Regional Security Agreements for Multipolar World Arrangement - Research Paper Example

  Introduction:  We reside in a unipolar world today. At the time of World War II, Winston Churchill observed regional security agreements as the foundation of a multipolar world arrangement, which could guarantee the balance of power and avoid another global inferno. However, the collapse of international cooperation with Iraq, and the increasing anti- Americanism around the globe, gave rise to doubts about a steady and legitimate international arrangement under U.S. hegemony. Hence a return to multipolarity has become not just a planned ambition of some key states, but also a normative one.  To deal with the transition of power in the international context, it has become important to look beyond the issue of U.S. defense mechanism and support the initiative for formation of the Grand Alliance that is aimed at providing multipolar defense mechanism to the nations. By adopting this mechanism U.S. can still persist its supremacy.   Return of multipolar international management (China & the U.S.):  Presently, the international structure has two actors who are looking for a return to a multipolar international arrangement. China is one of them whose spectacular dominance poses severe challenge to the post-Cold war balance of authority. The other one is France. France declared its independence from the US by declining to support the Bush administration’s plans to attack Iraq. However, there are dissimilarities between these two multipolarity-seeking authorities. Both these nations consider U.S. hegemony as a serious threat to world’s organization, challenging the likelihood of both harmony and fairness. The powers of China seem to be increasing unlike France. Thus, the craving for multipolarity of China is inspired to a greater extent by its awareness of U.S. supremacy as a hazard to its own aims related to regional power. Besides all these, China’s national search is for multipolarity, but France is structured within a Euro-nationalism. This requires the European Union (EU) to become a self-regulating actor in the global stage to offset the United States. Inspite of its increasing curiosity in regionalism, Beijing has not adopted regional cooperative safety to an equivalent extent, even though its hunt for multipolarity may include a long-term expedition for a regional field of influence (Acharya, 2).  Formation of Democratic Alliance (Grand Alliance) opposing Chinese economic and political supremacy: Barriers  Carlo Pelanda debated for the formation of an alliance between the U.S., European, and Asian democracies of the globe. He claims this alliance to oppose the speedily growing power of China. The growth of this nation intimidates the world economic structure, because of their effort to carry out liberal economics within a communist administration. As viewed by Pelanda, the Grand Alliance is the only method to oppose and stop this grim future to turn into a reality. The Alliance would call for to commence with a Euro-American Alliance. It is not a twist of fate that the United States only takes part in alliances where it sustains a larger share of authority and is the leading figure. The U.S. government and its people value their independence above everything. They consider alliances, where other countries have authority over US domestic and international policies, as an infringement of their sovereignty. Owing to their present position, the United States is eager to take part only in these kinds of alliances. However, if this rule continues, the Grand Alliance will never be achievable. The Grand Alliance discovers methods in which the alliance could be created, regardless of the problem of lack of preliminary U.S. support.  European countries are expected to be keener to give up some of their independence to form Euro-American alliance. European topography leads to isolationism unfeasible and negotiation of independence as an essential step to uphold security for European population. The key to persuade U.S. government to think about such an alliance lies not in the administration itself, but in the control of the U.S. people. Even if the people of U.S. were supportive of the alliance and considered it as the correct route of action, elected bureaucrats have no authority to create the alliance. The question now arises regarding how to persuade the US leaders to take part in the Grand Alliance so that it can convince the U.S. citizens that they should insist their leaders to participate. Answer to the question lies in the issue of U.S. nationalism. The U.S. nationalism differs from the kind of ideas regarding nationalism that most of the other countries follow. U.S. nationalism does not depend over any kind of artistic, racial or spiritual individuality. It is based on the admiration of and appreciation for the Constitution and its democratic values. Thus, the scope of such nationalistic approach is more pervasive compared to any other form of the same nature; thus, evaluation and utilization of such nationalism must be done in a different manner. Based on such approach the U.S. citizens provide highest importance to the powers as enshrined by the constitution and have undertaken a quite uncompromising approach regarding waving their sovereign rights off (Carlo).   Formation of the Grand Alliance: Positives   According to the U.S. observation, economic system of Europe is of socialist type. The establishment of a kind of association between these two democracies would lead to development of American nationalism. It is required that supporters of democracy learn to make out their similarities rather than emphasizing on their differentiations. This gives rise to another problem that is, persuading the U.S. people to accept that this alliance would to some extent hamper their sovereign rights. However, it would not disrupt the operation of the U.S. government and standard of living of the people (Carlo).   The nature of the current system is not one of unipolar supremacy but rather of uni-multi-polarity. According to Huntington, there is only one superpower. It does not imply that the earth has been dominated by unipolar system. He stated that a unipolar system has one supreme authority but there would not be major powers. There would be several minor authorities.  Thus, the supreme power could effectively solve all the crucial global issues single-handedly. Right now the United States is undergoing such a situation. U.S. cannot maintain its status by acting unilaterally and against the doctrine of international law. This would give rise to bitterness in international relations and thereby, damage the bonding and support of the immediate group of allies. Therefore, it is essential for the U.S. to take measured steps in such a way so that it is both beneficial and legitimate to the society (Hehir, 21). Thus, apart from only being aware about the issues of social benefit, there must be an endeavor to design new concept of international law related to human rights.   Dominance of the U.S. within the current arrangement is augmented by the need for regionally major powers, for example the UK and Japan, which is aimed at supporting the U.S. strategy in the context of international politics. Thus, a resolution by the hegemony to interfere may seem to have extensive support because dependant authorities will support it for geopolitical reasons rather than with confidence (Hehir, 22-23).  China: The Answer of Asia to the U.S. supremacy  In Asia, regional multilateral security systems were almost missing during the Cold War, even though the versatile sub-regional group, The Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) functioned under the conditions of bipolarity. In 1990, there had been emergence of ASEAN Regional Forum (Asia’s initial continent-wide provincial safety grouping). Today, China, has taken an unparallel curiosity in multilateral economic and security strategies at the provincial level. The observers consider this interest of China as a way of opposing US authority and influence in the region. The “new security concept” of China upholds the idea of multipolarity while adopting regional security collaboration in Asia. However, both China and the EU are not in a position to generate a multipolar world arrangement through counter-hegemonic provincial security systems (Acharya, 3).  Europe’s Standpoint regarding Polarity of Power:   The European familiarity of regionalism has been different from Asia. Europe was involved in two main types of ‘security’ systems, namely, the major regional safety systems, NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Conjointly these three issues constitute the aspect of “hegemonic regionalism”. They were formed and sustained by the two superpowers. In the present day, such hegemonic regional security systems are unpopular and irrelevant. The end of Cold War witnessed collapse of the Warsaw Pact. North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) had to adopt roles, such as mediation that had similarity with cooperative security organizations than collective defense systems in its conventional sense. Still, NATO encounters a rigorous test of its flexibility because of the unilateral U.S. choice to invade Iraq. However, though interest of the United States in NATO diminishes, it will not cause a “Europeanized” NATO that would form a multipolar world system. Another European regional security system, the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) was formed mainly as an instrument to diminish Cold War polarization and contention, rather than a confrontation to superpower ascendancy. The fundamental principle of “common security”, confidence-generating and arms management schedule helped to minimize the strategic significance of hegemonic regional security systems that retained bipolarity in Europe. The CSCE has remained a significant vehicle for supervising safety issues in Europe. The most convincing European power for multipolarity today is a sub-regional organization formed apparently for economic cooperation (Acharya, 3).   Polarity of Power and EU:  The EU emerged under situations of bipolarity and it received protection from the Cold War US safety umbrella. Periodic acknowledgment has been provided to EU for its potency to be a regional superpower integrating economic right and strategic intention. The disagreement between France and Germany on one hand, Britain and Spain on the other over Iraq weakened the trustworthiness of European foreign and defense attitude, both provincially and internationally. Moreover, a global superpower function for the EU in the usual sense requires an eagerness and ability for worldwide power protuberance. However, the European communities seem less and less prone to settle international problems.   Polarity of Power beyond Europe and East Asian Domain:  Looking beyond Europe and East Asia, crave of regional security systems for collective defense and operating under the safety umbrella of a great authority has never been encouraged much. Experience of the Southeast Asian Treaty Organization (SEATO) and Central Treaty Organization (CENTO) confirms the preceding statement. Even collective security and defense structures formed under the sponsorship of large multipurpose regional organizations for instance, the Arab League and the Organization of American States (OAS) have never been realistic and effectual. Among the developing nations, the expression “regional security arrangements” indicates methods for the peaceful resolution of disputes assumed by multipurpose regional organizations, rather than for alliances geared for protection against common hazards. By itself, their capability to modify the global power arrangement has remained negligible (Acharya, 4).  Recent development of the global framework and well-built European commitments to a synchronized globalization argue in support of a potential analysis of the drifts which will form the international atmosphere, the anxieties which will arrange its expansion in the coming decades and the evolutions that Europe could donate to support it. According to the United Nations, between 2009 and 2025, the world population will amplify by 20 percent to arrive at 8 billion populations. With a high fertility rate, South Asia will undergo a high population expansion while this development will be reasonable in South-East Asia and low in East Asia. In 2025 global production will approximately be doubled with respect to 2005. The USA-EU-Japan chord will no longer rule the world, even if United States preserves their supremacy (The World in 2025: The Rising Asia and Socio-Ecological Transition, 9). Before 2025 China could turn out to be the 2nd global economic superpower, transgressing both Italy and France (The World in 2025: The Rising Asia and Socio-Ecological Transition, 10).  Why it is Important to form the Grand Alliance?  No country is secured within its individual borders. Owing to the trauma of 9/11, the U.S. people have changed in a vulnerable way that would make them more open to an equivalent alliance. Even the recent war in Iraq has altered the U.S. consciousness both in moral and libertarian perspectives. The existing problems regarding war have to some extent brought to light the problems with unilateral and multilateral actions. This does not imply that the U.S. people would now claim multilateral support for any global action. However, it has made several citizens much more cautious and cynical about exclusively unilateral policies. The U.S. people understand that multilateral act is more influential and effectual in the world structure.  This change at the psychical level of U.S. people will prove to be beneficial in persuading them about participating in the Grand Alliance. Compared to the threat of China as a new economic superpower, the impending danger of terrorism is a matter of further concern for most of the U.S. citizens. In this context importance of the multilateral act can be perceived as it can reduce the threat to a considerable extent.   Basic alterations to U.S. principles will take time to cultivate and take root. The threat from China is increasing and becoming inescapable every day. The more the U.S. people will be tolerant about the Grand Alliance, the more probable it is that the present economic structure can be sustained and strengthened further (Carlo).   Conclusion: One Step Ahead towards Grand Alliance:  To conclude, regional security systems, for example, the EU, remain inadequate representatives of multipolarity in its planned aspect, but they can be significant agents for multipolarity in normative sense. The US remains an influential and dominant actor in guaranteeing regional peace and safety in several parts of the world. However, despite existence of the United Nations, people’s confusions as well as distrust against US strategic purposes and policies is soaring dynamically. This is a positive aspect regarding formation of the Grand Alliance, as it will boost the issue of regional security. In the long run these security systems have a prospect to emerge as the mechanism of a normative multipolarity, which could present better scenario for constancy than a de-socialized U.S. hegemony (Acharya, 7). As the US security assurances are no longer believable, regional systems could have a significant role in controlling peace and security in their own vicinity. The European Union is prospective enough to sustain such an expansion by partnering regional groups in the developing world. Works Cited 1. Acharya, Amitav. “Regional Security Arrangements in a Multipolar World? The European Union in Global Perspective”. FES Briefing Paper, Dec. 2004. Available at: http://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/global/50101.pdf (Accessed on Sept. 23, 2009). 2. Carlo, Pelanda. The grand alliance: the global integration of democracies, Milano: FrancoAngeli, 2007. 3. Hehir, Aidan. “Structural Imperatives and the “Globalization” of Human Rights”, n.d. Available at: http://www.peacestudiesjournal.org.uk/dl/Globalisation%20of%20HR%20final%20version%20edited.pdf (Accessed on Sept. 23, 2009). 4. “The World in 2025: The Rising Asia and Socio-Ecological Transition”. European Commission, 2009. Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/research/social-sciences/pdf/the-world-in-2025-report_en.pdf (Accessed on Sept. 23, 2009). Read More