Revisiting the Fundamental Change Debate

When considering the different scenarios for power transition that Professor Jackson mentions in his soliloquy, I couldn't help but think back to our debate back in Module 3 about whether or not the international can be fundamentally remade. Looking back, I took the position of "No, it is not possible". However, after listening to the lecture from this Module I would say that yes, in fact it can be remade.

We currently are in a hegemonic institutional scenario. The United States is the global hegemony and has set up institutions that reinforce its power. When forecasting scenarios for the fall of the U.S., if we were to find ourselves in a constitutional moment or a human project scenario, I would argue this would constitute a change of the international. Both of these scenarios would reflect a fundamental change to the behavior of states and actors in the international.

If fundamental change were not possible, once the U.S. falls there would be a power struggle that ensues and the strongest states would survive. Under the constitutional moment scenario, this would not be the case. Instead, this scenario forecasts that states would codify new rules and norms as part of a new global order. This doesn't rule out power politics entirely, but it does indicate that states are attuned to each other and may have somewhat permeable boundaries. There is some general agreement that states will work together on some level. The traditional view of the international has states in rigid impermeable and autonomous positions and they only participate in the current system because it is in their interest. If the U.S. were to fall and the system breaks, it would no longer be in the state's interest to work together so anarchy would ensue. A constitutional moment would signify a fundamental change.

The human project scenario would also be a indicator that there has been fundamental change in the international. This scenario forecasts some grave global threat will unite all actors to fight against the threat. When we were having the debate, it was this very scenario that most of us on the Con side of the argument said would be required in order to provoke a fundamental change in the international. If we see this human project scenario play out, that means that we have been attacked by aliens and not only have the rules of the game been changed, but the game itself is entirely different.

The fundamental change question is still very difficult and I waver back and forth. However, where a few weeks back I was leaning towards the "not possible" side of the debate, I have since shifted over more towards the "it is possible" side. I think a constitutional moment scenario is a very real possibility in the event the U.S. were to lose it's position as the premier global hegemony. This scenario requires actors to be more attuned and have more permeable borders and therefore and this would in fact qualify as a change in the international.