International order

In international relations, international order refers to patterned or structured relationships between

actors on the international level.[1][2][3]

Definition

David Lake, Lisa Martin and Thomas Risse define "order" as "patterned or structured relationships
among units".[2]

Michael Barnett defines an international order as "patterns of relating and acting" derived from and
maintained by rules, institutions, law and norms.[4] International orders have both a material and
social component.[4][5] Legitimacy (the generalized perception that actions are desirable, proper or
appropriate) is essential to political orders.[4][5] George Lawson has defined an international order as
"regularized practices of exchange among discrete political units that recognize each other to be
independent."[6] John Mearsheimer defines an international order "an organized group of
international institutions that help govern the interactions among the member states."[7]

In After Victory (2001), John Ikenberry defines a political order as "the governing arrangements
among a group of states, including its fundamental rules, principles and institutions."[8]

The United Nations has been characterized as a proxy for how states broadly perceive the
international order.[9]

Jeff Colgan has characterized international order as entailing multiple subsystems.[10] These
subsystems can experience drastic change without fundamentally changing the international
order.[10]

Liberal international order

The liberal international order describes a set of global, rule-based, structured relationships based
on political liberalism, economic liberalism and liberal internationalism since the late 1940s.[11]
More specifically, it entails international cooperation through multilateral institutions (like the United
Nations, World Trade Organization and International Monetary Fund) and is constituted by human
equality (freedom, rule of law and human rights), open markets, security cooperation, promotion of
liberal democracy, and monetary cooperation.[11][12][13] The order was established in the aftermath
of World War II, led in large part by the United States.[11][14]
The nature of the liberal international order, as well as its very existence, has been debated by
scholars.[15][16][17][11] The LIO has been credited with expanding free trade, increasing capital
mobility, spreading democracy, promoting human rights, and collectively defending the West from
the Soviet Union.[11] The LIO facilitated unprecedented cooperation among the states of North
America, Western Europe and Japan.[11] Over time, the LIO facilitated the spread of economic
liberalism to the rest of the world, as well as helped consolidate democracy in formerly fascist or
communist countries.[11]

Origins of the LIO have commonly been identified as the 1940s, usually starting in 1945.[11] John
Mearsheimer has dissented with this view, arguing that the LIO only arose after the end of the Cold
War, since Liberal International Order is practically possible only during unipolar moment(s), while at
the time of the Cold War the World was bipolar. [18] Core founding members of the LIO include the
states of North America, Western Europe and Japan; these states form a security community.[11]
The characteristics of the LIO have varied over time.[11] Some scholars refer to a Cold War variation
of the LIO and a post-Cold War variation.[19] The Cold War variation was primarily limited to the West
and entailed weak global institutions, whereas the post-Cold War variation was worldwide in scope
and entailed global institutions with "intrusive" powers.[19]

Aspects of the LIO are challenged internally within liberal states by populism, protectionism and
nationalism.[20][21][18][22] Scholars have argued that embedded liberalism (or the logics inherent in
the Double Movement) are key to maintaining public support for the planks of the LIO; some
scholars have raised questions whether aspects of embedded liberalism have been undermined,
thus leading to a backlash against the LIO.[23][24][22]

Externally, the LIO is challenged by authoritarian states, illiberal states, and states that are
discontented with their roles in world politics.[18][25][26][27][28] China and Russia have been
characterized as prominent challengers to the LIO.[18][26][27][29][30] Some scholars have argued that
the LIO contains self-undermining aspects that could trigger backlash or collapse.[25][30]

See also

International relations (IR), or International studies (IS), the study of foreign affairs and global
issues among states within the international system

International law, implicit and explicit agreements that bind together sovereign states

United Nations (UN), an international organization to facilitate international cooperation

World Trade Organization (WTO), an international organization designed to supervise and

liberalize international trade
 World Bank, an international financial institution

International Monetary Fund (IMF), an international organization that oversees the global financial
system

International organization, an organization with an international membership, scope, or presence

Non-governmental organization (NGO), a legally constituted, non-governmental organization with

no participation or representation of any government

The liberal international order, a particular international order centered on cooperation between
liberal democratic states and U.S.-led multilateral institutions

New International Economic Order, a set of proposals advocated by developing countries

New world order (politics), a post–Cold War political concept promulgated by Mikhail Gorbachev
and George H.W. Bush

World government, the notion of a single common political authority for all of humanity

World-system within the world-systems theory, a socioeconomic theory associated with thinkers
such as Andre Gunder Frank and Immanuel Wallerstein

Neorealism in international relations, or structural realism, a theory of international relations,

which includes:

Hegemonic stability theory (HST), a theory that the international system is more likely to remain
stable when a single nation-state is the dominant world power

Power (international), state power, including economic and military power

Anarchy in international relations, a concept in international relations theory holding that the
world system lacks a global authority Alliance of Civilizations

Clash of Civilizations

Global policeman

World Federalist Movement/Institute for Global Policy

References

1. Lascurettes, Kyle M.; Poznansky, Michael (2021). "International Order in Theory and Practice" (h
ttps://oxfordre.com/internationalstudies/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.001.0001/a
crefore-9780190846626-e-673) . Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies.
 doi:10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.013.673 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Facrefore%2F9780
190846626.013.673) . ISBN 978-0-19-084662-6.

2. Lake, David A.; Martin, Lisa L.; Risse, Thomas (2021). "Challenges to the Liberal Order:
Reflections on International Organization" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS002081832000063
6) . International Organization. 75 (2): 225–257. doi:10.1017/S0020818320000636 (https://do
i.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000636) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/
0020-8183) .

3. Lascurettes, Kyle M. (2020). Orders of Exclusion: Great Powers and the Strategic Sources of
Foundational Rules in International Relations (https://books.google.com/books?id=yCTTDwAAQ
BAJ) . Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-006854-7.

4. Barnett, Michael (2021). "International Progress, International Order, and the Liberal
International Order" (https://doi.org/10.1093/cjip/poaa019) . The Chinese Journal of
International Politics. 14 (1): 1–22. doi:10.1093/cjip/poaa019 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fcjip%
2Fpoaa019) . ISSN 1750-8916 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1750-8916) . PMC 7989545
(https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7989545) .

5. Martha Finnemore (2009). "Legitimacy, Hypocrisy, and the Social Structure of Unipolarity: Why
Being a Unipole Isn't All It's Cracked Up to Be" (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fwp.0.0027) . World
Politics. 61 (1): 58–85. doi:10.1353/wp.0.0027 (https://doi.org/10.1353%2Fwp.0.0027) .
ISSN 1086-3338 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1086-3338) .

6. Lawson, George (2016). The rise of modern international order (https://web.archive.org/web/20

210804192955/https://www.oxfordpoliticstrove.com/view/10.1093/hepl/9780198739852.00
1.0001/hepl-9780198739852-chapter-2) . Oxford University Press.
doi:10.1093/hepl/9780198739852.003.0002 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fhepl%2F9780198739
852.003.0002) . ISBN 978-0-19-185085-1. Archived from the original (https://www.oxfordpoliti
cstrove.com/view/10.1093/hepl/9780198739852.001.0001/hepl-9780198739852-chapter-2)
on 2021-08-04. Retrieved 2021-09-02.

7. Mearsheimer, John J. (2019). "Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International
Order" (https://doi.org/10.1162%2Fisec_a_00342) . International Security. 43 (4): 7–50.
doi:10.1162/isec_a_00342 (https://doi.org/10.1162%2Fisec_a_00342) . ISSN 0162-2889 (http
s://search.worldcat.org/issn/0162-2889) .

8. Ikenberry, G. John (2001). After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of
Order After Major Wars (https://books.google.com/books?id=86a3mz3W7DwC&q=after+victory
+ikenberry) . Princeton University Press. pp. 23, 29–31. ISBN 978-0-691-05091-1.
 9. Barnett, Michael (1995). "The New United Nations Politics of Peace: From Juridical Sovereignty
to Empirical Sovereignty" (https://www.jstor.org/stable/27800102) . Global Governance. 1 (1):
79–97. doi:10.1163/19426720-001-01-90000007 (https://doi.org/10.1163%2F19426720-001-0
1-90000007) . ISSN 1075-2846 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1075-2846) .
JSTOR 27800102 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/27800102) .

10. Colgan, Jeff D. (2021). Partial Hegemony: Oil Politics and International Order (https://books.goo
gle.com/books?id=g3U-EAAAQBAJ) . Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-754640-6.

11. Lake, David A.; Martin, Lisa L.; Risse, Thomas (2021). "Challenges to the Liberal Order:
Reflections on International Organization" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS002081832000063
6) . International Organization. 75 (2): 225–257. doi:10.1017/S0020818320000636 (https://do
i.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000636) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/
0020-8183) .

12. Ikenberry, G. John (2018). "The end of liberal international order?" (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20200702021057/https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/gji3/files/inta94_1_2_241
_ikenberry.pdf) (PDF). International Affairs. 94 (1): 7–23. doi:10.1093/ia/iix241 (https://doi.or
g/10.1093%2Fia%2Fiix241) . Archived from the original (https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/d
efault/files/gji3/files/inta94_1_2_241_ikenberry.pdf) (PDF) on 2 July 2020 – via OpenScholar
@ Princeton.

13. Norrlof, Carla; Poast, Paul; Cohen, Benjamin J; Croteau, Sabreena; Khanna, Aashna; McDowell,
Daniel; Wang, Hongying; Winecoff, W Kindred (2020). "Global Monetary Order and the Liberal
Order Debate" (https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekaa001) . International Studies Perspectives. 21
(2): 109–153. doi:10.1093/isp/ekaa001 (https://doi.org/10.1093%2Fisp%2Fekaa001) .
ISSN 1528-3577 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1528-3577) .

14. Wright, Thomas (12 September 2018). "The Return to Great-Power Rivalry Was Inevitable" (http
s://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/liberal-international-order-free-world-tr
ump-authoritarianism/569881/) . The Atlantic. Archived (https://web.archive.org/web/202007
02020627/https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2018/09/liberal-international-ord
er-free-world-trump-authoritarianism/569881/) from the original on 2 July 2020. Retrieved
23 July 2020.

15. Ikenberry, G. John (2001). After Victory: Institutions, Strategic Restraint, and the Rebuilding of
Order after Major Wars (https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7t1s5) . Princeton University Press.
doi:10.2307/j.ctt7t1s5 (https://doi.org/10.2307%2Fj.ctt7t1s5) . ISBN 978-0-691-05090-4.
JSTOR j.ctt7t1s5 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt7t1s5) .
16. Mearsheimer, John J. (2018). Great Delusion: Liberal Dreams and International Realities (https://
www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv5cgb1w) . Yale University Press. doi:10.2307/j.ctv5cgb1w (https://d
oi.org/10.2307%2Fj.ctv5cgb1w) . ISBN 978-0-300-23419-0. JSTOR j.ctv5cgb1w (https://www.j
stor.org/stable/j.ctv5cgb1w) . S2CID 240217170 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:2
40217170) .

17. Barnett, Michael (2019). "The End of a Liberal International Order That Never Existed • The
Global" (https://theglobal.blog/2019/04/16/the-end-of-a-liberal-international-order-that-never-e
xisted/) . The Global. Retrieved 2021-02-23.

18. Mearsheimer, John J. (2019). "Bound to Fail: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal International
Order" (https://doi.org/10.1162%2Fisec_a_00342) . International Security. 43 (4): 7–50.
doi:10.1162/isec_a_00342 (https://doi.org/10.1162%2Fisec_a_00342) . ISSN 0162-2889 (http
s://search.worldcat.org/issn/0162-2889) .

19. Börzel, Tanja A.; Zürn, Michael (2021). "Contestations of the Liberal International Order: From
Liberal Multilateralism to Postnational Liberalism" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS00208183200
00570) . International Organization. 75 (2): 282–305. doi:10.1017/S0020818320000570 (http
s://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000570) . hdl:10419/249777 (https://hdl.handle.net/10
419%2F249777) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0020-8183) .

20. Flaherty, Thomas M.; Rogowski, Ronald (2021). "Rising Inequality As a Threat to the Liberal
International Order" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818321000163) . International
Organization. 75 (2): 495–523. doi:10.1017/S0020818321000163 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2F
S0020818321000163) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0020-8183) .

21. Broz, J. Lawrence; Frieden, Jeffry; Weymouth, Stephen (2021). "Populism in Place: The
Economic Geography of the Globalization Backlash" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320
000314) . International Organization. 75 (2): 464–494. doi:10.1017/S0020818320000314 (http
s://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000314) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/
issn/0020-8183) .

22. Goldstein, Judith; Gulotty, Robert (2021). "America and the Trade Regime: What Went Wrong?"
(https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS002081832000065X) . International Organization. 75 (2): 524–
557. doi:10.1017/S002081832000065X (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS002081832000065X) .
ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0020-8183) .
23. Ruggie, John Gerard (1982). "International Regimes, Transactions, and Change: Embedded
Liberalism in the Postwar Economic Order" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS002081830001899
3) . International Organization. 36 (2): 379–415. doi:10.1017/S0020818300018993 (https://do
i.org/10.1017%2FS0020818300018993) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/
0020-8183) . JSTOR 2706527 (https://www.jstor.org/stable/2706527) .

24. Mansfield, Edward D.; Rudra, Nita (2021). "Embedded Liberalism in the Digital Era" (https://doi.o
rg/10.1017%2FS0020818320000569) . International Organization. 75 (2): 558–585.
doi:10.1017/S0020818320000569 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000569) .
ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0020-8183) . SSRN 3719975 (https://paper
s.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3719975) .

25. Farrell, Henry; Newman, Abraham L. (2021). "The Janus Face of the Liberal International
Information Order: When Global Institutions Are Self-Undermining" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2F
S0020818320000302) . International Organization. 75 (2): 333–358.
doi:10.1017/S0020818320000302 (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000302) .
ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0020-8183) .

26. Weiss, Jessica Chen; Wallace, Jeremy L. (2021). "Domestic Politics, China's Rise, and the
Future of the Liberal International Order" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS002081832000048X) .
International Organization. 75 (2): 635–664. doi:10.1017/S002081832000048X (https://doi.org/
10.1017%2FS002081832000048X) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0020-
8183) .

27. Adler-Nissen, Rebecca; Zarakol, Ayşe (2021). "Struggles for Recognition: The Liberal
International Order and the Merger of Its Discontents" (https://doi.org/10.1017%2FS00208183
20000454) . International Organization. 75 (2): 611–634. doi:10.1017/S0020818320000454 (h
ttps://doi.org/10.1017%2FS0020818320000454) . ISSN 0020-8183 (https://search.worldcat.o
rg/issn/0020-8183) . S2CID 234364938 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:23436493
8) .

28. Cooley, Alexander; Nexon, Daniel (2021-04-29). "The Illiberal Tide" (https://www.foreignaffairs.c
om/articles/united-states/2021-03-26/illiberal-tide) . Foreign Affairs. ISSN 0015-7120 (https://
search.worldcat.org/issn/0015-7120) . Retrieved 2021-12-08.

29. Kristinsson, Thorsteinn (2021). "Networks of order in East Asia: Beyond hegemonic theories of
the Liberal International Order" (https://doi.org/10.1057/s41311-021-00361-w) . International
Politics. 60: 1–24. doi:10.1057/s41311-021-00361-w (https://doi.org/10.1057%2Fs41311-021-
00361-w) . ISSN 1740-3898 (https://search.worldcat.org/issn/1740-3898) .
S2CID 240415250 (https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:240415250) .
30. Beckley, Michael (2022-02-15). "Enemies of My Enemy" (https://www.foreignaffairs.com/article
s/2021-02-14/china-new-world-order-enemies-my-enemy) . Foreign Affairs. ISSN 0015-7120
(https://search.worldcat.org/issn/0015-7120) . Retrieved 2022-02-19. "The liberal order, like
all international orders, is a form of organized hypocrisy that contains the seeds of its own
demise. To forge a cohesive community, order builders have to exclude hostile nations, outlaw
uncooperative behaviors, and squelch domestic opposition to international rule-making. These
inherently repressive acts eventually trigger a backlash."