Contemporary International System and the Interpretation of Liberalism

Contemporary International System and the interpretation of Liberalism
Contemporary studies in international relations, the introduction of new actors to compete with the State for recognition across borders has placed scholars of international relations in a state of perplexity. To identify if our current system and the way it is moving is conducive to advancing the interests of individuals that populate the international society or whether it is only conducive to advancing the interests of an elite few that profess to represent the State. Has liberalism within the international system advanced to such a stage that the ideals of freedom, equality and rule of law for the individual have had to give way to the sustainment and advancement of the State? It may be argued that the essence of State governance has been challenged by both regional and global interconnectedness, either by trans governmental organisations or organisations representing civil society.

With this increase in interconnectedness, the decisions being made by the sovereign State have to reflect international norms that provide a guidance to ensure that the wellbeing and security of individuals within the international community are able to be protected and assured. The current detainment of the illegal combatants at Guantanamo Bay was initially supported by western civil society with the threat of international terrorism fresh. This support with the movement of time has since wavered. Especially with the conditions and longevity of harsh treatment to the illegal combatant not being prosecuted for the possibility of conduction a crime that may be international organised or implemented. This treatment does not reflect international norms and similarly challenges the international legal institution but provides insight into the quagmire that is associated with nuclear security and nuclear diplomacy. (refer footnote १)

Individual identity as well as border demarcation for a State’s authority has become blurred with the current moves with multiculturalism and as the relationships within the international system between the traditional and new actors become more interdependent. The ideals of freedom and equality attributed to the individual are still maintained by the State. Equality with regards to materialism is not reflected. This material inequality is a factor attributed to a State’s choice of operating in a capitalist market and adopting a liberal political and economic approach to both domestic and international relations.

Modern political economic theory can be traced to have its origins reflected in the writings of Locke and his theory of property for individuals। (refer footnote २) It is the study of Locke’s writing that material inequality is identified as a norm within a liberal political system. The system ensures that the society within which the individual lives is able to prosper, facilitate complex interactions and ensure that the net gain remains stable and is able to continue to advance. Property and liberty as Locke theorised are the main two tenets that make up the social contract between the individual and the State or the individual and the international system. Locke’s writings only showed an interest in the theory of property rights when he identified that the arguments of his time were communistic in nature. His theory of property indirectly provided the foundations for the formation of the various international institutions, the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund that still continues today to regulate the capitalist system that is associated with liberalism. Both can make decisions for international system regulation that are not directly influenced by an individual State.

Footnote
1 Philip Gordon in his book A Certain Idea of France: French Security Policy and the Gaullist Legacy, identified that as late as the 1970s France’s nuclear force was a diplomatic instrument as opposed to a military one even though De Gaulle allocated nuclear weapons to each of the three services to seek security from within, preventing the provocation of a disgruntled army. As a diplomatic tool, de Gaulle used nuclear weapons as a tool to promote his foreign policy objectives although its independent effect as a nuclear deterrence to Russian aggression was limited.
2 Alvey, Jim. John Locke’s Theory of Property. 1987. Brisbane.