Full Breakdown
The Future of the Rules-Based World Order: Scenarios and Implications
4/12/2026, 1:03:00 PM
Erosion of the Rules-Based Order
The ongoing conflict involving the United States, Israel, and Iran has prompted discussions about the potential collapse of the rules-based world order, a framework established post-World War II to regulate international relations. Stacie Goddard, a political science professor at Wellesley College, notes that we are witnessing a significant decline in this order, which was intended to create a stable and prosperous global environment. However, critics argue that the order has historically favored Western powers, particularly the United States, while marginalizing countries in the Global South. Amitav Acharya, a professor at the American University, highlights that many nations perceive the rules as biased against them, limiting their agency in global affairs.
Scenarios for a Post-Rules-Based World
As the rules-based order faces challenges, experts propose several potential scenarios for the future:
Hemispheric Dominance
One scenario involves a revival of hemispheric dominance, reminiscent of the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine. This concept suggests that superpowers may seek to reassert control over specific regions, potentially leading to increased tensions. For instance, U.S. foreign policy under former President Donald Trump has been likened to this doctrine, with actions aimed at diminishing European influence in the Americas. However, Goddard cautions that leaders like Trump and Russia's Vladimir Putin often act in self-interest rather than for national benefit, complicating this scenario.
Multiplex World Order
Another possibility is the emergence of a multiplex world order, characterized by multiple influential actors rather than a single hegemonic power. Acharya envisions a system where middle and regional powers, such as the European Union, Indonesia, and South Africa, play significant roles alongside non-state actors and civil society. This scenario emphasizes cooperation at both global and regional levels, although it may still experience conflict and instability.
Total Collapse
A more dire scenario posits the complete collapse of the rules-based order, leading to chaos and potential global conflict. While this outcome is feared by many, both Goddard and Acharya believe it is unlikely, as the global community is acutely aware of the consequences of widespread warfare.
Official Statements & Responses
The discourse surrounding the future of the rules-based order reflects a growing concern among international relations scholars and policymakers. Goddard emphasizes the importance of middle powers in shaping the future, stating, "What happens with the rules-based order depends on those who still feel it is valuable and have the power to influence change." Meanwhile, Acharya notes that while a multiplex order may not eliminate conflict, it could reduce the dominance of hegemonic powers.
Criticism & Opposition
Critics argue that the current international system has failed to provide equitable benefits to all nations, particularly those in the Global South. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has faced accusations of disproportionately targeting African leaders, exemplifying the perceived inequities within the rules-based order. This sentiment reflects a broader discontent with a system that many believe is rigged against them.
What's Next?
The future of the rules-based world order remains uncertain. Key questions include whether countries like the European Union, Japan, South Korea, and India will forge independent trade agreements and military strategies while adhering to principles of the rules-based order. The responses to these challenges may ultimately shape the emergence of a new global framework, one that is not solely dictated by Western powers.
