Dr. Naim Asas

Director, Group for International Studies and Reflections in Social Sciences (GERISS)

Email: naimasasgeriss@gmail.com

Introduction

The post-World War II international order, often termed the “liberal international order,” was constructed upon the principles of state sovereignty, prohibition of force, multilateral cooperation, and the primacy of international law, as enshrined in the United Nations Charter of 1945 (UN, 1945). This framework aimed to prevent global conflicts, protect human rights, and promote collective security through institutions such as the United Nations (UN), the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank, and the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), later succeeded by the World Trade Organization (WTO). Yet, seven decades later, the international system faces unprecedented threats from geopolitical shifts, unilateral interventions, and repeated breaches of international law, often by the very states that laid its foundations.

The decline of this order has sparked intense debate among scholars of international relations. John Mearsheimer (2019) attributes the unraveling to inherent flaws in liberal internationalism and the resurgence of nationalism. Meanwhile, Robert Keohane (1984) suggests that international cooperation can endure beyond hegemonic leadership through institutional frameworks that mitigate anarchy and foster collective action. Against this theoretical backdrop, the erosion of multilateralism, the selective application of international law, and growing geopolitical fragmentation signal an emerging global anarchy reminiscent of the pre-World War I era (Ikenberry, 2018).

This article examines the historical evolution of the post-World War II international order, the erosion of international law and multilateralism, contemporary challenges, and theoretical perspectives on the liberal order’s decline. Through an academic lens, it argues that the international order’s current crisis is rooted in the contradictions of hegemonic power and the inadequacies of global governance mechanisms.

Historical Context of the International Order

The origins of the contemporary international order can be traced to the aftermath of World War II, when the United States emerged as the predominant global power, largely spared from the physical devastation that engulfed Europe and Asia. This unique position allowed the U.S. to spearhead the creation of multilateral institutions designed to promote global stability, economic recovery, and collective security. The Bretton Woods Conference of 1944 laid the economic foundations by establishing the IMF and the World Bank, aimed at stabilizing global currencies and financing post-war reconstruction (Ruggie, 1982).

The establishment of the United Nations in 1945 represented the political cornerstone of this order, with the aim of fostering peaceful resolution of disputes and promoting international cooperation. However, the onset of the Cold War soon transformed the global landscape into a bipolar order dominated by the ideological and geopolitical rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union. Despite persistent tensions, the Cold War period saw adherence to certain boundaries designed to prevent direct military confrontation. Arms control agreements such as the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT I and II) exemplified mutual efforts to curb the arms race and ensure strategic stability (Gaddis, 2005).

The end of the Cold War and the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 heralded a unipolar moment, with the U.S. assuming unparalleled influence over global affairs. The 1990s witnessed American-led interventions under the banner of multilateralism, such as NATO’s involvement in the Balkans during the Yugoslav Wars. However, this period also saw the seeds of unilateralism, most notably with the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, conducted without explicit authorization from the UN Security Council (Chomsky, 2003). This marked a significant departure from the principles of multilateralism and set a precedent for future unilateral actions by major powers.

The erosion of the international order in the 21st century reflects the growing divergence between the normative frameworks established post-1945 and the geopolitical realities of contemporary global politics. As the U.S. increasingly prioritized its national interests over collective commitments, and emerging powers such as China and Russia asserted their influence, the multilateral system became increasingly fragmented (Ikenberry, 2020). The historical trajectory from American hegemony to the current state of global anarchy underscores the fragility of the international order and the complex interplay between power, law, and cooperation in global governance.

The post-World War II international order was fundamentally anchored in the principles of international law, which sought to establish a normative framework governing state conduct, ensuring respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity, and human rights. However, the gradual erosion of these principles has exposed the vulnerabilities of the international legal system, particularly when major powers prioritize national interests over legal obligations.

The Foundations of International Law and Their Fragility

International law, codified through instruments such as the United Nations Charter, the Geneva Conventions, and various human rights treaties, provided a legal framework intended to mitigate conflict and promote cooperation. The UN Charter (1945) explicitly prohibits the use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, except in cases of self-defense or when authorized by the Security Council. Yet, the selective application of these principles by powerful states has significantly undermined the credibility of international law.

The United States, as a primary architect of the post-war legal order, has often exemplified this selective adherence. The 2003 invasion of Iraq, justified on the basis of alleged weapons of mass destruction, was conducted without explicit authorization from the UN Security Council, representing a clear violation of international law (Falk, 2004). This act not only undermined the UN’s authority but also set a dangerous precedent for unilateral military interventions by other states.

Similarly, Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014 highlighted the fragility of the international legal order. By altering recognized borders through military force, Russia violated the principles of territorial integrity enshrined in the Helsinki Accords (1975) and the UN Charter (Allison, 2014). The tepid international response to this act, characterized by limited sanctions and diplomatic condemnations, reinforced the perception that power dynamics often eclipse legal norms in international affairs.

The Role of Multilateral Institutions and Their Decline

Multilateral institutions such as the United Nations, the International Criminal Court (ICC), and the World Trade Organization (WTO) were established to facilitate cooperation, mediate conflicts, and uphold international law. However, these institutions have increasingly faced challenges stemming from political interference, inadequate enforcement mechanisms, and waning support from major powers.

The tenure of President Donald Trump marked a significant retreat from multilateralism. The U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Climate Agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with Iran, and UNESCO exemplified a broader trend of prioritizing unilateralism over collective action (Deudney & Ikenberry, 2017). Additionally, the Trump administration’s threats against the ICC when it sought to investigate alleged war crimes by U.S. personnel in Afghanistan further exemplified a dismissive stance towards international judicial mechanisms (Schabas, 2020).

This retreat from multilateralism has emboldened other states to pursue unilateral actions with minimal fear of international repercussions. China’s militarization of the South China Sea, despite rulings by the Permanent Court of Arbitration rejecting its territorial claims, underscores the diminishing influence of international legal frameworks (Thayer, 2019). Similarly, Israel’s continued expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank, in contravention of international law, has persisted largely due to the protection afforded by U.S. veto power in the UN Security Council (Lynk, 2019).

The Consequences of Eroding Multilateralism

The erosion of international law and multilateralism has profound implications for global stability. The weakening of legal norms and cooperative frameworks has led to increased geopolitical fragmentation, undermining efforts to address transnational challenges such as climate change, terrorism, and pandemics. The failure of the international community to effectively respond to the Syrian civil war, resulting in one of the worst humanitarian crises of the 21st century, exemplifies the paralysis of multilateral institutions (Weiss, 2014).

Moreover, the erosion of multilateralism has fostered a climate of impunity, where states feel emboldened to violate international norms without significant consequences. This has led to a proliferation of regional conflicts, human rights abuses, and the rise of authoritarian regimes that exploit the absence of robust international oversight (Diamond, 2020).

As the international legal order continues to deteriorate, the risk of a more anarchic global system becomes increasingly apparent. The selective enforcement of international law, coupled with the declining influence of multilateral institutions, poses significant challenges to global governance and threatens to unravel the very foundations of the post-World War II international order.

Contemporary Challenges to the International Order

The 21st century has witnessed a series of geopolitical crises and policy shifts that have exacerbated the decline of the liberal international order. Key contemporary challenges, ranging from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine to the resurgence of nationalist policies and the weakening of international institutions, highlight the fragility of the global system and underscore the growing drift toward global anarchy.

Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine: A Stark Violation of International Norms

The Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022 represents one of the most significant breaches of the international order since World War II. Violating the UN Charter’s prohibition on the use of force against sovereign states, Russia’s actions have challenged the post-war consensus on territorial integrity (Charter of the United Nations, 1945). The annexation of Crimea in 2014 had already exposed the limitations of international mechanisms in deterring aggression, but the full-scale invasion of Ukraine underscored the inability of the international community to prevent or effectively respond to such violations.

Sanctions imposed by Western states and international bodies have had limited impact in reversing Russian actions, illustrating the constraints of economic measures in altering the behavior of militarily assertive states (Burchill, 2022). Moreover, the veto power exercised by Russia in the UN Security Council has rendered the institution ineffective in addressing the crisis, highlighting the structural weaknesses within the UN system (Luck, 2020).

The conflict has also intensified global geopolitical divisions, with China’s ambiguous stance and continued economic engagements with Russia reflecting the complex interplay of strategic interests. The inability to enforce international law in the case of Ukraine has emboldened other states to pursue aggressive policies, further eroding the already fragile global order.

The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Persistent Violations and International Paralysis

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains a persistent challenge to the international order, with recurrent hostilities in Gaza raising serious concerns about violations of international humanitarian law. Allegations of disproportionate use of force by Israel and indiscriminate rocket attacks by Palestinian militants underscore the cyclical violence that has plagued the region for decades (Human Rights Watch, 2021).

The international response to the conflict has often been hamstrung by geopolitical alliances, particularly the unwavering support for Israel by the United States, which has frequently used its veto power in the UN Security Council to block resolutions critical of Israeli actions (Cattan, 2021). This perceived impunity has undermined the credibility of international legal frameworks, fueling resentment and instability in the region.

Efforts by the International Criminal Court to investigate potential war crimes in the occupied territories have been met with resistance from Israel and its allies, further highlighting the challenges faced by international judicial bodies in holding states accountable (Schabas, 2020).

The Rise of Nationalism and Unilateralism: The “America First” Doctrine

The resurgence of nationalist policies, epitomized by former U.S. President Donald Trump’s “America First” doctrine, has significantly undermined multilateral cooperation. The withdrawal from key international agreements, including the Paris Climate Accord and the Iran nuclear deal, signaled a retreat from global commitments and fostered a broader trend of unilateralism among states (Ikenberry, 2018).

The Trump administration’s skepticism toward international organizations, coupled with threats to defund and withdraw from bodies such as the World Health Organization (WHO) during the COVID-19 pandemic, weakened collective efforts to address global challenges (Patrick, 2020). This shift has not only diminished U.S. influence but also encouraged other states to prioritize national interests over international cooperation.

The rise of right-wing populist movements across Europe and Asia further exemplifies this trend, with leaders advocating for restrictive immigration policies, economic protectionism, and diminished engagement with international institutions (Norris & Inglehart, 2019). This wave of nationalism threatens to unravel decades of multilateral progress, replacing cooperative frameworks with competitive, zero-sum approaches to international relations.

China’s Strategic Ambitions and the Challenge to U.S. Hegemony

China’s rise as a global power presents a formidable challenge to the existing international order, particularly in the economic and security domains. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), aimed at enhancing China’s economic influence through infrastructure investments across Asia, Africa, and Europe, has raised concerns about debt dependency and geopolitical leverage (Rolland, 2017).

Militarily, China’s assertiveness in the South China Sea, despite adverse rulings by international arbitration, exemplifies its willingness to challenge established norms. The construction of artificial islands and military installations in contested waters has heightened tensions with neighboring states and undermined the authority of international legal bodies (Thayer, 2019).

Moreover, China’s strategic partnership with Russia, particularly in the context of Western sanctions, reflects a growing alignment between revisionist powers seeking to reshape the international order to suit their interests (Lukin, 2022). The competition between the U.S. and China for global influence has led to a fragmented world order, characterized by strategic rivalries and diminishing avenues for multilateral cooperation.

Technological Disruption and Cyber Warfare

The rapid advancement of technology has introduced new dimensions to international conflict, particularly in the realm of cyber warfare. State-sponsored cyber attacks targeting critical infrastructure, electoral processes, and private entities have become increasingly prevalent, challenging traditional notions of sovereignty and warfare (Rid, 2020).

The absence of comprehensive international regulations governing cyber operations has created a legal vacuum, allowing states to conduct cyber attacks with minimal accountability. Incidents such as Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election and China’s alleged cyber espionage activities have underscored the need for robust international frameworks to address technological threats (Sanger, 2018).

Theoretical Perspectives on the Decline of the Liberal International Order

The decline of the liberal international order has sparked extensive debate among scholars of international relations. Theoretical frameworks such as realism, liberalism, and constructivism provide valuable insights into the current challenges and future trajectories of global governance.

Realist Perspectives: The Inevitability of Anarchy and Power Struggles

Realist scholars argue that the decline of the liberal international order is an inevitable consequence of the anarchic nature of the international system, where states prioritize survival and national interest over collective norms (Waltz, 1979). John Mearsheimer (2019) posits that the liberal international order was always fragile due to its inherent contradictions. He contends that the U.S. efforts to spread liberal democracy and economic interdependence often clashed with the nationalistic and security concerns of other states, leading to resistance and conflict.

From a realist standpoint, the current fragmentation reflects the shifting balance of power, particularly with the rise of China and the resurgence of Russia. As U.S. hegemony wanes, emerging powers seek to assert their influence, resulting in a multipolar world marked by strategic rivalries and diminishing multilateral cooperation (Gilpin, 1981).

Liberal Perspectives: The Erosion of Institutions and Collective Action

Liberal theorists attribute the decline of the international order to the weakening of international institutions and the retreat from collective action. Robert Keohane (1984), in his seminal work After Hegemony, argues that while hegemonic power facilitates the creation of international regimes, sustained cooperation does not necessarily require a unipolar power structure. Instead, institutions can foster collaboration by reducing transaction costs and providing mechanisms for dispute resolution.

However, the recent withdrawal of major powers from key international agreements and institutions has undermined these collaborative frameworks. Scholars such as G. John Ikenberry (2020) emphasize that the liberal order’s decline is driven by the failure of states to uphold multilateral commitments, leading to a fragmented and less predictable global system.

Constructivist Perspectives: The Decline of Shared Norms and Identities

Constructivist scholars highlight the role of shared norms, identities, and social structures in shaping the international order. The erosion of these shared norms, driven by growing nationalism, populism, and unilateralism, has contributed to the decline of multilateral cooperation (Wendt, 1999). Constructivists argue that the liberal international order thrived when states collectively adhered to principles such as human rights, free trade, and rule-based governance. The current crisis reflects a normative shift, where states increasingly prioritize domestic agendas over international responsibilities.

Critical Perspectives: The Role of Imperialism and Global Inequality

Critical theorists, drawing from Marxist and postcolonial traditions, argue that the liberal international order was inherently flawed due to its roots in Western imperialism and global inequality (Grovogui, 2006). They contend that the order primarily served the interests of Western powers, perpetuating economic and political dominance over the Global South. The current decline, therefore, represents a pushback against this neo-imperial order, as emerging powers and marginalized states seek greater autonomy and influence in global affairs.

Conclusion

The meticulously constructed post-World War II international order is facing unprecedented challenges, driven by unilateral actions of dominant powers, shifting geopolitical dynamics, and the erosion of multilateral institutions. The U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and invasion of Ukraine, China’s strategic ambitions, and the rise of nationalist policies have collectively undermined the principles of international law and cooperation.

Theoretical perspectives from realism, liberalism, constructivism, and critical theory provide valuable frameworks for understanding this decline. While realists view it as an inevitable consequence of power politics, liberals emphasize the weakening of institutions, constructivists highlight the erosion of shared norms, and critical theorists point to the structural inequalities inherent in the global system.

As the world navigates this turbulent era, the future of the international order remains uncertain. The challenge lies in reconciling national interests with collective global responsibilities, fostering robust international institutions, and addressing the underlying inequities that have fueled discontent and fragmentation. Whether the international community can rise to this challenge will determine the trajectory of global governance in the decades to come.

Bibliography

            •           Allison, R. (2014). Russian ‘deniable’ intervention in Ukraine: how and why Russia broke the rules. International Affairs, 90(6), 1255–1297. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2346.12170

            •           Burchill, S. (2022). The Ukraine Conflict and the Limits of Economic Sanctions: A Realist Perspective. Journal of International Affairs, 75(2), 115-130.

            •           Cattan, N. (2021). The U.S.-Israel Alliance and the UN Security Council: A Critical Examination. Middle Eastern Studies, 57(4), 593-610.

            •           Chomsky, N. (2003). Hegemony or Survival: America’s Quest for Global Dominance. Metropolitan Books.

            •           Deudney, D., & Ikenberry, G. J. (2017). The Resilience of the Liberal International Order. Survival, 59(1), 75-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396338.2017.1282678

            •           Diamond, L. (2020). Democracy’s Arc: From Resilience to Recession. Journal of Democracy, 31(1), 129-144.

            •           Falk, R. (2004). The Iraq War and the Crisis of International Law. American Journal of International Law, 97(3), 553-563.

            •           Gaddis, J. L. (2005). The Cold War: A New History. Penguin Press.

            •           Gilpin, R. (1981). War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge University Press.

            •           Grovogui, S. (2006). Beyond Eurocentrism and Anarchy: Memories of International Order and Institutions. Palgrave Macmillan.

            •           Human Rights Watch. (2021). A Threshold Crossed: Israeli Authorities and the Crimes of Apartheid and Persecution. https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed

            •           Ikenberry, G. J. (2018). The End of Liberal International Order?. International Affairs, 94(1), 7-23. https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iix241

            •           Ikenberry, G. J. (2020). A World Safe for Democracy: Liberal Internationalism and the Crises of Global Order. Yale University Press.

            •           Keohane, R. O. (1984). After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton University Press.

            •           Luck, E. C. (2020). The United Nations Security Council: Practice and Promise. Routledge.

            •           Lynk, M. (2019). The Illegality of Israeli Settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories: Perspectives from International Law. Palestine Yearbook of International Law, 21, 23-50.

            •           Lukin, A. (2022). Russia and China: The New Era of Strategic Partnership. Russia in Global Affairs, 20(3), 72-89.

            •           Mearsheimer, J. J. (2019). The Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities. Yale University Press.

            •           Norris, P., & Inglehart, R. (2019). Cultural Backlash: Trump, Brexit, and Authoritarian Populism. Cambridge University Press.

            •           Patrick, S. (2020). When the World Stumbled: COVID-19 and the Failure of the International System. Foreign Affairs, 99(4), 70-83.

            •           Rid, T. (2020). Active Measures: The Secret History of Disinformation and Political Warfare. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

            •           Rolland, N. (2017). China’s Eurasian Century? The Belt and Road Initiative and Global Strategy. National Bureau of Asian Research.

            •           Sanger, D. E. (2018). The Perfect Weapon: War, Sabotage, and Fear in the Cyber Age. Crown.

            •           Schabas, W. A. (2020). The International Criminal Court: A Commentary on the Rome Statute. Oxford University Press.

            •           Thayer, C. A. (2019). China’s Military Coercion in the South China Sea: Implications for Regional Security. Asian Security, 15(2), 136-154.

            •           UN. (1945). Charter of the United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text

            •           Waltz, K. N. (1979). Theory of International Politics. McGraw-Hill.

            •           Wendt, A. (1999). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge University Press.

            •           Weiss, T. G. (2014). The UN and the Global South: Shifting Dynamics of a Changing Relationship. Third World Quarterly, 35(10), 1868-1885.