Liberal Internationalism Research Articles

Rhetorical action in a liberal international order in crisis: theorising EU and NATO enlargements post-2022

ABSTRACT The Russian invasion of Ukraine has thrust the issue of European Union and NATO enlargement back into the political spotlight. However, it remains uncertain whether established theoretical frameworks are still applicable in today’s rapidly changing world. In response to this uncertainty, this debate section brings together five short reflection pieces, with a response from Frank Schimmelfennig, to assess the relevance of the theory of ‘rhetorical action’ in light of recent developments in European and international politics. How effectively does rhetorical action explain current EU and NATO enlargement processes, as well as broader forms of international cooperation? The authors find strong overall support for the theory’s continued validity. However, they caution that the increasing politicisation of issues, the rising competition from populist, non-liberal forces, and the broader crisis of the Liberal International Order require more careful reflection and specification of the scope conditions that define the theory’s limits.

From Globalization to Isolation: Exposure to the 2008 Financial Crisis and Three Dimensions of Liberal Attitudes in a Swedish Twin Design

Abstract This study investigates the link between non-liberal attitudes and adverse exposure to market disturbances during the 2008 global financial crisis, drawing from the premise that anti-liberal sentiments among Western voters stem from economic distress. We delve into three facets of liberal ideology in a Swedish sample: economic liberalism, liberal multiculturalism and liberal internationalism. Using variation in crisis exposure within identical twin pairs, comprehensive longitudinal economic data and detailed survey responses, we find no significant shift in economic or multicultural liberal attitudes with different crisis exposures. However, exposure to increased unemployment risk significantly lowered support for liberal internationalism, increasing scepticism towards global governance and multilateral cooperation.

Nigeria’s 4-D Diplomacy and Regional Integration in West Africa: A Peacebuilding Debacle?

Nigeria’s soft power capabilities in Africa largely derive from its historical Afrocentric and good neighborliness foreign policy orientation. In West Africa and beyond, this foreign policy slant was activated to advance the de-colonial and anti-apartheid movements as well as restore political order in several security-beleaguered parts of Africa. Apart from the rigid application of Chapter Two of the ECOWAS Supplementary Protocol on Democracy and Good Governance which frowns at power acquired or maintained through unconstitutional means, Nigeria’s Afrocentric and good neighborliness foreign policy posturing has shifted under President Bola Tinubu’s administration. The foreign policy shift reflects the global dominance of liberal democracy in the context of the resurgence of military coup d’état in West Africa. Relying on the fundamental assumptions of liberal internationalism, this study unpacked how the shift in Nigeria’s foreign policy stance has affected regional integration in West Africa. The study found that it is not in Nigeria’s national interest to be in open hostility with its proximate neighbors because of its inclination toward the propagation of the ideals of liberal democracy in Africa.

The state of voluntariness? (Re)migration policy in Post-Fascist Germany between denazification, decolonization and development

ABSTRACT Between 1949 and 1980, voluntariness became a key element in West Germany’s post-fascist migration regime, intended to ethically frame the forced deportations of migrants. Voluntariness appeared in German migration legislation as a euphemistic term for forced removals. Politicians and lawyers emphasized the need to offer voluntary repatriation to those facing inevitable deportation. To avoid any association with Nazi deportations, both liberals and ‘former’ Nazis involved in Germany’s migration policy underscored the notion of voluntariness in what were essentially forced deportations. The paradigm of voluntariness in repatriation management was influenced by a specific German need to denazify deportations and migration practices, as well as by a global shift towards voluntariness associated with liberalization, decolonization, development, Cold War rivalries and the rise of liberal internationalism. Global practices and discourses of return migration both emerged from and helped shape this paradigm of voluntariness, as the liberalizing world sought to distance itself from its fascist legacy and align with emancipatory and progressive ideals, despite the ongoing deportation of migrants from the Global South. I argue that West Germany played a significant role in shaping and globalizing the concept of voluntary repatriation within this historical context, transforming it from a paradigm into a dispositive.

The fall and rise of sovereignty

The aftermath of the Cold War signalled a decline of the international norm of sovereignty. The ‘triumph’ of the Liberal International Order during a brief unipolar moment challenged traditional principles of sovereignty, notably non-intervention. However, recent years have seen a resurgence of affirmations of sovereignty in political discourse, coinciding with a broader narrative on the Liberal International Order’s erosion. This article attempts to make sense of this fall and rise of sovereignty. Motivated by genealogical concerns, it historicises political and scholarly conversations on the concept. First, it examines the perceived decline of sovereignty following the Cold War. Second, it traces the proliferation of sovereignty discourses in the European 2000s and 2010s back to debates surrounding the 1992 Maastricht Treaty. Third, it explores the concept of sovereigntism, charting its move from political discourse into academic debates. Finally, the article concludes with a reflection on the trajectory of sovereignty in a post-Liberal International Order world.

Competing Visions for US Grand Strategy in Cyberspace

Cyberspace is a primary battleground of the twenty-first century. Yet, grand strategists have been slow to address cyber strategy. We examine the implications of four prominent American grand strategies—restraint, deep engagement, liberal internationalism, and conservative primacy—for core topics in cyber strategy. Several unique features of cyberspace, including its nonviolent effects, pervasive secrecy, and the challenges of global governance, generate counterintuitive implications. For example, advocates of restraint, usually skeptical of conventional military force, should be more comfortable wielding cyber power, generating surprising convergences with conservative primacy. Conversely, liberal internationalists place importance on legitimating the use of force, rendering them more cautious than even proponents of the "restraint" strategy. We also briefly explore two newer grand strategies—progressivism and conservative populism—in order to show how our framework applies to emerging debates. Our approach can also help analyze how grand strategies extend to other emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence.

China’s Promoting of Authoritarian–Westphalian Democracy and Its Implications for the Liberal International Order

China is seen as undemocratic, illiberal, and autocratic by many who live outside it, and the terms “democracy” and “China” are often difficult to reconcile. Nonetheless, Beijing has been actively employing the concept of democracy both domestically and on the international stage in recent years. This paper aims to critically examine how Beijing conceptualizes and advocates for democracy at home and abroad. It also endeavors to explore the implications for the country’s domestic and global governance, particularly in relation to the US-centered liberal international order in the context of critical international relations studies. In so doing, this paper will focus methodologically on Beijing’s official documents and state media outlets, presenting an argument that is twofold. First, by promoting its unique form of democracy known as “whole-process people’s democracy,” Beijing domestically intertwines democracy with authoritarianism, hierarchy, and dictatorship. This whole-process people’s democracy appears to function at home as a tool of regime security that is characterized by a rule that is of and for the people but not by the people. Second, China on the international stage has adopted Western-style liberal values to advocate for enhanced democracy in international relations. Through its strategic adoption of these liberal values, Beijing accuses the United States of a hegemonic liberal hypocrisy in international relations while appearing to aspire to a world that is fragmented into essentially different entities.

MacLeish/Oppenheimer, Trump, and the Conquest of America

Archibald MacLeish (Pulitzer prize-winning poet/playwright) published his highly acclaimed essay “The Conquest of America” in the August 1949 Atlantic Monthly. His essay focused on an American crisis of national purpose, and central to his account is the importance of a national image for America. In particular, he called for a redeclaration of American purpose by appealing to a Jeffersonian “Revolution of the Individual.” MacLeish’s friend Robert Oppenheimer responded to his essay with high praise but also criticism. In this article, we use the MacLeish/ Oppenheimer exchange as a springboard for a discussion of the crisis of American democracy today exemplified by the election of Donald Trump. We take a synthetic approach, relying not simply on MacLeish/Oppenheimer but more importantly on contemporary scholars. We attempt to construct an American image with a realistic meaning for today. The image includes three interweaving political components—Liberal Democracy, Liberal Nationalism, Liberal Internationalism—complemented by America’s historical role as Democracy’s Vital Center. After sketching this national image, we discuss each component, touching on several contemporary issues as well as the general nature of the image in light of Trump and the current crisis of American democracy.

LIBERALISM IN THE DISCOURSE OF THE THEORY OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

The article analyzes the genesis of liberal theory and the main stages of its development in the context of socio-political changes on the international arena. The main idea is formulated and the main provisions of classical liberalism in international relations are revealed. The essential factors of the emergence of social-democratic liberalism are studied and its influence on international relations is considered. The features and basic values of neoliberalism, declared the highest criteria for the stability of Western society, are analyzed. Special attention is paid to the analysis of certain theories of neoliberalism in the science of international relations: liberal institutionalism, commercial liberalism, and liberal internationalism.

A World of Many Walks? Zapatista World Ordering between Center and Margins

Abstract At the current moment of multiple global crises, including of the International Liberal Order, a search for new practices of world ordering seems to coexist with a deep skepticism regarding the possibilities of global solidarity and common struggles between centers and margins. Against this background, this paper focuses on the world ordering practices of the Mexican Ejército Zapatista de Liberación Nacional, a group that occupies a position between center(s) and margin(s). While they clearly self-identify as being on the political and economic margins—geographically remote, economically weak and under constant threat of military repression—their ideas occupied center stage in the search for alternative visions of world order at least for a certain moment. The paper will explore the potential pathologies that a recourse to Zapatism may entail, namely romanticization, hollowing-out and epistemic extractivism/opportunism. It then asks if and how these pathologies can be overcome in a search for common ground for both social movements and International Political Theory when trying to think differently about world ordering from the margins. In this exploration, special emphasis will be given to the pathways toward a desirable order that the Zapatistas conceptualize and practice, namely creating, narrating and walking.

The Triple Nexus and the Future of Multilateral Governance: Rethinking Coordination between Humanitarian, Development and Peacebuilding Efforts

ABSTRACT The UN-orchestrated Triple Nexus – a multilateral endeavour to provide humanitarian-development-peace responses in fragile and conflict-affected contexts – embodies several features of the emerging trend towards governance through regime complexity. Praised for its multi-actorness inclusivity and cross-policy experimentalism, the Nexus approach has been criticised as an attempt to replicate top-down, neo-liberal templates to govern crises in the peripheries. We analyse the new evidence provided in this Special Issue, connecting it to the debate on the future of multilateral governance, against the decline of the Liberal International Order (LIO). Guarding against naïve expectations of the Nexus as a panacea to bridge cross-policy gaps and bring about inter-agency cooperation amidst increased geopolitical tensions, we discuss its potential to become a venue for an enlarged conversation among traditional and new players. While also compatible with pluralist scenarios, a progressive variety of the Nexus may well emerge in the UN context, between Western and Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC) players. Their shared understandings of civil and political rights offer a promising avenue to advance some forward-looking Nexus components, supportive of individual and nature-based rights, to govern the increased complexity of the current multiplex order.

Challenges and Prospects for “a Liberal International Order”: A Case Study of the International Human Rights Order

Challenges and Prospects for “a Liberal International Order”: A Case Study of the International Human Rights Order

Pivotal power of small states to save the international liberal economic order: the case from East Asia

Small- and medium-sized states acquire significant influence when regional and global orders are in flux, as in times of power transition. We have observed such dynamics especially since the 2008 Global Financial Crisis, when the competition between two superpowers of the United States (US) and China has intensified in such a way that it affects the soundness of the liberal international economic order (LIEO). These smaller states have become influential in the institutionalization of regional political and economic orders when conditions are right. We argue that the following three aspects of a small state’s attributes influence heavily in shaping their proactive approach to LIEO. The first is its economic structure that shapes its motivation. The second is its polity type that defines internal constraints. The third and final component is its international status that imposes external constraints. This study examines trade policies taken by Vietnam, Indonesia, and South Korea from the 2010s and onward and compares their respective approaches and their impacts on economic order-building in East Asia and beyond.

Liberal statecraft and the problems of world order

Abstract What is the future of the Western-led liberal international order? This paper makes four arguments. First, over the last two centuries, liberal democracies have pioneered a tradition of international order building, the essential impulse of which has been to create an environment—a sort of cooperative ecosystem—in which liberal states can manage interdependence, protect their values and interests, and aggregate capabilities to defend against threats and challenges to their global position and way of life. Second, liberal democracies have used institutions as tools and mechanisms to respond to dangers and opportunities in the global system, focused on the problems of anarchy, hierarchy, interdependence, liberal openness, and geopolitical vulnerability. Third, the most dramatic forms of liberal order building have occurred after major wars, when liberal democracies found themselves in war and geopolitical competition with rival and threatening illiberal great powers. Finally, liberal internationalism and the liberal project still have a future in that they offer cooperative solutions the core problems of twenty-first century world order.

Public History and Emancipatory Politics in Transition: From the Anti-Apartheid Struggle to Democracy in South Africa

Abstract The expansion of public history in the context of the ‘decolonial turn’ has generated conversations about the potential productive and mutually constitutive relations between the two. While recognizing that there is no predetermined connection between public history and emancipatory politics, this paper focuses on the strand in public history associated with movements of anti-colonization and decolonialization. In particular contexts, the ideas and practices of public history can present as acts of resistance, of which there are numerous examples. The focus here is on South Africa where the emergence of people’s history (an early instantiation of public history) was closely associated with the anti-apartheid struggle, itself a late instance of decolonization. People’s history proliferated during the 1980s and was both separately and co-produced by progressive scholars at some universities and activists in the internal liberation movements. The paper examines the evolution of the articulation of public history and emancipatory politics, from the anti-apartheid struggle to the democratic era, with particular reference to universities. Whereas the latter were important sites for the expansion of public history until the early 2000s, the adoption by university managements of corporatist models has reinforced hierarchical relations between institutions of higher learning and outside publics, thus narrowing the scope for the practice of a public history that seeks to maintain and grow its connection to emancipatory politics and movements.

Extended commentary—U.S.‐Asian policy in the throes of McCarthyism, old and new

AbstractThe subtext of this extended commentary for the 2024 Policy Studies Yearbook in Politics & Policy is the crucial role that liberalism and civil rights must play in U.S. foreign policy if America is to be on the right side of history. Our explicit subject is the conflux of elite and populist forces that constantly work against such liberal‐democratic engagement. It is no secret that today's MAGAism (“Make America Great Again”) wears many of the same antiliberal stripes as did postwar McCarthyism, which was its direct progenitor. Thanks largely to the center‐right resistance of President Eisenhower, McCarthyism was ultimately held in check domestically. Unfortunately, that was not the case on the side of U.S. foreign policy, where tenacious strains of antiliberalism had a very long shelf life. Thus, McCarthyism ended up having its most durable impact in the developing world, where cozy relations with highly reactionary regimes were considered necessary in the face of communist inroads. At a time when liberalism was hitting its full stride on American soil, U.S. foreign policy was exporting a very different America abroad, and especially in Asia. Even domestically, the waspish virulence of McCarthyism was never eradicated. It simply hibernated, and in 2016, it came back with a vengeance in the even more truculent form of Trumpism. Once again, xenophobic populism is laying claim to U.S. foreign policy and savaging liberal internationalism. The entrenched progressivism that stood its ground against McCarthyism has long since eroded. MAGAism faces no obstacle comparable to the dynamic liberalism of the 1950s or the counterculture of the 1960s. Seen from the perspective of January 6, 2021, the old McCarthyism looks tame by comparison.Related ArticlesCraig, Stephen C., and Jason Gainous. 2024. “To Vote or Not to Vote? Fake News, Voter Fraud, and Support for Postponing the 2020 U.S. Presidential Election.” Politics & Policy 52(1): 33–50. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12577.Haar, Roberta N., and Lutz F. Krebs. 2021. “The Failure of Foreign Policy Entrepreneurs in the Trump Administration.” Politics & Policy 49(2): 446–78. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12399.Skidmore, Max J. 2023. “Abortion—Reactionary Theocracy Rises in America, While Declining Elsewhere.” Politics & Policy 51(3): 437–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12534.

Reshaping the Multilateral Aid Regime from the Global South? Alternative Perspectives on Humanitarianism, Development and Peacebuilding from Latin America and the Caribbean

ABSTRACT In the context of rising contestations to the Liberal International Order (LIO), it is crucial to highlight the contribution of the Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region to international institutions and global governance, particularly considering its peripheral position in the world order. The Triple Nexus Approach (TPA), adopted in 2016, promotes a coordinated effort in providing humanitarian assistance and aid for development by integrating them with peace endeavours. The LAC region has provided political and conceptual contributions to each TPA component, providing alternative perspectives on multilateral governance in humanitarian action, development and peacebuilding, emphasising the pursuit of collective and context-specific outcomes for crisis prevention. Focusing on the period from the early 21st century to 2019, a time when the Triple Nexus theoretical structuring publications emerged, it is highlighted how contestations to the LIO and the changing world order have impacted global governance norms, creating opportunities for emerging and peripheral countries to shape post-liberal rules. This allows Global South countries to set self-determined development objectives and make a meaningful contribution to global rule-making.

Africa–Asia: a tale of worldmaking between alterity and contestation

Abstract Is South-South Cooperation providing a path of alterity for Global South states or is it indelibly caught in extractive and exploitative competition over resources and markets? Do Chinese engagements in the Global South increase African agency? Do they compete with or undermine Western-led Liberal International Order norms and standards? There is now a robust scholarship examining the failures and trepidations of the Liberal International Order especially from the vantage point of Global South perspectives. This scholarship sheds light, among other things, on the threat posed to the existing order by emerging powers engaging in South-South cooperation. Yet, despite the anxiety (or excitement) around South-South cooperation as an alternative to the liberal order, the question remains one of substance and concrete outcomes on whether the global order as we know it is being challenged or reinforced by emerging powers. This article argues for the need to look beyond the state as the main focus of analysis and interrogate the mechanisms, processes, and strategies undertaken by a wide array of actors engaging in South-South Cooperation. The article surveys African Affairs scholarship which takes a granular analysis of these dynamics on the ground from the perspectives of enterprises, agents, private business ventures and so on from China, India, and Brazil and how they navigate their engagements with African counterparts.

The Cooptation Dilemma: Explaining US Contestation of the Liberal Trade Order

Abstract While the United States (US) acted as a liberal hegemon in setting up the Liberal International Order (LIO), it is increasingly contesting the inclusive legacy institutions underpinning the LIO and is instead moving towards alternative, more exclusive institutions. Why is the US contesting the institutions it once set up to stabilize the LIO? We argue that hegemonic contestation is the result of a reactive sequence that is endogenous to cooptation-based orders where hegemons face a trade-off between inclusion and control. This Cooptation Dilemma is particularly pronounced in strongly institutionalized liberal (sub-)orders, such as the international trade regime. It unfolds in three stages: Privileging control, the liberal hegemon first creates exclusive institutions, which are likely to breed contestation by excluded states. To tame their contestation, the hegemon secondly includes previously excluded states into the order, making the previously exclusive institutions more and more inclusive. To compensate for the related control loss, the hegemon finally promotes alternative, more exclusive institutions, successively turning away from the inclusive legacy institutions. We demonstrate this reactive sequence by tracing the process that led to the US contestation of the World Trade Organization (WTO). Our findings suggest that cooptation-based orders in general and strongly institutionalized liberal orders in particular are prone to dynamic instability.

The Normalization of Contestation: The Sociology of Knowledge and the Challenges to the Liberal International Order

Abstract Many of the in-built contradictions in the liberal international order were pointed out by critics early on. Why were these voices not heard? How was contestation ignored or made acceptable by the people governing within liberal sub-orders, articulating progress, rationality, and equality? Drawing on insights from the sociology of knowledge and theories of organizational culture, I address this puzzle through the lens of the “normalization of deviance.” Beyond understanding the challenges as a crisis of and within the liberal international order, I argue that they unveil the limitations of hegemonic expertise governing this order. Part of the current predicament of the liberal international order has to do with the entrenched positioning and organizational cultures of political leaders and experts, making them blind to their own blindness. As they justify deviations and defend “their” order, they normalize contestation. The implications extend beyond the immediate challenges to the liberal international order, offering insights into reimagining its future and prompting a reconsideration of the discipline dedicated to understanding it.