Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
which has left the scene. But America's global position and the structure of incentives that
this setting generates is also part of the explanation. American unipolarity and the wider set
of shifts in the norms of sovereignty and the nature of security and interdependence have also
created a new setting for how the United States thinks about the provision of international
rules, institutions, and public goods.
Three Pathways of Liberal International Order
The old American-led liberal hegemonic order is in transition. There are growing pressures
and incentives for its reform and transformation. As in the past, the liberal international pro-
ject is evolving. But what sort of new order will emerge? What would be the organizational
logic of a post-hegemonic liberal international order? Will the coming order be a new type
of liberal international order or something different altogether? It is easier to identify the
pressures and incentives for change than to specify the organizational logic of an evolved or
transformed world order. We can, however, identify the issues that will be important in shap-
ing what comes next, and we can sketch alternative pathways of change.
One set of issues concerns scope and hierarchy. A reformed liberal international order will
need to become more universal (less Western-centered) and less hierarchical—that is, the
United States will need to cede authority and control to a wider set of states and give up some
of its hegemonic rights and privileges. But a flatter international order will also be one in
which the United States plays a less central role in providing functional services—generating
public goods, stabilizing markets, and promoting cooperation. So the questions are several.
What is the logic of a post-hegemonic liberal order—and is it viable? Can these functional
services be provided collectively? Will the United States agree to relinquish the special rights
and privileges built into the older hegemonic form of liberal order? Of course, it is possible
for more incremental shifts away from liberal hegemony. The United States could continue
to provide functional services for liberal order but do so in wider concert with other major
states. Liberal order can be endangered if there is too much hierarchy—indeed hierarchy in
its extreme form is empire. But it might also be endangered if there is too little hierarchy, as
the Wilson-era experiment in liberal order revealed.
A second issue concerns legitimate authority and post-Westphalian sovereignty. A re-
formed liberal international order will need to find a way to reconcile more intrusive rules
and institutions with legitimate international authority. The human rights revolution makes
the international community increasingly concerned with the internal workings of states. So
too does the new international-threat environment—a situation where growing security inter-
dependence is making each country's security increasingly dependent on what goes on else-
where, including inside other states. The international community is going to need capacities
Search WWH ::
Custom Search