What is it about?
Transformative geo-political and economic developments such as OBOR, the AIIB, NDB and the increasing internationalization of the Yuan all herald potentially significant changes to the existing international governance architecture. This will have enormous consequences on international law, global trade and international economic law. “[T]here does not appear to be a comparable example of a great power (or multiple powers) rising within a normative framework not of its own making, where that normative framework has not undergone substantial change or revolution as a result of the new power’s values and interests.” The article discusses the possible ramifications caused by these new potential governance architects.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
The existing architecture of the global economic and international law orders led by the United States and allied Western powers will not last indefinitely. International law is not static and several of the new architects’ customs and norms inherently conflict with current Western ideals. This will have enormous consequences on international law, global trade and international economic law. Will international law norms converge? Will Western notions gravitate towards the other spectrum in enlightened self-interest? The impact on international law norms, enforcement, human rights, sustainability, trade and investment treaties and arbitration will be far-reaching. Understanding how this potential re-orientations in power will affect international law is of critical importance.
Perspectives
While the former Soviet Union was a strategic rival to the USA the Soviets never integrated into the governance architectures and other than its arsenal of nuclear weapons and support of rogue dictators and failed states never represented a challenge to the hegemony of the United States. For example, the Ruble was not considered a reserve currency. In contrast, China has masterfully become an important economic actor and has led efforts at creating an alternative to the IMF and World Bank. Therefore, for the first time in over 70 years, the United States led-order has a real challenger. The United States and China have dramatically different notions of governance systems and there may very well be a "competition of ideas" with respect to which governance model is superior. The question of how the United States and China treat this competition is "the question" of the next few years.
Joel Slawotsky
IDC
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The Clash of Architects: Impending Developments and Transformations in International Law, The Chinese Journal of Global Governance, October 2017, Brill,
DOI: 10.1163/23525207-12340025.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
