23 July 2020, NIICE Commentary 5602
Ateka Hasan
The liberal world order was built on the principles of openness and rule-based systems. Reforms like liberal democracy, multilateral institutions for global governance, Economic liberalism, Security order, all fell under this umbrella concept. It introduced the world with an amorphous idea of global governance, establishing institutions through which the world was to be governed. Fearing a repeat of the world wars, its purpose was to keep nations in check and promote world peace.
However, the current global narrative is proof enough of how these desired reforms have been heavily eroded. Scholars like John Mearsheimer argue that the liberal order reached its peak around the year 2004, following which the world observed a liberal upheaval. The whole middle eastern region turned into a big chaos. In addition to this, in the year 2007-2008, the world witnessed the financial crisis, and according to the world bank’s estimates, it is suggested that the world post pandemic will see a deeper global downturn than the great recession. The more recent events of the exit of the US from Afghanistan, after 19 long years of military deployment, passing the battalion to Taliban- the very organization it went to fend off, or the US’s withdrawal from the Paris agreement in 2017 or its withdrawal from the WHO in 2020, all point towards a decline in the very tenets of the liberal order. According to Mearsheimer, the liberal world order contained the seeds of its own destruction from the very beginning. It was bound to fail, because the policies on which it was built were deeply flawed. For instance, this US-led unipolar world order extensively supported the setting up of international institutions, which they envisioned to eventually benefit them. The states were motivated and several times enticed to join these organizations, where they would have to follow the rules set up by these great powers. For example, the United States of America and the Union of Socialist Soviet Republic (USSR), cooperated in setting up of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The aim of the powers was to prevent any other nation from developing these weapons, which could pose a threat to their (the powers) national security in the future. If in certain cases these rules and laws set by these powers prevent them from carrying out their activities, they either ignore them or rewrite them. For example, in 2003, US invasion to Iraq violated the international law. The US acted on its own interest and security of its own country disregarding the rules. Or the recent termination of US’s relationship with the WHO during the global pandemic, because of the simple reason that WHO did not hold Beijing responsible for the global pandemic.
In this debate on erosion of tenets, democracy is of great significance, and as claimed by Larry Diamond, the world is experiencing what he terms as a ‘democratic recession’. He claims that post 2006, the democratic breakdown has taken precedence at an accelerating rate, in addition to a deepening of authoritarian principles. One of the root causes of this was a rise in the nationalistic ideologies. Apart from this, hyper globalization, a by-product of the Liberal world order, led to significant economic costs like loss of jobs, income inequality, declining or stagnant wages etc., which also eventually lead to political consequences of rising nationalistic ideologies. Furthermore, these growing erosions have eventually made democracies vulnerable to interference from external powers, particularly China and Russia; who have been observed exercising sharp power, and extending the manipulation of information beyond their own boundaries. These manipulations have been directed at changing their own narrative in all CAMP sectors (Culture, Media, academia and publishing) both within and outside of their own countries. For instance, China has threatened several academic journals like Springer and Cambridge University Press, for removing articles that are related to Taiwan or Tibet.
All this points to the continuous downfall of a liberal world order, although some scholars proclaim that what we are witnessing is not a breakdown in the liberal world order, but rather a transformation of the existing order into a broader and inclusive world order. This new and inclusive system of global governance would eventually include more actors, and issues. And although the liberal order had become exceedingly illiberal, it does not mean a complete change of the present order. Instead, chances are, that the present order will be transformed into a broader concept. China will evidently be a major player with its influence spanning in many directions, however, US’s position as a hegemon will see a decline, but not a complete takeover. The new order will certainly be more realistic and heavily armed, with less consideration for human rights and authoritarianism. One can say such an order has already begun, with the fast developing surveillance tactics by the governments and its use in squashing political unrests, like what’s happening at present all around the world over the death of George Floyd, or what happened in India Starting in December 2019, over the issue of National Register of Citizens (NRC). Having said this, many scholars do debate of world order run solely by Chinese standards, as per Xi Jinping’s vision. This is however a less likely, but not a completely implausible event.
