Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


New Political World Order

International Foreign Policy

Stalin Tayupanta

on 3 April 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of New Political World Order

International Foreign Policy
Stalin Tayupanta
Stefanny Rueda
Throughout history, many states have achieved the hegemony of the world due to its accumulation of the different sources of power and the creation of a political world structure that maintained them as the principal actors of the international system.
Power Transition Theory
Hegemonic Erosion Theory
Hegemonic Stability Theory
What is the new world order?
Regardless of the details of the preceding historical thread, WWI was the epochal event that began an identifiable program toward a new world order, a single global hierarchy, controlling all global affairs, under the control of elite financiers.
Some refer all the way back to The Illuminati, which was (still is?) a real conspiratorial clique aiming for global governance.
Others refer to Cecil Rhodes, who quite effectively used his wealth from diamond mining to promote his vision of global Anglo-Saxon dominance.
The real power behind the British government, however, by 1900, had long been the elite banking families of The City, in league with their colleagues in Europe and America. In Marxist terms, we would call this community the capitalist elite of the day, and they were the ones envisioning our now-unfolding new world order. Within the context of the British Empire, they had exercised considerable power over global affairs and finance, and they had outgrown the relatively limited vision of the British imperial model.

Britain itself, despite being still seen as the greatest world power, had become only a shadow of its former self. Once the manufacturer of the world — it enjoyed a near monopoly on industrial production for a century — it had now been eclipsed industrially by both Germany and the USA. Britain was no longer the obvious choice, as the base for a global power grab.
This phrase was used with certain reservations at the end of the II World War when the states were creating the plans for the implementation of the United Nations and the Bretton Woods agreements.
Actually, nobody can predict with certainty how the new world order will be. But if we want to create a better future for the next generations, we have to make a great effort to stop the environmental degradation that will dominate the world international affairs for decades.
The new world order expression has been used to refer to a new period of history pretending in this way that there are dramatic changes in the political ideologies and the power equilibrium.
Robert Keohane describes hegemony as the dominance of material resources that gives to the dominant state the capabilities to create and enforce law. In his book “After Hegemony” he defines it as a situation where a state is powerful enough to maintain the essential rules that govern the international relations and has the willingness to do it.
In the praxis of hegemony, imperial dominance is established by means of cultural imperialism, whereby the leader state (hegemon) dictates the internal politics and the societal character of the sub-ordinate states that constitute the hegemonic sphere of influence; either by an internal, sponsored government or by an external, installed government. The imposition of the hegemon’s way of life — an imperial lingua franca language and bureaucracies (social, economic, educational, governing) — transforms the concrete imperialism of direct military domination into the abstract power of the status quo, indirect imperial domination.
Antonio Gramsci defines the hegemony as the set of social groups, where the dominant actor establishes a moral, politic and intellectual leadership over the subordinated actors. In this way, the Hegemony is the progressive creation of alliances focused on a certain social group, where thanks to the moral and intellectual direction these gradually become its allies.
Immanuel Wallerstein refers to Hegemony as a normative system based on domination, coercion, exploitations and inequality. In economic terms it is an environment where the products of the central state are produced as efficiently as possible that they are competitive in other states, that´s why the central state will benefit from a free world market.
David Rapkin defines Hegemony as a legitimate domination relation exercised by a country over other states, which are the hearth of the world economy. In the industrial capitalism era, the sources of hegemonic domination are divided in 2 categories: the productive forces and the institutional influence.
Robert Cox argues that Hegemony is not simply a political order between states, it is an order inside the world economy with a dominant mode of production that influence in all countries. It is also a conglomerate of international social relations that are connected with the different social classes of different countries. His notion of Hegemony is based on an historical structure, in which the ideas, military capabilities and institutions are consistent. The interaction among these elements takes place through 3 correlated levels: Social forces that determine the way of production organization, state forms in which is now called state-society and the actual world order. He sees the Hegemony as a universal concept, that is to say, not an order in which a state exploits directly other states but an order in which the states could be interested in.
From Britain to the United States
From the United States to China?
The political order is created, typically, by a unique dominant power. The regimes are elements in the international order; this implies that the creation of international regimes depends normally on the Hegemony.

The maintenance of order requires a constant hegemony. In order to stabilize the world economy it has to be a stabilizer.

The Hegemonic State facilitates the free market. After the hegemony, the international economy survives without the Hegemonic State but the international liberal system doesn’t, because this state is the one that establishes the rules through the international regimes.

The absence of a hegemonic power is equivalent to international disorder (Hegemonic Peace).
Occidental Historical Hegemons
In Addition...
This theory has three main points:

It is necessary the existence of a state that establishes the rules enforces law and demonstrates the advantages of the system. Additionally, it is necessary that the dominant state proves the political determination to maintain and use this supremacy guaranteeing the stability of the international economic system.
The ideological prestige among the states in order to reach the common interests of nations.
The material power that allows a strong participation the economy and international commerce.
The dominant state commonly uses its power to create a stable political and economical structure and behavior norms to stabilize the system, by doing this, the hegemonic power guarantees its own security.

In other words, this state is interested in maintaining the status quo of the international system, where some great powers are satisfied.

Because of this, the dominant state create new alliances and seeks the cooperation for satisfaction of the states.
The International System
The international system is stable when it exist a major global power, but due to the existence of a hierarchy among states it is only stable until another global power obtains similar sources of power.
In this international hierarchy there exists the dominant power and the great, medium and small powers that are subordinated. These states don’t pretend to maximize its power; however, all the states pretend maximize its benefits when there is a power transition between the dominant power and a great power.
Great Powers
Middle Powers
Small Powers
Types of States
There are rival states that want to maintain its control over the sources of power in the system
These are characterizes for been a regional power, as the dominant state, but with the incapability of changing the international system structure.
These are small states that play a role in the alliances equilibrium.
The revisionist states- the ones that want to dominate or are unsatisfied with the system, try to balance their power and express its general disagreement with its position. This can be caused by historical, ideological, religious, territorial or cultural facts. Due to the fact that the international status quo is defended by the dominant state, only the great powers can be a threat.
Behavior Paths
Dominant State
Revisionist States
The Role of War
The most important consequence of a hegemonic war is that it changes the system according to the new power distribution. The war will determine who will govern the international system, and which will be the interests of the new world order.
According to this theory, the stability of the system depends on the existence of a global power or in the satisfaction creation of other states through cooperation and alliances. On the other hand, this theory predicts war, that could be global or regional.
When the revisionist state is unsatisfied.
Causes of War:
When the power parity between the dominant state and the revisionist state is similar.
When the power of the revisionist state exceeds the power of the dominant state
There is a low risk of war when the unsatisfied power has limited incentives to attack the dominant state because it is still weak in comparison with the dominant state.
Consequence of War:
This analysis supports that the maintenance of the international regimes could not require the military hegemony because the policies that result from these forums obey the (US) created interests that have the other participants of the system.
The power dynamics change constantly causing the erosion of the structure that rules by the moment.
Description of the International System
With a state of crisis and development of new policies, the dominant nation no longer will be able to guarantee the economic and politic objectives of the system, at the same time that the dissident states will begin to question the costs of the leadership and the detractors will turn aggressive.
This questioning will cause that the secondary states begin struggle in order to obtain a better status and autonomy in the system. A better status for secondary states means less status to the dominant state and a greater autonomy means a reduction of the dominant state influence in the system.
The international leader will have always the interest of keeping the status quo of the system, essentially for the multinational corporations, financial elites and governmental bureaucracies that are in charge of maintaining the good relations with the allies.
In the actual system, these enterprises transfer culture, negotiation forms, organization, among other things from the United States to other countries, turning them into the cultural leadership that this state possess in the world.
The British Empire represented the ultimate evolution of one particular path to global dominance.
A single hegemonic power, playing off other powers against one another in a balance of powers strategy. Certain mechanisms of power were perfected in this era.
As the integration of propaganda, racism, intelligence operations, covert intervention, diplomacy, financial manipulation, and naked military power — all orchestrated, with considerable art and brutality, in the pursuit of imperialist objectives.
Capitalism, in the next decades will no longer be a way of life that suits the world and its inhabitants.
Guns and troops had won the battle, but debt had won the war. All of Europe — winners and losers alike — were destitute as the war ended, and the victorious allies were encumbered by astronomical debt to the American Treasury and to the banking elite.
In British nationalist eyes, control over the balance of power in Europe was everything and the emerging Germany was a threat for its dominance of the world trade.
Because of this, the British nationalist were thinking in terms of war with Germany as the only mean of maintaining British Hegemony.
The banking elites worked together to set the stage of war, creating encircling alliances which would bring everyone against Germany
The Britain banking elite that had partner banks in the US and owned most of them, realized that the financing of wars is the most profitable and reliable of all banking operations. Britain could prosecute the war with Germany with the help of the American Banks. JP Morgan was the principal financier and goods supplier of Britain´s war on Germany.
Because of this huge amount of capital transfer America could be turned into a proto-superpower.
The WWI was the making of America, as a world power.
The internal industrial expansion, the influx of funding to the domestic economy, and the business consolidation that occurred. Money went from New York to London, on loan, and then the money was sent back to Chicago, or Cleveland, or wherever, to purchase the goods of war.
While Europeans and British were being slaughtered in their millions, Americans were experiencing boom times, leading into its golden age of the roaring 1920s.
When the war ended, Britain had accomplished her imperial objectives, had won the battle for European hegemony, and eliminated Germany as an immediate threat. In the process, however, she had inadvertently lost the war for global hegemony: Europe was no longer the focus of world power.
The best heritage that the United States system has given to the countries is that it has provided international forums (regimes) where the states have the opportunity to cooperate, share experiences, ensure the respect of international law principles and obtain relative power.
By intentionally committing economic suicide, the bankers have managed to kill not their banking system, but the economic viability of nations worldwide.
Since WWII the success of the banking elites was remarkable. The US that had achieved its hgemony would serve as an ideal base of operations for this next stage; a world government to be installed, making the whole Earth into a base of operations, a private fiefdom, to be owned and ruled directly by the banking elite.
The US system
The new world order project was in construction, and it had 4 key elements:
This model of imperial management is based on a regime-change operations as a way of keeping small nations under control. The installation of corrupt dictators or presidents who, once in power, were encouraged to enrich themselves and suppress their populations allowed that the investors from the North could exploit the nation´s resources and workers.
When these dictators were useless because the lose of control over the rebellious populations or because their started defending their national interests, the US intervention changed the regime in the country. At the same time the elite-controlled mass media discovered that there was a ruthless dictator removed in the world, thereby the successor regime change would be widely welcomed as a victory for democracy. In fact some reforms were implemented, but in the end it was another regime that facilitated the exploitation of foreign investors
Another important issue of the Pax Americana was the stigmatization of communist threat. Russia posed no real military threat to the US. It had been devastated by war and the last thing it wanted was to get involved in another one. The main concerns of Russia were to normalize relations with the West and pursue a large-scale nuclear disarmament.
With the destruction caused by WWII, and with the West again exhibiting hostility, Russia had little choice but to hold on to Eastern Europe as a protective barrier against another attack. Certainly Eastern Europeans were not happy with clumsy, autocratic Russian rule, but they were not being economically exploited as was the Southern "free world". Living conditions in Eastern Europe were typically better than in the Soviet Union itself, and better than in the South. Its "satellites" were an economic and political burden to the Soviets, an investment not in imperialism but in national security.
The "communist threat" provided a handy excuse for US interventionism, for maintaining a strong US military, and for the ongoing development of America's nuclear arsenal. Equally important, enabled by the fiction that Russia threatened the entire West, America was able to portray itself as the 'friend and protector of Europe', justify the economic isolation of the socialist block, and justify as well the Pax Americana regime in the "free world".
The banking elite was not satisfied with the profits that the expansion of the US hegemony produced, and they began to plant the new seeds of an economic decline. The first step was to start moving manufacturing overseas, leading to the de-industrialization of America and yielding increased profits to investors and transnational corporations.
The free trade doctrine and its deregulation of corporations and international finance created a situation where all goods and services are generated in the lowest-waged parts of the world, and then sold on the global market with the highest bidders. This not only maximizes the profits of the bankers and transnational corporations driving down the wages everywhere, it also results in market prices that are largely beyond the reach of the Global South.
Now the whole population of the South is in the way of ongoing economic development and the accelerated exploitation of Southern resources. This has caused a program of wholesale genocide in the South, facilitated by economic and social destabilization, in turn facilitated by free trade and by covert interventions.
The Rise and fall of America as hegemonic power
The preservation of American military supremacy as its only major asset
The Universal destabilization of localized economic systems
A worldwide extended boom-bust cycle, ending with most of the world destitute and hopelessly in debt
High Level Finance
Control over Resources
This ability to manipulate high-level finance that has been used to create the climactic conclusion of the American Century: the engineered global banking collapse and the ensuing general panic. This manufactured panic was then exploited to push through the disastrous bailout schemes that are transferring insolvency from the banks to the governments.
Of all the advantages the banking elites enjoy from this globalized and unregulated economic system, the most strategic is the discretionary power they have to arbitrarily manipulate global affairs. And of the tools available to them under this regime, the most potent is the ability to manipulate high-level finance.
Climate Change
Historically, all the new world political orders have changed through conflict.
This conflict could be caused when the effects of the global warming affect the developed countries by increasing the costs of raw materials, food, natural disaster aid, or even when the most important cities disappear because of the sea level rise.
What is for sure is that the climate change will dominate the international agenda in this new century.
The humanity has already the capacity of changing the modes of production, but the multinational corporations have been the principal obstacle to build this change.
This great crisis is not ecological it is political!
To create this change it is necessary to change the political system made for the multinational corporations interests.
The Regional Blocks will defend the respect of the values that the last system tried to guarantee in the world like Democracy, Freedom and Peace.
These revisionists states are now calling for a new political order where they could have a better representation and that could guarantee the values and principles that the Great Powers have been disrespecting.
The international actors will defend their right to participate and been heard. Because of this, the new Hegemon or Hegemons of the system will have to guarantee the good practices that the last system had in order to obtain support.
As long as the corporations and banking elites govern the world we will have a deregulated free market international world order camouflaged through Democracy, Freedom and Peace in order to legitimate the enterprise´s abuses.
The basis of the new world political order are totally related with the global capital flows.

The world investments are moving from the United States and Europe to the new emerging countries like BRICS and specially China.
Although, the Great Powers in the future will no possess the same power as they do now, they will influence the international decision making system.
Taking in account this path, the new political order will be multipolar, in other words, it will have a more spread power distribution due to the fact that the Middle Powers will convert in Great Powers.
The new participation tendency in the international order will cause a restructure in the UN and its Security Council or even the creation of a new dominant international institution.
Full transcript