Is the liberal International order flexible and desirable enough to accommodate and include the interests and values of rising powers?

LIO definiton 1?

many actors working together to meet mutual interests. promotion of capitalism, democracy, cooperation and progress

Baylis Smith and Owens 2023

LIO definition 2?

“settled arrangements between states”

Ikenberry 2009

reasons for?

1. GG institutions already reforming

2. BRICS struggle to organise

3. BRICS do not pose significant threat

reasons against?

1. pre-existing GG institution issues

2. BRICS have historically collaborated

3. crisis of norms

P1: GGs already reforming?

LIO is beneficial for all members, so doesn’t make sense for big changes to be made

Institutions are not being completely removed, just reformed for better inclusion

e.g G7 grown to G20

new regional bodies have formed to focus on rising powers in the past

e.g African Development Bank, ASEAN

P2: already issues with GGs?

NATO ‘enlargement fatigue’ - “the essential core meaning had been lost” Cox 2023

further change could lead to irreparable damage to the current system

EU has also got bigger, which has reduced efficacy. BREXIT 2016 suggests not all states view this positively

The LIO functions best with smaller, dominant institutions which have a clearly defined ideological stance

P3: BRICS struggle to organise?

BRICS can’t cooperate well

China and India are rivals - both manufacturing giants looking to increase dominance in the LIO. China has used FDI in states surrounding India to gather allies

differences in political structure - India and Brazil are democracies, Russia and China are autocracies

difficulties in expanding BRICs - Argentina and Saudi Arabia have declined membership

P3: BRICS struggle to organise - autocracy definition?

“the concentration of power in the hands of a single ruler”

Heywood 2014

P4: BRICs have historically collaborated?

BRICS worked together to block Western policy at the 2009 Copenhagen Climate Change Conference - India and China opposed and succeeded in blocking Western proposals

2022 UN General Assembly vote on Russia/Ukraine war - all BRICS countries except Brazil sided with Russia

BRICS ideologies do not align with LIO therefore undesirable

rise of nationalism in Brazil and India suggests they are becoming politically closer to Russia and China

able to exploit fragmenting GG

P5: BRICS do not pose significant threat?

they have not yet presented the West with a large ideological confrontation

democracy is still the most appealing system - China and Russia are looked down upon for their undemocratic politics

most developing countries are still democracies despite their nationalist/populist leaders

no alternatives to capitalism, just different forms - China particularly demonstrates how a state under communist control (CCP) has to adhere to capitalist norms for economic success

West desires involvement of BRICS until they become more powerful/dangerous

P6: LIO already experiencing crisis of norms?

new regional institutions relating to security, diplomacy and economics have begun to appear, many in opposition to existing arrangements

e.g Chinese New Silk Road initiative

suggests changing norms will not fit in with current institutions

war is beginning to break out again - Pakistan/India, Israel/Palestine. Russia/Ukraine - not enough space in the LIO