Ideological Transitions In The New World Order

Ideological transitions in the new World Order

The study of thought currents serves to identify the principles that govern the political, social and cultural behavior of the various factors immersed in the international system in a specific historical period;It is in that sense the most relevant milestones will be examined from the last decade of the twentieth century to contemporaneity, to determine ideological transitions in the new world order.

At the beginning of the 90s, the conflict between the antagonistic blocks witnessed its imminent end;The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) carried structural problems so deep that despite the implementation of reforms (Perestroika and Glasnot) the collapsed system. It is in this way that after the signing of the Belavezha Treaty in 1991 the USSR was dissolved. Therefore, the ideological confrontation between capitalism and communism between rival superpowers is terminated in the period after World War II, briefly positioning as the only superpower to the United States and, therefore, would also mark a victory of capitalism coup To Western Democracy.

Samuel Huntington believes that the most appropriate term to define the new dynamics of the international order, is the uni-multipolar system with the United States leading as superpower and multiple powers that, due to its importance and recognized geopolitical influence, become unquestionable factors of politics International (the European Union, Japan, China, Russia and India, Israel, Iraq); In the same way, new emerging powers are incorporated that have managed to position themselves in the system obtaining an increase in their influence and power, making them indispensable to achieve consensus and execute international policies (Brazil, South Africa, Iran, Turkey and Indonesia) Indonesia).

All this becoming has given way to the "beginning of a new historical period where international relations are characterized by the confrontation and the emergence of new rules of exchange and pressure between states, societies and interest groups" . According to Silvia Marcú the types of conflict in this framework of uncertainty:

• Ethnic conflicts;Cases such as Georgia, North and South Ossetia, Chehenia, Transnistria, Nagorno-Karabaj (these last two refers as ‘frozen conflicts’).
• Conflicts for energy and economic resources;They are mainly concentrated in the Black Sea and Caspian Sea, at the same time, the presence of external factors to the ex -Soviet spectrum such as the United States stands out.
• Conflicts for human rights violations;the manifestation of political instability within the former Soviet republics and terrorist actions in Central Asia.
• Conflicts linked to borders of countries outside Soviet space;relative to drug trafficking and smuggling and irregular migration.

Another important milestone to highlight is the securitization of the international agenda after the terrorist attack on 11/9 developed in the World Trade Center (2001), G.W.Bush legitimizes the implementation of the neoconservative project of the Republican Party unilaterally imposing a preventive war policy, thus justifying the war against the states of the "Axis of Evil", in the first instance fighting against Afghanistan under the "Durable Freedom Operation" and then withInfounded justifications before the UN, the war against Iraq in the "Operation Libertad Iraquí" for alleged possession of nuclear weapons. To the extent that the terrorist threat establishes the primacy of the order and security of the State about a concern for civil freedoms and individual rights, it may be associated with a drift to conservatism and erosion of liberal sensibilities.

At present, the configuration of the world order depends on more factors, not only on the powers that must or can cooperate, but on new factors and agents, on a broader framework in matters related to the sources of power, their exercise and the centersof decision that have world impacts.