For decades, international relations theorists have offered reasons for optimism, suggesting that great powers can maintain cooperative relations and resolve their differences without engaging in armed conflict.
But thousands of new students starting school around the world this week will learn that mainstream theories of international relations warn of future conflict between the great powers.
This is what Matthew Kroenig, author and academic, a professor at Georgetown University in the United States, sees in an article in the journal Foreign Policy in which he sheds light on the intense competition between the great powers and the transformations the world is witnessing. , indicates the change of the unipolar world order after the Cold War.
According to the author, realist theories of international relations focus on the balance of power and have emphasized for decades the bipolar world order that prevailed during the Cold War and the unipolar world order represented by American hegemony that has prevailed since the end of the Cold War. Combat was relatively simple and not prone to random battles caused by miscalculation.
These theories also claim that nuclear weapons have increased the cost of conflict and made war between great powers unthinkable.
In addition to other factors, including international institutions and agreements – such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, etc. – which were established after the Second World War and their validity was increased and expanded. After the end of the Cold War, it provided ways for the great powers to resolve their differences peacefully.
Unfortunately, almost all of these instruments and guarantees now seem to be collapsing before our eyes as, according to international relations theories, the main driving forces of international politics show that the new Cold War between the United States, China And Russia probably doesn’t exist. A peaceful conflict.
Regarding the balance of power, the American academic – who also serves as deputy director of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security – points out that the world is now shifting towards a multipolar system. Although the United States remains the world’s dominant power by almost all objective measures, China is ranked second only in military and economic power.
As for Europe, it is also an economic and organizational superpower, while Russia has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons on Earth. According to the author’s article, major powers in developing countries – such as India, Indonesia, South Africa and Brazil – are committed to the path of non-alignment in major power conflicts.
The author believes that multipolar world systems are characterized by instability and remain vulnerable to the possibility of unwanted wars as a result of miscalculation, and points to World War I as the most prominent example.
He also believes that this instability stems from several reasons, including that each country finds itself worried about many possible enemies. An example is cited by the United States, where the US Department of Defense is concerned about possible simultaneous conflicts with Russia in Europe and China in the Indo-Pacific region.
In addition to the possible conflict with Iran, where US President Joe Biden once stated that “the use of military force remains an option on the table as a last resort to counter Iran’s nuclear program”, and based on the above, the possibility of the US entering A war on 3 fronts is impossible.
The article notes that the main conflict in today’s world order is what Biden described as “the battle between democracy and tyranny.”
The author warns that the division or separation between democracy and authoritarianism in international politics is not limited to the style of government, but to the ways of life. This fact is reflected in the speeches and writings of the presidents of China, Xi Jinping, and Vladimir Putin of Russia, who often talk about their ideological ideas about the superiority of authoritarian regimes and the bankruptcy of the democratic approach.
The author concludes that the world has now returned to a 20th-century-like era in which ideologies collide and competition between democratic and autocratic regimes to prove which one can best serve its people. , which adds a more dangerous ideological element to them. The current conflict according to the article.
Source: Lebanon Debate
