President Trump and the System are increasingly out of control (source)
The international order is in a dire state: Tensions can no longer be effectively regulated and issues have become increasingly entangled.
North Korea has cunningly outmaneuvered the United States and has achieved another ‘victory’, with strategic implications for the Great Power dynamics of the System, not only on the Korean peninsula, but also at a global stage.
The current volatile politics and dynamics are typical for the stage of development of the current international order.
I can be mistaken, it seems the North-Korean delegation has difficulty suppressing a broad smile (meeting today).
Even an inexperienced Risk-player is well aware of the ill-considered strategy of the United States.
This is part II in a series of two articles, in which I discuss the courses of action open to the US regarding North Korea and Iran.
The security dilemma at display.
President Trump of the United States has caused enormous damage to American interests: Trump has systematically undermined his (domestic) political reputation and the already fragile international order. His positive achievements are meagre; a fact his bragging cannot disguise.
In this article, I apply insights in the relationships between network topology and ‘error and attack’ tolerance of networks to the dynamics of the System.
The (current) decoupling (disconnecting) of the United States from the international order can be interpreted as a response to the attack of Al-Qaeda on the WTC in New York, September 11, 2001.
The attack has set in motion – and has shaped – a series of responses from the United States (an attack on the Taliban in Afghanistan in 2001, an attack on Iraq in 2003, etc.) and events that then followed (the Arab Spring, the collapse of states in the Middle East, terrorist attacks, the fragmentation of Europe).
Despite the efforts of president Obama of the United States (2008-2016), the United states – as the most central and dominant state in the international network – was not able to maintain its own and the System’s stability and coherence.
In response, the United States in 2016 (under president Trump) de facto ‘decoupled‘ from the international order, in efforts to promote its own – now narrowly defined – interests (America First).
Insights in network dynamics help explain (from a network perspective) what the impact is on the stability of the (global) System when the United States disengages – decouples – from the international order.
Not surprisingly, the decoupling causes the fragmentation of the international order, and consequently states and radical communities will intensify their efforts to shape local and regional issues in accordance with their own interests as well (and by doing so, confirm Trump’s self fulfilling prophecy).
In this article, I explain the impact of the ‘decoupling’ of the United States from the international order from a network perspective.
President Trump addresses – blasts – the General Assembly of the United Nations to convince the assembly that nationalism should guide international relations: It seems he did not bother to read the Preamble of the United Nations Charter.
In the previous four parts of this series of articles, I argued that superficial reform – like streamlining the UN’s bureaucracy – will not suffice to solve the fundamental problems the current international order – the United Nations – now confronts.
Because of population growth, differentiated growth of states and rivalries between states in anarchistic systems, international orders require periodic reorganisation.
The problem is that international orders in anarchistic systems lack mechanisms to ‘upgrade’ an international by means of consultation and consensus.
In this article – the last article in this series – I argue that an International Panel on the Reform of the United Nations (IPRUN) must be established, in an effort to avoid a violent systemic crisis.
International orders – like other organisations that are confronted with growth, change and differentiated growth of its departments (states in case of the international order) – have typical life cycles, and need periodic ‘upgrades’ to ensure their continued effectiveness and efficiency.
However, contrary to ‘normal’ organisations, international orders are anarchistic in nature and lack mechanisms to adapt in a non-destructive manner to changed circumstances, history shows.
Awareness of the underlying mechanisms of the System’s dynamics is required to avoid collapse of the United Nations, as I explain in this article.