What kind of world order is now emerging? This is Georg Sorensen inquiry through a contemporary attempt to explain debate confusion depicting a new world order. He argues that any comprehensive analysis of order must address four major aspects or dimensions of the phenomena. They include (a) the realist concern of the politico-military balance of war; (b) the liberal concern of the make-up of international institutions and emergence of global governance; (c) the constructivist concern of the realm of ideas and ideology, with a focus on the existence or otherwise of common values on a global scale; and (d) the IPE (International Political Economy) concern of the economic realm of production, finance and distribution. He defines the new balance as an ‘interregnum’ since a stable order has not been established but significant elements of the old order stay in place. Sorensen goes on to discuss the consequences of the new situation by briefly looking into the four aspects.
Looking at order during the cold war, he observes that “order
during the cold war was a discernible pattern”, characterized by bipolarity
foundation, military competition between the two superpowers and their
respective allies including a ‘west-west and a north-south order. The western
order, based on the American hegemony and the Breton woods system’. The
south-north order is also based on the process of decolonization and entry of
the newly independent states into the system of the UN organization.
Sorensen defines world
order as,
“a governing arrangement among states, meeting the current demand for order in
major areas of concern” from this definition he First focuses on world order in
a generic sense, in contrast to the use of the term by some politicians, who
use it as a description or justification for certain policies they want to
promote. Some scholars use the concept to describe the specific foreign
policies of certain government administrations. Visions of order, including the
foreign policies based on such visions, have shown inputs to the debate about
the proper world order; they are not in themselves order substance.
Second, not every governing
arrangement among states can qualify as a world order according to the
definition. To qualify, such an arrangement needs to meet the current demand
for order in major areas. In that sense, the analysis of world order has a
normative aspect: does the governing arrangement that exists meet the
aspirations about order expressed by states? Third, the focus is on world
order, that is, on the global level. Many governing arrangements are sub
global, and concern a region or even smaller groups of states. Such
arrangements, such as the European Union (EU), together with the domestic
arrangements of states, are not unimportant for world order, but they are
conditions for world order and not world order as such.
.