What's Happening?
Charles Kupchan, a Georgetown professor and Council on Foreign Relations Fellow, proposes a return to a model similar to the 19th-century 'Concert of Europe' to bring order to the current global anarchy. According to Keenon.substack.com, Kupchan's new
book, 'Bringing Order to Anarchy,' argues that the existing multipolar disorder stems from two simultaneous tectonic shifts: a significant movement of international power from West to East and North to South, and the digital revolution dismantling the social contract of the industrial era. He describes the current state as a 'Gramscian interregnum,' where the old order is dying, and a new one cannot yet be born, leading to 'morbid symptoms of decay.' Kupchan suggests that a 'Concert of the World' would require conservative powers practicing restraint, which he believes is not currently possible with figures like Vladimir Putin, whom he identifies as a revisionist.
Why It's Important?
Kupchan's proposal highlights a critical debate about the future of global governance and the effectiveness of existing international institutions like the United Nations. His argument for a less democratic, great-power-led model like the Concert of Europe suggests a potential shift away from universalist ideals towards a more pragmatic, power-balancing approach. This is significant because it challenges the prevailing post-World War II liberal international order. The diagnosis of global anarchy, driven by power shifts and technological disruption, underscores the urgency of finding new mechanisms for stability. For the US, this implies a need for a 'national conversation' about its role in the world and how to navigate these profound changes, particularly in a post-President Trump era. The success or failure of such a model would profoundly impact international security, trade, and the distribution of global influence.
What's Next?
Kupchan believes that a 'Concert of the World' would have to await a 'post-Putin era,' indicating that the current geopolitical climate, marked by revisionist powers, is not conducive to such a cooperative framework. He also suggests that the US needs a national conversation about the digital revolution and its global role, which he anticipates will be a 'post-MAGA, post-Trump' discussion. This implies that future US foreign policy might be shaped by a re-evaluation of its engagement with the world, potentially moving towards a more restrained or selective approach to international leadership. The ongoing debate about how to bring order to global anarchy will likely continue to explore various models, weighing the benefits of great-power cooperation against the principles of democratic governance and multilateralism.
Beyond the Headlines
The deeper implication of Kupchan's analysis is the challenge to the foundational assumptions of the liberal international order, particularly the belief in inevitable convergence around democratic values and market economics. The 'Gramscian interregnum' concept suggests a prolonged period of instability and uncertainty, where established norms and institutions are losing their efficacy, but new ones have not yet fully formed. This could lead to a more fragmented and competitive international system, where national interests and power politics take precedence over collective security and universal human rights. The call for a 'national conversation' in the US also points to a potential internal struggle over identity and purpose, which will inevitably influence its foreign policy and its willingness to engage in global leadership. The success of any new global order will depend on the ability of major powers to find common ground and practice restraint, a significant hurdle in the current geopolitical climate.
