Search results

As at the end of the Cold War, today there is no desirable or superior alternative to a universal liberal international order. However, a liberal order is not automatic and today we are at a major turning point where we face two alternative scenarios: a turn for the worse or a turn for the better. The crisis in Iraq underscores the need to reaffirm and strengthen the democratic liberal international order. Concludes that the chances of a turn for the better are higher than those of a turn for the worse, i.e. the strengthening of the liberal international order is more likely than its disintegration and breakdown. There is a need for new initiatives, solidarities, consensus, intellectual and political leadership from all the countries that share the same vision of a universal order. It must, however, be a “voluntarist” endeavor.

Many people on both sides of the Atlantic take the Atlantic Community for granted, weakening the Community's foundations and world order in general. It is important to remember that the Atlantic Community has played, and continues to play a considerable role in creating the dynamics of a free and peaceful international order, well beyond being a simple military alliance. It was the shared identity and values of the Atlantic Community that brought a peaceful end to the Cold War. Today, members within and out with the Atlantic Community are faced with new global challenges that affect us all and that cannot be solved by any single nation alone. Basic principles must be reaffirmed in order to meet global challenges. Opinions among the members of the Community must not be a source of weakness, but rather a source of cooperation, strength and solidarity.

Fifteen years after the end of the Cold War there is a new deep worldwide preoccupation with the short‐ and long‐term outlook for international order. The case of Iraq shows that there is no valid alternative to an international order based on the principles of democracy, respect for freedom, human rights, solidarity and international law. However, the foundations of this order have to be strengthened through effective cooperation and commitment, both by the developed and the developing world. No country, small or large, can feign indifference, go it alone or afford the illusion that it will not be affected by the quality of the international order in the years to come. In this context, introduces a series of analyses that were presented at two international seminars, illustrating the complexity of international order.

This article reports a wide range of complementary or antinomic insights into the multi‐layered globalizing process, in an attempt to understand its causes and significance. Different perceptions and assessments of its far‐reaching consequences all over the world are picked out. The ambiguity of the high‐technology revolution with potential transition from material to time values is contrasted with the self‐destructive bases of self‐interest policies, and the flagrant defeat of the modern economy among those excluded from planetary society. While on the surface it seems to be only a change of relations between the finance sphere and the “real economy”, the more comprehensive and penetrating cognition of recent occurrences reveals a questioning of human values. New forms of social relationships will need to be imagined to define what human worth is.