For example, there are regional powers such as Brazil and Argentina in Latin America, Iran in the Middle East, and South Korea in East Asia. Furthermore, there are global powers such as the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund, as well as functional organizations such as the World Health Organization and OPEC. In the modern era, power does not necessarily have to revolve around countries, but rather global or functional organizations that hold power (Haass 45). Nonpolarity is the consequence of globalization. There are two ways in which the spread of information allowed other entities to gain power. The first way is that many cross-border flows occur outside of the control of governments and without their knowledge. This is how information can be leaked and manipulated by other countries or organizations. The negative effect of this is that globalization dilutes the effectiveness and overall influence of the major powers, such as the United States or China. The second way is that the aforementioned flows of information can strengthen the power of non-state actors: energy exporters, terrorists, rogue states like North Korea, and firms (Haass 51). As a result, it is quite apparent that the strongest state like the U.S. might have been a unipolar superpower rising from the fall of the Soviet Union. However, this lasted about fifteen years before globalization expanded and North Korea expanded their intense militaristic and inhumane
Michael J. Mazarr’s article titled “The Once and Future Order: What Comes After Hegemony,” examines the global issue of the U. S. – Led international world order and what the future of
The United States is the most powerful country in the world. The U.S. has maintained this level of power for the past five decades. This is going to change overtime, because this happens to all the great world powers. It happened to the Persian, Greeks, Romans, and the British empires. There are a number of countries like China, Brazil, and India that is trying to replace the U.S. are the world leader. There is a number of path the future may take the United States. The world may be a different place in 2030, in a nonstate world. According to (National Intelligence Council, 2012), “In this world, nonstate actors—nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), multinational businesses, academic institutions, and wealthy individuals—as well as subnational units (megacities, for example), flourish and take the lead in confronting global challenges.” So there need to be examination of the U.S. National Security Strategy (NSS); to see if a nonstate world threatens and challenges there national interest.
...In a rapidly evolving international system, the US is at the forefront and yet is most threatened by the emerging multipolar order (Zakaria 2009, 43).
While, we may argue that USA still remains, as the only ‘full service’ superpower, we need to question if this capacity have been ever been fully materialized? When US president George W Bush came on power, he adopted a unipolarity approach in pursuing US interest in foreign affairs. This was clearly evident when President Bush chose to use American military force following the September 11 attack to eliminate perceived threats and to promote U.S ideas around the world “based on four themes: a celebration of America’s physical superiority; a quasi-religious belief in the universality of American values and priorities; a confidence in Washington’s capacity to translate its material resources into intended outcomes; and a sense of threat, sufficient to justify institutional adjustment at home and pre-emptive action abroad.”
In this fragment from by the Friends Committee on National Legislation titled Shared Security Reimagining U.S. Foreign Policy a new core approach to the management of International Affairs relying on global cooperation is predisposed. The U.S. as the country leading International Affairs and with its concurrent role as policeman to the world is now seeking with this approach to draw nation states into mutual cooperation. Consequently, it is important to denote that America has achieved the three defining activities of a state and moving into this ideal of collective security does not come as a surprise in a nation that is legitimate, powerful, and driven to maintain world order. Meanwhile, pre-developing and developing nation states are still at the bottom tear of socio-economic development and the idea of collective security, w...
The world of politics, as we know it, is changing and how American foreign policy is developed will determine the position of the nation in a new world order. American foreign policy is the most significant in global politics. The United States has risen to be the greatest superpower in the world. As a result, international politics and the global economy are significantly pertinent to American politics and vice versa. The primacy the United States has attained, has granted the nation a powerful position within the world, with unique abilities in regards to soft and hard power. The diplomatic relations of the United States, its military power, and versatile economy are elements that make the country unique. The matter at
The current state of foreign affairs has been immobile for many decades; since the end of the Cold War, the United States has been the dominant players to this game of international order American dominance has only emerged in the past 200 years with the rise of liberal democratic states to global dominance (Ikenberry:2011, 1). However in recent decades this supremacy has been questioned, as there is a visible decline of the West and rise of the Rest - most noticeable amongst the BRIC nations. G. John Ikenberry claims that not only is the future of liberal order trending towards a less American system but also one that is less liberal due to newly powerful states that are beginning to advance their own ideas and agendas for global order (Ikenberry 2011). Internationalism is undergoing a certain transformation away from the existing system, it is interesting to analyse whether or not this change will in fact be beneficial. In order to do so, this essay shall be three fold: initially it shall discuss what liberal global order truly is, its origins and the rise of the rest that is casting doubt upon foreign affairs, following this shall argue reasons for, and subsequently reasons against the continuation of liberal global order, for each case observing the incentives on a world-wide level followed by a case study.
Today’s world politics are heavily influenced by globalization. Most of the sates are integrated in this phenomenon, creating social and cultural interaction as well as economic incentives which will facilitate the growth and development of the states. Thus many of the policies of a state are in accordance to its current state preferences and dependence with other countries. Despite of China’s rising power and its expanding aims, it must be taken into consideration that the emergence of rising powers have to be unified with other major powers to combat common dangers such as terrorism as it inflicts every state regardless of its power. Therefore, fundamental values, beliefs, needs and importance will bring all the major powers to very little degree of varying interest that will eventually sustain the world’s peace and stability. In this paper, I will argue that the rising power of China may not be a threat (in terms of realism approach) to other states because of its role in today’s globalised era.
After the fall of the Soviet Union, the U.S. reacted on many threats which came from the Cabinet elite and made foreign policy stronger, even in today’s age. Others said the United States are the “world’s policeman” saying that the U.S. was the only power to prevent any dangerous actions on other nations.