‘Patriot’ games? Visions of a post-liberal international order and how to keep peace

Declaring the so-called Liberal International Order, and Multilateralism in general, obsolete has become fashionable after the Russian invasion of Crimea and Eastern Ukraine in 2014. Among others, Russian and American leaders have emphasized competition and the uncompromising quest for the national interest as the basic and natural elements of inter-state relations. This worldview is reflected within societies throughout the world in populist nationalist movements and smacks of ‘strongman politics’ with its undertones of toxic masculinity, in which the only check against outright conflict is the balance of power.This worldview is, clearly, bad news for small states. Alternatives such as Xi Jinping’s ‘Community for the Shared Future of Mankind’ would also, at closer look, seem to refer back to the primacy of national sovereignty – in this case that of one particular state, China. Instead, small states with open economies such as Finland would prioritize strengthening multilateral cooperation and the rules-based international order. Adapting the present international order rather than abandoning it wholesale is key to overcoming these challenges. That adaptation should be driven by a constructive critique of the current state of affairs. But we also need to look critically at the ‘brave new worlds’ that populists and strongmen are promoting. An international order based on the balance of power and a search for absolute national sovereignty will rob us of the ability to overcome global threats as well as to seize opportunities provided by global civil society activism and scientific innovations.