The End Of The ‘Rules Based International Order’
DISPATCHES FROM MOON OF ALABAMA, BY "B"
This article is part of an ongoing series of dispatches from Moon of Alabama
The 'western' countries, i.e. the United States and its 'allies', love to speak of a 'rules based international order' which they say everyone should follow. That 'rules based order' is a way more vague concept than the actual rule of law:
The G7 is united by its shared values and commitment to a rules based international order. That order is being challenged by authoritarianism, serious violations of human rights, exclusion and discrimination, humanitarian and security crises, and the defiance of international law and standards.
As members of the G7, we are convinced that our societies and the world have reaped remarkable benefits from a global order based on rules and underscore that this system must have at its heart the notions of inclusion, democracy and respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms, diversity, and the rule of law.
That the 'rules based international order' is supposed to include vague concepts of 'democracy', 'human rights', 'fundamental freedoms', 'diversity' and more makes it easy to claim that this or that violation of the 'rules based international order' has occurred. Such violations can then be used to impose punishment in the form of sanctions or war.
That the above definition was given by a minority of a few rich nations makes it already clear that it can not be a global concept for a multilateral world. That would require a set of rules that everyone has agreed to. We already had and have such a system. It is called international law. But at the end of the cold war the 'west' began to ignore the actual international law and to replace it with its own rules which others were then supposed to follow. That hubris has come back to bite the 'west'.
Anatol Lieven's recent piece, How the west lost, describes this moral defeat of the 'west' after its dubious 'victory' in the cold war:
Accompanying this overwhelmingly dominant political and economic ideology was an American geopolitical vision equally grandiose in ambition and equally blind to the lessons of history. This was summed up in the memorandum on “Defence Planning Guidance 1994-1999,” drawn up in April 1992 for the Bush Senior administration by Under-Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz and Lewis “Scooter” Libby, and subsequently leaked to the media. Its central message was:
While that 1992 Washington paper spoke of the “legitimate interests” of other states, it clearly implied that it would be Washington that would define what interests were legitimate, and how they could be pursued. And once again, though never formally adopted, this “doctrine” became in effect the standard operating procedure of subsequent administrations. In the early 2000s, when its influence reached its most dangerous height, military and security elites would couch it in the terms of “full spectrum dominance.” As the younger President Bush declared in his State of the Union address in January 2002, which put the US on the road to the invasion of Iraq: “By the grace of God, America won the Cold War… A world once divided into two armed camps now recognises one sole and pre-eminent power, the United States of America.”
But that power has since failed in the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, during the 2008 financial crisis and now again in the pandemic. It also created new competition to its role due to its own behavior:
The Sino-Russian Alliance Comes of age — Part 1
The Sino-Russian Alliance Comes of Age — Part 2 The Sino-Russian Alliance Comes of Age — Part 3 Bhadrakumar describes how the 'west', through its own behavior, created a mighty block that now opposes its dictates. He concludes:
Quintessentially, Russia and China contest a set of neoliberal practices that have evolved in the post-World War 2 international order validating selective use of human rights as a universal value to legitimise western intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign states. On the other hand, they also accept and continuously affirm their commitment to a number of fundamental precepts of the international order — in particular, the primacy of state sovereignty and territorial integrity, the importance of international law, and the centrality of the United Nations and the key role of the Security Council.
While the U.S. wants a vague 'rules based international order' China and Russia emphasize an international order that is based on the rule of law. Two recent comments by leaders from China and Russia underline this.
In a speech in honor of the UN's 75th anniversary China's President Xi Jinping emphasized law based multilateralism:
Xi: No nation should act like boss of the world
China firmly supports the United Nations' central role in global affairs and opposes any country acting like boss of the world, President Xi Jinping said on Monday.
...
"No country has the right to dominate global affairs, control the destiny of others or keep advantages in development all to itself," Xi said.Noting that the UN must stand firm for justice, Xi said that mutual respect and equality among all countries, big or small, is the foremost principle of the UN Charter.
No country should be allowed to do whatever it likes and be the hegemon or bully, Xi said. "Unilateralism is a dead end," he said.
...
International laws should not be distorted or used as a pretext to undermine other countries' legitimate rights and interests or world peace and stability, he added.The Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov went even further by outright rejecting the 'western rules' that the 'rules based international order' implies:
Ideas that Russia and China will play by sets of Western rules under any circumstances are deeply flawed, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview with New York-based international Russian-language RTVI channel.
"I was reading our political scientists who are well known in the West. The following idea is becoming louder and more pronounced: it is time to stop applying Western metrics to our actions and stop trying to be liked by the West at any cost. These are very reputable people and a rather serious statement. It is clear to me that the West is wittingly or unwittingly pushing us towards this analysis. It is likely to be done unwittingly," Lavrov noted. "However, it is a big mistake to think that Russia will play by Western rules in any case, just like thinking this in terms of China."
As an alliance China and Russia have all the raw materials, energy, engineering and industrial capabilities, agriculture and populations needed to be completely independent from the 'west'. They have no need nor any desire to follow dubious rules dictated by other powers. There is no way to make them do so. As M.K. Bhadrakumar concludes:
The US cannot overwhelm that alliance unless it defeats both China and Russia together, simultaneously. The alliance, meanwhile, also happens to be on the right side of history. Time works in its favour, as the decline of the US in relative comprehensive national power and global influence keeps advancing and the world gets used to the “post-American century.”
P.S.
On a lighter note: RT, Russia's state sponsored international TV station, has recently hired Donald Trump (vid). He will soon host his own reality show on RT. The working title is reportedly: "Putin's Apprentice". The apprenticeship might give him a chance to learn how a nation that has failed can be resurrected to its former glory.
Posted by b on September 22, 2020 at 17:59 UTC | Permalink
The rules are follow the dictates of our western neo-colonial institutions like the World Bank, the IMF et all. We will own you and you will do what we say and those are the rules. Any challenge to our authority will lead to war, economic ruin or both.
Its a pretty simple concept backed by the attack dog of the US military.
Posted by: circumspect | Sep 22 2020 18:27 utc | 2
'Rules based order' was always a euphemism for exceptionalism of one kind or another.
The term was invented to avoid having to say 'rule of law', which invited criticism because even the most minimal amount of law (such as Geneva conventions, ICC etc) was rejected in practice and in policy by the leading members of the actually existing world order.
Posted by: ptb | Sep 22 2020 18:37 utc | 3
Can't resist tooting my own horn.
https://patrickarmstrong.ca/2017/04/29/the-west-actually-lost-the-cold-war-it-turned-victory-into-defeat/Posted by: Patrick Armstrong | Sep 22 2020 18:52 utc | 4
Rumor says the "Wolfowitz Doctrine" also envisioned the balkanization of Russia (the document is still classified, but it leaked to a NYT journalist at the time, who published a report on it).
It's not clear-but that a Russia-China alliance would have advantage over the American Empire. The secret here is that the USA must be seen not as a North-American empire, but as a thalassocracy that control "The Seven Seas". This makes the USA larger in surface area than the Eurasian landmass.
Martyanov stated that new hypersonic missiles rendered the US Navy ineffective in a war of aggression against Russia and China. That's true, but that's not the main role of the US Navy: it's main role is to guarantee the shipping routes, thus controlling the totality of foreign trade. In that, it is still undisputed.
The way to go is to, first of all, guarantee the Russia-China alliance, and, second, to finish the BRI as fast a possible. If China-Russia guarantee the land routes of trade and supply through Eurasia, the game is basically over for the USA, because Eurasia is where most of human civilization lives, it's the "World Island" - the world island not in the military sense, but in the economic sense. Every path to human prosperity passes through Eurasia - that's why the USA can't "let it alone" in the first place, while the reverse is not true, that is, Eurasia can give to the luxury of letting the Americas alone.
The recent White House plans to control content of school curriculum, especially regarding history, suggests a few powerful people in Washington are trying to shore up the exceptionalism emphasis.
Posted by: watyler | Sep 22 2020 19:07 utc | 6
I laughed out loud at the RT skit. They certainly have found a good DJT impersonator.
Got to admire their in yer face, ‘ take the mick ‘ type humour.
I’d love to be a fly on the wall to see some U.S. politicians and state dept. persons reactions.
Lindsey Graham and Nancy Pelosi immediately come to mind.
Oh the faux outrage! Comedic gold! * Trebles ( Gin and Tonic’s ) all round *
* A reference to a British satirical periodiclal, Private Eye.
Posted by: Beibdnn | Sep 22 2020 19:08 utc | 7
It is not over in the sense that the West hasn't given up in its attempts to take over the world.
But as the "exceptionalist" western countries decline, they will go even crazier and crazier and there will be full blown hysteria.
In this sense, the rule based order will be over as there will be only disorder and animalistic, crazed western rage and bullying.
The West is like a trapped animal. It will start pouncing, raging and snarling like a wild animal.
This is the real nature of the West. A hungry wild animal that needs to feed.
All the liberalism is just self-congratulation about how exceptionalist it is. It is born out of narcisism and self-obsession during the "good times" of the West.
But behind the liberal mask, there are hateful eyes and gnashing teeth, and hunger and greed for other people's resources.
The real face of it is hateful and snarling. And it will be fully exposed during the next 10 years, as the West goes crazy and it becomes a hungry wild animal that desperately needs to feed.
Expressed in words, the West's face says "I'm the best and you are nothing! Give me your stuff! And this is how it will forever be!"
Countries need to stay out from the wild animal and carry a big stick just in case, until it succumbs from its internal hatreds and contradictions.
Posted by: Passer by | Sep 22 2020 19:43 utc | 9
Putin's Apprentice is perfect. Shove that title right back in Maxine Waters face. Here's the link for English speakers without the Russian subtitles:
Trump is here to make RT Great Again!
Posted by: One Too Many | Sep 22 2020 19:44 utc | 10
As Putin has said, the US is no longer agreement capable. As b. outlines. the US elites no longer follow the rule of law. This is even true within the US. The US inherited the role formerly played by the British Empire after WW2. the national security apparatus of both the US and the Soviet Union kept the Cold War going. Notice how soon after JFK was assassinated Khrushchev was deposed. Gorbachev rightly stopped the Soviets superpower regime. As Dmitri Orlov points out - Empire hollowed out the Soviet Union and he sees it doing the same to the US. instead of bringing Russia into the Western liberal democracies (with the threat of major nuclear war now drastically reduced) the now Anglo-Zionist Empire just looted it. The life expectancy of Russians fell 7 years in a decade until rescued by Putin. It can now be seen that the Nixon-Kissinger opening up to China was not to gain access to its large market potential but to gain access to hundreds of millions of cheap, disciplined, and educated workers. The elites starting in the 70s became greedier. Jet travel,electronic communication, and computers allowed the outsourcing of manufacture. The spread of air conditioning allowed even the too hot south to be a location. First in the US as the factories began their march through the non union southern states onto Mexico. Management from the north could now live in air conditioned houses, drive air conditioned cars and work in air conditioned offices. The 70s oil inflation led to stagnation as the unionized labor were powerful enough to get cost of living raises. With the globalization of labor union power in the US has been destroyed. As Eric X Li points out China's one party rule actually changes policies easier than the Western democracies. So China's government hasn't joined in with the West in just creating wealth for the top 1% and debt for the real economy. As b.pointed out, the Anglo Zionist policies created the mutual benefit partnership of Russia and China. The Chinese belt and road initiative appears to be intent on creating a large trading zone that could benefit those involved. The US is just using sanctions and the military to turn sovereign functioning countries that don't go along with it into failed states and their infrastructure turned to rubble
Posted by: gepay | Sep 22 2020 19:44 utc | 11
Is rt trying to troll the democrat russiagater's or DJT fanbase?
Either/or...it's a misfire.
Any type of enmity btw the two countries under Trump is pure theater.
We all know that DJT does actually admire Putin, and for good reason!But I would go further to say that Putin has respect and admiration for DJT...and appreciation for bringing the warhawks in Syria to heel.
So I suppose y'all who feel that DJT is some ineffectual- when it comes to outplaying Russia- establishment figure, it might be funny for you. To me, it is just silly.
But give Biden a chance to prove me right and bring us to further brinkmanship in Syria.Posted by: NemesisCalling | Sep 22 2020 20:07 utc | 12
Now, the US is forced into puppeteering the UN in order to maintain the illusion of the 'rules based order,' even as it slides further and further away from any meaningful international cooperation:
Fortunately for the world, the United States took responsible action to stop this from happening. In accordance with our rights under UNSCR 2231, we initiated the snapback process to restore virtually all previously terminated UN sanctions, including the arms embargo. The world will be safer as a result.
The United States expects all UN Member States to fully comply with their obligations to implement these measures. In addition to the arms embargo, this includes restrictions such as the ban on Iran engaging in enrichment and reprocessing-related activities, the prohibition on ballistic missile testing and development by Iran, and sanctions on the transfer of nuclear- and missile-related technologies to Iran, among others. If UN Member States fail to fulfill their obligations to implement these sanctions, the United States is prepared to use our domestic authorities to impose consequences for those failures and ensure that Iran does not reap the benefits of UN-prohibited activity.
https://www.state.gov/the-return-of-un-sanctions-on-the-islamic-republic-of-iran/
Posted by: Roy G | Sep 22 2020 20:11 utc | 13
After November 3 2020, the USA will devolve into chaos. You have nothing to worry about.
Posted by: gottlieb | Sep 22 2020 20:13 utc | 14
Great clip of "Trump" in Moscow, the end scene in front of Tsoy’s wall in the Arbat has a message, a reference to the well known in the former USSR song Peremen, Changes, by the group Kino. Trump would do fine in Moscow were he to lose the election, there is a kitsch side to the megalopolis too, but it is such a huge and varied city, an imperial capital, that it had to have it.
Posted by: Paco | Sep 22 2020 20:15 utc | 15
Any type of enmity btw the two countries under Trump is pure theater.
Posted by: NemesisCalling | Sep 22 2020 20:07 utc | 10
Actually the Trump Administration has done far more against Russia than all US administrations from the last 30 years. Do not listen what they say, look at what they do.
Right now the US in a full blown Cold War with Russia with ever increasing attacks.
Posted by: Passer by | Sep 22 2020 20:15 utc | 16
Pompeo talks more or less continually about "China's bullying behaviuor". To me it is wonderful that he can say this with a straight face. (Perhaps it is a result of his lessons in the CIA on "how to lie better".)All the countries that have engaged with China have benefitted from it, whether as salesmen or as recipients of aid or loans at advantageous rates. The countries that have engaged with America have mostly (All?) lost. (The fifty+ countries invaded and wrecked since WW2 or the NATO "allies" or the countries attacked with sanctions.) Either their economies were destroyed or billions upon billions of dollars were paid to the US MIC. The NATO member countries have got what from their membership? Formerly, they had "Protection" from an imaginary Soviet threat, more recently "Protection" from an equally imaginary Russian threat! Some bargain, that!
Posted by: foolisholdman | Sep 22 2020 20:22 utc | 17
Rules based international order .... the U.S. functions as the the Supreme Court for the U.N., 'we have invoked snapback sanctions anb extended the arms embargo on Iran indefinitely and are enforcing it'. UN, 'but your vote failed'.
U.S, 'we have the right to seize cargo between any two countries transported in international waters based on U.S. federal appeals court decision even though the transaction in no way involves the U.S. We call this Freedom of Navigation and why we need to have aircraft carriers in the South China Sea and Arabian Gulf'
We are completely and totally insane.
Posted by: Christian J. Chuba | Sep 22 2020 20:38 utc | 18
Rules based International Order is the dog whistle for global private finance controlled economies.
It is sad that we are in a civilization war with China/Russia about who runs international finance going forward and yet there is no discussion of the subject but instead all sorts of proxy conflicts.
Thanks for the posting b as it gets to the core myths around the global private finance jackboot on the neck of countries in the West.
Posted by: psychohistorian | Sep 22 2020 20:41 utc | 19
Thanks b, and I will add that we here in the US also are expected to be okay with a financial rules based order that favors the rich over the not well off and seeks the same sort of hegemony in terms of its own citizens.
Recently I loved reading that President Roosevelt sent thousands of bankers to prison. Wish we still had him.
Posted by: juliania | Sep 22 2020 20:49 utc | 20
Putins apprentice is perfect for RT and I propose that Trump would need a regular foil with a standard 30 second discussion with Joe Biden in every show. Joe could have his name board or US flag upside down. With only 6 weeks to go to election day this show would drive the entire dopey establishment crazy.
Posted by: uncle tungsten | Sep 22 2020 20:55 utc | 21
Related to this, we can't separate these dynamics from the political economy of the states in question. China, in particular, is showing that an interventionist state, with high levels of public ownership, is essential to qualitative power, human security, and economic and social development.
Capitalism might enrich a few, but it is the primary cause of America's relative and absolute decline.
Posted by: profk | Sep 22 2020 20:59 utc | 22
[premium_newsticker id="213661"]
About the author(s)"b" is Moon of Alabama's founding (and chief) editor. This site's purpose is to discuss politics, economics, philosophy and blogger Billmon's Whiskey Bar writings. Moon Of Alabama was opened as an independent, open forum for members of the Whiskey Bar community. Bernhard )"b") started and still runs the site. Once in a while you will also find posts and art from regular commentators. You can reach the current administrator of this site by emailing Bernhard at MoonofA@aol.com.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The Liberal International Order or Pax Americana are synonyms for The Rules Based Order. The plan that was followed for years was the outline given by Zbigniew Brzezinski and the Trilateral Commission in The Grand Chessboard to "contain" the ambition of Russia, China, and Iran over their interest to expand into Central Asia and the Middle East. Brzezinski changed in 2016, so did Kissinger, Brzezinski wrote that it was time to make peace and to integrate with Russia, China and Iran. But the elites had changed by then, newer people had taken over and no longer followed Brzezinski.
Posted by: Kali | Sep 22 2020 18:18 utc | 1