The current liberal world order was established after World War II, by the creation and enhancement of global governance systems such as the UN, participation in the WTO and WHO, as well as the IMF and more.  However, the current rise of populism and cracks in NATO has shown the schism between elites vs. the population has been rising everywhere, including the West.

The current liberal world order has been put in place by the U.S., but with the influence of various countries across the world increasing in scope, the current world liberal order seems to be at stake.  There seems to be a fundamental issue of trust with various people and both national and global institutions, as well as expertise.  In addition, although the global governance systems – as well as national political institutions – has stayed relatively stagnant or behind in adapting to new demands and changes, the pace at which both technology and private industry has evolved has been very fast.  Owing to this, there are a lot of issues that point to a fundamental change that needs to happen.

No one can see what will happen next – with the COVID-19 crisis, economically other rising powers such as China has cemented its influence as well as economic growth internally, but there are also U.S. policy changes that will most likely happen under Biden-Harris post-2020.  There remains a lot to be seen, but it seems that there are more things pointing to a change in the liberal world order – whether by a new successor – or a fundamental change to amend it from its existing system.

 

https://www.cfr.org/article/liberal-world-order-rip

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/liberal-international-order-free-world-trump-authoritarianism/569881/

In “American Grand Strategy in the Age of Trump,” Hal Brands refers to how America serves as a sense of stability to the rest of the world. He states, “Since 1945, international security has rested heavily on the credibility of American commitments; U.S. officials have thus sought to demonstrate that Washington is a reliable and competent actor, one that can carry out complex tasks effectively and serve as a source of stability in a dangerous world.” Compared to that vision of American leadership, yesterday’s New York Times states, “the president barely shows up to work, ignoring the health and economic crises afflicting the nation and largely clearing his public schedule of meetings unrelated to his desperate bid to rewrite the election results. He has fixated on rewarding friends, purging the disloyal and punishing a growing list of perceived enemies that now includes Republican governors, his own attorney general and even Fox News.” This President has clearly shown the world that as long as he is in Washington, the United States is not a reliable or competent actor. 

As unstable as the U.S. has felt the last 4 years, Trump has still found a way to escalate the tension of his presidency in its waning weeks. Peter Baker of The New York Times reports, “With six weeks until he leaves office, Mr. Trump remains as unpredictable and erratic as ever. He may fire Mr. Barr or others, issue a raft of pardons to protect himself and his allies or incite a confrontation overseas. Like King Lear, he may fly into further rages and find new targets for his wrath.” That sense of stability in a dangerous world that Brands refers to has seemingly escaped our current White House. 

Many times during this administration I witnessed the President get right up to the line and I would tell myself ‘there’s no way he crosses that one.’ Time and time again the President gleefully proved me wrong. I will still try to remain positive, but Peter Baker reminds us, “We’re approaching the end of the play here and that’s where catastrophe always comes.”

 

Baker, P. (2020, December 05). Trump’s Final Days of Rage and Denial. Retrieved December 06, 2020, from https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/05/us/politics/trump-presidency-election-loss.html

Brands, Hal. “7. American Grand Strategy in the Age of Trump.” America Grand Strategy in the Age of Trump. Brookings Institution, 2018, pp. 153-182.

According to the latest agreement of the European Council, third countries will be allowed to join the European Military Project. But their participation will depend if they can add substantial value to respective projects being carried out and when such participation will not lead to dependencies on third states. Besides, any third country participant need also to be agreed and respect the values of the European Union has, and the principles of good neighbor relations with the Member States. Therefore, the approach toward participation undoubtedly satisfies only the closest partners of choice like the United States, Norway, and the United Kingdom.

Third countries can contribute relevant capacities for military operations, technological know-how as well as research and development. Their participation also facilitates closer EU working relationships with neighbors and non-EU NATO allies, helping safeguard NATO unity. For instance; Norway — an EU-oriented country with a third of its exports going to the bloc. As the only member of the European Free Trade Association that is both part of the European Economic Area and host to notable defense industry, Norway would be a substantial contributor to PESCO projects, from research programs to the joint development and acquisition of defense capabilities initiatives.

This is an article that I read before, but it came back  to my mind as I was looking at our last class in the syllabus for the semester: Whither the International Security Order in the 21st century? It is interesting to see that when the U.S. and its allies established the liberal world order, they wanted a world based on the rule of law and respect for countries’ sovereignty and territorial integrity.  They also wanted human rights to be protected. Unfortunately, more than 70 years later, people are raising questions and concerns as whether the liberal world order is still viable.

The article highlights that what constituted the basis of the liberal world order, that is, liberalism, universality, and the preservation of order itself are under attack. In fact, it points out that liberalism is fading away, populism is gaining weight, countries are now chanting nationalism as never before. There is disorder in the Middle East, wars and rumors of wars are ripping Syria and Yemen, and elsewhere, while North Korea is expanding its nuclear capabilities. Attempts to form global frameworks have failed, and we often hear of trade wars.

According to the CFR, the U.S. for the most part, is responsible for the weakening of the liberal world order. In fact, President Trump by deciding against the TPP, withdrawing from the PCA, and threatening NAFTA and other alliance relationships proves that we have come to a turning point. The U.S. has failed to play its major role given that it was the principal architect of the liberal world order, and its principal backer. The CFR says that,the liberal world order cannot survive on its own, because others lack either the interest or the means to sustain it. They suggest that our world will be less free, less prosperous, and less peaceful, for Americans and others alike. I may not agree with all their speculations, but  it seems to me that everything is falling apart. Perhaps it is time for us to see the New World Order that Presidents Bush and Obama used to claim.

https://www.cfr.org/article/liberal-world-order-rip

 

Exactly 25 years ago, I came back to my home country on behalf of my employer. After more than a decade, influenced by the teaching of German liberals, socialized in civic and Christian values, I met a country only a few years after the Soviets left. However, the economic elite heirs of the communists under the false hat of liberalism still had enough strength to usurp power. A beloved method of that “spiritual elite” to grab and keep the power was and is the theory of the so-called “false consciousness” that the average person often does not recognize what is good for them thus who recognizes it should steer them in the right direction. [2] A country that was at times one of the largest in Europe and whose inhabitants have suffered Islam and the horrors of the Ottoman occupation on behalf of the rest of Europe for 150 years. Nevertheless, this country was a multi-ethnic state and later as a dual monarchy well known for its culture and talented people. In which the citizens of the Jewish faith, up to the occupation by Nazi Germany and the shameful cooperation of their blinded local supporters, could achieve careers up to the defense minister, and which have repeatedly fertilized western culture. What exactly was the reason? Tolerance. We are talking about Hungary. According to Marion Countess Dönhoff[3]

The historical root of liberalism lies in the enlightenment, which is why tolerance is its symbol – or at least it should be.

Before we can answer the question of where liberalism is going, one should consider where liberalism is coming from. Without delving deeply into the emergence of liberalism, which significantly wiser and more experienced scientists have made long before me, I dare to say that an essential reason lies in education. Traditionalism and liberalism have shaped the different educational systems of the two geographical hemispheres, the East and the West. In the East, the Prussian spirit of traditionalism has taken root, while in the West, the different social order has led to the growth of more liberal ideas. Liberalism is not liberalism. In the unfortunate part of Europe that had to live in a totalitarian system for long decades after WW2, the liberals were the “better placed” who could secure economic advantages. The teachings of western politicians about freedom and justice sound almost a mockery for these countries. In a book[4], received from a young liberal politician in Germany years ago I read a fitting quote from Karl Popper

 While differing is widely in the various little bits we know, in our infinite ignorance we are all equal.

Very often in the past three decades, I have seen how a larger state or company wants to teach and dominate the smaller one how something works. It did not work. Not for German. Not for the US. And the rising star European Union is behaving like that and is trying to teach member states how the liberal world order works. The UK did not want to go with them. Murray illustrates in his The Madness of Crowds: Gender, Race, and Identity the devastating effects of liberalism through British society, which could serve for Central Europeans as a warning. Now “bad boys” Hungary and Poland are in the penalty corner for standing up for their rights. As Nye et al[5] opines

Leadership is not the same as domination and Washington’s role in helping stabilize the world and underwrite its continued progress maybe even more important now than ever. Americans and others may not notice the security and prosperity that the liberal order provides until they are gone—but by then, it may be too late.

I hope it is not too late to save good liberalism. I wish it for the young German liberal. He is my son.

 

[1] “Whither thou goest”: Thomas Nelson Publishers. 2011. King James Study Bible. Ruth 1:16-17

[2] Mansfeld, Harvey. 2015. “Our Parties, Part One”. City Journal. https://www.city-journal.org/html/our-parties-part-one-13700.html.

[3] Ring Politischer Jugend Sachsen e.V. und Jungliberale Aktion Sachsen 2014. Liberales Lesebüchlein. 2nd ed. Dresden, p. 38.

[4] Ring Politischer Jugend Sachsen e.V. und Jungliberale Aktion Sachsen 2014. Liberales Lesebüchlein. 2nd ed. Dresden, p.1.

[5] Nye Jr., Joseph S. “Will the Liberal Order Survive?” Foreign Affairs, vol. 96, no. 1, Jan. 2017, pp. 10–16. EBSCOhost.

In the last few weeks before president Trump leaves office more actions are seen in Iran. The death of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, the top nuclear scientist and mastermind of Iran’s nuclear weapons program has been killed in an ambush on Friday confirmed by Iran’s security forces that the act was held by Israel. Fakhrizadeh has been mentioned in 2018 in a presentation by Natanyahu releasing Fakhrizadeh’s work on the nuclear program and was put on Israel’s top agenda ever since. The assassination of Muhsen Fakhrizadeh has be met by heavy condemnation of Iranian officials, Iran calling the UN to condemn the act and many senior officials publicly announcing retaliation. Protests by Iranian civilians also calling for retaliation as Fakhrizadeh has created a Covid-19 kit for his people to fight the virus[1]. The assassination of Fakhrizadeh goes along with a number of scientists killed by the Israeli government and on par with the U.S. assignation of major general Qassem Solimani. Both have served and had prominent roles in the Islamic revolutionary Guard corps (IRCG), Solimani was the major general of the (IRCG) and Fakhrizadeh was senior official. Which magnifies possible forceful attempts within retaliation. This makes it a very tough environment for president-elect Joe Biden to walk into office and restore friendly diplomatic relations and revive the JCPOA as pledged in his campaign.

[1]https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/27/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-scientist-assassinated-mohsen-fakhrizadeh.html

 

As a result of the lockdowns around the world to control the coronavirus outbreak, huge decreases in aerial transportation and industrial output resulted in a considerable drop in daily global carbon emissions of 17% in April of this year. However, COVID-19 is also prompting lackluster responses by governments that could pose detrimental impacts on the environment and on the ability to combat climate change. It is imperative that more large-scale actions be introduced in global legislatures to avoid the worst impacts of this crisis.

Overall, international agreements on Climate Change mitigation and adaptation have been halted due to the pandemic. The World Conservation Congress, responsible for gauging global conservation levels, has been postponed to January 2021. The Convention on Biological Diversity, which would have established new global measures to protect wildlife and plants from climate change and other threats, has also been postponed until next year. Lastly, The 2020 U.N. Ocean Conference scheduled for June this year has been delayed. All of these pushbacks have led many governments to temporarily devote their attention to other pressing issues regarding Public Health. As a result, due to the virus threatening the finances and economic output of many countries, many of the financial pledges towards implementing target-based practices to mitigate emissions may be largely overlooked in the coming months, or years. 

Many of the root causes of climate change also increase the prevalence of global pandemics. Deforestation, which occurs mostly for agricultural purposes (a significant cause of Climate Change), is the largest cause of habitat loss worldwide. It has been argued that loss of habitat forces animals to migrate and potentially contact other animals or people, thus transmitting viral or bacterial matter. Large livestock farms can also serve as a source for spillover of infections from animals to society.Recent research has also found that people who live in places with poor air quality (another principle cause of Climate Change) are more likely to die from COVID-19 even when accounting for other factors that may influence risk of death such as pre-existing medical conditions, socioeconomic status, and access to healthcare.

On the contrary, the high infectivity rate of the virus has compelled city governments to implement curfews and lockdowns, which can have an impact on carbon emissions levels. Furthermore, to avoid public transportation and contact with possible infected individuals, cities like Oakland, CA introduced Slow Streets, which banned cars on 74 miles of streets, encouraging slower driving and promoting biking and walking. New York, San Francisco, Minneapolis and Seattle have followed suit by implementing street closures, which in turn, decreases vehicular usage. Brookline, MA, a Boston suburb, used temporary structures to widen sidewalks and increase bike lanes. Moreover, European cities have also expanded biking initiatives. Barcelona added 13 miles of city streets for biking, with Berlin incorporating 14 new miles of bike lanes into their vast network. Though air pollution levels have decreased considerably within the last few months, this should not take precedence over the progress that must be met in addressing Climate Change at a global scale, particularly once the virus becomes contained and a vaccine is finalized and distributed.

 

Sources:

Coronavirus and Climate Change

COVID-19’s Long-Term Effects on Climate Change—For Better or Worse

 

The killing on Friday of Iran’s top nuclear scientist, Mohsen Fakhrizadeh might bring more within it than what it seems like. The latest assassination is putting Israel, the US and Iran in a very sensitive position. According to Barbara Salvin “Why Was Iran’s Top Nuclear Scientist Killed?”, the assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh isn’t about stopping a bomb — it’s about preventing diplomacy. Joe Biden doesn’t have to let it work.

The Trump administration’s unilateral withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal pushed Iran to produce a large amount of uranium, but it is not close to the level needed to produce a nuclear weapon. Iran has said repeatedly that it will go back into full compliance with the nuclear agreement if the Biden administration agrees to do the same, and lifts the onerous sanctions piled on by President Trump. However, the recent assassination of its top nuclear scientists has made Iran take a step back and made the diplomacy between Iran and the new US administration under the leadership of Joe Biden harder.

The Trump administration is fearing an expected return to the Iran nuclear agreement by the Biden’s administration. Both the current Trump administration and Israel are fearing that such action would revive Iran’s struggling economy and make it harder to contain its influence in the Middle East.

 

As we delve further into the holiday season and Americans cannot help but want to spend time together, we currently await a surge of COVID cases to be reported. Dr. Fauci explains how holiday travel will inevitably result in a surge as travel rates reportedly reached the highest since this March with almost 1.1 million travelers passing through airport security. The traveling occurred despite last week’s recommendation from the CDC against holiday gatherings this year. These small gatherings, they explained, could potentially become super spreader events. Despite these disconcerting predictions, Biden appears to be building up his COVID strategy plan. It looks like he will not adopt Trump’s state-by-state tactic and instead plans on implementing a national strategy removing the responsibility from state leaders. It appears like he also plans on implementing a vaccination strategy. Several vaccines appear to be progressing with 55 vaccines undergoing clinical trials in humans and 87 preclinical vaccines in animals. But like everything involving the pandemic – this is not so simple. Even if the vaccines were perfectly ready to be administered next week, it is not indicative of people that will actually accept to receive the vaccine. Pre-pandemic the anti-vaccine movement was already steadily on the rise. Now, an entire movement against COVID vaccines is rising. WaPo reports Alabama and other poor rural states will be the most challenging states to administer the vaccine. In short, I hope Biden’s plan will somehow encourage Trump’s conspiracists to protect themselves. But looking at the amount of traveling and holiday converging, I may have better luck writing Santa a letter to create a Christmas miracle.

In their article, “Confronting Climate Change and Reframing Security”, Carol Dumaine and Irving Mintzer discuss how the issue of climate change has become a topic of discussion and study in security and military circles. They discuss how since the 1970’s American policy makers have “securitized” the issue of climate change and discussed how the United State’s military and security apparatus should prepare for the incoming affects of climate change. They contrast the American security lens with that of Germany. The German lens does not focus on security and military matters, instead it focuses on using strong multilateral and cooperative approaches to deal with and mitigate the damage that will come from climate change. Dumaine and Mintzer quote some German experts as stating that they believed that America’s focus on the security aspect of climate change is a distraction from the real issue. I believe that American policymakers are correct in “securitizing” climate change .As the environmental situation continues to degrade resources such as water and arable land will become scarcer and only countries that can physically defend their resources will be able to keep them. I would also consider it unwise for nation states to rely on multilateral approaches when dealing with climate change considering the fact that the United States left the Paris Agreement. In my opinion, it is the German experts who are acting foolishly in believing that the international community would come together during such a crisis and not crumble into a state of chaos in which every nation is solely looking out for the survival of its own people.