.
The example of the United Sates after the Cold War is the most recent example of a unipolar world. When it comes to military aspects, the United States can prove itself easily as a unipole; in 2007 the US spent 623 billion dollars, while the rest of the world combined summed up 500 billion dollar in military expenditures.3 Taking a look at the US history after the Cold War one can see that a unipolar system can be very troubled and full of conflicts. The US have being engaged in interstates wars since 1991 in Kuwait, then in Kosovo in 1999 followed by, Afghanistan from 2001 until the present, and finally Iraq from 2003 to 2010. As Nuno Montero (2011:11) says in his article Unrest Assured: Why Unipolarity Is Not Peaceful, "In all, the United States has been at war for thirteen of the twenty-two years since the end of the Cold War. Put another way, the first two decades of unipolarity, which make up less than 10 percent of U.S. history, account for more than 25 percent of the nation's total time at war."4.
A bipolar global system is defined by two states or group of states sharing the global power. In this system the cultural, economic, and military influence is divided by two major sources of power. Alliances, bandwagon, and counter-balance are often seeing in this in this kind of system. Weather a bipolar system is stable and peaceful still a good topic of discussion between scholars of the topic. According to the realistic point of view a bipolar world is not the most stable kind of international power division. In his article, The Long Peace, the End of the Cold War, and the Failure of Realism, the author Richard Ned Lebow (1994:252), mention the realist vision of Morgenthau, he says, "For Morgenthau, the long peace was not an analytical puzzle but a desperate hope. Morgenthau believed that post war international relations were shaped by bipolarity and nuclear weapons.
