During the Cold War, the global situation was described as "bipolar." Almost all nations aligned themselves with either the United States or the Soviet Union. There was a "non-aligned movement" led by India. But even their name reinforced the reality that there were only two real powers in the world.

After the USSR collapsed, international affairs experts began talking about a "unipolar" world. This was a rare moment when one country, in this case the United States, strode the world as an unchallenged power. But the unipolar moment did not last long.

Other countries and groups of countries challenge the United States on a range of issues and sometimes get their way. The European Union offers the Euro as a serious alternative to the U.S. dollar for global investment. China flexes its trade muscle with American allies in the developing world. The Middle East controls much of the U.S. energy supply, and so on. No one country can counter the United States across the board, but the slow aggregation of these challenges led foreign policy wonks to begin talking about a "multipolar" world.

In fact, "multipolar" has been a buzz world in policy circles just long enough that it is about time for someone to offer up a new word and a new way of describing the current world. To do so, along comes Richard Haass.

Ambassador Haass is former Bush Administration official and author who now heads the Council on Foreign Relations. In a new article for Foreign Affairs and in a column for the Financial Times, Haas describes a world of "nonpolarity."

Haass acknowledges the rise of some other big powers (like China, the European Union, India, Japan, and Russia), but he adds:

"Today's world differs in a fundamental way from one of classic multipolarity: there are many more power centers, and quite a few of these poles are not nation-states. Indeed, one of the cardinal features of the contemporary international system is that nation-states have lost their monopoly on power and in some domains their preeminence as well. States are being challenged from above, by regional and global organizations; from below, by militias; and from the side, by a variety of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) and corporations. Power is now found in many hands and in many places."

Haas says this new world offers many challenges and dangers for the United States. But I am glad he also focuses on changes we can make now to reap the benefits a nonpolar world offers.

• The Age of Nonpolarity: What Will Follow U.S. Dominance from Foreign Affairs
• What Follows American Dominion? from Financial Times
• After the Unipolar Moment: Reconciling the U.S. and the World, from the Stanley Foundation
• The New Consensus — A Multipolar World, from the International Herald Tribune