world order

Five global hinge points

/ Dan Smith / Leave a comment

Among those sayings that encapsulate political wisdom but are either inaccurate or apocryphal (such as the ancient Chinese curse, ‘May you live in interesting times’ that is neither Chinese nor ancient, or the misinterpretation of the Chinese character for crisis as fusion of danger and opportunity), I have a soft spot for the one by Harold Macmillan. When asked either what he most feared or what was most troubling when he was UK Prime Minister from 1957 to 1963, he may have replied, ‘Events, my dear boy, events.’

If he didn’t say it, he should have. The press of events is the bane of those trying to steer a strategic path in government. Today, it is particularly difficult because there are so many events consuming so much government oxygen while we face five major hinge points in global affairs that complicate everything.

Continue reading →

The nuclear challenge today and tomorrow

/ Dan Smith / 1 Comment

On 6 and 9 August this year, we will mark the 80th anniversaries of the two occasions on which nuclear weapons have ever been used in war – the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.* Humanity has perpetrated and experienced a great deal of harm in the past eight decades but nuclear weapons have not been used again. Despite today’s widespread and intensifying perception of nuclear risk, the nuclear taboo survives.

That does not mean the nuclear problem has been solved, of course. It is “an encouraging fact”, as the Nobel Peace Prize Committee put it when giving the 2024 award to the movement of Japanese nuclear survivors (the hibakusha), Nihon Hidankyo. But not more than that. And honouring the hibakusha in this way was also intended as a wake-up call to those many people who until recently regarded nucleapons as yesterday’s problem.

Continue reading →

Trump and the challenge of the non-singular systemic

/ Dan Smith / Leave a comment

Amid the cacophony of overblown claims both for and against, what is so bad about Trump? Or, put the other way round, what is so good about him? Or, to ask my question properly, why is he such a polarizing figure, so it seems that one group supports him and what he stands for in their eyes just exactly as much as another group loathes him? 

I think part of the answer, at least, may be what I am choosing to call the non-singular systemic.

Continue reading →

World order §8: A multiplex alternative: international cooperation in bite-sized pieces

/ Dan Smith / 2 Comments

It is all very well to argue, as I did in my two most recent posts, that far-reaching international cooperation is essential to solve critical world issues and, furthermore, that there are issues on which it is evidently possible. But that does not solve the problem – the world order is in shaky condition and there is no consensus on how to fix it. Now’s the time to have a stab at what to do when consensus is lacking.

Continue reading →

World order §7: Shared vulnerabilities demand cooperation

/ Dan Smith / Leave a comment

My previous post makes an argument that regular readers of this blog will find familiar: the challenge of ecological disruption including climate change crosses national boundaries and can only be tackled by international cooperation. It is not a problem that any single country, however rich, can solve alone. It is the superordinate challenge of our time and one part of the difficulty of rising to it is that, at the very time when we need a world order with strong institutions encouraging, facilitating and streamlining international cooperation, they are weakening. Deteriorating relations and increasing hostility between the great powers and their respective allies are undermining the ability of world order institutions to protect peace and security and get in the way of working productively on climate change and other issues. In the face of that, how can we do cooperation?

To the pessimism that might produce, I have a simple response. If international cooperation is necessary it has to be possible because the alternative is unacceptable. And if it is possible on the ecological crisis, I’m now going to argue, it’s possible in other areas as well.

This post is the next to last in a series on the shaky state of the world order. It is based on the introductory chapter to the recently released SIPRI Yearbook 2024.

Continue reading →

World order §6: Ecological disruption and cooperation

/ Dan Smith / 2 Comments

Researchers, commentators and policy-makers are increasingly aware of the negative effects of climate change for peace and security. Climate change undermines conditions for peace and security for all, while increased conflict, disputation, instability and disorder add to the difficulties of arriving at agreements to slow down global warming. When we think about peace and security and about world order, climate change – and, by extension, the full spectrum of ecological disruption – should be in the centre of our attention.

Continue reading →

World order §5a: Laws and norms – and the ICJ speaks on Israel

/ Dan Smith / Leave a comment

The International Court of Justice – the highest legal body in the UN system – has issued an advisory opinion (i.e., a legal ruling) about Israeli settlements on the West Bank.

The 80-page judgement refers seven times to “Israel’s unlawful presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory”, explains why and how it is unlawful. Israel’s presence, the court makes clear, violates “the prohibition on the acquisition of territory by force and the right to self-determination of the Palestinian people” (paragraph 267). Since the presence is against international law, “Israel has an obligation to put an end to those unlawful acts” (paragraph 268). Further, “Israel is also under an obligation to provide full reparation for the damage caused by its internationally wrongful acts to all natural or legal persons concerned” (paragraph 269).

This is not the first time the ICJ has declared against Israel’s occupation of the West Bank; it did so 20 years ago. What I found striking, since I am thinking a lot and writing about the shaky condition of world order today, is that the ICJ is also clear about other states’ obligations:

“In view of the character and importance of the rights and obligations involved, all States are under an obligation not to recognize as legal the situation arising from the unlawful presence of Israel in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. They are also under an obligation not to render aid or assistance in maintaining the situation created by Israel’s illegal presence in the Occupied Palestinian Territory.” (paragraph 279)

It feels like another acid test for much of the West about right and wrong, law and norms. Is is too much to hope for consistency?

World order §5: Laws and norms – and the double standard

/ Dan Smith / 1 Comment

How do you solve a problem like the world order?

We have had one – an order, a way of arranging international relations through institutions, treaties, law and norms – for virtually eight decades since the end of World War II. It has had its ups and downs and gone through some changes, though nothing fundamental. But now, so much seems to be going wrong at once – more armed conflicts with rising death tolls, worsening ecological disruption, growing economic inequalities and fragmenting social cohesion in numerous countries.

It all adds up to system failure on a world scale. This post, number 5 in a series based on the introductory chapter to the recently released SIPRI Yearbook 2024, focusses on the importance of laws and established norms in the world order.

Continue reading →

World order §4: Conflict management in a disordered world: the Security Council and Gaza

/ Dan Smith / 1 Comment

During the 2020s, on current trends, four times as many people (or more) will die in war as in the first decade of this century. Since 2010, the number of armed conflicts each year has almost doubled. The number of refugees has more than doubled in the same period. Meanwhile the world spends vastly more on the military than ever before, 2.443 trillion US dollars in 2023, compared to about 1.1 trillion at the start of the century.

What is going on? What has happened – is happening – to the world and to conflict? How come conflict management doesn’t seem to be working any more?

This post is number 4 in a series, based on the introductory chapter to the recently released SIPRI Yearbook 2024, asking, What world are we shaping for ourselves in the coming decades if these trends continue unchanged? 

Continue reading →

World order §3a: NATO enlargement

/ Dan Smith / Leave a comment

Most of NATO is involved, together with other states that are politically defined as part of the ‘West’, in the war in Ukraine by providing training and equipment for Ukraine’s armed forces and by supporting its government financially and politically. NATO is also involved in another way as part of the Russian narrative that presents the invasions of Ukraine in 2014 and 2022 as forced upon Russia by NATO’s incorporation of eastern European states since the end of the Cold War.

Russian spokespersons and others have treated NATO’s increasing membership as an exculpatory reason for, or a partial justification for, or a proximate cause of, or a contributing factor to Russia’s war against Ukraine. These are arguments worth looking into.

Continue reading →