For Asian News Network
It is said that every day we need to keep a rule-based order. But who’s order? What are the rules? Why do we need to keep our orders when we didn’t have a say in shaping?
It’s all in the realm of politics and geopolitics. The greatest thinker who shaped the current neoliberal order was the Austrian philosopher Friedrich Hayek (1899-1992), whose classical liberal ideas of freedom, democracy and market self-order are globally related. Was in control of. Neoliberalism took place in the 1980s, with US President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher advancing a free market philosophy that wiped out Keynesian intervention in the 1950s and 1970s.
A deeper thinker on the whole issue of constitution, politics and international order is the German lawyer Carl Schmitt (1888-1985), who has increased influence on the conservative political world of almost every great power. When Noema wrote an editorial on Schmidt’s Earth’s Nomos (1950), I noticed Schmidt’s work. Schmidt is controversial because he essentially wrote the legal basis for Nazism in the 1920s. This describes his expulsion from academia (“cancellation” in today’s language) for decades.
Schmidt was a cruel realist thinker who sought the legal basis of European political theory. Schmidt argues that order cannot work without sovereign authority. A nation is legally constructed when politics distinguishes friends from enemies and citizens are willing to fight and die for their identity. Only the state is empowered by citizens to violence (and enforce) to enforce the law.
Schmidt is considered an authoritarian supporter. Because the sovereign (ie, the president) has decided in an exceptional situation that the law must be suspended due to war, the sovereignty is ultimately delegated to the executive branch (rather than the legislature or judiciary). Because. Or take on urgent power to restore order. Decisions by the executive branch are bound by law or by his or her moral attitude.
The world is watching on television today whether former President Trump is morally or legally responsible for causing the January 6, 2021 riot. The Ukrainian War is endorsed by NATO on the issue of moral principles of non-members, but if the war escalate to the global destruction of nuclear weapons that kills everything, how do we escalate individual rights to all others? Do you survive in exchange for a person’s collective rights? ??
Schmidt analyzed the European Constitution and the international order and divided it into three stages: before 1500 and after 1648-1919 (World War I). Prior to the discovery of the United States, European forces fought each other under religious cloaks as the Pope decided to dispute their rights for moral reasons. Indeed, it was the Papal Bull of 1455 and 1493 that allowed the Portuguese and Spaniards to conquer all lands and capture and enslave Saracens and non-Christians in the Americas, Africa and Asia. was. Religious grounds consist of a control code that allows Christians to control non-Christians and own their property, and a discovery code that treats land owned by non-believers as terra nullius (empty land), or non-Christian indigenous people. It was done. I don’t have the right.
But what was the legal justification when the Dutch and British began to fight the Portuguese and the Spaniards over foreign territories? The Dutch legal scholar Grotius (1583-1645) provided a secular rationalization that discovery alone was not enough, but because of the freedom of the sea, sovereign occupations had the right to be seized throughout the war. confirm. Schmidt, after the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, to enable sovereign states to have the right to go to war based on their own judgment of justice and necessity, without interfering with each other’s internal affairs. He claimed that the Publicum Europaeum had emerged. This changed after the end of World War I when the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 treated the loser as a criminal and his rights were revoked or confiscated.
While the Europeans were busy fighting, the United States seized global power and imposed Monroe Doctrine in 1823, claiming that it had the right to intervene in Latin American states and had her own sphere of influence. Its sphere of influence will transcend the boundaries of legal sovereignty and spatially cover cultural, economic, military, political, and today’s technological monopoly.
Schmidt foresaw the situation if the war was fought on a “good vs. evil” basis and all rights on the other side were “revoked” (such as the freezing or seizure of foreign exchange assets in Afghanistan and Russia). I did. It may be in an unstable equilibrium state. The unstable European security architecture was decisively settled by the United States in two world wars because of her overwhelming military, economic and industrial power. But in today’s multipolar situation, who decides the rules of the international order? Who decides other than the use of weapons if both sides accuse the other side of being evil and illegitimate?
To put it simply, the NATO military alliance, which consists of nearly a billion people and 47.3 percent of world GDP (2020), is currently the ultimate determinant of “rule-based order.” It plays the role of. The problem is that the BRICS countries and Indonesia have a population of 3.5 billion, accounting for a quarter (25.6%) of the world’s GDP on a market basis. However, under the terms of GDP PPP, it is almost the same as NATO, so it may have its own view of the international order. What if a large non-Western country wants its own version of Monroe Doctrine?
The moral principle that we should all live in peace on one planet when humanity can be burned by climate warming or nuclear war needs to nullify the sovereign nations that vie for power and ego. there is. We must all work reasonably for Nomos (or order) on the planet, not the Earth. If we really believe in democracy, can 8 billion people around the world vote for a rule-based order or leave it to the G7?
Without true justification, order will not be stable. How to achieve that order remains an open question.
http://island.lk/whither-the-rules-based-order/ Where is the rule-based order? –Island