A WORLD BETWEEN ORDERS

Each generation is convinced that it faces a more uncertain and threatening world than any before it, a crisis of unprecedented proportions, and that man’s very survival is at stake.

We are no exception, judging by the commentaries in the media. And yet, mankind has not only survived but steadily improved its lot. More people live longer, healthier and more prosperous lives than ever before in history.

One explanation for this paradox or contradiction between our objective condition and the way we perceive it is the idea of a world order. We have been conditioned into assuming that a world order is normal and beneficial by the bipolar Cold War and the subsequent unipolar moment, when first two and then one superpower dominated and ordered the world. One can understand why a hegemon would want us to think so.

But what do history and experience tell us? In fact, world orders have been the exception in history. For most of history, there has not been a world order. It is only when there is a tremendous imbalance in the distribution of power, as under the Mongols in the 13th century, with Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries and with the US and, briefly, the USSR after World War II, that there has been a world order. And those were not necessarily the most peaceful times. Unlike the Cold War, when over 80 per cent of world military and economic power was controlled by the two superpowers through their blocs, the two largest powers, the US and China, control less than 50 per cent of world GDP and military power today. Power, therefore, is much more evenly distributed in the world than in periods when a world order obtained.