Speech held in the conference on the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea.
Speech held in the conference on the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea.
The Center for National Strategy (USMER) has organized an international conference on the Eastern Mediterranean and the Black Sea on July 18 and 19 in Istanbul, Türkiye. Today, we present the speech of Alessandro Fanetti, responsible for Latin America and the Caribbean in the Italian Eurasia and Mediterranean Studies Centre (CeSEM).
First of all, I would like to extend warm thanks to all the organizers, the National Strategy Centre and President Şule Perinçek.
A warm greeting from me and the entire “Eurasia and Mediterranean Studies Centre” (CeSEM), especially from my colleague Stefano Bonilauri.
The resurgence of conflicts that are developing nowadays (albeit with different and oscillating degrees of intensity) in the Black Sea – East Mediterranean area, clearly reflect the strategic geopolitical conflict unipolarism – multipolarism.
On the one hand we thus see the desperate attempt of the defenders of unipolarism to somehow maintain the status quo that arose after the Fall of the Berlin Wall and the consequent dissolution of the Soviet Union (1989 – 1991). A “unipolar pole” that, having just seen the rise of a world with only one Superpower, was even convinced that it had brought the “geopolitical world” to the “End of History” (Fukuyama dixit). An “end of history” period in which even the West Asian area had somehow shown itself incapable of opposing such hegemony (even though the shoots of resistance to such an order and promotion of another design were already firmly anchored in various popular strata and in some ruling classes).
The unipolar vision described above is therefore opposed by the other hand composed of all those forces that aspire to the birth of a true, complete and substantial multipolar world.
An all – out clash that ideally and materially divides the globe into two substantially opposed “geopolitical visions”, with the conflict becoming more acute by the day.
In this regard, two examples clarify the situation well:
1) The Cuba – Venezuela – Nicaragua Axis is considered diametrically opposed by the two camps: the “unipolar bloc” defines it with contempt as the “axis of evil”, while the “multipolar bloc” considers it a substantial and even essential part of itself.
2) While former US President Ronald Reagan had already defined the Soviet Union as the “evil empire” and still in June 2025 NATO defined Russia as “the most significant and direct threat to the Atlantic Alliance”, thus seeking to isolate it from the rest of the world, Moscow however actively participates as a protagonist in all the major organizations clearly oriented towards the multipolar idea.
And in this regard, Western Asia as a whole is, at least since recent years, one of the hubs of active resistance to unipolarism; and thus, one of the “strategic beacons” for the construction of a multipolar world.
The pressure exerted by the so – called “political West” in this area, first and foremost by the USA (and its most faithful allies in the “armed wing” NATO), as well as its “iron partner” Israel, is so strong and decisive precisely for this reason.
Pressure that has two key breaking points: Israel’s all – out war against the entire non-aligned Middle East and an unwieldy NATO presence on Russia’s borders.
Two existential dangers not only for this region, but for the entire world, that reappear overbearingly on the global geopolitical scene as “monsters” that somehow seek to halt a multipolar transition that is in essence inescapable. To save an objectively agonizing unipolarism not only in this region but essentially across the globe.
In the words of my compatriot, the great Italian thinker Antonio Gramsci: “The old world is dying, the new one is slow to appear. And in this contrast between light and dark monsters are born.”
Existential monsters that must be properly addressed by multipolar forces, and in general by all those who aspire to ameliorative changes in the global geopolitical landscape. Tackled both regionally and globally, trying as far as possible to put reason against barbarism.
In this context, West Asia (and Asia as a Continent) and its most proactive, Eurasian and multipolar forces have all the cards to play a leading role in the transition to the “new world”. And in order to fully spread its wings, it is inevitable to give birth to a sort of cohesive and as united as possible “Islamic Pole”, even and firstly on concrete and inescapable issues such as tackling the Palestinian question in a decisive manner. It is to be considered in the immediate future, in fact, the mother of all battles and an open wound for all those forces that aspire to multipolarism and defend the self-determination of peoples.
Therefore, a pole that geopolitically brings together the various peoples of the region who aspire and struggle for an area of peace, development, unity, and prosperity; against all kinds of external interference and global imperialism. A pole that is not only united every now and then in some “dialogue format” with few concrete implications, but that succeeds in having a certain political homogeneity and gives substance to the claims and aspirations of the peoples that make it up.
A pole then capable of participating actively and concretely, with strong leadership capabilities, in the various continental and global multilateral fora.
A pole that is truly capable of organizing itself into a true and solid geopolitical bloc, sovereign and effectively united. First and foremost, to adequately tackle a certain Western hegemony that is still present. A hegemony that especially in the Middle East is represented and led by Israel (with the almost unconditional support of the United States of America). Also because it is quite clear in everyone’s eyes that fragmentation guarantees wider margins of maneuver for unipolar designs, even in this region.
A “pole among poles”, therefore, as it is clear and obvious that for the complete and delineated construction of the multipolar world there is a need for the division of the world into “geopolitical poles”. All with a certain independence, unity, sovereignty and “existential capacity”.
Poles formed by “large spaces”, each inhabited by “peoples – civilizations” characterized by a certain unitary and sovereign capacities. Accustomed to independence and “allergic” to external interference and meddling.
Division into poles that, with a certain degree of approximation, could be as follows:
- United States of America (or North – America more generally)
- Latin America and the Caribbean
- The great spaces of the Pacific
- Africa
- The Islamic Pole
- The Great European Space
- The Chinese Civilization
- The Indian Civilization
- The Russian Civilization
In all this, it is clear and straightforward that Türkiye can and must play a pivot role. A Türkiye fully inserted in the “multipolar dynamic”, that is, able to play all its cards without external ties and laces of any kind. Indeed, there are few “States – Civilizations” in the world that can aspire to the leading role within the geopolitical pole of reference and in the global landscape. And Ankara is one of those, first and foremost because of its history and the capabilities it can still bring to bear. In the service of itself, of its pole of reference, and of a fairer and safer world for all.
In all this context, the defeat of the unipolar Israel – US axis in the area, together with the development of a renewed united, sovereign and acting capacity among the various countries with an Islamic majority in the region, would certainly be a determined and decisive step towards the full realization of the multipolar world.
And on the other hand, an absolutely strategic defeat for the global unipolar axis, which would guarantee the entire area a renewed overall and above all proactive protagonism towards the full realization of multipolarism. An undeniable advance towards the latter, therefore, but one that would still commit the entire “new multipolar area” to a renewed struggle to support the emancipation of peoples in other parts of the world as well.
In my opinion, in fact, the definitive defeat of the “unipolar axis” can only pass through the strengthening of the various “multipolar areas” and the support of these latter (as they have reached a certain level of independence, sovereignty, and unity) to the other areas that are not yet able to independently achieve this condition.
In this regard, the signing of “global strategic partnerships”, such as the “Russia — North Korea partnership” of 2024, seems to be heading in this direction. So does the Beijing — Moscow “no – limits friendship”.
And so does the creation of regional and/or global supranational organizations of a clear multipolar nature, which are eroding the “unipolar foundations” (starting with the dominance of the dollar and the western capacity for influence in the four corners of the globe).
In this regard, it is possible to list, among others: BRICS+ at the global level (an organization in which Türkiye is also absolutely interested), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in Asia (with significant developments around the globe), Alianza Bolivariana para los Pueblos de Nuestra América – Tratado de Comercio de los Pueblos (ALBA – TCP) and Comunidad del los Estados Latinoamericanos y Caribeños (CELAC) in Latin America and the Caribbean, The Confederation of Sahel States (AES) in Africa.
“Divide et Impera” has in fact always been the preferred plan of the great totalizing and alienating empires. It is up to the “multipolar puzzle” not to fall into the trap, and to join forces to ensure a transition that lives up to the expectations and hopes of the vast majority of humanity.
Thank you all for your attention.