With the disintegration of the Soviet Union and the collapse of the bipolar structure, and the emergence of a new international order, world politics has entered a new era of pattern transformation.
In this historical transition period when the old world has not completely withdrawn and the new world pattern has not yet been born, the biggest feature of world politics is disorder.
Of course, under the basic characteristics of overall disorder in the transitional period, world politics still shows some new characteristics and trends that can be grasped: the single polarization and multi polarization of the world political pattern coexist and compete with each other at the same time.
Globalization has become an important factor affecting the development of world politics.
Relations between major countries have been adjusted rapidly and international cooperation has been strengthened.
The overall political situation in the world has eased while local tensions have increased. I. the disorder of world politics after the cold war over the past decade, there have been a series of terms to describe the current world pattern, such as “unipolar world”, “peace under the rule of the United States”, “multipolarization”, “one superpower and many powers”, and so on.
This shows that people are so confused about the sudden arrival of a world where no two superpowers compete for world hegemony that they don’t know how to call and define the new world.
Therefore, the vague concept of “Post Cold War” is popular in the world.
However, it only shows a time meaning, and any other information about the essence and characteristics of today’s world has not been accurately described.
Perhaps the post Cold War world is so complex and uncertain that people can’t find a suitable concept to describe and summarize it.
Generally speaking, the change of international political structure and world order is the result of systematic war.
A war in which all the major powers in the world take part is bound to break the old world pattern, and the victorious country will quickly establish a new world order after the war.
Since modern times, it has been the case in the three decades of war, war and two world wars in Europe.
However, since the end of the cold war was not the result of a systematic war and no victorious country was able to dominate the new world order, and because the accelerated process of globalization since the cold war made the basic historical and social background of world politics more complicated, it was more difficult to reshape the new world order, The new world pattern can not be completely finalized, and world politics shows obvious characteristics of disorder.1. Although there is no war between major powers after the cold war, local conflicts and hot issues around the world continue, which is an important manifestation of world political disorder.
During the cold war, the two superpowers of the United States and the Soviet Union competed with each other.
Due to the existence of the “balance of nuclear terrorism”, none of them dared to act rashly.
Therefore, although there was a crazy arms race and some crisis events between the United States and the Soviet Union, there has been no direct military conflict.
Moreover, under the separate control of the two superpowers of the United States and the Soviet Union, small countries and regions have also maintained relative peace.
However, after the collapse of the two poles, all the suppressed ethnic contradictions, territorial disputes, religious and cultural conflicts suddenly broke out.
The Gulf War, the expansion of Islamic fundamentalist forces, the conflict in the Balkans and the Kosovo war, the civil war in Afghanistan, the crisis in East Timor, the war in Ethiopia, the war in the Congo and the intensification of the Palestinian Israeli conflict in the Middle East, as well as the destruction of world cult organizations, especially the “9 / 11” terrorist attack on the United States, These unexpected sudden crises are proving the disorderly characteristics of the post Cold War world.2. Economic globalization has brought a series of global problems.
The solution of these problems exceeds the ability of any single country.
However, there are still serious obstacles to international cooperation, and the effective global governance system is still far from perfect.
An important consequence of globalization is the emergence of global problems, such as the deterioration of the ecological environment, the financial crisis, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the spread of AIDS and other diseases, and transnational crimes.
These increasingly serious global problems not only transcend national boundaries and will bring serious harm and even devastating consequences to the whole world, but also exceed the ability of any single country to solve them.
In the face of these increasingly severe and urgent problems and challenges, equal and democratic consultation between nation states has become an objective need and necessity.
Multilateral joint action, global public planning based on cooperation, and the establishment of corresponding international mechanisms and systems have become appropriate ways and means of global governance.
In fact, the cooperation between countries that can provide good governance and the role of international organizations and systems such as the United Nations are greatly limited.
The most important obstacle is the increasingly serious unilateralist policy of the United States.
Throughout the post Cold War period, there has been a debate on unilateralism and multilateralism in the US strategic and diplomatic circles.
After the Bush administration came to power, the colors of realism and unilateralism in US foreign policy have been significantly strengthened.
It opposes the Kyoto Protocol and the comprehensive nuclear test ban treaty aimed at preventing global warming, the unilateral withdrawal from the 1972 ABM Treaty, and the recent increase in tariffs on steel imported into the United States in violation of WTO regulations.
After the terrorist attacks, the United States adopted multilateralism of international cooperation in order to win international support and build a global anti-terrorism alliance.
However, after the first phase of the war achieved results, US government officials once said that “we can do it on our own”.
Paul Wolfowitz, US Deputy Secretary of defense, put it more bluntly: “the mission of the United States is to lead the world by strength and give orders to the world in a strong voice of interventionism.
agreements reached with all parties or opinions from allies should not affect the strength of the United States.
” The unilateralist policy of the United States is characterized by blatant violation of the provisions of international organizations and international law, acting arbitrarily without regard to the alliance countries, other major powers and the public opinion of the international community, especially strengthening foreign military, political and economic intervention.
This will seriously undermine the international order originally based on the Charter of the United Nations and international law, hinder international cooperation, and seriously restrict the role of the United Nations and other international organizations in global governance.
This not only makes the world more disorderly, but also makes it more difficult to establish a new international order and implement effective international governance.3. Disorder in security and arms control systems.
In the era of globalization, due to the rapid development of communication and transportation technology, the weakening and nullification of national boundaries and the weakening of national control, the proliferation of some weapons of mass destruction has become easierIn the state of the Union address on February 4, 1997, it was declared that the United States should “continue to be a beacon of world freedom” and maintain its “world leading position”, so that the 21st century will remain the “American Century”.
The Bush administration went further in the policy of unilateralism and military intervention.
After the end of the cold war, the United States wantonly pursued power politics and hegemonism in order to achieve the purpose of dominating the world.
Politically, the United States has openly interfered in the internal affairs of other countries and even subverted the regimes of other countries on the grounds of promoting democracy and protecting human rights.
Economically, we should proceed from our own interests and vigorously pursue the unfair policies of economic globalization and liberalization against developing countries.
It is easy to impose economic sanctions on other countries, even its allies.
In terms of security, we should adhere to the Cold War mentality and vigorously strengthen military alliances.
Strive to promote NATO’s eastward expansion in Europe and further strengthen the US Japan security alliance in Asia.
Through NATO’s eastward expansion in Europe and the strengthening of the military cooperation chain based on the US Japan military alliance in Asia, form a strategic situation in which the East and West wings echo and advance towards the hinterland of Eurasia, and establish a geostrategic pattern beneficial to the United States.
In international arms control and disarmament activities, the United States and Western countries are the core to formulate rules and systems, without considering the interests and requirements of the majority of developing countries.
Sometimes, under the guise of the United Nations and other international organizations, the United States pursues its own self-interest.
When the United Nations and other international organizations are unfavorable to the United States, they will not hesitate to kick them away and do something else by themselves.
After the “9 / 11” incident, the US global strategy has been greatly adjusted, military spending has been wildly increased, and the pursuit of unilateral strategic advantage and absolute security has significantly strengthened the color of unilateralism and armed intervention in its foreign policy.
The “Quadrennial Defense Review Report” issued in 2001 put forward a new military guiding ideology, that is, from dealing with “threats” to dealing with “capabilities”.
This military guiding ideology focuses on the possible or developed and growing capabilities.
It tends to pursue an absolute security and eternal power advantage.
The Quadrennial Defense Review report pointed out that the US military should be equipped with military forces that “can make other countries dispel the idea of an arms race with the United States in the future”.
On January 8, 2002, the US Department of defense submitted a “Nuclear Posture Review” to Congress, which regarded seeking the absolute military superiority of the United States as the highest guiding ideology of the new US nuclear military deterrence strategy.
On December 3, 2001, US President Bush officially announced in the rose garden of the White House that although Russia expressed concern, the United States would still withdraw from the Anti Ballistic Missile Treaty, clearing the way for the continued development of the missile defense system.
This is the first time that the United States has withdrawn from an important international agreement since World War II, which means that the international mechanism that has maintained world strategic stability for 30 years will collapse.
In short, the United States no longer intends to maintain the apparent strategic balance.
The United States pursues and seeks the policy of absolute military superiority.
It is unwilling to recognize that Russia, China or any other country has an equal strategic position with it.
It is conceivable that the change of US policy will have an impact on the world strategic pattern and stability.
It is generally believed that this will inevitably lead to a high-tech nuclear arms race and the future of mankind will enter a more dangerous state.
This reminds us of what Carl Deutsch said in his book analysis of International Relations: “If human civilization is strangled in the next 30 years, the killer will not be famine or plague, but foreign policy and international relations.
We can overcome famine and plague, but we can’t deal with the power of our own weapons and the behavior we show as a nation-state.
” (2) multipolarization efforts of other international forces according to the balance of power theory of international relations, when a great power rises, it will inevitably move towards the path of hegemony, while other great powers will boycott alone or jointly, because when this country obtains the hegemonic status, other countries will be threatened, suppressed or even military aggression by the hegemonic power, Thus threatening the security and prosperity of these countries.
Therefore, after the disintegration of the Soviet Union, when the United States became the only superpower with superior strength in the world and was ambitious to establish a separate hegemony of the United States, other powers or power centers resisted the attempts of the United States to varying degrees.
They constantly adjusted their diplomatic strategies and promoted the world pattern to move forward in the direction of multi polarization.
Western Europe and Japan took advantage of the opportunity of the United States and the Soviet Union to strive for hegemony, jumped from the ruins of the Second World War to become equal competitors with the United States after the cold war, and challenged the economic hegemony of the United States.
No wonder President Bush of the United States issued a warning at the end of the Cold War: “we must prevent the danger that old allies in the cold war will become new economic enemies and cold war fighters will become strong trade enemies.
” On December 9-11, 1991, the European Council held a summit meeting in Maastricht, a remote town in the southeast of the Netherlands, and signed the Treaty of the European Union, also known as the Maastricht Treaty, or Mayo for short.
This indicates that the development of the European community has entered a new period.
The European Union is no longer limited to the economic aspect, but to enter a new stage with political union as the important goal.
In terms of economy, the Mayo broke through the pattern of the European community centered on the customs union and the common market.
Instead, it should establish a coordination mechanism in macroeconomic policies and public fiscal policies, stipulate the establishment of the European Community central bank, formulate and implement a unified monetary policy, and finally achieve the goal of replacing the currencies of member states with the European Community single currency, From economic integration to an economic union.
The official launch of the euro on January 1, 1999 has posed a strong challenge to the status of the US dollar.
In terms of politics and military affairs, EU countries should coordinate their positions on international issues and gradually strive to speak with one voice in diplomacy.
The Kosovo war highlights the backwardness of European defense forces relative to the United States.
Europe is trying to establish an independent European armed force to reduce its dependence on the United States in defense.
In view of the fact that the United States is stepping up the development of the national missile defense system and may cause an arms race in space, the European Union has decided to launch a total of 30 man-made satellites and build a “global positioning system” within five years, that is, by 2007, in an attempt to form a tripartite trend among Europe, the United States and Russia.
Therefore, if handled properly, the EU will be in a multipolar pattern in the futureChina’s long-term economic boom during the Clinton administration has soared, while the efforts of other major powers to multipolarize have been frustrated.
The Bush administration abandoned the Clinton Administration’s policy of multilateralism and global cooperation, and the color of selfish American interests and unilateralism in US foreign policy strengthened.
In particular, with the outbreak of the “9 / 11” incident, the United States quickly organized a global anti-terrorism alliance as a victim.
Russia, China, the European Union, Japan and India joined one after another.
Their independence was damaged, which strengthened the United States’ control over the world, seriously weakened the efforts of multi polarization and further reversed the trend of multi polarization.
The adjustment of the US global strategy is mainly characterized by unipolar hegemony and more reliance on military superiority and unilateral coercive means, which will inevitably lead to the vigilance and opposition of other major powers.
The global anti-terrorism alliance will be divided.
Under this background, major powers and power centers will start a new round of differentiation and combination, and its trend has begun to show signs. III. new trends in world politics after the cold war during the cold war, the international community and world politics were already pregnant with new trends of change.
With the end of the cold war, under the overall easing of the world situation, the formation of a global market economic system, and the combined action of various other factors, the new trend of the development of the international community and world politics has emerged rapidly.
(I) the profound impact of globalization on international relations under the world background of accelerated globalization, the old international relations have been impacted unprecedentedly.
The process of globalization is not only the deconstruction of the original structure of international relations, but also the integration of new international relations.
It is not only the negation of some behavior patterns and codes of conduct of international actors such as original countries and international organizations, but also the choice of new behavior patterns and codes of conduct.
It is not only the abandonment of some provisions in the old norms of international law, but also the establishment of some new norms of international law.
There are not only the rethinking of old values, but also the general popularity of some new concepts.
First, globalization and changes in the world pattern.
The main content of globalization is economic globalization, which is bound to bring corresponding adjustments to international relations.
The formation and breaking of all previous international structures before the cold war were the result of changes in military strength, which was finally solved by war.
However, it is undeniable that the deconstruction of Yalta system is not the result of war.
In fact, it is largely caused by the economic failure of Sudong group.
Therefore, it is globalization that has changed the driving force and mode of international pattern transformation.
The old international pattern has been broken, and the new international pattern will be formed under the integration of globalization forces.
Second, globalization has changed the connotation of international relations concepts such as security and power.
The traditional security concept attaches importance to military security and emphasizes the role of military security in national security.
Economic globalization has brought about unprecedented changes in the concept of security.
Economic security has replaced military security as the first security.
Especially after the outbreak of the economic crisis in Latin America and Asia, countries all over the world feel the importance of national economic security.
Once a financial crisis occurs, it will not only reverse the national economy for several years, but also seriously affect social stability and political rule.
The most typical example is Indonesia, which, under the impact of the financial crisis, led to serious ethnic conflicts and social unrest, and ended the decades of dominance of the Suharto family.
In this context, the source of power is becoming more and more decentralized, and the trend of politicization of the world economy is becoming more and more obvious.
Economy not only transcends politics, but also becomes the main content of politics.
The relationship between economy and power is becoming closer and closer.
The source of state power is not only the size of military strength, but also economic strength has become an important measurement index, which has changed the connotation of the concept of power to a certain extent.
In the environment of globalization, the interdependence between countries is strengthened, which makes it difficult for national military strength to play a role in other problem areas.
Power in different problem areas is more disconnected.
Therefore, international organizations and international systems in different problem areas have also become important sources of power.
Because the international system has never been absolutely neutral, it reflects the will and interests of countries that occupy a strong position in the international system.
During the cold war, the hegemonic status of the United States largely depended on the dominant position of the United States in international organizations in the fields of world economy and security.
After the cold war, the status of countries in major international organizations and the dominant power in the formulation and modification of international systems have become more intense.
Third, globalization has weakened the power and status of the nation-state to a certain extent.
The relationship between globalization and national sovereignty is the most controversial issue in academic circles in recent years.
Some people believe that globalization has caused the “erosion of state power”, and the status of nation-state in international relations has become insignificant.
The opposite view is that globalization is driven and led by the state, and the governance of global issues still needs to be organized by the state.
Therefore, the power of the state will not be weakened, but will be strengthened.
We believe that in the foreseeable future, the nation-state will still be the most important actor in international relations.
It still has a position that can not be replaced by any other actor.
However, it must also be recognized that the power and status of the state will be weakened to a certain extent.
First of all, the deepening of economic globalization and the strengthening of the penetration of information and science and technology make the traditional national boundaries more fragile.
The increased mobility of information, science and technology and the increase of information transparency have weakened the state’s control over public opinion and made it more difficult for the state to manage its internal affairs.
Due to the reasons of economic globalization, countries have to join more and more international and regional organizations, which will inevitably lead to the transfer and weakening of national sovereignty to a certain extent, but this is not the loss of national sovereignty.
Secondly, with the acceleration of globalization, other actors in the international community are increasing and their role is further strengthened, which will inevitably lead to the decentralization of power with the nation-state in international affairs.
Among non-state actors, transnational corporations have the most significant impact.
According to statistics, there are more than 200000 transnational corporations in the world so far.
Through direct investment or other economic activities, they have controlled and affected about 40% of the industrial production of developing countries.
In the late 1990s, a wave of multinational mergers and acquisitions rose all over the worldHuge multinational corporations have formed an economic empire, which poses a serious threat to the sovereignty of the country in economic policy-making and macro-control.
In recent years, non-governmental organizations such as the International Olympic Committee, Greenpeace, the International Red Cross and the Rome club have become more and more active in international affairs.
They have been directly or indirectly involved in affairs within the scope of national sovereignty.
On the issue of environmental protection and ecological balance, the impact of Greenpeace on national environmental protection policies has attracted extensive attention of the international community.
Human rights organizations in western countries were also very active after the cold war, often gossiping about developing countries, causing tension in relations between countries.
(2) the competition of comprehensive national strength based on science and technology and centered on economy among major powers intensifies the disintegration of the bipolar pattern, causing the shift of the focus of international relations from the political and military fields to the economic and scientific and technological fields, and the increasing role of economic and scientific and technological factors, which is a major change in the field of international relations.
The pursuit of economic interests by large countries promotes the rapid development of global or regional economic groups, and the development trend of global economic integration, collectivization and regionalization is obvious.
The great powers have intensified their competition for strategic resources in the Middle East, Central Asia and the Caspian Sea, which has exacerbated the instability of the situation in these regions.
The development of international affairs has shown, and will continue to show, that which country has strong economic power, which country will take the lead in the world strategy, and vice versa.
In today’s world, the national strategy lies in the national economic development strategy in the final analysis.
Whether it can occupy a place in the world economy directly determines the destiny of the country and the future of the nation.
In the contest of the comprehensive national strength of big countries, economy is the core.
The United States clearly put forward the strategic slogan of “economic security first” and “economic security and military security are equally important”.
With the rapid development of science and technology and its application in economic, military and other fields, the power of science and technology has been widely valued.
The economic development of the United States after the cold war is mainly due to the new economy with information technology as the core, and its strong military strength is based on advanced military technology.
In February 1998, U.S. President Bill Clinton delivered a speech at the annual conference of American science and technology, pointing out that maintaining the advantages of American science and technology is the task and responsibility of the whole American society.
The Clinton administration first put forward the plan of building a national “information superhighway” in the world.
In 1997, it began to implement the plan of “next generation Internet” in order to maintain its dominant position in this industry.
At present, in addition to the efforts to implement the fourth framework plan for scientific research and Technological Development (1995-1998), the EU also continues to seriously implement the “Eureka plan” and the “European scientific and technological cooperation plan”, in order to rely on collective strength to seize the commanding heights of science and technology.
In 1996, Japan proposed a new policy of “scientific and technological innovation” to replace the long-standing policy of “building a country through technology”.
Despite the difficulties, Russia continues to strengthen its investment in high, precision and advanced science and technology, and strive to maintain its leading position in aerospace and other fields.
Facing the development of world science and technology, China has also put forward the strategic policy of “rejuvenating the country through science and education”, but there is still a long way to go in catching up with the world’s scientific and technological power.