As the world transitions from the ‘new world order’ established by leading powers in the late 1940s, to a newer ‘contemporary world order’ defined by diffused and decentralised networks of power, questions about its nature, scale, and direction loom large in the international community. Multiple perspectives and explanations characterise the paradigm of the current world order, and the answers to these questions remain inconclusive.
The Us’ ‘America First’ policy and its withdrawal from several multilateral agreements, including the 2016 Paris Climate Agreement, the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Iran nuclear deal are often seen as points of departure from the established ‘new world order’. However, Cameron Munter, the CEO and President of The East West Institute and a former American diplomat, argued that these developments are not a break from the past but an indication of a directional intensification of the steady global change. Munter explained that the current global order is shaped by a diffused power structure, which makes it difficult to achieve the stability of the bipolar Cold-War period. Moreover, with the increase in the number of players and issues, the nature of the current world order has become heterodox, a concept that people are not familiar with.
Tectonic changes leading to an unfamiliar world order raise concerns about global security, especially as the rule-based arms control system, which the new world order sought to establish, seems to be gradually eroding, as seen in the Us’ recent plans to withdraw