Advertisement

Beyond Liberal Empire and Peace: Declining Hegemony of the West?

  • Marko LehtiEmail author
  • Henna-Riikka Pennanen
Chapter

Abstract

Much of the recent international relations (IR) debates set out from the proposition that the continuance of the liberal international order is dependent on the hegemony of the United States. From this perspective, that largely aligns with the Hegemonic Stability Theory, change in the form of relative decline in US global power or unwillingness to maintain international stability, signals a crisis. In this chapter, we call for a broader and more flexible approach that can better reflect on change and tease out the complexity of liberal hegemony. To this end, we cross-read hegemonic stability theories with Gramscian notions of cultural hegemony and hegemonic ideas. We claim that “Western” hegemony is not only embedded in material dominance, but above all in ideational power: the universalization of the ordering principles of liberal peace, liberal institutionalism, and liberal internationalism. This prompts us to include in our analysis the discussions on consent and legitimacy, and their opposite, contestation and challenge. Since the nineteenth century, both Western hegemony and liberal order have gone through historical changes in which the hegemon of the order has been substituted and the basic ordering principles have transformed. This points toward the resilience of Western hegemony and the capability of the liberal order to undergo metamorphosis. However, the perspective of cultural hegemony lays visible the paradox in Western hegemony: liberal peace is entwined with liberal empire, and universal liberal values and norms continue to be firmly attached to the idea of liberal as a particularistic heritage of the West. These paradoxes are one of the main sites for contestation today. Coupled with the growing disillusionment with liberal organizing principles within the West, it is not inconceivable that the hegemonic resilience of the West and the capability of the liberal order to metamorphose might once again be put to a test.

Keywords

Hegemony Liberal world order Liberal peace Legitimacy 

References

  1. Acharya, Amitav. 2018. The End of American World Order. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  2. Ahiska, Meltem. 2003. Occidentalism: The Historical Fantasy of the Modern. The South Atlantic Quarterly 102 (2/3): 351–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ajami, Fouad. 1980/1981. The Fate of Nonalignment. Foreign Affairs 59 (2): 366–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Alcaro, Riccardo. 2018a. Contestation and Transformation. Final Thoughts on the Liberal International Order. The International Spectator 53 (1): 152–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. ———. 2018b. The Liberal Order and Its Contestations. A Conceptual Framework. The International Spectator 53 (1): 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Allison, Graham. 2017. Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap? Melbourne: Scribe.Google Scholar
  7. ———. 2018. The Myth of the Liberal Order: From Historical Accident to Conventional Wisdom. Foreign Affairs 97 (4): 124–133.Google Scholar
  8. Anderson, Perry. 2017. The H-Word: The Peripeteia of Hegemony. E-book. Verso Books.Google Scholar
  9. Bailey, Richard. 1972. Reviewed Work(s): Dissent on Development: Studies and Debates in Development Economics. International Affairs 48 (4): 650–652.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barma, Naazneen, Ely Ratner, and Steven Weber. 2013. The Mythical Liberal Order. The National Interest 124: 56–67.Google Scholar
  11. Bourdieu, Pierre. 1991. Language and Symbolic Power. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  12. Bowden, Brett, and Leonard Seabrooke. 2007. Global Standards of Market Civilization. In Civilizational Identity: The Production and Reproduction of ‘Civilizations’ in International Relations, ed. M. Hall and P.T. Jackson, 119–134. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Breslin, Shaun, and Silvia Menegazzi. 2017. The Chinese Perspective on Global Order. In Still a Western World? Continuity and Change in Global Order, ed. S. Fabbrini and R. Marchetti, 71–84. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Buruma, Ian, and Avishai Margalit. 2004. Occidentalism: The West in the Eyes of Its Enemies. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
  15. Bush, George W. 2008. President Bush Discusses Importance of Freedom in the Middle East. White House Archive, January 13. https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/01/20080113-1.html.
  16. Chandler, David. 2001. The Road to Military Humanitarianism: How the Human Rights NGOs Shaped a New Humanitarian Agenda. Human Rights Quarterly 23: 678–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ———. 2002. Introduction: Rethinking Human Rights. In Rethinking Human Rights, ed. D. Chandler, 1–15. London: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. China and the World Trade Organization. 2018. The State Council, The People’s Republic of China. http://english.gov.cn/archive/white_paper/2018/06/28/content_281476201898696.htm.
  19. China’s Peaceful Development. 2011. The State Council, The People’s Republic of China. http://english.gov.cn/archive/white_paper/2014/09/09/content_281474986284646.htm.
  20. Coker, Christopher. 2010. Rebooting the West: Can the Western Alliance Still Engage in War? In The Struggle for the West: A Divided and Contested Legacy, ed. C. Browning and M. Lehti, 73–89. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  21. Conceison, Claire. 2004. Significant Other: Staging the American in China. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press.Google Scholar
  22. Cox, Robert. 1993. Gramsci, Hegemony and International Relations: An Essay in Method. In Gramsci, Historical Materialism and International Relations, ed. S. Gill, 49–66. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Cubitt, Christine. 2013. Responsible Reconstruction After War: Meeting Local Needs for Building Peace. Review of International Studies 39 (1).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Cumings, Bruce. 2002. Parallax Visions: Making Sense of American-East Asian Relations. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Currie, David, and David Vines. 1992. A Global Economic Policy Agenda for the 1990s: Is There a Special British Role? International Affairs 68 (4): 585–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Den Boer, Pim. 2005. Civilization: Comparing Concepts and Identities. Contributions to the History of Concepts 1: 51–62.Google Scholar
  27. Donnelly, Jack. 1998. Human Rights: A New Standard of Civilization? International Affairs 74 (1): 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Foulkes, Imogen. 2016. Are We Heading Towards a ‘Post Human Rights World’? BBC News, December 30. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38368848.
  29. Fu, Ying. 2016. The US World Order Is a Suit that No Longer Fits. Financial Times, January 6. https://www.ft.com/content/c09cbcb6-b3cb-11e5-b147-e5e5bba42e51.
  30. Gilpin, Robert. 1981. War and Change in World Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. ———. 1988. The Theory of Hegemonic War. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History 18 (4): 591–613.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gong, Gerrit. 1984. The Standard of Civilization in International Society. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hansen, Lene. 2017. Conclusion: The Ways of the West and the Road Ahead. In Uses of the West: Security and the Politics of Order, ed. G. Hellmann and B. Herborth, 280–300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Heraclides, Alexis. 2012. Humanitarian Intervention in the 19th Century: The Heyday of a Controversial Concept. Global Society 26 (2): 215–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Herborth, Benjamin, and Gunther Hellmann. 2017. Introduction: Uses of the West. In Uses of the West: Security and the Politics of Order, ed. G. Hellmann and B. Herborth, 1–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Hopf, Ted. 2013. Common-Sense Constructivism and Hegemony in World Politics. International Organization 67 (2): 317–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. ———. 2017. Russia Becoming Russia. In Uses of ‘the West’: Security and the Politics of Order, ed. G. Hellmann and B. Herborth, 203–228. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Human Rights at UNGA! 2018. European External Action Service, September 27. https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-Homepage/51218/human-rights-unga_en.
  39. Hurrell, Andrew. 2007. On Global Order: Power, Values, and the Constitution of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Ifversen, Jan. 2008. Who Are the Westerners? International Politics 45 (3): 236–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Ikenberry, G. John. 1996. The Myth of Post-Cold War Chaos. Foreign Affairs 75 (3): 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ikenberry, G. John. 2011a. Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  43. ———. 2011b. The Future of the Liberal World Order. Foreign Affairs 90 (3): 56–68.Google Scholar
  44. Ikenberry, G. John. 2018. The End of Liberal International Order? International Affairs 94 (1): 7–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ikenberry, G. John, Inderjeet Parmar, and Doug Stokes. 2018. Introduction: Ordering the World? Liberal Internationalism in Theory and Practice. International Affairs 94 (1): 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ivanov, Igor. 2018. Russia, China and the New World Order. Russian International Affairs Council, June 19. http://russiancouncil.ru/en/analytics-and-comments/analytics/russia-china-and-the-new-world-order/.
  47. Jahn, Beate. 2013. Liberal Internationalism: Theory, History, Practice. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. ———. 2018. Liberal Internationalism: Historical Trajectory and Current Prospects. International Affairs 94 (1): 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Jervis, Robert. 2017. Our New and Better World. In Still a Western World? Continuity and Change in Global Order, ed. S. Fabbrini and R. Marchetti. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  50. Jervis, Robert, Francis Gavin, Joshua Rovner, and Diane Labrosse. 2018. Introduction. In Chaos in the Liberal Order: The Trump Presidency and International Politics in the Twenty-first Century, ed. R. Jervis, F. Gavin, J. Rovner, and D. Labrosse. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Kagan, Robert. 2004. Of Paradise and Power. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  52. ———. 2018. The Jungle Grows Back: America and Our Imperiled World. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
  53. Karaganov, Sergey, and Dmitry Suslov. 2018. A New World Order: A View from Russia. Russia in Global Affairs, October 4. http://eng.globalaffairs.ru/pubcol/A-new-world-order-A-view-from-Russia%2D%2D19782. Accessed 25 October 2018.
  54. Keohane, Robert. 1984. After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the World Political Economy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Krige, John. 2006. American Hegemony and the Postwar Reconstruction of Science in Europe. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Laclau, Ernesto, and Chantal Mouffe. 2001 [1985]. Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd ed. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  57. Lake, David. 2017. Hierarchy in International Relations. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lavrov, Sergey. 2017. Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s Address and Answers to Questions at the 53rd Munich Security Conference, Munich, February 18, 2017. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, February 18. http://www.mid.ru/en/press_service/minister_speeches/-/asset_publisher/7OvQR5KJWVmR/content/id/2648249.
  59. Lewis, David, John Heathershaw, and Nick Megoran. 2018. Illiberal Peace? Authoritarian Modes of Conflict Management. Cooperation and Conflict 1–21.Google Scholar
  60. Lind, Michael. 2017. There’s No Such Thing as ‘the’ Liberal World Order. The National Interest, September 5. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/theres-no-such-thing-the-liberal-world-order-22177.
  61. Luce, Edward. 2018. The Retreat of Western Liberalism. London: Abacus.Google Scholar
  62. MacMillan, John. 2013. Intervention and the Ordering of the Modern World. Review of International Studies 39 (5): 1039–1047.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Morozov, Viacheslav. Uneven Worlds of Hegemony: Towards a Discursive Ontology of Societal Multiplicity. Manuscript.Google Scholar
  64. Mouffe, Chantal. 1999. Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism. Social Research 66 (3): 745–758.Google Scholar
  65. Mulligan, S.P. 2006. The Uses of Legitimacy in International Relations. Journal of International Studies 34 (2): 349–375.Google Scholar
  66. Neocleous, Mark. 2011. The Police of Civilization: The War on Terror as Civilizing Offensive. International Political Sociology 5 (2): 144–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Norrlof, Carla. 2010. America’s Global Advantage: US Hegemony and International Cooperation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. ———. 2018. Hegemony and Inequality: Trump and the Liberal Playbook. International Affairs 94 (1): 63–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Nye, Joseph. 2017. The Kindleberger Trap. China-US Focus, March 1. https://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/the-kindleberger-trap.
  70. O’Hagan, Jacinta. 2002. Conceptualizing the West in International Relations: From Spengler to Said. Houndmills: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  71. Owen, John. 2017. Anti-liberalism Pushes Back. Global Policy 8 (Suppl 4): 73–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Paris, Roland. 2002. International Peacebuilding and the ‘Mission Civilisatrice’. Review of International Studies 28 (4): 637–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Parmar, Inderjeet. 2018. The US-led Liberal Order: Imperialism by Another Name? International Affairs 94 (1): 151–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Pence, Michael. 2019. Remarks by Vice President Pence at the 2019 Munich Security Conference. White House, February 16. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-vice-president-pence-2019-munich-security-conference-munich-germany/.
  75. Peterson, John. 2018. Present at the Destruction? The Liberal Order in the Trump Era. The International Spectator 53 (1): 28–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Pojman, Louis. 2005. Kant’s Perpetual Peace and Cosmopolitanism. Journal of Social Philosophy 36 (1): 62–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Pompeo, Michael. 2018. Restoring the Role of the Nation-State in the Liberal International Order. U.S. Department of State, December 4. https://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2018/12/287770.htm.
  78. Rapkin, David, and Dan Braaten. 2009. Conceptualising Hegemonic Legitimacy. Review of International Studies 35 (1): 113–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Ren, Yuanzhe. 2018. Does Liberal International Order Have a Future? Global Times, April 16. http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1098219.shtml.
  80. Rosenblatt, Helena. 2018. The Lost History of Liberalism: From Ancient Rome to the Twenty-First Century. ProQuest Ebook Central. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  81. Russett, Bruce. 1981/1982. Security and the Resources Scramble: Will 1984 be Like 1914? International Affairs 58 (1): 42–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. ———. 1993. Grasping the Democratic Peace. Principles for a Post-Cold War World. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  83. Schmidt, Brian. 2018. Hegemony: A Conceptual and Theoretical Analysis. DOC Research Institute, August 15. https://doc-research.org/2018/08/hegemony-conceptual-theoretical-analysis/.
  84. Schwarzer, Daniela. 2017. Europe, the End of the West and Global Power Shifts. Global Policy 8 (Suppl 4): 18–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Schweller, Randall. 2018. Why Trump Now: A Third-Image Explanation. In Chaos in the Liberal Order: The Trump Presidency and International Politics in the Twenty-First Century, ed. R. Jervis, F. Gavin, J. Rovner, and D. Labrosse, 22–139. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Staniland, Paul. 2018. Misreading the “Liberal Order”: Why We Need New Thinking in American Foreign Policy. Lawfare Blog, July 29. https://www.lawfareblog.com/misreading-liberal-order-why-we-need-new-thinking-american-foreign-policy.
  87. Stokes, Doug. 2018. Trump, American Hegemony and the Future of the Liberal International Order. International Affairs 94 (1): 133–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Strange, Susan. 1987. The Persistent Myth of Lost Hegemony. International Organization 41 (4): 551–1574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Stubbs, Richard. 2018. Order and Contestation in the Asia-Pacific Region: Liberal vs Developmental/Non-interventionist Approaches. The International Spectator 53 (1): 138–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. The Latest: Congo to Boycott UN Meetings About the Country. 2018. AP News, September 27. https://www.apnews.com/31b65fafe3754c4cbe81dd1a802cb32c.
  91. Toynbee, Arnold, Viscount Cecil of Chelwood, Marquess of Lothian, and R.A. Butler. 1938. The Issues in British Foreign Policy. International Affairs 17 (3): 307–407.Google Scholar
  92. Transcript: Donald Trump’s Foreign Policy Speech. 2016. New York Times, April 27. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/28/us/politics/transcript-trump-foreign-policy.html.
  93. Trump, Donald. 2017. Remarks by President Trump to the People of Poland. White House, July 6. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-people-poland/.
  94. Vlahos, Michael. 1987/1988. The End of America’s Postwar Ethos. Foreign Affairs 66 (5): 1091–1107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Wiener, Antje. 2014. A Theory of Contestation. Heidelberg: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Wolff, Jonas, and Lisbeth Zimmermann. 2016. Between Banyans and Battle Scenes: Liberal Norms, Contestation, and the Limits of Critique. Review of International Studies 42 (3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Wright, Thomas. 2017. All Measures Short of War: The Contest for the 21st Century & the Future of American Power. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  98. Wu, Xinbo. 2018. What Will Future International Order Look Like? Global Times, July 17. http://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1111181.shtml.
  99. Yazid, Mohd Noor Mat. 2015. The Theory of Hegemonic Stability, Hegemonic Power and International Political Economic Stability. Global Journal of Political Science and Administration 3 (6): 67–79.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Tampere Peace Research Institute (TAPRI)Tampere UniversityTampereFinland
  2. 2.Turku Institute for Advanced StudiesUniversity of TurkuTurkuFinland

Personalised recommendations