New world order will come after COVID-19

2024 Author: Seth Attwood | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-16 15:55

Rarely, when the established world order undergoes significant changes: Rome was not built in one day, and the world it formed - Pax Romana - existed for centuries. The world order that emerged as a result of the Congress of Vienna in 1815 became a thing of the past only with the outbreak of the First World War. But it also happens that trust in the old order collapses, and humanity remains in a vacuum.

It is at this time that new world orders are born - new norms, treaties and institutions emerge that determine how countries interact with each other and how people interact with the world, writes former US State Department official Edward Fishman in an article published May 3 in Politico.

The coronavirus pandemic, which disrupted the normal course of world processes in a way that has not happened since World War II, has become just such a moment. The post-1945 world order no longer works. If this were not the case, one would expect at least an attempt to provide a unified response to the challenge of a pandemic that knows no boundaries. And yet, the UN withdrew itself, WHO became the object of "political football", borders were closed not only between individual countries, but also between members of the European Union. The cooperation that has been building for decades is now a thing of the past.

Whether someone likes it or not, after the end of the pandemic, a new world order will emerge, and the United States must do everything possible to ensure that such a world order is adapted to meet the challenges of the coming era. The possibility of a transition from the old world order to a new one has been discussed before, including with the participation of the author. Within the framework of such discussions, historical examples of changing world orders were considered, as well as possible reforms. According to Fishman, the fragility of the current global structure was recognized before, but then many understood the force of inertia: until an extraordinary moment arrives, world leaders are unlikely to be ready to create a new world order.

And now such a moment has come, so the United States has the opportunity to build a new world order, which, if done correctly, will be adequate to the challenges of the time - climate change, cyber threats and pandemics - and will also allow the fruits of globalization and technological progress to be more widely disseminated. In this regard, it is extremely important to take into account the mistakes and successes that accompanied the creation of the world order after the First and Second World Wars.

So, in the first case, the world order that appeared in 1919 was marked by the Great Depression, the emergence of totalitarian regimes and, ultimately, a confrontation, even more destructive than the First World War. In the second case, after World War II, the established world order provided more than seven decades of peace and prosperity, during which the number of violent deaths fell sharply and world GDP increased at least 80 times. In order for Washington to avoid the mistakes that were made after the First World War and repeat the successes of the post-1945 world order, three factors must be taken into account.

First, the United States must in advance, that is, until the crisis caused by the pandemic is over, outline the features of a new world order. Thus, when US President Woodrow Wilson arrived at the Paris Peace Conference in January 1919, two months after the end of the war, none of the principles of the post-war order had yet been agreed upon. Because of this, the allies pursued conflicting goals, so the treaty they concluded could not solve the problems of the future world.

On the contrary, President Franklin Roosevelt began planning the post-war world before the United States entered the war. In August 1941, four months before Pearl Harbor, Washington and London adopted the Atlantic Charter, which formulated their goals for the postwar order. The Bretton Woods Conference, which laid out the postwar economic system, took place in July 1944. By the time the war ended in 1945, the principles of the new order were already well known, allowing the Allies to focus on implementation.

Due to the coronavirus, the normal course of life will stop for a long time, but not forever, and when the crisis passes, the contours of the new order will quickly take shape. To ensure that this short window of opportunity is properly exploited and not missed by quarrels, the United States and world leaders must begin shaping these principles together now.

It would be foolish to expect US President Donald Trump, who is one of the reasons for undermining the current international order, to spearhead the planning for a new one. It may be necessary to wait until the more internationally inclined head of the White House can shape the institutions of the new order. Nevertheless, the fact that Trump is at the head of the United States does not mean that the present moment cannot be used to its advantage. The leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties should take on the main job of defining the future world order, and before they begin to define such parameters as the principles of the UN, they first need to agree on goals.

Second, the United States must avoid falling into the trap of placing all responsibility on one side or the other, as was the case in 1919, when Germany was declared guilty for starting the war, which was supposed to make territorial concessions and pay reparations. This approach was the cause of the resentment that contributed to the rise to power of the Nazis.

In contrast, the architects of the post-World War II world order of 1945 focused on the future, committing themselves to rebuilding Germany and transforming it into a flourishing democracy, despite the fact that Germany was more to blame for the outbreak of World War II than at the start of World War I. The example of today's Germany, a model of liberalism and a staunch ally of the United States, testifies to the wisdom of that course.

Despite their eagerness to find those responsible for the start of the pandemic, which has already killed more US citizens than those killed in the Vietnam War, American leaders should be generous in helping to rebuild the global economy after the pandemic. While Beijing is "undoubtedly" responsible for suppressing early reports of the coronavirus, it is far more beneficial for the United States and the world to help strengthen the PRC's health system than to try to punish Beijing.

Nowhere is generosity more important than in the quest to end the pandemic with new therapeutics, and ultimately vaccines. Rather than trying to cash in on the development of such a drug, Washington should lead a global effort to develop, test, manufacture and deliver these drugs as quickly as possible and to as many countries as possible. The role of the United States in ending the pandemic will largely determine how strong moral authority it will have in shaping the new world.

The US also needs to be generous in supporting the institutions of the new order. Washington has already spent more than $ 2 trillion to get the country out of the coronavirus abyss. And that's not all. This amount is many times higher than the funds that the United States allocates for international development, foreign aid and contributions to international organizations. The pandemic has shown more than anyone the need to prevent crises, not fight them, so from now on, the United States will have to fund the institutions of the new order so that they can prevent the next crisis before it gets out of control.

Finally, the new order must be based on internal consensus. President Wilson did not include a single prominent Republican in the US delegation to the Paris Peace Conference, excluding not only radical isolationists, but also moderate internationalists with whom he could find common ground. The Senate rejected the Treaty of Versailles, and the United States never joined the League of Nations. Presidents Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman learned from their predecessor's mistake by focusing initially on supporting the post-1945 world order. When the UN Charter was presented in the Senate, it received overwhelming approval from American lawmakers.

In addition, the actual question is what form the new world order will take. At the global level, the new order must be directly focused on issues that require collective action, including climate change, cybersecurity and pandemics. They will jeopardize the world in the era to come, just as nuclear weapons in a bygone era. The nuclear non-proliferation regime has borne fruit because it simultaneously established clear rules and punishment for their violations: monitoring, inspections, export controls, bans and sanctions are all instruments of the nuclear non-proliferation regime.

At the same time, a renewed alliance of like-minded people is needed. The United States and its allies in Europe and Asia must unite in a council of democracies, expanding collective defenses beyond the military to counter more subtle threats such as election interference, disinformation, and financial coercion.

On the economic front, the time has come for an international system that prioritizes human well-being over economic growth. The US, EU, Japan and other democracies must negotiate new economic agreements that go hand in hand with broadening market access to suppress tax evasion, protect data privacy, and uphold labor standards. A certain level of rejection of globalization is inevitable and justified, but it cannot be planned now, this retreat will be a chaotic and ill-considered splash of the child along with the water.