International system of states transformation, Peter W. Schulze, Co-Founder, DOC Research Institute

Summary

The video script discusses the evolution of the international system, from the bipolar era of the Cold War to the current multipolar world. It highlights the shift from a US-led unipolar system to a polycentric one involving China, Russia, and the US. The script emphasizes the different roles and challenges faced by these actors, with the European Union caught in the middle. It also touches on the impact of this geopolitical landscape on domestic politics, particularly the rise of nationalist parties.

Takeaways

• 🔄 Hegemons are only dangerous when challenged, and currently, no global hegemon is being seriously challenged.
• 🌍 The international system has evolved from a bipolar structure, where the U.S. and Soviet Union balanced power, to a more complex, multi-actor system.
• ⚖️ The bipolar system of the Cold War era relied on a balance of power, avoiding direct conflict due to the risk of mutual destruction.
• 💣 The Cuban Missile Crisis was a critical moment when the stability of the bipolar system was at risk but ultimately led to better communication between the superpowers.
• 🇺🇸 After the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991, the U.S. became the dominant global hegemon, promoting a liberal, rules-based international order.
• 🛡️ The U.S.'s global dominance has been rooted in both military strength and the promotion of universal values like democracy and human rights.
• 🌏 A new multipolar system is emerging, with three primary actors: the U.S., China, and Russia, followed by the European Union as a secondary player.
• 💼 Russia, despite being a military power, has limited economic influence, while China's global outreach is relatively new but expanding.
• 🇪🇺 The European Union faces a dilemma between aligning with the U.S. or developing more independent foreign policies, influenced by differing national interests.
• ⚖️ Europe’s military weakness but economic strength position it as a potential mediator in international conflicts, although current leadership lacks the capacity to fully realize this role.

Q & A

What was the nature of the bipolar system that existed after World War II?

The bipolar system was characterized by a balance of power between two superpowers, the United States and the Soviet Union. They balanced each other and avoided direct conflict due to the potential for mutual destruction, a concept known as MAD (Mutual Assured Destruction).

How did the balance of power during the bipolar era influence international relations?

During the bipolar era, the balance of power led to a policy of non-interference in each other's spheres of influence. This was due to the understanding that any major conflict could escalate to a nuclear war, leading to catastrophic consequences.

What is meant by the term 'unipolar system' as described in the script?

The term 'unipolar system' refers to a period where one single superpower, the United States, dominated the global landscape after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. This hegemony was based on both military power and the promotion of universal values such as democracy and human rights.

How did the United States establish its hegemony after the bipolar era?

The United States established its hegemony through a combination of military strength and the promotion of liberal values. It positioned itself as the global arbiter of justice and order, often intervening in other nations' affairs under the guise of promoting these values.

What is the significance of the term 'polycentric' or 'multipolar' in the context of the current international system?

The terms 'polycentric' or 'multipolar' suggest a shift towards a world where power is distributed among multiple major actors, such as China, Russia, and the United States, each with different visions for global order. This contrasts with the previous unipolar era dominated by the United States.

What are the key differences between the military and economic positions of Russia and the United States as discussed in the script?

Russia is described as a military giant, controlling a significant portion of the world's nuclear weapons, but economically it is relatively weak. In contrast, the United States has both significant military and economic power, although its economic influence is waning.

How does the script suggest the European Union should navigate its relationships with the United States and Russia?

The script implies that the European Union should carefully consider its alliances, as its interests may not always align with those of the United States or Russia. It suggests that Europe is in a position to mediate and play a balancing role between these powers.

What challenges does the script highlight for the European Union in the current international system?

The script highlights the challenge of aligning with either the United States or Russia, as doing so exclusively could be unrealistic and too weak. It also points to the rise of more nationalist parties within Europe, which have different outlooks from established parties, contributing to domestic policy instability.

What role does the script suggest for Europe in terms of mediating international conflicts?

The script suggests that Europe, despite its military weaknesses, could play a significant mediating role in international conflicts due to its economic strength. However, it also notes the current lack of politicians capable of effectively delivering this role.

How does the script characterize the current transitional period in the international system?

The script characterizes the current period as a transformative one, moving from a unipolar system dominated by the United States towards a more polycentric or multipolar system with multiple major actors influencing global affairs.

Outlines

00:00

🌍 International System Evolution

This paragraph discusses the evolution of the international system of states. It starts with the bipolar system post-World War II, characterized by a balance of power between two superpowers, the US and the Soviet Union, which prevented direct conflict due to the threat of mutual destruction. The paragraph then transitions to the unipolar system following the Soviet Union's collapse in 1991, where the US emerged as the sole superpower, establishing a liberal order based on military power and universal values. The US's hegemony was challenged by its economic decline, leading to a transformative period towards a new polycentric or multipolar system.

05:02

🔄 Shifting Power Dynamics

The second paragraph delves into the current transition phase towards a multipolar world order, featuring China, Russia, and the US as the main actors. It highlights the different approaches of these nations: China's focus on domestic affairs and emerging global outreach, Russia's military strength contrasted with its economic weakness, and the US's declining economic might despite its military capabilities. The paragraph also discusses the European Union's strategic position, caught between aligning with the US or Russia, and the need for Europe to define its own interests. It concludes with the challenge of finding effective political leadership in this shifting landscape of power.

Keywords

💡Hegemon

A hegemon refers to a state that is so powerful that it dominates other states in the international system. In the video, the speaker discusses how the United States became the hegemon after the collapse of the Soviet Union, establishing a liberal institutional hegemony based on military power and universal values. The concept is central to understanding the shift in global power dynamics and the current international system.

💡Bipolar System

The bipolar system refers to a world order characterized by two superpowers that are roughly equal in strength and influence. The video script mentions the bipolar system that existed from the end of World War II until the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, dominated by the United States and the Soviet Union. This system was marked by a balance of power and mutual assured destruction, which prevented direct conflict between the two superpowers.

💡Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD)

Mutual assured destruction is a doctrine of nuclear deterrence where the threat of using nuclear weapons prevents opposing sides from initiating a conflict. The script refers to MAD as the 'magic balance of terror' that kept the bipolar system stable, as neither superpower wanted to risk total annihilation.

💡Unipolar System

A unipolar system is characterized by a single dominant power. The video describes the period following the Soviet Union's collapse as a unipolar system where the United States emerged as the sole superpower, exerting its influence through military might and promoting its values globally.

💡Polycentric or Multipolar System

A polycentric or multipolar system is one where power is distributed among multiple major actors. The video suggests that the world is transitioning to such a system, with China, Russia, and the United States as the main actors, alongside the European Union. This system is expected to be more complex and fluid, with each actor having different visions for global order.

💡Nuclear Weapons

Nuclear weapons are discussed in the context of military power and deterrence. The script notes that Russia and the United States control over 80% of the world's nuclear weapons, which gives them significant influence despite other economic or political challenges. The possession of such weapons is a key factor in the global balance of power.

💡European Union (EU)

The European Union is mentioned as an emerging actor in the international system, with the potential to play a significant role due to its economic strength. The video discusses the EU's challenge in aligning with either the United States or Russia, highlighting the need for the EU to define its own interests and role in the global order.

💡National Interest

National interest refers to the goals and objectives that a nation identifies as essential to its survival and well-being. The script contrasts the idea of national interest with the global hegemon's role, suggesting that while all states pursue their national interests, a hegemon also seeks to establish a global order and justice.

💡Transformational Period

A transformational period is a time of significant change or transition. The video describes the current era as a transformative period of structural and constellation changes in the International System of States, indicating a shift from a unipolar to a multipolar world.

💡Global Outreach

Global outreach refers to a nation's engagement and influence on the world stage beyond its borders. The script mentions China's slow but growing global outreach, indicating a shift in its foreign policy from focusing on domestic affairs to expanding its international presence and influence.

💡National Center Parties

National center parties are political parties that emphasize national interests and often have a more nationalist or protectionist outlook. The video suggests that the rise of such parties in Europe reflects a shift in domestic politics influenced by the instability in the international system, indicating a move away from established, more globalist parties.

Highlights

Hones are never dangerous unless challenged, leading to a hegemon.

We are in a transformative period with structural changes in the International System of States.

The bipolar system lasted from 1949 to the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.

The bipolar system was characterized by a balance of powers to prevent mutual destruction.

Mutual assured destruction (MAD) was a key feature of the Cold War era.

After the Soviet Union's collapse, the US emerged as the sole superpower in a unipolar system.

The US established a liberal institutional hegemony based on military power and universal values.

The US considered itself exceptional, justifying interference in global affairs.

The hegemony of the US is not over but has been reduced in effectiveness.

We are transitioning to a new polycentric or multipolar system.

China, Russia, and the US are the three major polycentric actors in the new system.

The European Union is a significant actor but has to decide its alignment in the new world order.

China is focusing on internal affairs and slowly moving towards global outreach.

Russia is a military giant but economically weak, creating an asymmetry.

The US has a strong military but is weakening economically and financially.

The fate of the International System will be defined by the three major actors and the EU.

Europe is shifting between the poles of the US and Russia, seeking its own path.

The rise of National Center parties in Europe reflects the instability in the International System.

Europe's economic strength is well-suited for a mediation role in conflicts.

The lack of capable politicians is a challenge for Europe's role in the new world order.

Transcripts

[Music]

hones are never dangerous because they

control

everything unless they are

challenged and if they are challenged

there is already then inent

hegemon and this is not the case I

mean we are still in

a transformative

period of structural and con

constellation changes in the

International System of States we have

had the bipolar system which was B which

originated after the breakdown of

European States due to the second world

war and the results it lasted from

1949 approximatively up to the demise or

the collapse of the Soviet Union in

1991 and this bipol system was

basically in structure a system of the

old nature of the 19 century namely a

system of balancing

Powers Yeah two bipolar superpowers

balancing each other they do not want to

go to war with each other because it

would have meant either the end of

mankind or definitely the end of Europe

Pulver nuclear pulverization of Europe

and therefore they accepted their fears

of

influence and when eruption happened in

the East the West did not

interfere and the East did not really

interfere in the west as well though it

was a kind of we don't harm each other

because we can kill each other this was

the

magic balance of Terror balance of of

annulation it's called it was called mad

Mutual assured

destruction and it was interesting I

mean this this was a very stable um

system and um um it was once to the

brink in the Cuban crisis of getting

really nasty and breaking down but after

the Cuban crisis there started then an

enormous communication between the two

superpowers but Europe doesn't exist it

you was just the union partner in the

west with the United States in the East

with with with Soviet Union in Moscow so

after the collapse of the Soviet Union

in

1991 um there was an unipolar

system with the hegemon the definite

hegemon of the United States and then

and this hegemon established a liberal

institutional

hegemony built on two two things on

armed power because they are still up to

today the most

developed um Power in regard to arms

technology nuclear arms and conventional

arms and secondly on

values they occupied the whole realm of

universal values democracy the rule of

law human rights itaka and so forth and

so forth and so forth on the other side

on and and nobody and and and and they

forc basically this kind of of

Paradigm yeah on other nations and

States so when we when you can say in

the 19th century or up to the and end of

the up to the 50s or 60s we have had a

kind of a eurocentric view on global

affairs from 1991 onwards we have had an

American centered view on things the the

United States considered themselves as

exceptional yeah in in and and and and

being exceptional you can interfere

everywhere where you like you don't need

it not you don't do it out of national

interest this is really

pity

it's only all states are doing this but

the global heon is not doing this a

whole Global hagon is striving for the

establishment of rule order and Justice

and of course um um uh by doing so um

putting the um um this kind of stances

into the um realm of smaller middle

States so this kind of situation in the

International System lasted from

1991 maybe up to n up to 2003 or maybe

up to

200 7 78 or 9 whatever it was an

intermediary in in in inter interim

system so the the hegemony of the United

States is not over but has been reduced

in Effectiveness and enforced

dramatically yeah and now we are in a

transition stage to a new system yeah

the new system is called often

polycentric or

multipolar and we have three polycentric

actors or multipolar actors which is

China Russia and the United States and

then comes a huge pause long pause and

then comes the European

Union so it it is a system composed of

three plus one as four actors in total

and of

course these actors have

different perceptions of how a world

order should be

established uh the Chinese are looking

much more inter into the internal into

the internal domestic affairs and only

slowly

and starting to move out and having a

kind of a Global

Outreach this is very new it's just

starting it could lead to clashes yeah

Russia has been on its feet or crawling

on the ground for 20

years in military terms a giant because

Russia and um the United States

control more than 80% of all nuclear

weapons in the

world but you cannot use nuclear weapons

yeah but they control this is their

Mighty factor of being called in again

or being back from the out of the cold

into the international scenery but

economically Russia is a dwed basically

non-existent so it's an enormous

asymmetry be between military

potentialities and economic reality the

United States is different the United

States have as well an enormous

potential in weapons and nuclear weapons

but as well in Conventional Weapons yeah

and they are they have been um but they

are getting weaker and weaker in

economic and financial terms so we have

here a very fragile and floating

constellation of forces but the

let's say the fate of the International

System will be defined by these three

major actors and the European Union has

to decide to a certain degree to with

whom they want to go together I mean

this is the situation this situation is

on since the end of the bipolar world

yeah of course there is an an enormous

tendency and strength among Western

middle States or in European member

states of aligning them themselves with

the Atlantic Community or going together

with the United States but on the other

hand they see as well European interests

do

not can differ as well from the American

national interest one example was Iraq

2003 yeah um or the situation in um in

in in Syria nowadays or and or or other

factors

so Europe has to get this act together

and this this some somehow where to go

and I think the situation is very

difficult uh because you can because you

cannot develop an altern and a sole

alternative you cannot go only with with

the United States and you cannot go only

with the with Moscow this is anyhow too

weak and and and and and not realistic

so Europe has is somehow shifting in

between the two poles yeah and um um and

and this kind of um instability of

course penetrates domestic policies of a

member states we see it now with the

rise of more National Center parties

yeah which have a different Outlook than

the established parties and I think that

this kind of process will continue but

but

Europe um um out of out out of this

weakness in military terms but its

strength in economic terms is very well

adopted as well to play a kind of a

mediation role in conflicts but so far

we don't have the politicians in the

states who can deliver that's a problem