International Orders Emerge After The World War II

World order are the activities and relationship between the world states, and other significant non-state global actors, that occur within a legal, political and economic frame work. The need for world order has arisen due to the past historical conflicts, colonialism, greater interdependence between nations, and the increased impact of the activities of nation states upon other nation states. Legal measures such as the UN, as well as non-legal measures such as the media and Non-governmental organisations, show a mixed effectiveness in response to resolving conflict and working towards world order.

World Order exists so that world conflict and global destruction doesn’t. Not only this, but World Order works through relations between countries, meaning that no nation state will stand alone, hence global issues such as

At this point in time, the main actors in the international system are nation-states seeking an agenda of their own based on personal gain and national interest. Significantly, the most important actor is the United States, a liberal international economy, appointed its power after the interwar period becoming the dominant economy and in turn attained the position of hegemonic stability in the international system. The reason why the United States is dominating is imbedded in their intrinsic desire to continuously strive for their own national interest both political and economic. Further, there are other nature of actors that are not just nation-states, including non-states or transnational,

Since 1914 the United States military has grown and gotten to one of the strongest forces in the world, their technology has developed from Molotov cocktails to the development of the atomic bomb. As nations across the world started to build their troops and modernize, they also began to ally with each other, especially throughout Europe. The Triple Entente consisted of Great Britain, Russia, and France- and the Triple Alliance consisting of Germany, Austria and Italy. Since land was still being fought over in Europe it was bound for a war to start, the spark setting off the beginning of WWI was in the Balkans, this is where the Ottoman Empire disintegrates and new territories wanted to take control. By the time August rolled around Germany had declared war on Russia and France, but as they meet outside the river in Paris the war takes a pause and they just battle as a stalemate. Accompanying the entrance of this war was a huge modernization in weaponry including machine guns, tanks, submarines, aircraft, and submarines. As the countries continued to fight they began to come up with different ways to battle besides weapons and started to use chlorine and mustard gas. This made both sides of battle have to wear gas masks and the number of causalities to rapidly increase.

Ikenberry argues that there are many dilemmas within the organization of the international world order. The liberal order is defined by its openness and its rule based order. Order is maintained in these institutions when states agree to follow the rules set by these institutions. The liberal order has sought to establish its rules in a non-biased system that will not discriminate other states, so that the entire institution can agree on these regulations. However, this has raised many serious dilemmas’. There seems to be concern of how the balance of power operates. Ikenberry argues that the international order has been put into place

The purpose of this essay is to inform on the similarities and differences between systemic and domestic causes of war. According to World Politics by Jeffry Frieden, David Lake, and Kenneth Schultz, systemic causes deal with states that are unitary actors and their interactions with one another. It can deal with a state’s position within international organizations and also their relationships with other states. In contract, domestic causes of war pertain specifically to what goes on internally and factors within a state that may lead to war. Wars that occur between two or more states due to systemic and domestic causes are referred to as interstate wars.

Ikenberry’s book After Victory discusses how order is reestablished after war. In the book it explains the different ways that order can be reestablished, and how postwar order has evolved from Balance of Powers, to Hegemony, to present day Constitutionalism. He aims to address three main points throughout his book: The choices that the winners of the war face in regards to establishing order, the reasoning behind choosing their specific mode of order reestablishment, and the lasting stability of 1945 postwar order (Ikenberry 3). In my analysis I explain the different modes of postwar reestablishment, and

The War and Peace Studies therefore created this foundation of New World Order of movement, aided by economic interdependence; collective security maintaining international order through a multinational police force under compacted authority. "The age of nations must end. The governments of nations have decided to order their separate sovereignties into one government to which they will surrender their arms". - U.N World Constitution, which strengthen this world order shift from unilateral actions based solely on national interests, supported the list of action based common

World disorder has haunted the world for a while now. It poses a powerful threat to the existence and sustenance of world order. World order, by definition, is a set of rules governing the most significant of relationships of the general interstate system and the world’s super powers in particular. It is anticipated that in the future, world order will be dominated by hegemonic globalization in the US whereby secondary order relegated to multi-polar power with emphasis on economic, political, and cultural blocs or federations (the EU in particular) in conjunction with Russia, Japan and China. The emerging US order will overshadow any possible power emerging from India, OPEC countries and the Latin American countries.

World War I saw the nations involved rallied into two major alliances in order to curb German’s increasing power. It is evident that German amassing too much power poses a threat to the security of its counterparts in an anarchic system. As a result, other countries were willing to use various means not only to mitigate the risks but also maintain their independence in the world’s political structure. The balance of power theory focuses on how countries can achieve a balance and international order. The causes of World War one can be attributed to the balance of power mechanisms used by the countries involved.

International order, though it may be fleeting in the grand scheme of history, seems to be at least on a continuous track of lingering longer and longer each time before chaos takes over. The Persians, Greeks, and Romans all seemed to enjoy ever-increasing periods of relative peace at the top of their systems of international order before it unraveled. Most of Europe was in good order on the tail of the Industrial Revolution until some arch duke decided to vacation in Sarajevo. After each major conflict, the world re-shuffles itself and order is established again in some form or fashion. The players are bigger and more numerous with greater consequences for conflict but order is still unseated from time to time and the rules of the existing orders seem to change daily. Realism can explain this violent cycle of order and disorder. States and even non-state actors continuously seek to balance regional power in order to secure their survival in a world dominated by fear and uncertainty; if unable to balance that power through violent means, players will seek to form alliances and organizations to at least prevent domination; once a status quo has been created and survival is temporarily assured, players will seek to maintain life within that order; new members thrust the order back into violence and potentially chaos if unable or unwilling to play by those rules. This cycle of power balancing can be illustrated in three phases. International orders are created as

     After the tragedies of World War II, European leaders have made striving efforts to prevent such a catastrophic event from occurring on their continent again. The best solution seemed to be highly mechanized cooperation among the highest European powers to assure that future conflict, and perhaps war, could not arise between them. If all the states ran themselves in a manner cooperating with their neighbors, conflict could be avoided. To prevent other nations from not cooperating, treaties and institutions would have to be designed for each area of international interest such as trade, communications, security, and so forth. As the century progressed, more organizations, institutions and associations were

IGOs are voluntary associations of sovereign states established to pursue many objectives for which states want to cooperate through sort of formal structure and to which states are unable to realize by themselves (Miller, 1994). There are hundreds of IGOs in today's world which are significant in their respective fields. They are created by treaties and negotiations which mainly reflect preferences of stronger states. Especially stronger states create IGOs because they need them to protect their interests. By and large, decisions made by IGOs are the product of negotiations among the governmental representatives assigned to them. In general, it is not idealism, but the need of states which tend them to cooperate with other states in the context of IGOs. Therefore, they are part of the Westphalia state system in which IGOs are instruments of nation-states (Miller, 1994: 67). Regarding to the function and the purpose of IGOs, the influence of state as an actor in international relation still remains strong but in a different way, IGOs replace the original ideas of individual states but to identify states which have the same normative behavior and same ambitions to form a cooperate with each other so as to achieve the same goal. Even said so, powerful states are less constrained by the principle of IGOs than those who are relatively weak (Ataman, 2000: 152-167). This suggests that state is the key element in

The authors go on to explain the concept of international organizations, and their importance in terms of international relations, from a historical perspective. As Yi-chong and Weller

seen in history that it is possible to restrain the players. It is said to be