The following article - from a major speaker at our forthcoming family office investment summit in November - addresses the assertion that the world is moving towards a more "multipolar" period, with implications for investors. Tue author argues that this claim is off-base.

The following article comes from Jesse Friedlander, who is due to speak at the Family Wealth Report Family Office Investment Summit on November 16. (More on the author below.) His talk will be based around the following article. The editors are pleased to share this content and invite feedback. To comment, email tom.burroughes@wealthbriefing.com and amanda.cheesley@clearviewpublishing.com

Jesse Friedlander 

To register for the summit, click here.
 

For much of the past decade, wealth managers and investors have become accustomed to hearing that the world is entering a "multipolar" era. The narrative is familiar: China's rise, the growing influence of Gulf states, the expansion of BRICS, and the increasing assertiveness of middle powers such as India, Turkey and Saudi Arabia are creating a more fragmented and competitive geopolitical landscape.

At first glance, the argument appears compelling. Countries that once operated largely within a US-led international order are pursuing more independent economic and diplomatic strategies. Sovereign wealth funds in the Gulf are deploying capital globally, emerging economies are building domestic industries, and governments are seeking to reduce dependence on traditional Western institutions.

Yet beneath these visible shifts, a different reality may be emerging. Rather than a genuinely multipolar world, investors may be witnessing the development of a global system increasingly dominated by two interconnected centres of power: the US and China.

For family offices and private investors, understanding this distinction could have significant implications for long-term asset allocation.

Two systems underpinning the global economy
The traditional multipolar thesis assumes that power is becoming dispersed among numerous competing nations and regions. However, a closer examination of global supply chains and financial markets suggests that influence remains heavily concentrated.

China has become the world's dominant manufacturing platform. Over several decades, it has developed deeply integrated industrial ecosystems spanning everything from consumer goods and electric vehicles to renewable energy technologies, advanced materials and industrial machinery.

Its position extends well beyond low-cost manufacturing. Today, China plays a central role in many of the world's most important supply chains, making it difficult for governments and corporations to reduce exposure quickly or completely.

At the same time, the US continues to dominate the global financial architecture. The US dollar remains the primary reserve currency, American capital markets remain the deepest and most liquid in the world, and US technology companies continue to exert outsized influence across sectors ranging from artificial intelligence to digital payments.

While concerns about "de-dollarization" frequently attract headlines, there remains no credible alternative with comparable scale, liquidity and institutional support.

For investors, this suggests that economic power may be less fragmented than political rhetoric often implies.

The limits of middle-power influence
The rise of countries such as India, Vietnam, Brazil and Saudi Arabia is undeniable. These markets are attracting investment, expanding domestic industries and playing increasingly important regional roles.

However, many still depend heavily on either Chinese industrial capacity or American financial infrastructure.

India offers a useful example. It has emerged as one of the world's most attractive growth stories, benefiting from demographic advantages, manufacturing investment and technology development. Yet many of the industries driving that growth remain linked to global supply chains shaped by China, while international capital flows continue to be influenced by US monetary conditions.

Similarly, Gulf states have become major investors and strategic players, but their economic models remain closely connected to both Chinese demand and Western financial markets.

This does not diminish the investment opportunities available in these regions. Rather, it suggests that many emerging growth markets may function less as independent poles of power and more as beneficiaries of a broader US-China framework.

Why decoupling remains difficult
One of the defining themes of recent years has been the notion of economic decoupling between the US and China.

While governments have introduced tariffs, export controls and investment restrictions, the reality on the ground is more complicated. Trade relationships remain extensive. Supply chains continue to span both economies. Multinational companies still rely on Chinese manufacturing capacity while maintaining significant exposure to US consumers and capital markets.

The pharmaceutical sector illustrates this interdependence particularly well. Many Western healthcare companies continue to depend on Chinese production capabilities for critical inputs and manufacturing processes. Similar patterns can be found across electronics, industrial equipment and consumer goods.

Even in technology, where competition is often most intense, complete separation remains difficult due to the complexity of global research, development and production networks.

For investors, this suggests that geopolitical risk should not automatically be interpreted as a signal to avoid either market entirely. Instead, portfolio construction increasingly requires an understanding of where interdependence remains strong and where vulnerabilities may emerge.

Implications for wealth management
If the world is evolving toward a form of US-China duopoly rather than true multipolarity, several investment themes become more important.

First, sectors exposed to strategic competition may experience elevated volatility. Semiconductors, critical minerals, defence technologies and advanced manufacturing are likely to remain focal points for both governments and investors.

Second, infrastructure linked to global trade and energy security could continue to attract capital as countries seek greater resilience within existing systems.

Third, emerging markets should be evaluated carefully. Not all will benefit equally from geopolitical shifts. Countries able to position themselves as trusted partners within both American and Chinese ecosystems may enjoy stronger long-term growth prospects.

Finally, investors should remain cautious about narratives that assume a rapid collapse of existing financial structures. While the global economy is changing, many of the institutions underpinning international capital flows remain remarkably resilient.

Looking beyond the headlines
Geopolitical narratives often swing between extremes. Some analysts foresee the decline of American influence, while others focus on the risks associated with China's rise.

The reality is likely to be more nuanced.

The evidence increasingly suggests that the world's two largest economies remain deeply intertwined, even as they compete across technology, trade and national security. Rather than replacing one another, they may continue to shape different layers of the global system: China as the dominant industrial platform and the US as the primary financial and innovation hub.

For family offices and private investors, the key question may not be which country ultimately prevails.

A more relevant challenge is understanding how portfolios are exposed to the opportunities and risks created by this evolving relationship. In an environment defined by structural interdependence rather than outright separation, successful investing may depend less on choosing sides and more on identifying the businesses, sectors and regions positioned to benefit from both centres of global power.

About Jesse Friedlander
Jesse Friedlander is founder and chief investment officer of Des Voeux Partners Family Office. Established in Hong Kong as a multi-family office, the firm operates exclusively for Friedlander’s family. During his two decades in Hong Kong, he also researched Asian equity and credit for Susquehanna and advised corporate and financial services clients for Merrill Lynch and JP Morgan. Friedlander has allocated to virtually every asset class, across strategies and continents, from African Venture Capital to Australian Litigation Finance.

Friedlander’s current focus is early-stage investments in health and wellness companies. He serves as an advisor to Lever Venture and First Bight Ventures; he is also an associate producer with Crescent Moon Film Productions. 

Friedlander has been invited to address conferences on US-China relations and the Middle East, Global capital markets, and emerging markets. He publishes Seeking Harbor on Substack which analyzes geopolitics and capital markets.  He previously hosted a podcast ReOrient! about Asia and was published numerous times in the South China Morning Post. 

Friedlander graduated cum laude and with honors in East Asian studies from Yale College and holds an MBA from Wharton and a MA in international relations and economics from Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS).