Sea are nudging Indonesia closer to defending the rules-based order.

Saudi Arabia: Vision and Leverage

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s “Vision 2030” aims to diversify the kingdom’s economy and global alignments. Riyadh has deepened ties with China, joined BRICS, and cultivated neutrality on Russia’s war. Yet it remains bound to the U.S. for defense and global financial stability, even as it explores oil trade in yuan—a potential shock to the dollar-based system.

South Africa: Nonalignment Reimagined

Africa’s most industrialized power casts itself as champion of the Global South. Memories of Western ambivalence during apartheid shape its suspicion of U.S. motives. Closer economic and political ties with China and BRICS reflect this outlook. Yet Pretoria remains a democracy, a nonproliferation leader, and a peacekeeping force—while tensions with Washington have grown under Trump’s second term.

Türkiye: Strategic Hedge

Under Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Türkiye has pursued a “360-degree” foreign policy—remaining in NATO while buying Russian arms and seeking BRICS membership. It supports territorial integrity in Ukraine yet nurtures ties with Moscow. Economically fragile, Türkiye courts Gulf, Russian, and Western investment alike. It remains indispensable for U.S. defense and regional stability but increasingly charts an independent course.

Washington’s Dilemma

For decades, the U.S. built and invested in the international order because it reflected American preferences and extended U.S. influence. That assumption no longer holds. The global swing states—multi-aligned, assertive, and pragmatic—now wield disproportionate influence over whether the rules-based order survives.

To engage them, Washington must change its diplomatic tone, expand market access, rebuild soft power, invest in hard power, and pursue partnerships in critical minerals, semiconductors, and defense industries. These relationships cannot be transactional alone—they must acknowledge the autonomy and ambitions of the swing states themselves.

The Wild Card: The U.S.

Ironically, the biggest uncertainty in the contest over global order is not China, Russia, or the swing states. It is the United States itself. Having created and led the order for decades, Washington is now divided over whether to sustain it.

If America retreats, others will fill the vacuum. If it reinvests, the order may yet endure. But either way, the six swing states—Brazil, India, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, and Türkiye—will shape the outcome far more than in the past.

References:

1. https://bpb-us-e1.wpmucdn.com/blogs.gwu.edu/dist/1/2181/files/2025/07/GibbsMckinley_TWQ_48_2.pdf