Essay: Haass’s prediction of a nonpolar international system

With the end of the cold war, there has been a lot of suggestions offered up to define the structure of the International System. From the bipolar system to the Unipolar system then a Multipolar system and now a Nonpolar system which has been postulated by the author and former director of policy planning for the department of state ambassador, Richard.N Haass predicts the that the characteristics of the 21st century is turning out to be a non-polar system, where the united states is joined by increasingly powerful states as well as centers with meaningful powers. He elaborates that in this century a number of non-state actors will also influence the behavior of major governments ‘from above by regional and global organizations, from below by militias and from the side by a variety of nongovernmental organizations and corporations (Haass, 2008).Haass’s article examines what non polarity is all about, how it materialized, its difference from other forms of international order, its consequences and how America should respond to its development.in this paper I will outline the major key points of Hass’s article and present his arguments. I will argue that the world is not becoming non polar and that the united states is not in decline and conclude by evaluating Haass’s article bringing in other theoretical insights into the debate.
Haass’s article examines the nature of Nonpolarity, he attempts to explore the implications of a nonpolar system. He proclaims that today’s world may appear to be multipolar but that is not so as he argues that nation states have lost their power and preeminence with the advent of non-state actors possessing meaningful power the world becoming less state centric which he argues to be the reason for the decline of the United states position and economic dominance in the world. However, his article attempts to contribute to the wider debate by giving Nonpolarity a place within International Relations discourse. Haass breaks down his article into four main parts the first part provides the reader with newer world order where he defines Nonpolarity and distinguishes it from other forms of international system, part 2 presents the reader with decline of America’s unipolar moment, part 3 examines the dangers of a nonpolar disorder and its implication and part 4 presents the reader with Haass’s recommendations as to how America should respond to its development.
Haass defines Nonpolarity as a world dominated not by one or two or even several states but rather by dozens of actors possessing and exercising various kinds of power(Haass,2008) He argues that the world today is becoming increasing nonpolar with no single power and becoming less state centric with the rise of non-state actors having meaning full powers, such as terrorist organisations, global media companies such as Cnn and the Bbc , Ngo’s  doctors without borders and so on although in his article haass doesn’t give an elaborate description of how the above mentioned constitute a threat to global security. However According to Robert Manning he asserts that in history at the moment there are different range of power and non-state actors impacting on particular issues differently which doesn’t necessarily mean there are no concentrations of power that can shape events and outcomes on different issues, he gives examples of the g20 on financial issues, the six party talks on north Korea, public private partnerships such as governments business Ngo’s taking initiatives like arranging affordable Hiv/Aids treatments and malaria pills to less developed countries, He further states that there are various issues which different actors bring their influence to bear on, and that even though nation states are eroded from above by multilateral arrangements and below by non-state actors such as those mentioned by Haass, Manning asserts that the state still remains the central actor in world affairs.The idea of a nonpolar world may be useful, however for bringing focus to the complexities of the international system, but it is off the mark if intended to characterize this historical period we are in(Manning, 2009).
Haass argues America is in decline, with the raise of many other power centers, and nation states, such as the Brics, the middle east, east Asia and so on. Though he recognizes Americas military strength he still takes for granted its primacy, these rising powers though may pose a challenge, do not pose a threat to the united states economic dominance, to support my argument authors like Ely rather and Thomas wright in their article America’s not in decline it’s on the rise. Asserts that America is recovering from the financial crisis whereas emerging powers are still experiencing troubles. Brazils growth rate has fallen from more than 7percent in 2010.currencies of brazil, India, Indonesia, south Africa, Iran and turkey are fragile and very vulnerable to high inflation, large deficits, low growth and a downturn in china and may soon face international financing problems, protests in brazil over wasteful government spending, Russia looks more authoritarian by the day, the Chinese communist party have been trying to crack down on journalist, academics and bloggers in an attempt to control the discontent that accompanies slower growth and painful economic reforms. The Brics, the shanghai cooperation organization and Ibsa continue to disappoint, the middle east will continue its painful and bloody revolution the Eu appears increasingly unable to move beyond protracted stagnation eroding its ability to play a constructive role in world affairs and still depends on the Us for military support. While at the same time the united states is experiencing a turnaround of fortunes as unemployment rate has fallen and its energy revolution poised to overtake Russia as the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas, The Us military is the most superior in terms of technologies and still remains the linchpin of the international community through its diplomacy, economic pressure and the spectre of military action(Ratner and Wright, 2013).Dorothy Grace Guerrero also asserts that despite impressive economic figures, it is misleading to think the rise of new powers like the Brics means that they will soon rule the world the way the united states has been doing. The Us is still the most powerful and that the rise of new powers does not necessarily mean that they are seeking to assume the hegemonic role of the Us.it is more likely that a multipolar world means that a new mix of leading countries will define the global political economy together with the united states as the lead (Guerrero, n.d.).
Hass inability to give an elaborate expansion for his initial proclamation, and not including scenario’s or case studies to support his argument for instance he made mention of al Jazeera, the Bbc and Cnn as powers but did not elaborate as to how and why they constitute a threat to the united states in a non-polar world. the author did not make any reference to his sources, or used any relevant source to back up his argument which made it very difficult. I made numerous research but writings on Nonpolarity are very uncommon, which shows that the debate on this topic is extremely limited, and leaves most of the article based on his theoretical ideologies and perspective.as a result the article at several points falls short of placing some of Haass’s argument into perspective, instead it acts as an article trying to convince the reader that we are in a non-polar world where as there has been little or no debate on the issue.If one was to take it upon one’s self to compare Haass’s points to an example they deemed fit,this may lead to a misinterpretation of his argument.
Although it is difficult to classify Haass into any IR school of thought Haass’s prediction of  nonpolar international system contributes to the wider debate in international relations, Haass suggestion that a nonpolar world will be dangerous is some worth true because in a world full of numerous of power centers with so many non-state actors possessing meaningful power and trying to assert their influence will be extremely violent, as it will be especially difficult to erect collective responses to regional and global challenges, it will also be difficult to make institutions work and the inability of states to reach agreement. The promotion of global integration and creating means to make possible and ensure the close and continuing collaboration of a core group of democracy loving nations should reduce the danger. Even readers who may not agree with the suggestions advised by Haass will surely learn from his illustrations of the growth and evolution that will likely shape the new international order that takes over the present multipolar world whether what emerges is Nonpolarity or disorder. Although as stated by Joseph Nye it is entirely not possible for this article or any other to foresee the future because there so many possible futures dependent on unpredictable scenarios and they play a huge role the further out one tries to look.