A POST-WESTERN

INTERNATIONAL ORDER?

POLS214
W E EK 7
MARCO VIEIRA
Learning Outcomes
2

1. Are we heading towards a post-American world?

2. New forms of multilateral cooperation among

rising powers: BRICs and IBSA;
Impact on the international system

Theoretical implications

.Understand the different ideas around the theme of

an post-American world and what next in the 21st
century
Context
The international system set up in the post-1945 era and
led by the US is now seriously destabilised

Bretton Woods and UN system facing crises of efficiency,

legitimacy and authority

Centre of gravity of the global economy is no longer in the

US: rise of illiberal states

Since 9/11, US administrations foreign policy and war on

terror (use of drones, Guantanamo detainees, renditions,
unconditional support to Israel, climate change, etc.)
undermined its credentials as a normative leader
Post-American?
Different viewpoints on American
Decline (or not)
Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World
Niall Ferguson, Colossus: The Price of American
Empire
Robert Kagan, The World America Made
Gideon Rachman, Zero-Sum Game: American
Power in an Age of Anxiety
John Ikenberry, The Liberal Leviathan
Michael Cox, Empire by Denial
Ian Bremmer, G-Zero: Every Nation for Itself
Common features of emerging powers

They are all from the Global South with the important
exception of Russia (former Soviet Union)
They are established regional powers

They are fast-growing economies with large populations

They challenge some of the tenets of the US-led liberal

system
They create coordination mechanisms/institutions to
achieve their commonly defined goals (IBSA, BRICS,
BASIC)
 B.R.I.C.S.
Size matters!

Emerging markets
Brazil, Russia, India,
China and South Africa

Focus on multi-
polarity and economic
development

Soft balancing
The Creation and Evolution of BRICS

In 2001, Jim ONeill, Goldman Sachs, coined the BRICs acronym

to signal a hot new investment class of large, emerging economies
with high growth potential going forward.

In the mid-2000s, Putin saw the opportunity to make BRICs a

political grouping, and by 2006 the Russian foreign minister was
organizing informal meetings of his counterparts on the sidelines
of meetings of international governmental organizations.

In April 2009 the BRICs held their first leaders summit in

Yekaterinberg, Russia.

In 2010, the club BRICs became BRICS with the inclusion of South
Africa
BRICS Development Bank

The establishment of the group's development bank

was first proposed in 2012, but approved only earlier
in 2013 at the BRICS Summit in Durban, South
Africa.
Initial investment of $50 billion mainly from China

Aimed at providing funds for infrastructure

projects in developing countries and among BRICS
partners
Alternative to IMF/WB?
The Bigness of BRICS

Territorial size 25% of planets land mass

Demographics 40% of worlds population

(Brazil: 194mil; Russia 142mil; India:1.15bil;
China:1.33bil; South Africa 50mil)

BRICS share of the global economic output in

2012 20% (EU + US around 40%)
IBSA

India, Brazil and South Africa

South-South cooperation

Shared identity

Normative/soft power
IBSAs Substantive Policy/Political
Initiatives
Common diplomatic stance at WTO ensure results
compatible with the interests of developing countries
Critical of type of humanitarian intervention in Libya and
against military intervention in Syria
Joint naval exercises in the Atlantic and Indian Oceans

Joint diplomatic pressure for a permanent seat in the

UNSC
Strong collective advocates of UN Millennium Development
Goals and debt eradication in poor countries
Development assistance in least developed nations through
the IBSA Fund
IBSA and UN Security Council Reform

IBSA states claim a permanent seat at the UNSC

Brazil, India, and South Africa are largely against US and

European views within the UNSC as shown by IBSAs voting
record in 2011, when they were all non-permanent member of
the UNSC

Washington had only supported Japan in the event of any

enlargement, until President Obama in late 2010 also endorsed
Indias bid

Obama refrained from extending the same endorsement to

Brazil following
Brasilias abstention on the UNSC Libya resolution (2011) and
Its 2010 diplomatic intervention in the dispute over Irans nuclear program.
Scenarios for the future?

Bipolar (Rise of China?) Chimerica

Liberal multi-polar (liberal internationalism
without clear hegemonic leadership?)
Empire (reassertion of American power?)
Decentralization of global governance through the
G-spots: G8; G20; G2; G3
Regionalisation of global politics (EU, Mercosur,
ASEAN)
Consolidation of a North-South divide?
Theoretical Implications

Realism: hegemonic transition the rise of China

and reconfiguration of strategic balancing
Liberal: crisis of liberal internationalism and the
rise of non-liberal states
Critical Theory/Marxist: Capitalist crisis/systemic
crisis/emergence of new historic bloc led by South
powers
Constructivist: normative/ideational transition in
international order and the role of emerging
powers identities
Questions for reflection

Do we live in a post-USA world?

What kind of order we have now and may envisage

for the future: Uni-polar? Multi-polar? Or chaotic?

Which theory best understands the rise of the South?

In future, can we expect more conflict or more

cooperation?
(reflect also on end of history and clash of
civilisations theses)