Global Perspective: New world order needed in face of China's rise

By Makoto Iokibe, Chancellor, University of Hyogo

For most of humankind's long history, the reality was that if disputes could not be resolved through negotiation, the final decision would be made by force through the "power politics" where the strong would win. Humanity has long lived in a world where the law of the jungle ruled.

This changed after the two world wars of the 20th century. Why? Ironically, it is because of the remarkable development of science, technology, and military means that humanity has acquired. The machine gun, which became the main weapon of World War I, had much higher killing power, and it was a terrible death trap for the young men who were to be the future of the world. Tanks and aircraft, which appeared as new weapons at the time, became the mainstay of World War II, targeting not only combatants, but also all civilians. Even nuclear weapons appeared.

The extreme advancement of such means of warfare made war irrational. Rationality is the balance between ends and means. The normal objectives of war are limited to territory, resources and interests, and it is the height of irrationality to kill large numbers of people to achieve them. Is there any war objective that should be launched at the risk of the destruction of the people?

In May 1919, the Paris Peace Conference was drawing to a close. At the Hotel Majestic in the French capital, likeminded scholars and specialists from the United Kingdom and the United States gathered, regretting that, contrary to the cause of "peace through justice and wisdom," the conference had ended in a violent outburst of retaliation against Germany. They agreed that there was nothing they could do about it except to prepare for the next peace conference so that they would not repeat the mistake, and decided to promote the study of international affairs. They were subsequently established the Royal Institute of International Affairs in London and the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. This was the starting point for postwar planning during World War II.

During World War II, the U.S. created two new ways of dealing with the postwar order: the United Nations system and the free trade system.

Under the U.N. system, the use of force other than for self-defense was prohibited. Even powerful nations were forbidden from invading other nations. Small and medium-sized countries were also guaranteed their existence. Five "policemen" -- the five permanent members of the Security Council -- were appointed to manage global security. As long as they could cooperate, the U.N. system was not a bad one. Human history took a step away from the law of the jungle.

The free trade system, on the other hand, is a product of wisdom. Germany and Japan flashed their swords to obtain resources. Even if both countries were crushed, the next status quo-breaker would emerge if there were no system to share resources and markets. Representatives from the U.S., U.K. and other countries gathered in the mountains of Bretton Woods to discuss such apparatus for a world-wide free trade like the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. Supported by this system, the world market economy expanded for a long time after the war, enabling the postwar reconstruction of Western Europe and Japan, and later, the economic breakthrough of China.

The postwar order after World War II not only constrained war, but also provided the apparatus that enabled countries to develop peacefully through their economies. It was an admirable change rarely seen in the history of mankind.

What about the U.N. system? During the Cold War, when the U.S. and the Soviet Union were at odds with each other, it was difficult for the five "policemen" to cooperate, but they recognized the nuclear age's threat of "mutually assured destruction" and managed to avoid an all-out war between the two camps. The attempts of North Korea, Iraq and other countries to seek regional hegemony were controlled and order was maintained by U.N. forces or coalition forces of willing countries based on U.N. resolutions

Now comes the Russian invasion of Ukraine. This is the first time in the 77 years since the end of World War II that a "policeman" who is supposed to be in charge of the world's security has invaded a neighboring country, and it is an astonishing event that seems to have dislocated the joints of the times. Will history return to the jungle age?

When the invasion of Ukraine began, three surprising things became apparent: First, the military forces of Russia, a military powerhouse, were not well trained. Second, the Ukrainian side was highly motivated to fight. Third, the U.S. and Europe, which had been at odds with each other for so long under former U.S. President Donald Trump, came together, and Japan joined them in imposing strict sanctions against Russia.

As a result, two fronts are currently being pursued simultaneously. One is the battlefield in Ukraine and the other is the economic front between Russia and the U.S., Europe and Japan.

Russia has failed to capture the Ukrainian capital city of Kyiv and establish a puppet state, but it still occupies about 20% of Ukraine's territory. Both sides realize that their achievements on the battlefield will define their postwar border, and thus they are unable to end the war.

The other front being fought with economic sanctions is no less important. The people of Russia as an imperial giant want a strong government. President Putin is a strong leader, but how far will he go under international sanctions? The countries sanctioning Russia are also suffering from rising energy and food prices. Europe may scream of hardship and loosen sanctions before Russia does. If that happens, Russia's aggression will be rewarded, and the joints of the times will truly be dislocated.

The impact of this on China is worrisome. China, sympathetic to Russia, has managed a certain distance from Russia in view of the severe sanctions against Russia by developed countries, so that China is free from similar sanctions. In the past, the road to World War II became unstoppable as Japan and Germany moved in unison. If China were to force the unification of Taiwan and seize the Senkaku Islands, the post-World War II order would collapse in its entirety, and perhaps World War III would become inevitable.

Russia, North Korea and China are countries that want to change the status quo through the use of force, and they are sharpening their swords, waiting for an opportunity to use them. The opportunity is the moment when their adversaries are less powerful and there is no international intervention. China has already established its superiority over the U.S. and Japan in East Asian waters through its massive military buildup over the past 30 years since the end of the Cold War. However, in terms of overall military power, including intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched missiles, the U.S. still has an advantage over China. It is essential that China not harbor the illusion that it can win a war now due to its regional superiority over the U.S. and Japan. It is imperative that Japan and the U.S. make urgent efforts to neutralize China's unilateral dominance in the area of intermediate-range missiles.

As China's economic and military power grows stronger, will Japan be able to rebuild a relationship with China without an invasion? It is essential to hasten the preparation of force, strengthen international solidarity and talk with China. Ultimately, the challenge is to create a new world order that surpasses that of the World War II era.

Profile: Makoto Iokibe

Born in 1943, Iokibe graduated from Kyoto University, specializing in Japanese political and diplomatic history. After serving as a visiting scholar at Harvard University, a professor at Kobe University and president of the National Defense Academy, he has served as chancellor of the University of Hyogo since 2018. Iokibe also sits on the government's reconstruction design council as its chair following the Great East Japan Earthquake. He is chairman of the Asia Pacific Prize selection committee.)