Power and Developments III Flashcards
3
New World Order - Russia
- Collapse of the Soviet Union - loss of empire
- Political and Social instability - saw the rise of oligarchs and violent corruption
- Resurgence after Putin
2
New World Order - Newly independent states
- Sovereignty and nation-building - Ukraine, Georgia, Armenia became independent - struggled with identity and divisions - pro-Russia, not pro
- Some join NATO or EU - security concerns in the face of Russia’s potential irrendentism
3
New World Order - former Soviet bloc countries
- Shift to democracy and market economy
- EU and NATO integration - Poland joined EU in 1999 and EU in 2004
- Cultural and politica transformation - sought to rid the legacies of the Soviet control and embrace European democratic values
3
New World Order - UN and the power it has
- Shift in global power dynamics - US emerged as the world’s sole superpower
- Expansion of membership
- Challenges to UN power - had to give a lot of humanitarian aid - Balkan Wars 1990s
3
New World Order - USA
- Superpower status and global influence
- NATO expansion and ‘end of history’ narrative - where liberal democracy and capitalism were seen as the final, most successful form of gov and econ systems
- Intervention and new challenges - unilateralism and global response
2
Outcome of the New World Order
By mid 1990s it was clear that the New World Order was in tatters. Leading powers willingness to collaborate and solve conflicts on occasion, own interests unaffected - a will to intervene over the invasion of Kuwait, as much of the world’s oil supply would have been at the mercy of Saddam Hussein had he dominated the Gulf
5000 peacekeepers in 1990, 80,000 in 1994
Supervised ceasefires and monitored elections in Mozambique in 1992 and Cambodia in 1993
3
USA as a hegemony - Economic power
- Remains largest in the world - USA GDP in 2016 was 18.566 tr and US dollar main form of structural power in global economic governance and international currency
- Expanding pop estimated 439M by 2050
- China is expected to overtake in terms of GDP and foreign investors in 2020, collapse of Lehman Brothers questions faith in Washington Consensus, AIIB
2
USA as a hegemony - Military power
- World’s largest military defense - 2015 - 610B on defence - more than the rest of the world put together - 800 military bases in more than 70 countries, aggregate tonnage of the US navy - greater than the size of the next 17 navies combined
- China spends 216B, Russia and China are challenging global reach. China is developing short-medium range missiles to have a dom force in the South China Sea. 2016, Russia, announced it constructed the world’s most lethal nuclear weapons - R5: 28 Sarmat which can dodge radar, travel up to 10K km, carry up to 12 warheads
2
USA as a hegemony - Cultural power
- 10 highest grossing films, 2015 - Forbes - 8/10 most successful brands in the world were American
- Bollywood v Hollywood, Confuscious Institutions, Association Football
2
USA as a hegemony - Political power
- Possesses structural power in many IGOs - most permanent member of the UNSC and plays a dom role in the IMF, NATO, G7
- BRICS and MINT, China and Russia also permanent members, India becoming a significant actor in Global South, Trump’s ‘American First’ alienates other countries
4
Events that show USA’s unipolar moment
- Benign hegemony in operation
- Clinton provided leadership during NATO bombing of the Bosnian Serbs in 1995 and Serbia in 1999 during Kosovo War
- Bush coalition to liberate Kuwait from Iraq forces under a UN mandate - August 1990
- Middle East - Clinton used US influence to encourage the acceptance if the Oslo accords between the Palestine Liberation Organisation chairman - Yasser Arafat and Israel’s PM Yitzshak Rabin
4
Did unipolarity bring stability? - Hegemonic stability theory
Nye - ‘not since Rome has one nation loomed so high above the others’
- Global policeman
- Pax Comana - provided stability in the ancient world for decades
- 2nd half of 19th century - naval outreach of GB - patrolled sea lanes globally
2
Did unipolarity bring stability? - Washington Consensus
- Led to greater trade between nations than ever before - encouraging trust and cooperation
- Had not been in the interest of other powers to seek to challenge the economic principles upon which the USA had succeeded in creating a more globally interconnected economy
3
Did unipolarity bring stability? - freeloading effect
- Hegemon’s military, pol and econ influence can guarantee international stability necessary for free flow of goods and capital
- Disputes betwen states more likely to be resolved since unchallengable military power can deter aggression
- States with no ideological allersion to a hegemon can therefore successfully freeload off the back of a benging hegemon - provided the basis to the post Cold War Pax Americana
2
Did unipolarity bring stability? - Resentment amongst emerging powers
Hegemonic status of one state can encourage dangerous resentment amongst emerging powers - because states are security maxim they will feel constrained by another power’s claim to global hegemony in an attempt to protect themselves
China has been building reefs in the South China Sea in defiance of the US led regional condemnation
Russia annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 in defiance of onslaught Western crisis
Did unipolarity bring stability? - Dangerous power transitions
Particularly destabilising when a hegemon is decreasing in power and influence
- US hegemony failed to achieve its objectives in either Afghanistan or Iraq, followed by the collapse of the US bank Lehman Brothers which highlighted economic and military weaknesses
2
Did unipolarity bring stability? - Chomsky argument
- The possession of power by one state is dangerous due to the lack of contraints it has - there is a potential for a malign hegemony/rogue superpower
- Pursuing its own interests at the expanse of international law - US invaded Iraq 2003 without a UN mandate demonstrates the dangerous of one power having such pre-eminent power that it can ignore the wishes of other states and international organs of global governance
2
Is UK still a global hegemon - ‘war on terror’ limits US power
Afghanistan War 2001-2021 - despite the initial success in toppling the Taliban and sirputing al-Qaeda - the US struggled to establish long-term stability
The eventual withdrawal of US troops in 2021 - after 2 decades of engagement led to the rapid collapse of the Afghan government and the return of the Taliban to power
2
Is US still a global hegemon - resilient, adaptive economy
2008 financial crisis and recovery - responded with a combination of aggressive fiscal stimulus, monetary easing, helped stabilise financial markets - 2010 - led to consistent GDP
The Shale Revolution - 2018 - US became the largest producer of oil - global leader in energy production from the development of hydraulic fracking
3
Is UK still a global hegemon - weakened by the 2007-8 global financial crisis
- The collapse of the Lehman Brothers damaged trust long term economic growth diminishes global trust in US financial institutions
- Unemployment increased to 10% in 2009 - many middle and lower incomes hit family hardest
- Primarily caused by risky lending practices - diminished trust in US financial institutions
2
Is UK still a global hegemon - structural and soft power
- Holds considerable structural power in IGOs in the IMF, World Bank, WTO - dominant voting share - can influence shaping economic policy and develop programmes - can align with political interest
- Hollywood and media influence
2
Is UK still a global hegemon - global community has failed to follow US lead
- UN Security Council Rejection - for invading military action in Iraq - key members of the UNSC - France, Russia, Germany strongely opposed
- In Middle East, invasion was seen as a violation of international law
3
Does a multipolar world lead to stability - no one power will dominate
- Will create a senses of states that have more equal powers - BRICS and MINT
- China has spent more than 170% on defence in real terms since 2002 and acquiring parts of US debt means the have leverage over each other
- When no-one dominates, they have to cooperate - India has fastest growing population and Russia has a vast array of natural resources
2
Does a multipolar world lead to stability - as liberal world created and led by the USA dismantles, could lead to increased instability
- USA will not accept other country competing with it and will push back - against China in South China Sea
- Russia arguably invaded Ukraine as they have sensed US weaknesses from the failures in Iraq and Afghan and the weakness in not interfering in the Syrian civil war, along with Assad’s use of chemical weaponry
2
Does a multipolar world lead to stability - leading powers become interconnected
- Economic trade amongst the G7 and G20 ensure that they are dependent on each other - trade links bring greater interdependence, leading to cooperate
- Total value of the US trade in goods with China amounted to around 690.6B US$ in 2022
2
Does a multipolar world lead to stability - a chaotic period realignment could take place
- Realists argue that stability is formed in either a bipolar or unipolar system, but as the power transitions there is an era of instability
- EG Post WW1 - as UK power decreases, multipolarity emerges, conflict follows only 20 years later
3
Does a multipolar world lead to stability - evidence that emerging powers may bandwagon rather than balance the US led system
- States choose to ‘join’ with a threatening state rather than balancing it, so it is no longer a threat to them
- EG EU countries belonging to NATO and working with the USA
- China forming alliances with the BRICS, whilst trying to maintain friendly relations with the west
2
Does a multipolar world lead to stability - could lead to the formation of a new set of allies
- Mearsheimer has previously described the poential the US and Russia have working together against China or alienate relationships between those 3 powers
- The formation of the BRICS, as well as the way China is using the AIIB, to expand its influence and form alliances
Putin v West
- Aggressive foreign policy and military actions - Crimea 2014, Ukraine 2022, involvement in Syria directly challenged Western democratic norms, territorial integrity and international law
- Support for autocratic regimes and cyber warfare and hybrid tactics to destabilise and undermine trust
- Global influence campaign - energy leverage that can influence European energy security and create divisions - also sponsors BRICS
