U.S. Concept of a “Rules-Based Order” and Its Discontents: Is There a Credible Alternative?

Trapara, Vladimir and Jović-Lazić, Ana (2024) U.S. Concept of a “Rules-Based Order” and Its Discontents: Is There a Credible Alternative? In: Global Security and International Relations After the Escalation of the Ukrainian Crisis. Institute of International Politics and Economics; Faculty of Security, University; Sapienza University, Department of Political Science; Austin Peay State University, Belgrade; Rome; Clarksville, pp. 153-174. ISBN 978-86-7067-328-1

Text iipe_gsirescu-2024-ch6.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives. Download (256kB)

Abstract

Recently, there has been significant discourse in political and academic circles surrounding the concept of a “rules-based order” (RBO) in international relations, championed by the Obama and, especially, the Biden U.S. administration. The primary issues revolve around the relationship between this concept and international law, as well as the reactions of other states to it. Various alternative stances towards this concept appear within and outside the U.S.-led bloc of states, ranging from its acceptance in principle, albeit with different interpretations attached, to vociferous resistance. The authors delineate the fundamental assumptions of the U.S. concept of RBO, linking it to its grand strategy of liberal hegemony (rooted in wilsonian principles), the perceived imperatives of the current international political landscape (including challenges to liberal democracy and a growing confrontation with alleged anti-RBO powers), and a broader anglo-Saxon legal tradition of the rule of law (in contrast to the continental European Rechtsstaat). Then they evaluate the credibility of alternatives to the concept, proposed by U.S.-allied Germany and australia, rival powers Russia and China, and India as a “third force”. This assessment takes into account the specific national interests and regional imperatives of these states, their positions in the current international situation, and the distinct legal traditions they adhere to. The credibility of international law and institutions is appraised separately, considering the current international power and interest dynamics. The authors conclude by advocating for a reform of international law based on a mutual understanding of diverse national interests and legal traditions, positing it as the optimal foundation for a genuine rules-based order.

Actions (login required)

View Item