The four models of world order are:
1) International Anarchy 2) Global Governance 3) World Hegemon and 4) World
State. The four models are also
sub-categorized under the areas of supranational authority(World Hegemon; World
State) and no supranational authority (International Anarchy; Global
Governance), and effective norms and values (Global Governance; World State) and
no norms and values (international Anarchy; World Hegemony).
International
Anarchy relates to the academic school of international realism because
sovereign nation-states remain the main actors on the international stage and
continue to pursue their national interests with little or no international
authority, as “the model postulates the impossibility or at least the long-term
ineffectiveness of universally valid norms and rules in international politics”
(Kruck, Rittberger & Zangl, 269). I
do support this model as reality, but I think that the period of history that
this model represented has long past and whether it will one day return is
currently only worth contemplation.
Global
Governance is an over-optimistic world model which declares the “possibility of
sustained cooperation between states and non-state actors on the basis of
international and transnational agreement on binding norms and rules” (Kruck,
Rittberger & Zangl, 274). The model
of Global Governance views international cooperation as a horizontal structure,
instead of a vertical hierarchy established by a superior nation-state power or
military-economic hegemon acting as an authoritative international
overseer.
The
World Hegemon model views international organizations as instruments or
institutions to establish and maintain world hegemony, whether by a single
polar power or by multiple powers. In this
model, a single nation-state or an alliance of nation-states can further their individual
economic-political-territorial-military interests through a hegemony that often
comes disguised as an international organization using “carrots and sticks” (Kruck,
Rittberger & Zangl, 270).
Economic
globalization and true democratic authority through international organizations
are the cornerstones of the World State model and are considered to be
essential to the process of civilization.
This model seems very far reaching and unattainable in the future
because under the guise of international cooperation between nation-states, a
power hierarchy will always exist to disrupt true international democracy and
equality. There will never be an
inherently ‘good’ and honest democracy as power rules the international stage,
the actors involved and the human element.
When
I view and contemplate which model is the most realistic model of world order,
the only plausible choice is the model of world hegemony. I clearly see a collective hegemony, each
individually interested in individual nation-state interests, very precisely
established in the United Nations Security Council. I believe the victors of WWI attempted to set
up a world state model on the international stage with the failed League of
Nations, but after a second war and the realization that a world state model was
impossible, the United Nations and the UN Security Council was established
under a world hegemony model and has been successful in holding a collective
hegemon for over 60 years (though I do not think it will last for another 100
years).
I
just do not see how anyone could look at the UN as anything other than a
perfect example of the World Hegemony model.
Kruck, Rittberger, & Zangl,
International Organization, 2nd ed. (New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012),
268-278.
No comments:
Post a Comment