(Foreign Policy) Nostalgia can be deceptive. Too fond a portrayal of the era of Western hegemony would be misleading. Iraqs chemical weapons use against Iran in the 1980s; the 1990s bloodletting in Bosnia Rwanda and Somalia; the post-9/11 wars in Afghanistan and Iraq; Sri Lankas brutal 2009 campaign against the Tamils; and the collapse of Libya and South Sudan: all these happened at a time ofin some cases because ofU.S. dominance and a reasonably coherent West. A liberal and nominally rules-based order hardly stopped those setting the rules from discarding them when they saw fit. The erosion of Western influence in short looks different from Moscow Beijing and the developing world than it does from Brussels London or Washington. Still for better and for worse U.S. power and alliances have for years shaped international affairs set limits and structured regional orders. As the Wests influence declines accelerated by U.S. President Donald Trumps contempt for traditional allies and Europes struggles with Brexit and nativism leaders across the world are probing and prodding to see how far they can go. In their domestic policies many of those leaders embrace a noxious brew of nationalism and authoritarianism. The mix varies from place to place but typically entails rejection of international institutions and rules. There is little new in the critique of an unjust global order. But if once that critique tended to be rooted in international solidarity today it stems chiefly from an inward-looking populism that celebrates narrow social and political identity vilifies minorities and migrants assails the rule of law and independence of the press and elevates national sovereignty above all else.
by is licensed under
©2025, The American Dossier. All rights reserved. Privacy Policy