2. Irresponsible Stakeholders?
Issue
◦ The impact of the growth of powerful developing nations on
traditional geopolitics
◦ E.g.: Brazil, China, and India
3. 1. The Difficulty of Integration rising Powers
USA is faced to a strategic challenge: integration emerging powers
into international institutions
Emerging powers may be demand greater global influence
but they often oppose the political and economic ground rules
During the next 10 years, the U.S. will have to accommodate new
powers in reformed structures of global governance while
safeguarding the Western liberal order
4. 2. Testing Obama„s Ambitions
China as „responsible Stakeholder“, this principle extended by
Obama to all rising nations
National Security Strategy: integration emerging powers into world
order
Objective: manage global interdependence
Changing: today‟s international problems need to be resolved not
only by Western representatives
By giving emerging countries a greater stake, the Obama
administration is hoping to increase the legitimacy of existing
arrangements
bilateral dialogue with world‟s non-Western powers
5. 3. Multipolarity without Multilateralism
Global interdependence is increasing
But fundamental interests still collide and strategic rivalries persist
What if the new global order leads to an era of multipolarity
without multilateralism?
Cooperation does not mean there is no competition
Example - USA & China:
◦ U.S. objective: balance of power in East Asia & democracy
◦ China‟s objective: keep dominance in East Asia & communism
Example - China & India:
◦ increasing competition, especially at the border
Even if basic interests of established and emerging powers
align (terrorism, climate change…) the priorities can differ
6. 4. Compromise may come second
Different view on global governance
Emerging nations are intent on altering existing rules
They do not grant the U.S. the sole authority to define limits of
responsible sovereignty
Source of tension: limits of national sovereignty
Economic relations: all emerging players seek to have greater
weight in global governance, but not necessarily seek more global
governance
U.S. often insists of enforcement of international rules
Little insight is provided by the White House into what it can or
will do to persuade these powers to cooperate
7. 5. Power without Responisbility
Rising powers enjoy often privileges of power without assuming its
obligations, they prefer free-riding on the contributions of
established nations
They wrestle within conflicting identities
◦ they want to alleviate poverty, thus they resist global initiatives that
would hamper their domestic growth
Addressing global problems calls for meaningful cooperation, also
with non-democracies
8. 6. Change from within
The more important the institution, the more its powerful
members will resist diluting their authority within in
Example: China & Russia oppose allowing any new permanent
members to join US Security Council (no limitation of veto power
or extension that gives power to others)
Expansion of existing forums can also harm consensus: G-8 became
G-20, for sensitive security and political issues not the best
9. 7. A grand Bargain
The U.S. has no other choice but to rely on rising powers to help
address today‟s global challenge
Quick integration or incremental approach?
A multilateral cooperation within large groups will increasingly rest
on “minilateral” agreements
10. 8. Preservation through Cooperation
Biggest obstacle to integrate rising powers into the world order
may come from within the U.S.
Making room requires psychological adjustment, defined
touchstones have to be reevaluated
U.S. will have to become a more consistent exemplar of multilateral
cooperation
11. Findings
Outcome
◦ The emerging powers are often not content to observe traditions established in
the post- Second World War era
◦ Many problems have to be faced
◦ To maintain the liberal regimen the United States will be required to adopt a
policy of multilateral cooperation and diplomacy
