Nausheen Wasi
Contemporary global politics has experienced profound shifts and transformations, defying numerous early predictions and expectations that arose at the conclusion of the Cold War. Experts and decision-makers envisioned a new world order marked by the end of ideological conflicts, the expansion of democratic governance, and an era of peace and prosperity underpinned by global economic integration.
Post World War II international liberal order characterized by norms, rules, and institutions designed to manage relations between states and address global challenges, was expanded after the Cold War and came to be known as rule-based order. This includes a network of treaties, international organizations, and legal frameworks intended to promote peace, security, economic integration, and human rights.
However, several developments have countered the post-cold war predictions:
Contrary to expectations of a peaceful world, the post-Cold War period has witnessed numerous conflicts, including wars in the Balkans, the Middle East, and the spread of non-state actors and terrorism, exemplified by the attacks of September 11, 2001, and the rise of groups such as ISIS, al Qaeda, Hamas and likes which forcefully challenged state writ. The most notable challenges to rule-based order surfaced more recently in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine and Israel-Hamas (Palestinian) conflict in which the implementers of rule-based order became its blunt violators.
There have already emerged fissures in the global power relationships consequent to three significant factors: globalization, the digital revolution, and the escalating impacts of environmental degradation and climate change. It is crystal clear why. Globalization has catalyzed unparalleled economic expansion and connectivity, yet it has concurrently given rise to marked inequalities, social disruptions, and widespread resistance to economic liberalization across various regions. These developments have ignited nationalist and populist movements, posing substantial challenges to the liberal international order. Predominantly, globalization is perceived as favoring the ‘rich’ nations of the global north, further exacerbating the divide between the world’s affluent and less affluent regions.
The digital revolution has profoundly transformed international relations, positioning cyberspace as a pivotal arena for strategic competition. In the aftermath of the Cold War, the full spectrum of cybersecurity threats, the dynamics of information warfare, and the impact of social media on political processes were not entirely foreseen.
This digital landscape offers unique capabilities to scrutinize, challenge, and target societies in ways never seen before. A notable instance of this occurred during the conflict between Israel and Hamas on October 7, 2023. Until that point, Western narratives of conflicts, often aligned with their geostrategic interests, predominated. However, the prevalence of social media now has significantly contested the West’s influence in shaping these narratives. Furthermore, the state’s authority and legitimacy are now under unprecedented challenge in this new era of digital transparency and engagement.
The mounting effects of climate change and environmental degradation have thrust themselves to the forefront of global politics, requiring a level of cooperation and regulation among states that surpasses expectations from the early 1990s. Failure to forge a global consensus on tackling these pressing challenges highlights the intricate nature of contemporary international relations. They underscore the difficulty of adhering to a rule-based order, revealing its shortcomings in effectively addressing global environmental crises. A thorough examination of the aforementioned factors underscores the increasing necessity for a rule-based order, particularly given its innovative approach, more than ever. However, its primary advocate and enforcer, the United States, faced significant challenges due to China’s remarkable economic ascent in the 1990s, Russia’s defiant stance in the 2000s, and the Global South’s pursuit of alternatives for development. This situation forced the U.S. and its allies to deviate from the rule-based order, rendering the concept’s novelty commonplace. At first, the US and its allies were deviating from their own set rules for their strategic interests.
This was evident when the US violated WTO rules under Donald Trump’s presidency to refrain China from making profits in the Western markets. Over the period of time they appear helpless in regulating the states’ interactions. This was witnessed in the wake of the Russia-Ukraine conflict when even its preferred allied countries such as India could not be restricted to trade with Russia. Israel’s blatant refusal to adhere to any legal or human rights regime in its latest attacks on Gaza is another case in point.
In fact, in today’s context, not only is the rule-based order, designed to manage the interactions between states, facing considerable obstacles, but the very notion of ‘state’ itself is under scrutiny. Moreover, the ideals proposed by the Western state system, including democracy, freedom of speech, justice, and human rights, are being compromised by the West itself. This reflects a critical juncture in global affairs, where the foundational principles of international relations and their implementation are being reevaluated.
As the efficacy and appeal of the liberal/rule-based order wane, countries are increasingly confronted with the challenge of navigating a fragmented global landscape. This shift compels nations to reconsider their reliance on multilateral institutions and frameworks that have traditionally guided international cooperation and conflict resolution.
Countries are now more inclined to pursue individual policies tailored to their unique interests and circumstances for there is no option for the state and vulnerable groups but to resort to a ‘self-help system’ endorsed by centuries old realist discourse.
It is high time for reflection. From Europe’s multifaceted crises, spanning economic, security, health, climate, and migration challenges to civil wars in Sudan and Myanmar and their regional and global repercussions to acute food shortages in Somalia, and large-scale worldwide environmental degradation, the global political landscape presents a gloomy picture.
This exemplifies the consequences of lacking effective, functional, and equitable rule-based governance.
Consequently, nationalism has resurged and more alarming is to see the renewal of the nuclear arms race. While individual policies may offer short-term benefits or address specific national concerns, this approach poses significant risks and limitations in addressing global challenges that require collective actions. The failure can lead to unintended consequences, including escalating tensions and economic inefficiencies. We find ourselves unmistakably entrenched in a zero-sum game.
The ongoing global transition emphasizes the critical need for flexible and advanced strategies to understand and manage international relations. Countries may need to venture into innovative forms of collaboration that reconcile their domestic agendas with collective actions. By reimagining international cooperation in this manner, there lies a potential pathway in an era where the traditional liberal order is experiencing significant pressure.
The author is an Assistant Professor at the Department of International Relations, University of Karachi.
