Beyond the Election: Protecting the International Liberal Order
Published by the Penn Political Review in the Winter Print Edition (2020)
These past four years have done irreparable harm to the United States’ standing in the world. Not only have we seen an abdication of American leadership on the world stage, but we’ve also seen an unprecedented shift in political norms — here in the United States and abroad — that has delegitimized the institutions and governing bodies that promote multilateral cooperation. These institutions and bodies, known as the international liberal order, have seen an unprecedented amount of damage. This order, established after World War II, was an open and rules-based order led by the United States to encourage multilateralism to prevent a tragedy like World War II from happening again.
Since President Trump’s election, we’ve seen his complete disregard for the international order and what it embodies. We’ve witnessed the United States — the chief architect of this order — cozy up to dictators, disregard historical alliances, and resort to military intervention rather than diplomacy. Moreover, since President Trump’s election in 2016, we’ve seen the accelerated rise of populism in Europe, thus further weakening the international liberal order. Since 2016, the American voters have spoken and elected former Vice President Joseph R Biden Jr. as the country’s 46th President. President-elect Biden’s team will have to repair the damage that has been done to the international liberal order. This article will expand on the importance of the international order, its importance for dealing with the challenges that will arise in the next few decades, and the threats the order faces.
The international liberal order is one of the most consequential creations of the post-World War II era. After the horrifying reality of World War II, which left eighty-five million dead, the world was ready for a new reality and a way to prevent something like this from ever happening again — thus was the international liberal order born. The international liberal order is broadly defined as the US-led effort to encourage multilateralism, more integrated and open markets, security guarantees, and the spread of liberal democracy. After World War II, the world saw a historic level of peace and economic growth powered by these new norms and institutions. As described by American Historian Robert Kagan, “The past 70 years have seen an unprecedented growth in prosperity, lifting billions out of poverty. Democratic government, once rare, has spread to over 100 nations around the world, on every continent, for people of all races and religions.” Now, amid a fast-changing world, this order is under threat from multiple fronts. Strengthening this order and rejecting rising calls for protectionism and isolationism should be a top policy objective for the new President-elect Biden. The challenges that face us, from climate change to a nuclear ambitious Iran, will require multilateral cooperation to solve.
Multiple threats are facing this order which can be broken down into two camps: one, our current domestic political culture, and two, the rise of populism in Europe and authoritarian leaders like Vladimir Putin of Russia.
When attempting to understand the domestic threats that face the international liberal order, we have to go back to the United States’ response in Iraq and Afghanistan. After the disastrous intervention led by President Bush in these two countries, many Americans were tired of the idea of “forever wars”. This resentment of our intervention in the Middle East led to President Obama’s election in 2008, as Obama opposed the Iraq war and campaigned on a different foreign policy strategy than the Republican party. President Obama championed multilateralism and expanded the international rules-based order in his foreign policy efforts.
He championed policies like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the JCPOA, more commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal, a multilateral effort led by the United States to curb Iran’s nuclear program. These policies that created a more interconnected world economy are the hallmarks of President Obama’s contribution to the international liberal order. During President Obama’s term, some critics argued that policies like the Iran deal and the TPP weakened American influence and caused economic nationalistic messaging and a hawkish foreign policy.
Then, enter President Trump, who campaigned on a message of economic nationalism, an isolationist foreign policy agenda, and resentment for institutions like NATO and the World Trade Organization. Since the election of President Trump, we’ve seen the decay of the international order. There are two things to note about this decay.
First, President Trump and his administration have gotten rid of multilateral agreements such as the JCPOA, TPP, the Paris Climate Accord, and started to impose strict tariffs which slow down global trade– arguing that these agreements and trade deals were unfair to American’s interest and were benefiting other countries more. With these actions, President Trump has shown a propensity for protectionism that harms the international order and long-term American interests. Secondly, beyond President Trump, we’ve seen a shift in the political culture of the United States that discourages foreign intervention and engagement. One of Gallup’s recent polls highlights that a growing number of Americans express isolationist tendencies in how they view American foreign policy. These trends are important to note given that the international order relies on American leadership. If American leadership isn’t present, our absence creates a vacuum from which other powers stand to benefit.
America’s political culture is essential to understand when looking at the international order’s health, but an additional crucial factor is the plethora of global threats that face the order. Namely, authoritarian leaders like President Putin of Russia and the rise of populism in Europe present a threat to the order.
The long-time President of Russia, Vladimir Putin, is one of the biggest threats to the international liberal order. When speaking with the Financial Times about the global order and the rise of populism in the US and Europe, President Putin stated, “there is also this so-called liberal idea which has outlived its purpose. Our western partners have admitted that some elements of the liberal idea, such as multiculturalism, are no longer tenable.” President Putin is one of the biggest threats because he benefits the most from its dismantlement. As discussed by American Historian Robert Kagan, Russia’s political, military, and economic influence would allow Russia to have hegemony over Europe and China-backed Asia, which would be a problem for the US given Europe and Asia’s importance for global peace and stability. Moreover, Putin is speaking not only about his reservations regarding this order, and how it limits his strategic options, but is making a broader observation about another force that threatens the international order — rising populism in Europe.
Well, before the election of President Trump, we saw rising levels of populism in Europe. Most prominently, England’s exit from the EU Brexit and Marine Le Pen’s campaign in France embodied this trend. The key argument for many populist movements, on the left and right, is economic centrism and a retreat from multilateralism to focus on their respective domestic challenges. These nativist and protectionist policies, if widely adopted, would create a withdrawal from the order and create space for authoritarian leaders to ignore internationally adopted conventions. The common critique by those who argue that populism directly responds to the values emphasized by the liberal order, such as an integrated market, is misguided in that this critique equates globalization with the liberal order. The problems plaguing the working class in the United States and Europe are more systematic than the international liberal order’s values. Merely resorting to protectionist policies and retreating from engaging with the world will not yield meaningful benefits to the working class. According to the Federal Reserve, the effectiveness of protectionism has been disproven numerous times as an economic measure. What appears to be a net positive on jobs for President Trump’s imposed tariffs are offset by the net losses in industries hurt by the tariffs. Protectionism and disengaging from the world will not lead us any closer to solving the challenges of our time.
The international liberal order — though imperfect — is needed now more than ever to help us overcome the challenges we face. The nature of the problems we face, from climate change to mass migration, require a renewed focus on multilateralism and cooperation if we want to address these problems with the speed and diligence they require. As enduring as the order seems, countless threats face the order from the current political culture in the United States to the rise of populism in Europe to President Putin’s disregard for international norms. The road beyond the election will be challenging but addressable if we continue our commitment to the international liberal order and the values it upholds.
