Main menu


The third trend: this system is still in the process of formation

However, there is a near-consensus on the disagreement on the structure, mechanisms, issues and areas of interest

On the other hand, the matter is complicated when we get to the events of September 11, 2001 and its impact on the international system, as we find that there is a reluctance and weakness about it before the events to take a position on its issues and problems, so we will monitor the concept, features and features of the international system during the Nineties era up to the events of September 11, 2001 in a later chapter.

The term new international order is used in the context of referring to the outcome of developments that have taken place

In the structure and concerns of the international system with the end of the Cold War, the disintegration and disappearance of the Soviet Union, and then the transformation from a bipolar system to a new one is still, as James Baker, former US Secretary of State, described a system that is looking for an identity, where there are multiple visions and orientations in describing it, or recognizing it as a multi-power system, or recognizing it as a system that is still in the process of formation( undergoing a transition to the new). in this regard, we will review the visions in the light of three directions::

The first trend recognizes the existence of a new international order.

The second trend: it does not recognize its existence and recognizes the very multiplicity of forces since the end of the Second World War.

The third trend: this system is still in the process of formation.

The first trend: its supporters affirm the existence of a new unipolar international order, the United States is the one that leads at the top without competition or challenge, and its position is supported by the support of its Western allies, and its ability to use military force to resolve any conflict to maintain international stability, and direct the global movement towards democracy".

What is new in this trend is the absence of the Soviet peer and the wildness of power, and even the absence of the Soviet peer from them was identified in December 1989 at the Malta Summit when the Soviet Union succumbed to political transformations and put its keys in the hands of one player, the United States, which prompted Brzezinski to say "the absence of the Soviet Union from the arena means that the United States will be the only superpower with international responsibility".

The collapse of the Soviet Union legitimized the hegemony of the United States and its status as the most powerful power in the world, Clark says, "the perception that the United States of America is the number one country in the world is fueled by a huge stock of thoughts and feelings that make skeptics of this statement subject to accusations of being disinterested or unpatriotic . The logic of this vision is that the demise of the Soviet Union has given way to the United States to manage and organize international affairs without real competition or challenge from other international powers), interpreting the collapse of communism as a victory for capitalism and affirming its ability in the units of the international system.

In addition, the United States enjoys strategic advantages and advantages over other powers in all political, economic, military and diplomatic aspects, and Brzezinski mentions in each of his books about these strengths and components: he says that the collapse of the rival put the United States in a unique position, it simultaneously became the only world power, however, America's global sovereignty is reminiscent in some ways of.

For those empires, he describes them as a unique cosmic force that can reach any spot.

It has a global economic role, a global policy, a cultural and intellectual attraction, and a global economic role.

Then he says in another book: " America's unique place in the world hierarchy has become widely recognized today and the elementary astonishment of foreigners has receded because of their anger at the explicit affirmation of America's dominant role to be replaced by submissive and resentful efforts to limit, contain, change its course or ridicule that hegemony, and even the Russians who were most reluctant to recognize the extent of America's power and influence for reasons of nostalgia accepted that the United States will remain for some time the deciding actor in international issues.

So much so that he said in another place count the self-coronation of the American president since the collapse of the Soviet Union.

The historical moment marked in the presentation as the first world leader .

Former US President Richard Nixon also referred to this in several places, saying.

We now live in a world where the United States is unique as a superpower, he said: "the United States at the dawn of the new millennium, enjoys a superiority that has not been matched even by the greatest empires of the past, from its manufacture of weapons to.

The organization of Labor, and from science to technology, and from higher education to popular culture is practiced.