THE LIBERAL WORLD ORDER AND THE HISTORY OF UNITED STATES’ ILLIBERAL APPROACH TO POWER: A CRITIQUE

Cyril Chibuzo Ezeani, Felix OkeChukwu Akamonye

Abstract


The present work examines United States history of what it terms illiberal approaches to power and international relation as a unipolar entity which is observed in her accomplishment of the earliest mission of expansionism and exceptionalism, pursuit of liberalism of imposition and unilateralism in its prosecution of wars and sanctions among others. It shows that the ultimate cost have been economic, perception and legitimacy costs, all of which have been a major factor in its gradual losing of global hegemonic hold today. The work of course acknowledges that this is only a factor among myriads of factors but by no means insignificant. In order to effectively do this it uses the hermeneutical and analytical approaches while it first espouses what liberal values and liberal theory of international relations vis a vis other theories. It then locates the illiberal approach within the larger context of liberal world order dilemma and crisis while highlighting the need for a concerted scholarly articulation to surpass the dilemma as it advocates for more restraint in liberalism of imposition and where expedient for more multilateral engagement.

Full Text:

PDF

References


i Georg Sǿrensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition: Liberal Values and World Order in the New Millenium, International Relations vol. 20 (30), 2006.

ii See Francis Fukuyama, The End of History and the Last Man (New York: Avon Books, 1992)

iii George Bush ‘New World Order’ Speech to Congress March 1991 as in Georg Sǿrensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition†iv G. John Ikenberry, “The End of Liberal International Order†International Affairs 94: 1 (2018) 7-23. v Georg Sǿrensen “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition, p. 254

vi As cited in Georg Sǿrensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition,†p.254.

vii For a full treatment see Sorensen, Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition, p.254.

viii United Nations, United Nations Millenium Declaration. Resolution 55/2 adopted by the General Assembly (New York: UN, 2000); Text in parenthesis abbreviated from the original as appeared in Georg Sorensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition,†p. 258.

ix Sorensen “What Kind of World Order?: The International System in the new millenniumâ€, Cooperation and Conflict: Journal of the Nordic International Studies Association vol. 41 (4) 2006, p. 343

x G. John Ikenberry, “The End of Liberal International Order?â€

xiG. John Ikenberry, “The End of Liberal International Order?â€

xiiJayatiScrivastava and Ananya Sharma, “International Relations Theory and World Order: Binaries, Silences and Alternatives,†South Asian Survey 21 (1&2) 23 2017 http://sas.sagepub.com

xiii Andrew Moravcsik, “Taking Prefences Seriously: A Liberal Theory of International Politics†International Organization 51(4) 1997, p.520 xivG.JohnIkenberry “Liberal Internationalism 3.0: America and the Dilemmas of Liberal World Order†Perspectives on Politics 7(1), 2009, pp71-72.

xvErsanOzkan and HakanCem Cetin, “The Realist and Liberal Positions on the Role of International Organizations in Maintaining World Order†https://dx.org/10.19044/esj.2016.v12n17p85

xvi See Ozkan and Cetin, “The Realist and Liberal Positionsâ€

xvii See Ozkan and Cetin,“The Realist and Liberal Positionsâ€

xviiiSee Ozkan and Cetin,“The Realist and Liberal Positionsâ€

xix Kenneth N. Waltz, Theory of International Politics. Reading, (MA: Addison Wesley, 1979), p.88

xxJayatiSrivastava and Ananya Sharma “International Relations Theory and World Order,†p 28.

xxi G. John Ikenberry, “Liberal Internationalism 3.0:,†pp. 71-72

xxii Ian Hurd, After Anarchy: Legitimacy and Power in the United Nations Security Council, (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007) p.78-79.

xxiii Robert Keohane, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy (Princeton N.J: Princeton University Press, 1984) p.138

xxivWikipedia.org “Constructivism (international relations)â€

xxv Wikipedia.org “Constuctivism (international relations)â€

xxviSee JayatiScrivastava and Ananya Sharma International Relations Theory and World Order, p.30

xxvii See Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism (New York: Henry Holt and company, 2008), p.20

xxviii Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, p.20.

xxix Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, p.22.

xxxAndrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, pp48-49.

xxxixxxi Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, p.50. xxxiien.m.wikipedia.org “Realpolitikâ€.

xxxiii Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, pp 74-75

xxxiv Georg SÇ¿rensen, Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition, p. 262.

xxxvIsaiah Berlin, Four Essays on Liberty, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1969), p. 132-3; See Georg Sorensen, Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition p.

xxxvi Georg Sǿrensen, “What Kind of World Order,†p. 347.

xxxviiGeorg Sǿrensen, “What Kind of World Order,†p.347.

xxxviiiGeorg Sǿrensen, “What Kind of World Order,†p.349.

xxxixJayatiScrivastava and Ananya Sharma, “International Relations Theory and World Order,†p.22.

xl Terry Macdonald and Kate Macdonald, Towards a ‘Pluralist’ World Order: Creative Agency and Legitimacy in Global Institution, European Journal of International Relations 2019, p.4 sagepub.com/hom/ejt

xli Georg Sǿrensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition,†p. 264

xliiAndrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, p.156.

xliiiAndrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of power, pp.156-7.

xliv Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, p.157.

xlv Andrew J. Bacevich, The Limits of Power, p.157.

xlviAmerican empire: Joe Biden’s biggest challenge-Opera News official-http://a6ec1c3210204en_ng?client=news

xlviiAmerican Empire: Joe Biden’s biggest Challenge

xlviiiTerry Macdonald and Kate Macdonald, Towards a Pluralist World Order, p.4.

xlixG.Ikenberry, American Foreign Policy: Theoretical Essays, (Boston: Houghton Miffllin, 2005), p. 596.

l Georg SÇ¿rensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition,â€

li Georg Sǿrensen, “Liberalism of Restraint and Liberalism of Imposition,†liiNaohikoHatta “Why China is Unlikely to Dominate the Globe†https://www.operanewsapp.com/ng/en/share/detail?news_id=9147dc76473b6

liiiNaohikoHatta, “Why China is Unlikely to Dominate the Globeâ€

liv G. John Ikenberry, “The End of Liberal International Order?†pp. 7-23. lv G. John Ikenberry, “The End of Liberal International Order?†pp. 7-23. lviJaroslawDziubinski and JuliuszPiwowarski “Polarity: Benefits and Long Perspective Durability†January 2015


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright © 2015-2019. IJAAS. All Rights Reserved.

ISSN:2504-8694, E-ISSN:2635-3709Â