Ali Resul Usul, "American Elections and the Global (Dis)order," All Azimuth 6, No.1 (2017): 103-108. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Restructuring of the World Order in Contemporary International Relations
Bezbednosni dijalozi, 2015
In the past decade a series of viewpoints and scenarios about the existing international order have appeared. The dilemma arises over the question which model explains the best the new constellation of international relations. Disintegration of the bipolar structure has left a number of potential crisis areas with undefined lines of delineation. Imbalance has created a strategic gap so even a small local tremor may create unforeseeable global consequences. The complexity arises from the various types and the intensity of the transnational challenges and threats that have impact on the role and activities of the international actors. Intensification of some issues, such as climate change, regulation of global financial markets, migration, disintegration of states, terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, has additionally complicated the global state of affairs. Globalization has increased the impact and power of international organizations, transnational corporations, non-state actors and sub-state actors. There is an unequal distribution of power in international relations.
The Liberal International Order-the United States, the West and the Global South
The Liberal International Order (LIO) is defined as an "open and rule-based international order" that is "enshrined" in institutions such as the United Nations, the WTO, and other international institutions (Kundnani 2018), geared towards liberal principles and objectives. Based on the ideals of multilateralism it encompasses the liberal concepts of political and economic integration at the international level. It emphasizes open markets, multilateral institutions, liberal democracy, and is extensively headed by the United States (US) and its allies. On the basis of these parameters, the LIO can be considered Western in terms of its ideological foundation (liberalism) and capitalist by way of its economic system. Since World War I and II, and at the end of the Cold War, liberal powers such the US and the United Kingdom (along with other democratic states) have risen in influence and have had a primary role in shaping the world order that we know today. However, much of the current debate about the rules and norms of the LIO revolves around the issue of whether influence over the order was solely from the US and other Western countries or if the Global South had a hand in shaping. These rules and norms consist of integrating states economically and politically, institutionalism, multilateral cooperation, democracy, humanitarianism and liberal values of the free world. This paper discusses and examines whether such rules and norm were solely engineered by the US and other powerful Western states or if countries south of the economic-political border have an influence over it as well. It would also be prudent to maintain a focus on the period between the world wars and the early 21 st Century as this was a time when the world system began to make a more visible and felt change with the rise of the United Nations and the International Financial Institutions (IFIs). It is during this period (circa 1944-1990) where the US ascends to its hegemonic status as the world leader in the growing order. For seventy years the world has been dominated by this western world system and by virtue of this description alone, one can assume that this order's objectives, ideals and rubrics are mainly architected by the West. The US plays a central role here and her primacy in decision making over the order is quite evident: …the United States became the 'first citizen' of this order, providing hegemonic leadership-anchoring the alliances, stabilizing the world economy, fostering cooperation and championing 'free world' values (Ikenberry 2018a, p.7). With the establishment of multilateral and international organization, states began to integrate and assume membership of the system on which these institutions were built. 'Western elites see this order as a hugely positive force for promoting peace and prosperity around the globe' (Mearsheimer 2018), and it is in these goals that the West plays a key role in ensuring the strength and continuance of this system. From the period after the World Wars and the Cold War, the US grew exponentially in influence not only politically but economically as well. This coupled with having the world's largest and most powerful army allowed it and other powerful Western
World Order in the Past, Present, and Future. SeH 1-2016
The present article analyzes the world order in the past, present and future as well as the main factors, foundations and ideas underlying the maintaining and change of the international and global order. The first two sections investigate the evolution of the world order starting from the ancient times up to the late twentieth century. The third section analyzes the origin and decline of the world order based on the American hegemony. The authors reveal the contradictions of the current unipolar world and explain in what way globalization has become more profitable for the developing countries but not for the developed ones. In the paper also explains the strengthening belief that the US leading status will inevitably weaken. In this connection we discuss the alternatives of the American strategy and the possibility of the renaissance of the American leadership. The last section presents a factor analysis which allows stating that the world is shifting toward a new balance of power and is likely to become the world without a leader. The new world order will consist of a number of large blocks, coalitions and countries acting within a framework of rules and mutual responsibility. However, the transition to a new world order will take certain time (about two decades). This period, which we denote as the epoch of new coalitions, will involve a reconfiguration of the World System and bring an increasing turbulence and conflict intensity.
Global Power Shifts and Challenges for the Global Order
The world is facing a dangerous power vacuum which may last for decades. This vacuum is developing because Europe and the USA are currently in a phase of relative decline while China, India and Brazil are claiming international standing without being able to fill this role. A close look reveals several significant changes in global politics and the world economy: China, Russia, India and Brazil are global actors and are gaining relative strength. Together with other regional powers (e.g. Turkey, South Africa, Indonesia) they are influencing global energy, climate, security, trade, currency, and development policies. At the same time, however, they are too weak because they – despite partly strong economic growth – are unable to eradicate poverty in their own countries and an extremely imbalanced distribution of income and wealth prevails resulting in massive social problems. The weak infrastructure, technological under-development and low levels of education for the majority of the population are characteristic for their economic and social situation. Their ability to effectively lead on a global level is limited as they do not yet provide enough global public goods (security, monetary arrangements, development aid). Furthermore, they are often not recognised as leading powers in their own regions. Their alliances such as IBSA (India, Brazil, South Africa) and BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa show a low degree of institutionalisation and a large gap between rhetoric and reality. Additionally, the new regional powers disagree on many issues and thus do not constitute a counterpole to the West. Finally, there is a growing normative disconnect between the regional powers, Europe and the USA. The paper is organized as such: First chapter deals with the relative decline of the US, the EU, the Western world. The second focuses on the rise of the New Powers (BRICS et al), the third chapter tries to find out how the New Powers act globally and influencing the global.
An International Order without Globalism
The liberal international order (LIO) is challenged by new powers, especially China, and powers that seek to restore their role in the international realm, especially Russia. It is also challenged by nationalist populism in nations that formed and long supported the order, especially the United States, as revealed by the election of Donald Trump (Ikenberry, 2017: 2). Some see the abandonment of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), Britain quitting the EU (Brexit), and the US' declining support for the UN and other multilateral institutions as indications that the LIO is endangered. Moreover, they fear that the result will be a less orderly world, and that increased tensions and conflicts among nations as well as violations of human rights, will follow. This article attempts to show that although these observations and concerns are valid, the world seems to be transitioning from an LIO to a nation-centered system (NCS), one based on nation-states, high respect for their sovereignty, and agreements among nations rather than liberal concepts of individual rights, liberalizing regime changes, and global governance. The article will attempt to show that the transition is less disruptive than it may at first seem because (a) several key elements of the LIO were not nearly as liberal as they have often been depicted and hence are not frequently challenged by the rising powers and nationalist populists. (b) As to the liberal elements of the LIO, the Wilsonian project, the global promotion of human rights and democracy both in other nations' domestic political systems and in world governance, the article finds that these have been distorted. If these distortions are corrected, these elements could find a place in the new world order. i (c) In addition, we shall see that the international order needs to Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3035438 be expanded to cover new 'territories,' areas in which key issues are raised by technological changes. These include climate change, outer space, cyberspace, as well as the spread of transnational terrorism.
Introduction Major power shifts always trigger debate. And the same is true in international relations while analyzing the post-cold war world order. The structure of the international politics remained multipolar for three centuries but in the 20th century it has changed three times. It was multipolar at the outset, it became bipolar after the World War-II, unipolar immediately after the disintegration of the Soviet Union and as the new millennium dawns it is gradually taking a unique kind of shape which is yet to be settled (Waltz, 2001: 1). Even after the two and half decades of the end of the cold war, the international system is still in a flux. The current constellation of global forces and alliances is much less clear than it was in the two previous stages of the post war international system. Scholars of international relations are not unanimous about the nature of world order in post cold war era. Accordingly, they have defined this changed global order in different ways. The present world seems neither completely unipolar nor multipolar. Rather, according to few, growing political and economic interdependence is witnessing a non polar world which is more akin to the prevailing realities (Yadav, 2009: 25). In fact, world order which seems multi-polar and unipolar at the same time is taking shape. It amounts to an a la carte menu which makes room for both old and new