New World Order: Impacts in Terms on Global Cooperation
As the Cold War between US and USSR reached to an end, the world witnessed a shift from bilateral to unilateral nature of power. In 1991, President Bush inoculated the concept of New World Order which aimed to increase the international collaboration, collective security, globalization, interdependence, authority and achievement of common goals. All the impacts of New World Order directly or indirectly left their marks on the nature of cooperation among nations. This paper, after succinctly introducing the concept of New World Order in general, aims to discuss the Bush Administration’s version of New World Order.
The paper discusses the impacts of New World Order’s implementation in terms of cooperation among the states and later discusses its negative corollaries. After providing a critique of the established viewpoints about the impacts of New World Order, the paper ends by drawing a conclusion in favour of the concerned system as the only viable solution if international peace and security is to be achieved. Introduction Although New World Order is not a novel concept, it is often misinterpreted as one. It is largely because of various transformational phases the system has gone through ever since its inoculation.
However, differences among its versions have existed. These differences are more evident due to the changing circumstances in which these versions were established. As the New World Order aimed to provide amelioration in the prevailing system, its guiding principles have varied from time to time. Giddens believes that the direct corollaries of these changes appear in the shape of forces like globalization, individualism and political agency etc (Pillay & Elliot, 2001, p. 8&9). Before analyzing the implications of New World Order in terms of cooperation across the world, it is mandatory to create a sufficient understanding of the concept.
New World Order is an abstract concept that attempts to create a better world. Therefore its contents may vary from time to time based on the situation and the nature of paradigm shift required. New World Order and the United States: In the history of the United States, the term ‘New World Order’ was first introduced by Woodrow Wilson after the World War I. Marked by idealism, the concept did no prevail long. After the World War II, Franklin D. Roosevelt attempted to establish the concept by making possible increasing role of international bodies like United Nations for the attainment of peace which never reached pragmatism.
Both these versions of New World Order remained transient up until 1991 when President George H. W. Bush introduced the term at the time of Gulf War which marked the characteristics of post cold war era. Bush’s idea behind new world order included the abandonment of aggression against nations, collective security to guard against the aggression and increases collaboration of nations to meet such peace creating goals (Miller and Yetiv 56). Before 1991, the New World Order only existed as an abstract concept.
President Bush perpetuated it in the international politics (Yovanovish 3) which was practically implemented in case of the Iraq’s war with Kuwait. Concept of New World Order in the Light of Bush Administration What Bush Administration implied by New World Order was fairly divergent from the preceding concepts addresses by the other US presidents. In a nut shell, the major components of President Bush’s New World Order can be reckoned in the following except from his speech, “a new era-freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice, and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the
nations of the world, East and West, North and South, can prosper and live in harmony … a world where the rule of law supplants the rule of the jungle … where the strong respect the rights of the weak” (Miller and Yetiv 56). The concerned statement passed in 1991 provide an unequivocal agenda of New World Order that included peace creation, global prosperity and a rule of law to control the world. The other aspects introduced by President George H. W. Bush included interdepence, collective security, collective action, international authorities and globalization etc. Positive Impacts of New World Order in Terms of International Cooperation
The New World Order has played dual role in bringing the phase of transformation. On a positive side, establishment of this order and the end of cold war removed the threat of nuclear havoc. Similarly, the state governments shifted to a mutual problem solving approach as a result of increasing dependency arriving from globalization. Such corollaries are evident in events like General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and North American Free Trade Agreement etc (Hauss 2&3). Interdependence The end of cold war and the collapse of Soviet Union led to a unipolar environment in the world politics.
As the balance of power disturbed , the New World Order inoculated a system of interdependence providing equal opportunities for all the states by advocating the dependence of nations on one another. Related to interdependence is the preference of common interests to state interests that was addressed by the new system (Kessler 53). Therefore, the New World Order suppressed national sovereignty in favour of international authority. Cooperation To increase interdependence and through the work of international bodies, the concept of Free Trade emerged as a product of New World Order.
With the lifting of trade barriers as a result of Free Trade policy, increasing flow of technology across borders, individuals from different countries are crossing their borders to enter into the other countries to hunt for opportunities and are constantly being exposed to the foreign cultures and issues. This trend has started diminishing the borders between nations thereby threatening the concept of statehood. As a result ‘greater economic and social interdependence seem to affect national decision-making’ thereby making the concept of state obsolete (Bertucci & Alberti, p.
9). However, the whole process served to achieve an important goal of New World Order which was to increase cooperation between the nations. On social grounds, the emergence of English language as a lingua franca is largely a corollary of the New World Order. Although widely criticised to have caused languages deaths, the very transformation has brought an aspect of cooperation among the contemporary nations by providing a same medium of communication thereby enhancing better understanding (Bandura 6). International Bodies
As the interdependence among nations increased and the international bodies were given higher levels of authority, the New World Order triggered a transformation in the role of state in terms of sovereignty. The states in post cold war era experienced debilitating sovereignty as it is supplanted by the international authority of the bodies like United Nations. In terms of cooperation, this shift provided better chances of cooperation by providing a rule of law and peace keeping environment for all the nations.
Implementing a just supreme authority like UN above all the nations was aimed to motivate the nations in thinking globally rather than locally. The increasing role of United Nations in the New World Order was also because in the preceding times of cold war, the authority of UN remained nearly impossible because of the conflicting super powers of US and USSR. Empowering such international bodies by New World Order was aimed to protect the interests of both the strong and weak nations alike in order to maintain justice for peace and cooperation.
The very fact was accentuated by Former UN Secretary-General Sir Brian Urquhart who said, “It is no longer acceptable that international action is taken only when a situation threatens the interests of the most powerful nations. ” (Holmes). Such International bodies are of varied types. One such example in economic world is that of World Trade Organization. World trade organization as a key instrument of New World Order has been using uniform trade policies for all the nations participating in the international economic trade. The developing countries are rising as a result of free trade.
For the very reason the share of developing countries in global trade market increased. Consequently, on economic grounds the stronger states like US are as much dependent on the relatively weaker nations as they are on the former. Collective Security To ensure collective security, the New World Order proposed a rule of law. It also led to the UN resolution that prohibited invasions as a way of practicing aggression against other nations. In order to make possible this collective security and maintain absence of invasions, US used force against Iraq to withdraw its forces from Kuwait.
The very concept of collective security led to the UN forces to aid the weaker nations during the times of war. Although providing a great scope of amelioration, the New World Order also implies certain threats arising due to the increased collaboration and globalization. Such threats include the transcendence of national boundaries, increased nuclear proliferation and the intermingled and inseparable nature of problems facing the world etc (Hauss 5). Globalization As perceived by Waters, “If globalisation in its most complete sense takes effect then the nation-state will be its chief victim (Shaneland). ”
With the positive picture of new world order to have catalyzed the process of globalization, authors like John Mc Murtry also throw light on the hidden threats of such apparently favourable changes. The author goes on to consider new world order a global coup d’etat which encourages oligopolistic trade in the name of international free market (Gordana 23). According to the paper “Is there a future for the nation-state in an era of globalisation? If so, what future? ” provided by Shaneland, there are three basic challenges that the nations are to face as a result of global development shaped by rapid globalization.
These include (a) a reduced ability of the state to exert influence on its economy in the times when economic transactions are increasingly taking place on a global level which is considerably due to the trend of free trade; (b) an augmentation of trans-national bodies. These bodies are political (for instance the UN), economic (like NAFTA), a combination of the two (like the EU) and even the Non Governmental Organizations and (c) the establishment of global ruling organizations.
Often termed as the super-national and sub-national centres of power, they include bodies like United Nations. The same author believes that in such a scenario the role of state has shifted from being the ‘primary unit of international relations to being a provider of public goods and infrastructure to global businesses’. International Bodies Many analysts propose the existence of a global authorities leads to the process of ruling the nations by meddling in the state affairs. The instruments of such a global authority are considered to be the present world’s organizations.
This means that at one hand the states are losing their role within their territories and at the other hand they are not having a considerable role in the global community (Shaneland). Nuclear Proliferation Increased cooperation and ties between nations have resulted in increased nuclear proliferation. Previously held by only a single state, many of the contemporary states are now armed with nuclear weapons which pose a constant threat to the world peace and security. A war raged in such a scenario would lead to massive destruction. New World Order – A Critique:
Many aspects of the New World Order are criticized for their contrary hidden implications. Joseph Nye argues that the interdependence suggested by New World Order is multilevel in nature. By the term ‘multilevel interdependence’, Nye suggests the idea of multiple layers in terms of distribution of power where one layer may have bipolar structure while the other sustains a unipolar structure. The most crucial of this layer is that of military power which is clearly unipolar in favour of the US. The second is the economic layer which although tripolar still has US as a major sharer.
In fact it is only the third and last layer of interdependence that shows lack of concentrated power in favour of any strong country like US (Kessler 54). According to Marguerite K. Rivage-Seul and D. Michael Rivage-Seul, the New World Order is in itself a threat to the poor states and thus a strategy used by the stronger nations like US. This might result in a third world war against the weaker nations (1). Such an assumption is based on the increasing vulnerability of weaker nations as a result of international authority.
For instance, to survive in the global economic competition, the weaker nations require larger investments than they can afford. Loans from organizations like International Monitory Fund increase the vulnerability of such nations. Such a threat is not faced by the stronger nations. Conclusion Every phenomenon has its differential dimensions. So is the case with the new world order. However, the importance of it in terms of increasing interdependence and cooperation cannot be denied.
As an alternate course of action, if the New World Order is to be replaced, the success of the system would require benignity which in turn demands an extra ordinary amount of change on the part of the human (Hauss 4). To dwell in such an idea of change would rather be utopianism than rationalism. In short, the merits of New World Order greatly supersede its demerits thereby making it the most viable international system for the cooperation and peace creation among the nations in the contemporary world. Works Cited Bandura, Abdul Karim. “Accelerated Language Deaths in the Developing
World: A Consequence of the New World Order”. Oct. 1997. Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC). Capella University Library, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 11 Apr. 2009 <http://www. eric. ed. gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/15/4f/ff. pdf> Bertucci, Guido, and Adriana Alberti. Globalization and the Role of the State: Challenges and Perspectives. United Nations. 11 Apr. 2009, <http://unpan1. un. org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/UN/UNPAN006225. pdf> Hauss, Charles. Beyond Confrontation : Transforming the New World Order.
Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, 1996. Holmes, : Kim R. “New World Disorder: A Critique of the United Nations. ” Journal of International Affairs 46. 2 (1993): 323-340 Is there a future for the nation-state in an era of globalisation? If so, what future? Shane Martin Coughlan. 11 Apr. 2009 <http://www. shaneland. co. uk/academic/ma/globalisationessay1. pdf> Kessler, Bart R. Bush’s New World Order: The Meaning Behind the Words. Mar. 1997. Air Command and Staff College, USAF Air University, Montgomery, Alabama. 11 Apr. 2009 <http://www. oldthinkernews.
com/documents/Bush’s%20New%20World%20Order%20-%20The%20Meaning%20Behind%20the%20Words. pdf> Miller, Eric A. , and Steve A. Yetiv. “The New World Order in Theory and Practice: The Bush Administration’s Worldview in Transition. ” Presidential Studies Quarterly 31. 1 (2001): 56 Pillay, Hitendra, and Bob Elliott.. “Emerging Attributes of Pedagogy and Curriculum for the “New World Order. ” Innovative Higher Education 26. 1 (2001): 7-22. ERIC. EBSCO. Capella University Library, Minneapolis, Minnesota. 11 Apr. 2009 <http://ezproxy. library. capella. edu/login? url=http://search.
ebscohost. com. library. capella. edu/login. aspx? direct=true&db=eric&AN=EJ639438&site=ehost-live&scope=site>. Rivage-Seul, Marguerite K. , and D. Michael Rivage-Seul. A Kinder and Gentler Tyranny: Illusions of a New World Order. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers, 1995 Tucker, Robert W. , and David C. Hendrickson. The Imperial Temptation: The New World Order and America’s Purpose. New York: Council on Foreign Relations Press, 1992. Yovanovich, Gordana. New World Order : Corporate Agenda and Parallel Reality. Canada: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2003.