The dramatic abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro by US special forces marks a critical juncture in world history. Leaders and citizens across the world have been thrust into terra nova.
Historically, when Washington toppled governments, it claimed to act in pursuit of values, such as human rights. It presented itself as the defender of a legal international order. By deploying surgical military force and then declaring, “I do not need international law”, President Trump has effectively invalidated the post-World War international order. He has recast the global die.
Established political beliefs, concepts and norms are being nullified. So too is the interregnum detailed in Antonio Gramsci’s dictum that the old world is dying and the new cannot be born.
Washington is birthing a new world by dismantling the order it once helped create. The immediate task is to interpret this new international reality and determine an appropriate response.
A rules-based international order
In the aftermath of the World Wars, and particularly the Cold War, Washington defined, promoted and dominated what it called a rules-based international order, anchored in international law. Through this order, it pursued global primacy; a doctrine aimed at unparalleled military, economic and political dominance to ensure security, prosperity and stability for itself and others.
While military force was sporadically deployed, influence (soft power) was Washington’s preferred approach in the post-Cold War era, when it faced no peer competitor. The US invested heavily in political, economic and cultural influence, spreading its ideas and ideals around the world. It worked. Much of the former Warsaw Pact states, Africa, South America and Asia came to see themselves in Washington’s image. The concepts of the Washington Consensus, liberal human rights and good governance were widely adopted —South Africa’s post-apartheid path clearly illustrates America’s universalist influence.
American culture pacified and groomed. Its monetary and financial systems fed the world and its organisations. The US pursued soft imperial ends by affording privileged market access to acolytes while capturing allies in security dependency. Europe, the former colonial powers, was effectively vassalised. Washington strategically promoted safety and prosperity abroad, lifting the tide for all boats. Whereas the citizens of the world’s states would act as the strategic means for political legitimacy, the US , through norms and organisations, determined the ways.
The world community must now rally around rationality, accountability and leadership to critically re-establish institutions that are adequately representative.
By orchestrating internationalism, Washington endorsed sovereign nation states as the legitimate vessels of political power. As the primus inter pares, it created a coherent international order of nation states. Many of which were artificially drawn and maintained through external norms and pressures. By withdrawing its support, Washington now exposes these states to existential dilemmas: they must either consolidate distinct identities and pursue defined interests or fragment under internal and external power. It is worth recalling the global power arrangement before American supremacy. Noting how the number of nation states proliferated during this period. Also worth noting is that peer competitors such as China and Russia primarily conceive of themselves as civilisational states, not nation states.
For decades, Washington’s strategy as primus inter pares dismissed the aspirations of regional powers and the push towards multipolarity. The BRIC concept was initially proposed by Goldman Sachs as an exhortation to Washington to incorporate emerging powers into its sphere of influence. Offering privileges to manage and moderate their ambitions. Instead, Washington and the G8 consolidated their exclusivity, expelled Russia, and systematically blocked major developing countries’ claims for greater representation and global influence. BRICS emerged as a response. Its primary objective remains the reform of global governance to better reflect the interests of its members.
A new epoch for global power
The attack on Venezuela was not merely the whim of an authoritarian leader. It signals a realist approach to global primacy and marks a new epoch for global power. The U.S. will no longer command Pax Americana — supporting and remaking the world in its image. Steering consensus building, multilateralism and international co-operation.
Washington now acknowledges that unipolarity is over. It will no longer rebuff multipolarity; it will seek to dominate it. Reasserting control over the Western Hemisphere is a multipolar act. A return to spheres of influence. This is set out as the Trump corollary to the Monroe Doctrine in the recent national security strategy.
“We are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower”, said Trump’s political advisor Stephen Miller.
The world community must strategically pursue non-alignment while defending core values and principles.
Rather than a singular global order, the world is returning to bounded orders, led by global powers. The UN is likely to remain a contested space. Washington’s withdrawal from 66 UN bodies and international organisations signals that the UN is no longer an arena where it can reliably advance its interests.
By asserting that it will “run” Venezuela in pursuit of American interests, Washington demonstrates that it will act as it pleases. Unbound by rules and norms. Venezuela set the precedent: others may be exploited at will. Not only as vassals, but as blood bags. Brutal and dangerous, this is set to embolden great powers, as a door to a new era of global conquest is opened.
The absence of a norm guarantor and the deadlock at the UNleave the world in a precarious state where raw power dominates and restraint is uncertain.
Towards a responsible global community
The world community cannot wait for a pre-Trump international order to return. It will not, nor should it. That system was inadequate at addressing contemporary challenges.
The world community must now rally around rationality, accountability and leadership to critically re-establish institutions that are adequately representative. In cohering a reformed global arrangement that advances humanity collectively, the world community must responsibly remind great powers the selfish actions have destructive consequences.
The world community must strategically pursue non-alignment while defending core values and principles. It is now the responsibility of citizens worldwide to actively persuade political leaders, established or aspirant, to reform global architecture in ways that genuinely advance the interests of all humanity.
• Dr Kotzé is an associate of the Inclusive Society Institute and a research affiliate at the University of Cape Town’s Centre for Rhetoric Studies.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.