scholarly journals Calling the Shots

2003 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 139-142
Author(s):  
Imam Ghayth Nur Kashif

While many Americans are just becoming aware of the United States' extraordinary dominance over the UN, Phyllis Bennis has long been a "prophet," warning of the catastrophic consequences of its disproportionate influence over this international body. A prolific writer, whose published works include Beyond the Storm: A Gulf Crisis Reader and Altered States: A Reader in the New World Order (Interlink: 1999. Edited with Michael Moushabeck), Bennis' signature work, Calling the Shots(Interlink: 1998. Edited with Michael Moushabeck), was initially pubfished by Olive Branch Press in 1996 and revised in 2000. ''The latter edi­tion examines US-UN relations at the close of the 20th century and sug­gests possible ways forward for the world body," according to its back cover promotional endorsements. The 341-page book has 11 chapters: "The Founders," "The History," "Center Stage: The Role and Power of the UN in Washington's Gulf War," "Who Rules: The Struggle for UN Democracy," "Peacekeeping, Interven­tion, and a Whole New World Out There," "Washington Keeps Its Own Peace," "Peacekeeping Goes to War: Somalia, Rwanda, Haiti, Bosnia,""UN Sanctions: The Not-Quite Warfare," "To the World's Attention," "The Exception: The Middle East and Palestine," "Democratizing the UN," and "The Laws of Empire and the UN's New Internationalism." This is followed by a 19-page appendix entitled "The United Nations Charter and Principal Organs of the UN." ...

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (11) ◽  
pp. 179
Author(s):  
Nazhan Hammoud Nassif Al Obeidi ◽  
Abdul Wahab Abdul Aziz Abu Khamra

The Gulf crisis 1990-1991 is one of the important historical events of the 1990s, which gave rise to the new world order by the sovereignty of the United States of America on this system. The Gulf crisis was an embodiment to clarify the features of this system. .     The crisis in the Gulf was an opportunity for the Moroccans to manage this complex event and to use it for the benefit of the Moroccan situation. Therefore, the bilateral position of the crisis came out as a rejection, a contradiction and a supporter of political and economic dimensions at the external and internal levels. On the Moroccan situation, and from these points came the choice of the subject of the study (the dimensions of the Moroccan position from the Gulf crisis 1990-1991), which shows the ingenuity of Moroccans in managing an external crisis and benefiting from it internally.


2021 ◽  
pp. 108-151
Author(s):  
Rebecca Lissner

This chapter studies the Persian Gulf War. Prior to the Persian Gulf War, the United States was focused primarily on Europe, where rapid changes to the regional security order provided early signals of the nation’s dawning preeminence, but few indications of what a “new world order” would entail. Beyond the Soviet Union, there were no clear threats to U.S. global interests, and emergent American grand strategy envisioned a world where economic and diplomatic power would predominate, resulting in some measure of multipolarity. Yet the shock and awe of the war revealed that the United States stood alone as the world’s sole superpower, backed by international political support—including from a surprisingly deferential Russia—as well as unprecedented military preponderance. Washington therefore moved toward a more militarily assertive form of hegemony, characterized by the discretionary use of force to enforce the terms of the “new world order.” The war also inaugurated the preoccupation with Iraq and nonproliferation as central focuses of post–Cold War foreign policy.


2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 65-69
Author(s):  
Dmitrii N. Khristenko

The article examines the foreign policy concept of the «new world order» of George Herbert Walker Bush, which he put forward during the Gulf War (1990-1991). Despite its short duration, the Middle East conflict has become a symbol of the transformation of international relations initiated by the crisis of the bipolar system and arising of the United States as the main military and political world power. Consequently, Washington sought to rethink its role in the world arena. This task was intended to solve by the concept of a «new world order». The main sources for this article were the memoirs of the former American president and James Addison Baker III (U.S. Secretary of State), documents of White House’ administration, as well as publications of «Foreign Affairs» – the most influential journal on international relations in the United States. The research methodology includes the space-time analysis of Fernand Paul Achille Braudel, historical-descriptive and historical-genetic methods. It is noted that the foreign policy concept of a «new world order» was in the centre of public attention and caused a heated discussion in the United States, as a result of which was rejected its main element – reliance on allies and the rule of international law. The attempts of Russian diplomacy to propose a corrected interpretation of the concept of a «new world order» did not meet the understanding overseas. Washington took a course towards sole leadership in the world that triggered the deterioration of the state of affairs in the world arena in the long term.


2020 ◽  
pp. 13-24
Author(s):  
I. V. Bocharnikov ◽  
O. A. Ovsyannikova

Тhe article reveals the main directions of transformation of the modern world order caused by the decline of the American-centric system, as well as the crisis of European integration. The main factors that determine the development of these processes, problems and prospects for the formation of a new world order at the beginning of the third decade of the XXI century are determined. The most significant aspects of the transformation of the policy of the United States and its European allies in relation to Russia are considered, and historical analogies are drawn with the processes of transformation of the world community in the XIX and XX centuries.


Author(s):  
Martin S. Flaherty

This chapter looks to the real “New World Order.” Conventionally, international relations as well as international law concentrated on the interactions of nation-states. On this model, the United States, China, Russia, the United Kingdom, Kenya, Mexico, and the Bahamas, for example, are principally the irreducible units. Recent thinking emphasizes that instead, international relations more and more consists of executive, legislative, and judicial officials directly reaching out to their foreign counterparts to share information, forge ongoing networks, coordinate cooperation, and construct new frameworks. The traditional nation-state has today become “disaggregated,” dealing with its peers less as monolithic sovereign states than through these more specialized “global networks.” Notably, the counterparts that officials of one state seek out in others tracks the divisions of separation of powers: executives to executives, judges to judges, legislators to legislators. How such transnational, interdepartmental networking affects each branch of government within a given state is another matter.


2019 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 1950024
Author(s):  
James M. Dorsey

Underlying global efforts to counter fake news, psychological warfare and manipulation of public opinion is a far more fundamental battle: the global campaign by civilizationalists, illiberals, autocrats and authoritarians to create a new world media order that would reject freedom of the press and reduce the fourth estate to scribes and propaganda outlets. The effort appears to have no limits. Its methods range from seeking to reshape international standards defining freedom of expression and the media; the launch and/or strengthening of government-controlled global, regional, national and local media in markets around the world; government acquisition of stakes in privately-owned media; advertising in independent media dependent on advertising revenue; funding of think-tanks; demonization; coercion; repression; and even assassination. The effort to create a new media world order is closely linked to attempts to a battle between liberals and non-liberals over concepts of human rights, the roll-out of massive Chinese surveillance systems in China and beyond and a contest between the United States and China for dominance of the future of technology. The stakes in these multiple battles could not be higher. They range from basic human and minority rights to issues of transparency, accountability and privacy, human rights, the role of the fourth estate as an independent check on power, freedom of expression and safeguards for human and physical dignity. The battles are being waged in an environment in which a critical mass of world leaders appears to have an unspoken consensus on the principles of governance that should shape a new world order. Men like Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Victor Orbán, Benjamin Netanyahu, Mohammed bin Salman, Mohammed bin Zayed, Narendra Modi, Rodrigo Duterte, Jair Bolsonaro, Win Myint and Donald J. Trump have all to varying degrees diluted the concepts of human rights and undermined freedom of the press. If anything, it is this tacit understanding among the world’s foremost leaders that in shaping a new world order constitutes the greatest threat to liberal values.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document