The contemporary world is in constant transition. Human society would be stale and stagnant without the momentum of salient shifts in space and time in world history. I am baffled whether cycles of political order, disorder and reorder resemble the world stage too. A personification of state or state personified, however, corroborates otherwise. Contemporary international relations have intrinsic limits and possibilities of experiencing similar phenomena of order, disorder and reorder in the realm of public affairs. A question has been raised about the nature of world affairs today – is it unipolar, bipolar, tripolar, quadripolar, or multipolar?
The Treaty of Westphalia of 1648 led to the concept of nation-state sovereignty in Europe. Battles were fought on the premises of this notion in European history. Since then frequent long and short wars punctuated the American and European hemispheres revealing power politics and diplomacy in inter-state relations. Two Great World Wars were considered in terms of casualties and political frailties witnessed after the dawn of the 20th century. As a matter of history, world politics revolved around the Western world till 1945 A.D. Meanwhile the Non-West had their challenges and problems in attaining nationhood or statehood. The last century predominantly experienced American and European power politics in international affairs with simultaneous contests of totalitarian powers, the Pax Sovietica and Pax Sinica state systems. The world order till 1990 A. D. was determined by bipolarity in common understanding.
The Western ingenuity based on their principles and practices of liberalism, democracy and justice created international institutions to serve humanity. It is the reflection of the highest excellence of political and international thought in the Western benchmark. However, the non-Western thought enriched such foundational praxis further, deeper and wider. I believe that reciprocal and mutual linkages and interrelation expand and broaden the horizon of understanding, cooperation and empathy that we need today more than ever. The rise of a just world order is taking shape after the downfall of the bipolar world order with the end of the history of the Cold War or the so-called Long Peace. This is the world in reordering, when the Enlightenment is universalizing or interfacing with local knowledge systems. ‘Local’ in the sense of continental, regional, national subnational, or micro level of knowledge or thought practices. I am triggered to write this essay because the nature of the world is getting multipolar. It is neither unipolar nor bipolar nor characterised by a Cold War-type mentality. As I have been writing on choices or options and concerns of international relations, conflict is enduring on democracy or authoritarian tendencies in the intrinsic systemic forces either in the internal or external arena of power politics.
A resilient society can be nurtured in freedom, openness and democracy. However, we perceive or misperceive its efficacy or performance to be soft, weak, or ephemeral. Since the course of human history, those who helped themselves have talked of the authenticity of vulnerability. However, the strength and power of human society derive their source from the people at the grassroots. Because legitimacy need not only derive at ward levels at rural or village or in semi-urban or urban habitus. International relations and diplomacy today engage in international sustainable development, economics and finance, technological innovation, human and social capital, cultural trove and strategic edges in land, sea, or air.
Meanwhile, IR watchers talk of great power rivalry, competition, contestations, and conflict as well as cooperation, coalition, coordination and partnerships in the fields of strategy, war, energy economics, trade and diplomacy. I do not subscribe to the rules-based liberal word order that is of Western origin and is inclusive. The post-western world is emerging as we traverse from 1990 to 2025. Amid the state of flux in politics and international relations, plural and diverse overtures and postures are manifesting to install justice, liberty and truth. As we experience tensions, contradictions, and paradoxes in democracy, it reflects as a mirror in the international arena too. We can at least ascertain the aesthetics of life which are similar across the globe. However, it is interesting to find solutions and avenues to resolve disputes, conflicts, cases and contestations in the emerging global civil society with its nexus with the local level of analysis. Currently, the discourses of local and global are penetrating and seeping into our mindscapes as never before in terms of density, intensity and extensity. For example, human rights, human security and human development issues are repeatedly in both offensive and defensive modes in human activities in politics and international relations. Climate change, natural disasters, international migration, trafficking, global public health challenges, global education, science and technological growth, energy crises, financial markets, economic models, cultural sensitivities, tolerance and secularism are challenging in the domestic sphere.
Additionally, regional powers and spheres of influence are preoccupied with statesmanship and statecraft. Erstwhile imperial temptations and aspirations of heritage and religio-cultural linkages, theo-political or civilizational state interests, desires and wants – in domestic and neighbourhood and beyond are examples of the status of the rhetoric and reality of great powers. On the other hand, the existential relevance of nation-states is further consolidating in traction with pan or ethnonationalism or greater identity expansion like that of the diaspora.
Likewise, international inter-governmental organizations, policy exercises, dynamism and activities, programmatic and thematic engagements, dealings and transactions, solidarity on global democracy and participation of authoritarian powers are features of contemporary world activities. Amid emergency, contingency and exigency enveloping the environment, a global legitimacy crisis emerges in global public policy if ownership, accountability and responsibility are ignored or leaders are callous towards action to the hilt. Sovereignty and independence are innate with nationalism and capitalism as Siamese twins in governance. And contemplating, articulating and abiding by its norms and values from local to global is daunting but rewarding to every generation engaged in the art and science of politics and diplomacy. It is filled with anxiety, pangs of proximity and hypocrisy in national and international affairs while undertaking or discharging interallied duties.
A mathematical like quantitative cum qualitative symmetry of national and international agenda, intersections, cross-cutting and overlapping interests consolidates solidarity and a concerted program of action. Public officials formulate and implement similar plans, programs and policies across the world with the United Nations and its specialized agencies as catalyst entities. Similarly, multilateral diplomacy underlines the multipolar world order. It is a current vogue in this field of government and governance – national and global. Therefore, it is a hunch to say that we are entering such an epoch of enriching discourse and deliverables towards the first 75 years in this New Century or Third Millennium. I can figure out democracy in international relations or global democracy as a prevailing framework, a sentiment and framework we all fit in as parties representing state, government, non-state, non-government, media, academics, citizens, entrepreneurs and private sectors.
Mr. Kunwar is a freelance writer on politics and international relations based in Kathmandu.
