CC BY
0
GLOBAL SOCIETY
Tian Jiaxin
Master's Student, School of International and Public Affairs Jilin University
tianjx21@mails.jlu.edu.cn
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE TRANSFORMATION IN THE FACE OF DECLINING US HEGEMONY
Abstract: In recent years, US society has experienced a widening gap between rich and poor, serious political polarization, and difficulties in reconciling the contradictions of various domestic interest groups. US foreign policy has also become more conservative, uniting allies to intensify its confrontations with non-Western emerging countries. US hegemony is on the decline. The decline of US hegemony has had a huge impact on the international order and the pattern of global governance, with an insufficient supply of international public goods and a deficit in global governance. In order to respond to the decline of US hegemony and profound changes unseen in a century, the international community should take a more proactive approach to win-win cooperation: Promote global governance system reform, take the country as the main body to carry out international cooperation and provide public goods to the international community; Promote global governance institution reform, Improve and innovate institutions in different areas in order to enhance the authority and legitimacy of global governance; Lead a transformation of global governance concept, Actively develop partnerships and promote multipolarity in international relations.
Keywords: decline of hegemony, US hegemony, governance deficit, global governance, public goods provision, Non-Western countries
On 7 February 2023, US President Joe Biden delivers his annual State of the Union address to Congress. In his speech, Biden summed up the current US "We're the only country that has emerged from every crisis we've ever entered stronger than we got into it." On the domestic level, the economy is booming, COVID had shut down, and American democracy remains unbroken. On the international level, Biden referred to "Putin's invasion" and "work with China under the premise of protecting national sovereignty". Meanwhile, Biden indicated that the US will lead its allies to actively participate in global governance in the future, "America is rallying the world to meet those challenges, from climate to global health to food insecurity to terrorism to territorial aggression." The presentation was a strong demonstration of American welfare and American responsibility. And in fact, in recent years, in the face of the rise of emerging countries, the United States has been unable to solve various social problems such as racial divisions and the excessive gap between rich and poor. The United States has pursued values-based diplomacy internationally, creating small groups and cliques in an attempt to reduce transaction costs and assume fewer international obligations. US hegemony is on the decline. The United States has adopted a variety of approaches to continue to maintain its special position in the international community, and these actions have injected a great deal of uncertainty into the current international environment and posed a great challenge to the current global governance order.
1. The theoretical logic and realistic manifestations of the decline of American hegemony
1.1 Theoretical Logic
At the end of the 20th century, with the collapse of the Soviet Union following the dramatic changes in Eastern Europe, the United States gained hegemony as the sole superpower. In War and Change in World Politics, Robert Gilpin uses a realist approach to provide a more detailed analysis of Western history over the past 2,400 years or so, from the perspective of the changing cycles of
world history. Through his study of history, Gilpin has come to the conclusion that world history is an endless cycle, there will always be rising powers challenging the incumbents and this will evolve into wars of hegemony. "The end of one hegemonic war is the beginning of the growth, expansion and eventual decline of another hegemonic cycle." 1The United States developed its unipolar hegemony by a very fortuitous means--- The self-collapse of the Soviet East, not by invading other countries and inhibiting their development, thus conferring its own hegemonic status. The US sense of hegemony was gradually built up in the context of the bipolar confrontation of the Cold War, from this, the United States realised the limitations of the military in an era of globalisation and placed greater emphasis on economic instruments and the soft power that shapes the international system. Therefore, after the end of the Cold War, the US advocated so-called armed liberalism and used the big stick to maintain the world geopolitical and moral international order under US control.2 But in recent years, along with the pattern of international relations rising in the east and falling in the west, American hegemony is in decline. "The ''unipolar moment'' is over, and the Pax Americana—the era of American ascendancy in international politics that began in 1945—is fast winding down"3Although previous international relations theorists have made many observations about the decline of hegemony from the perspective of the hegemonic power, for instance, Gilpin proposed three recommendations for hegemonic powers to preserve their strength: Eliminate the causes of increased costs and weaken or destroy new challengers; Expand the circle of defence with more security but less cost; Reduce international obligations. Joseph Nye encouraged the hegemonic powers to pursue soft power, using international norms and regimes as instruments. In The Long Peace: Inquiries into the History of the Cold War, John Lewis Gaddis suggested, "The beginning of the decline of hegemony is a moment fraught with danger, before material power is exhausted and it manifests itself in erratic and even desperate behaviour."4 The United States is currently displaying this eccentric behaviour in various areas.
1.2 Realistic Manifestations In the area of economics and finance, Biden mentioned in his State of the Union address in the new year, "12 million new job more jobs created in two years than any president has created in four years." But the fact is that the employment climate and economic situation in the United States is not as rosy as President Biden has portrayed it to be. The current US economy is heavily indebted, Michael Hudson suggested in an interview with Xinhua, "The United States is heavily dependent on manufactured goods and raw materials from other countries, and its economy is deeply indebted, with high levels of indebtedness among American households, businesses and local governments. After de-industrialisation, the high standard of living and wealth of Americans is maintained to some extent by the hegemony of the US dollar."5 But foreign countries will not always pay for the US prosperity, and in January, the US national debt exceeded the US$31.4 trillion ceiling. If the US fails to raise its debt ceiling this June, the credibility of the US, and the dollar in the global economy, will be greatly damaged. If all countries lose confidence in the US dollar, the credibility and leadership and dominance of the US in the global economy, and indeed the global trading activities based on the dollar, will be damaged. As it turns out, many countries have already begun to "De-dollarisation". The US seizure of Russian foreign exchange after the escalation of the Ukraine crisis is a warning to the whole world that the US can seize the gold and foreign exchange reserves of any country that does not submit to US neoliberal policies. This has led some countries to abandon or reduce their dollar reserves and promote trade and investment
1 Gilpin, R. War and change in world politics; Cambridge University Press: 1981.
2 Гейдаров, Н. Идеология глобальной гегемонии США. Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Международные отношения 2008, 5-14.
3 Layne, C. This Time It's Real: The End of Unipolarity and the "Pax Americana". International Studies Quarterly 2012, 56, 203-213.
4 Gaddis, J.L. The Cold War, the long peace, and the future. Diplomatic History 1992, 16, 234-246.
5 Exclusive lnterview: Continued DecIine in DoIIar Hegemony Makes the U.S.Economy Worse-interview with
U.S.Economist Michael Hudson. Chinese Journal of Political Economics 2022, 191-192.
based on other currencies. If this continues, the pillar of financial hegemony on which the United States relies to maintain its hegemony will also face a substantial decline.
In the area of politics, in his State of the Union address for the new year, Biden mentioned, "Our democracy remains unbowed and unbroken." And ironically, during the speech, Republican lawmakers booed when Biden, without naming names, criticized a Republican for deliberately blocking negotiations to raise the debt ceiling. Taylor Marjorie Green, a right-wing Republican congresswoman backed by Trump, even called Biden a "liar" in public. On January 6, 2021, at the end of the US presidential election, Trump's supporters stormed Capitol Hill in an act that epitomized the inevitable polarization of American politics. This phenomenon has not been improved by the arrival of Biden in power. In November 2022, around the time of the US mid-term elections, both parties held essentially the same number of seats in both chambers, highlighting the torn and antagonistic nature of public opinion within the US. The polarisation of American politics is an irreversible trend. Regardless of who is president or a member of Congress, the political divide will only deepen further, not ease.
The United States is also continuing to tighten up on its foreign policy, reducing its foreign commitments. Last year, Biden gave his State of the Union address just six days after the outbreak of the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. At that time, he devoted a great deal of his speech to the topic. This year's speech, however, did not add up to more than two minutes on the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, and Biden did not give a specific commitment to continue to assist Ukraine. Faced with the decline of hegemony, the US is not psychologically prepared for this, but it is unable to continue to maintain its dominance in terms of capacity. In order to reduce the costs required to maintain hegemony, the US either had to abandon its pursuit of hegemony or intensify its suppression of emerging countries. Clearly the US has chosen the latter. Although Biden mentioned cooperation with China in his State of the Union speech, "I'm committed to work with China where we can advance American interests and benefit the world. But make no mistake about it: As we made clear last week, if China threatens our sovereignty, we will act to protect our country." But the fact is that this cooperation is still more in favour of competition. This competition is already taking place in the traditional areas of economics, politics and the military, while the US is also actively using its soft power to smear China in the arena of international public opinion. In early February this year, a Chinese civilian balloon flew into the US state of Montana due to the influence of westerly winds. China was the first to state that the presence of the balloon in the US was an accident and that there was no security threat. But the US still sent F22s to shoot down what they saw as a "spy balloon", and at the same time made a big media splash accusing China of "threatening the territorial security of other countries and interfering in their internal affairs". The purpose of this behaviour is firstly to shape the external threat and ensure internal unity, and secondly to show muscle to allies that the US is still the centre of Western democracy.
2. Impact of the decline of US hegemony on global governance
According to realist theory, the decline of one hegemonic power means the rise of another, but in fact the world today is moving in a more multipolar direction. "a multipolar world will eventually move in the direction of global state formation in which an alliance of powers cooperate to perform the functions of global governance formerly performed by the hegemon."1 But the decline of US hegemony has also inevitably had a negative impact on global governance and the process of globalisation in many ways.
2.1 Declining ability and willingness of the United States to provide international public goods, thereby creating a global governance deficit
Public goods are social infrastructure such as defence, diplomacy, policing, roads and bridges, public facilities such as road signs and lighthouses, etc. These public goods are non-
1 Chase-Dunn, C.; Kwon, R.; Lawrence, K.; Inoue, H. Last of the hegemons: US decline and global governance.
International Review of Modern Sociology 2011, 1-29.
segregated, non-competitive and non-exclusive. Because of the huge economic surplus in the international community, the hegemonic state is able to bear the huge costs of international public goods. In this process, the hegemon will gain the international community's acceptance of the international order it has constructed, while at the same time tolerating the "free-riding" behaviour of other countries. According to the marginal cost doctrine, over time, the more public goods are provided, the less the hegemon gains and the more it pays. Hegemony also becomes unstable once the marginal gains he derives from his international order diminish and fall short of offsetting the marginal costs of maintaining it. When hegemony is unstable, the hegemonic state cuts spending on the cost of public goods, resulting in an inadequate supply of public goods.
In October 2022, General Secretary Xi Jinping proposed at The 20th National Congress of the CPC, "The changes in the world, times and history are unfolding in an unprecedented way. The peace deficit, development deficit, security deficit and governance deficit are increasing. Human society is facing unprecedented challenges."1 The world is currently facing a major change unprecedented in a century, with the pattern of international relations "rising in the east and falling in the west" and a power shift in the international landscape. In order to alleviate the pressure from the transfer of power and to strengthen their competitive efforts with non-Western countries, both the Trump administration and the Biden administration have adopted a strategy of instrumentalising global governance.2 Although the two governments differed slightly in their specific approaches, in general they both reduced spending on public goods in order to preserve their own hegemony, thus creating a global governance deficit as a result. When it comes to the topic of global governance, the US often suppresses the legitimate claims of other countries in order to preserve its own dominance. Former US President Donald Trump's "America First" slogan and his "Withdraw or Threaten to Withdraw" policy seeks to reconstitute an international order in line with US interests. The US has frequently withdrawn from international organisations or international agreements such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Paris Climate Agreement, the World Trade Organisation, UNESCO and others. The current Biden administration has joined hands with Western countries to adopt economic sanctions and decoupling in various fields to cut the international industrial chain and supply chain and interfere with the process of global governance.3
2.2 The United States has transformed the current international order in order to maintain its hegemony and seek legitimacy for a new world hegemony, which in turn has made international cooperation increasingly difficult.
In recent years global governance has witnessed a new wave of complex multilateralism, shaped by the subjectivity of the hegemonic powers. "Toward achieving the strategic goal of maintaining hegemony, a hegemonic country uses issue securitization as an approach ideological consensus as an excuse to win over allies, adopts a 'decoupling' policy in key technology fields, builds exclusive 'small cliques', or sets high-level rules, and impose tailor-made restrictive rule systems for rising countries to "confine" the development space of these countries."4 Under the wave of global governance complex multilateralism, the international order is becoming increasingly exclusive and ideologically confrontational. Exclusivity means excluding countries that pose a threat to hegemonic powers from the current international order. After the Biden administration took office, eager to repair the alliances damaged by the Trump administration, the US has shown a more pronounced tendency to expand on alliance issues, expanding traditional
1 Jinping, X. Holding high the great banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics and working together to build a socialist modern country in an all-round way. 2022-10-26 p. 001.
2 Lin, R.; Bo, P. GIobaI Development lnitiative:The Chinese Solution to the lmbalance between Supply and Demand of Global Development Public Goods. Journal of Latin American Studies 2022, 44, 52-67+155-156.
3 Hongjun, Y.; Changzheng, D.; Zhicheng, W.; Feng, Z.; Canrong, J.; Changhe, S. Deeply study and implement the spirit of the 20th CPC National Congress: respond to the changes of the world with China's plan. International Forum, 1-31, doi:10.13549/j.cnki.cn11-3959/d.2023.01.001.
4 Lin, R.; Siyu, M. Hegemonic Maintenance, Compex Multilateralism, and the Crisis of Global Governance Order. Foreign Affairs Review 2022, 39, 53-77+53-54, doi:10.13569/j.cnki.far.2022.05.053.
military alliances into broad issue-based alliances around various global governance issues, while gradually increasing the number of alliance targets.1 For example, the current G7 has been resurrected and is very active. Particularly in some emerging areas, such as the US suppression of China in 5G technology and attempts to create a technological alliance of Western countries. At the same time, the US has also adopted an ideologisation of the issue, with the hegemonic powers drawing ideological boundaries, pulling together Western allies to act as a group and establishing a "club of Western developed countries" to shorten the sharing of costs and distribution of benefits, reducing the cost of action and increasing the efficiency of action for the hegemonic patronage.
Since the end of the Cold War, the United States has hoped to maintain and strengthen its privileged position as leader of the international community, using military alliances and intergovernmental international organisations as tools to achieve this goal and to induce less powerful countries to cooperate with the United States, thus ensuring the legitimacy of American hegemony and American influence. But in recent years, with the decline of US hegemony, the US has begun to move towards more flexible and less institutionalised forms of engagement in international cooperation, both to reduce the cost burden of global leadership and to give a more meaningful role to some of the lesser powers, thus ensuring that they can support the US in its privileged position in the international community.2 These American actions have, to some extent, exacerbated the current crisis of global governance deficit and difficulties in international cooperation.
2.3 The US will take more aggressive measures to maintain its hegemony, and the international community will become more insecure and confrontational.
The outbreak and continuation of the Russian-Uzbekistan conflict is precisely due to the continuous efforts of the United States pour oil on a fire between the two sides for slowing down the decline of hegemony. US foreign policy places great importance on the influence of geopolitical doctrines. One of its representatives, Nicholas Spackmann, emphasised the role of the periphery, also known as the coastal zone. Halford Mackinder emphasised the strategic role of Eastern Europe. "Whoever rules Eastern Europe rules the Heartland, whoever dominates the Heartland rules the World Island, and whoever rules the World Island controls the whole world." Ukraine is in such a geopolitically important zone linking Europe and Asia. After the end of the Cold War, the United States actively pursued the expansion of NATO to the east, spreading "Russian fear" in Eastern Europe and squeezing Russia's geo-existence space. This culminated in a violent conflict between Russia and Ukraine in February 2022. The Russian-Ukrainian conflict could have been resolved in a more peaceful way, but the US has used the Russian-Ukrainian military conflict to cut Russian-European relations, trying to use this military conflict to militarily bring European countries more firmly under the domination of US hegemony.3 The US is also trying to use the Russia-Ukraine conflict to isolate Russia and China and create an atmosphere of insecurity in the international community. "The US politicians and media have created a so-called 'Russia-China' axis, which ties China and Russia together. NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg even declared that NATO strategy needs to reimagine the challenge of China's rise."4 Such a context poses great challenges for global security governance. On 8 February 2022, the United Nations Development Programme released its Special Report on Human Security, pointing out that global development progress does
1 Lin, R.; Haiqi, Z. Weak Alliance Expansion and the Global Governance Order. Social Sciences Digest 2022, 76-78.
2 Богданов, А.Н. Факторы легитимности американской гегемонии: меняющаяся роль коалиций и партнерств.
Вестник Московского университета. Серия 25. Международные отношения и мировая политика 2022, 14, 732.
3 Yu, R.L. Peace and Development: Reflections on the Theme of the Times against the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict.
World Socialism Studies 2022, 7, 89-95+119-120.
4 Weixing, H. Russia—UkraineConflict, Great Power Competition and the Evolution of the World Geopolitical Pattern—From the Perspective of Geopolitics. Asia-Pacific Security and Maritime Affairs 2022, 12-28+12, doi:10.19780/j.cnki.ytaq.2022.4.2.
not automatically bring people greater security and that six out of seven people worldwide are plagued by insecurity, human security has fallen to an all-time low.
3. Where should global governance go in the face of declining US hegemony?
On 24 August 2021, during a telephone conversation with the Dutch Foreign Minister, The Member of Political Bureau of the CPC Central Committee, The Director of Office of Foreign Affairs of the CPC Central Committee, Wang Yi mentioned, "In the face of an international situation full of uncertainties, all countries should adhere to genuine multilateralism, especially by jointly safeguarding the international system with the United Nations at its core, and stopping the world from moving towards division."1 The decline of US hegemony has had some negative impact on global governance, but the process of globalisation is irreversible. For the emerging countries, represented by China and Russia, we should continue to adhere to the existing UN system and global governance system, and promote the change of the existing global governance system to the right track.
Firstly, promote global governance system reform, take the country as the main body to carry out international cooperation and provide public goods to the international community. In his keynote address at the fifth meeting of BRICS leaders, Xi Jinping proposed, "No matter how the global governance system changes, we must actively participate, play a constructive role, promote the international order in a more just and reasonable direction, and provide institutional safeguards for world peace and stability." In order to effectively respond to the changes in global governance, the western countries led by the United States should not adopt the method of "beggar-thy-neighbour" to transfer contradictions abroad. Global governance should be dominated by sovereign states, each of which should take care of its own domestic affairs. At the same time, all major countries should actively cooperate to jointly provide public goods to the international community. According to Keoghan, non-hegemonic cooperation is difficult, but not unattainable as there are also complementary interests between countries. "No one but the sovereign state can provide public goods. The role of sovereignty is reinforced, the state rejects external domination and its freedom to choose its political and cultural path, its development model and its foreign policy orientation is increasingly urgent."2
Secondly, promote global governance institution reform, Improve and innovate institutions in different areas in order to enhance the authority and legitimacy of global governance. The US-led global governance mechanisms have become increasingly unsuited to the development demands of the international community. The United States' use of global governance mechanisms for its own interests has also greatly weakened the authority and legitimacy of these mechanisms. In the area of security, non-Western countries should "Firmly uphold the basic norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, the authority and status of the United Nations, and the core role of the United Nations in international affairs."3Drive UN reform towards greater equity. In the economic field, non-Western countries should make full use of multilateral economic cooperation organizations such as the World Bank, the World Monetary Fund and the Asian Development Bank to cooperate. For example, Russia has promoted the formation of new development finance institutions and development funds within the framework of the BRICS mechanism as a way to improve the proxy organization for global economic governance.
Lastly, lead a transformation of global governance concept, actively develop partnerships and promote multipolarity in international relations. The greatest resistance to achieving a
1 Wang Yi Holds a Telephone Talk with Foreign Minister Kager of the Netherlands. Available online: https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/web/gjhdq_676201/gj_676203/oz_678770/1206_679234/xgxw_679240/202108/t20210824 9182941.shtml (accessed on February 17th).
2 Караганов, С.А.; Суслов, Д.В. После коронавируса: новые идеи для внешней политики. Россия в глобальной политике 2020, 18, 170-182.
3 Jinping, X. Xi Jinping on governance. National new bibliography 2014, 6-7.
multipolar world is the US's defence of a unipolar world and global hegemony.1 Under these conditions, it is important to promote the values of all humanity in the world, to emphasize the equal exchange of civilizations, and not to use the wealth, size, power or weakness of countries as criteria for participation in global governance. Furthermore, countries should uphold the principle of seeking common ground while reserving differences, constantly seeking convergence of interests, expanding consensus on governance, and resolving conflicting interests and perceptions.
With the United States' domestic governance capacity and international leadership in decline, US hegemony is in decline. The United States began to abdicate its global obligations in many areas and to reduce the supply of international public goods. The United States turned to use alliance relations to suppress non-western countries. In the face of these challenges, non-Western countries should continue to participate actively in the transformation of global governance, and shape a global governance order that is inclusive rather than exclusive, versatile rather than isolated from each other. At the same time non-Western countries should focus on infrastructure research and development to ensure that the industrial chain and supply chain can function properly in the absence of the hegemon. In this way, the crisis of global governance under the decline of US hegemony can be resolved.
References:
1. Gilpin, R. War and change in world politics; Cambridge University Press: 1981.
2. Гейдаров, Н. Идеология глобальной гегемонии США. Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Международные отношения 2008, 5-14.
3. Layne, C. This Time It's Real: The End of Unipolarity and the "Pax Americana". International Studies Quarterly 2012, 56, 203-213.
4. Gaddis, J.L. The Cold War, the long peace, and the future. Diplomatic History 1992, 16, 234-246.
5. Exclusive lnterview: Continued Decline in Dollar Hegemony Makes the U.S.Economy Worse - interview with U.S.Economist Michael Hudson. Chinese Journal of Political Economics 2022, 191-192.
6. Chase-Dunn, C.; Kwon, R.; Lawrence, K.; Inoue, H. Last of the hegemons: US decline and global governance. International Review of Modern Sociology 2011, 1-29.
7. Jinping, X. Holding high the great banner of socialism with Chinese characteristics and working together to build a socialist modern country in an all-round way. 2022-10-26 p. 001.
8. Lin, R.; Bo, P. Global Development lnitiative:The Chinese Solution to the lmbalance between Supply and Demand of Global Development Public Goods. Journal of Latin American Studies 2022, 44, 52-67+155-156.
9. Hongjun, Y.; Changzheng, D.; Zhicheng, W.; Feng, Z.; Canrong, J.; Changhe, S. Deeply study and implement the spirit of the 20th CPC National Congress: respond to the changes of the world with China's plan. International Forum, 1-31, doi:10.13549/j.cnki.cn11-3959/d.2023.01.001.
10. Lin, R.; Siyu, M. Hegemonic Maintenance, Compex Multilateralism, and the Crisis of Global Governance Order. Foreign Affairs Review 2022, 39, 53-77+53-54, doi: 10.13569/j .cnki.far.2022.05.053.
11. Lin, R; Haiqi, Z. Weak Alliance Expansion and the Global Governance Order. Social Sciences Digest 2022, 76-78.
12. Богданов, А.Н. Факторы легитимности американской гегемонии: меняющаяся роль коалиций и партнерств. Вестник Московского университета. Серия 25. Международные отношения и мировая политика 2022, 14, 7-32.
1 Путин В. Пленарное заседание Петербургского международного экономического форум. URL: http://kremlin.ru/misc/54667/videos/3509 (дата обращения 01.08. 2017)
103
13. Yu, R.L. Peace and Development: Reflections on the Theme of the Times against the Russian-Ukrainian Conflict. World Socialism Studies 2022, 7, 89-95+119-120.
14. Weixing, H. Russia—UkraineConflict, Great Power Competition and the Evolution of the World Geopolitical Pattern—From the Perspective of Geopolitics. Asia-Pacific Security and Maritime Affairs 2022, 12-28+12, doi:10.19780/j.cnki.ytaq.2022.4.2.
15. Wang Yi Holds a Telephone Talk with Foreign Minister Kager of the Netherlands. Available online: https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/web/gjhdq_676201/gi_676203/oz_678770/1206_679234/xgxw_679240/ 202108/t20210824_9182941.shtml (accessed on February 17th).
16. Караганов, С.А.; Суслов, Д.В. После коронавируса: новые идеи для внешней политики. Россия в глобальной политике 2020, 18, 170-182.
17. Jinping, X. Xi Jinping on governance. National new bibliography 2014, 6-7.
18. Путин, В. Пленарное заседание Петербургского международного экономического форума. URL: http://kremlin.ru/misc/54667/videos/3509 (дата обращения: 01.08. 2017).
ТРАНСФОРМАЦИЯ ГЛОБАЛЬНОГО УПРАВЛЕНИЯ В УСЛОВИЯХ ОСЛАБЛЕНИЯ
ГЕГЕМОНИИ США
Тянь Цзясинь
Магистрант, Институт международных и общественных отношений Цзилиньского университета
Аннотация: в последние годы американское общество столкнулось с увеличивающимся разрывом между богатыми и бедными, серьезной политической поляризацией и трудностями в примирении противоречий различных внутренних групп интересов. Внешняя политика США также стала более консервативной, объединив союзников для усиления конфронтации с незападными развивающимися странами. Гегемония США идет на спад. Закат гегемонии США оказал огромное влияние на международный порядок и модель глобального управления, вызвав недостаточное предложение международных общественных благ и дефицит глобального управления. Чтобы отреагировать на закат гегемонии США и глубокие изменения, невиданные за столетие, международное сообщество должно использовать более активный подход к взаимовыгодному сотрудничеству: продвигать реформу глобальной системы управления, рассматривать страну в качестве основного органа для осуществления международного сотрудничества и предоставления общественных благ международному сообществу; Содействовать реформе институтов глобального управления, совершенствовать и внедрять инновации в институты в различных областях в целях повышения авторитета и легитимности глобального управления; Возглавьте трансформацию концепции глобального управления, активно развивайте партнерские отношения и продвигайте многополярность в международных отношениях.
Ключевые слова: закат гегемонии, гегемония США, дефицит государственного управления, глобальное управление, обеспечение общественными благами, незападные страны
Для цитирования: Tian Jiaxin. Global governance transformation in the face of declining us hegemony// Архонт, 2022. № 6(33). С. 97-104.
