Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
worldwide liberal international order is in dispute. This is a way of saying that the problems
that beset the American-led order are deeper than the Bush administration's failed efforts.
The American role itself within the global order is being contested. The terms of hegemony
are in dispute. Some sort of liberal international order will emerge on the other side of this
crisis. The question is whether or not the next era of liberal order will continue to be shaped
and led by the United States, and if so, in what ways.
American dominance within the order will certainly give way to a more diffuse and shared
system of authority and rule. But will the United States continue to play a decisive role? Can
the liberal order make a transition away from a hierarchical, American-dominated system to a
flatter and more shared system of governance? How much of a reduction in America's hege-
monic role is necessary to make the system functional and legitimate again? How much of a
reduction in America's hegemonic role will make the system less functional and legitimate?
Does liberal international order require some measure of hierarchically organized authority
and control? If so, how much is too much and how much is too little? These are the questions
we pursue in this chapter.
This chapter unfolds its argument in four steps. First, I suggest that there are a series
of dilemmas in the organization of liberal international order. These are dilemmas—or ten-
sions—between rule-based order and the balance of power, hegemony and democratic com-
munity, autonomy and universal human rights, and sovereignty and international authority.
These are dilemmas that are never fully reconciled in any of the great eras of the liberal as-
cendancy. They are always lurking under the surface. And indeed they are tensions that have
historically driven states—the United States and its allies and partners—to bargain and nego-
tiate over rules and institutions. But they are also dilemmas or tensions that have been dra-
matically exposed in recent years as the American-led liberal hegemonic order has entered
into crisis. The next era of liberal international order will necessarily need to grapple with
these dilemmas in a new round of negotiations and bargains over rules and institutions.
Second, I argue that there are three general pathways that lead away from the current era of
American-led liberal hegemonic order. One pathway is simply a renegotiated American-led
system. This is an evolution away from the existing order, with the United States continuing
to provide unique system functions for the larger order while it also moves to operate with-
in more inclusive and concert-based great power institutions. A second pathway is really the
move to a post-American liberal international order. This is a much flatter system of shared
authority and rule. Collective institutions and universal rules are at the center of this evolved
liberal order. Finally, a third pathway is toward a more fragmented system of rival spheres or
blocs. This entails not just the diffusion of power and authority away from the United States
but a breakdown of rules and institutions on a global scale.
Third, I argue that the degree to which the order remains a united, one-world order with
the United States at its center depends on several key variables. These include the ability of
Search WWH ::




Custom Search