Worrisome shift: Changing dynamics in global interactions causing concern

by Ben Sokhean
September 5, 2024

The shifting dynamics in the role superpowers play in ensuring world order, has academics, scholars, researchers, and government officials expressing concern that instability, caused by disregard for multilateralism or global cooperation, could have dire consequences including even nuclear war.

The concerns were raised yesterday at the Third International Relations Forum (IR Forum), under the theme “Changing Global Order and the Role of Superpowers for Global Peace, Security, and Prosperity,” which was organised by the Royal Academy of Cambodia’s (RAC) International Relations Institute of Cambodia (IRIC), in cooperation with and funded by the German political think tank Konrad Adenauer Stiftung (KAS).

In his opening remarks, Kin Phea, Director-General at the RCA’s International Relations Institute of Cambodia (IRIC), highlighted that the world was undergoing a period of significant geopolitical change where old, new, and other emerging actors are competing for roles in regional and global affairs.

He noted that the US-led order, established after World War II, is being questioned, and the rise of new powers and influential non-state actors is shifting global dynamics.

“This has led to widespread dissatisfaction with globalisation, not only in the US but also in many Western countries, resulting in increased instability and potential conflicts,” he said.

“The prospect of a war breaking out between two or more of the major powers, something that was generally considered to be reasonably improbable just a few years ago, is no longer unimaginable. The world will become more unstable and dangerous if the practice of multilateralism is replaced by narrow, nationalistic approaches,” he added.

The most compelling dynamic at present is the ongoing conflict between Ukraine and Russia and the war between Israel and Hamas. These events have underscored the fragile state of global geopolitics, affecting global food, energy, and security. The bolstering of external military support by NATO to Ukraine has prompted fear of nuclear confrontation and demonstrates to the world what other simmering global hot spots could lapse into if they remain unchecked, he added.

(L to R): Raimund Weiss, Associate Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science at Paragon International University; Un Kheang, Secretary of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation; Ka Mathul, Deputy Director General of the International Relations Institute of Cambodia, Royal Academy of Cambodia; and moderator Jason Chumtong, Country Director of Konrad Adenauer Stiftung in Cambodia. KT/Chor Sokunthea

Phea also highlighted that despite the US support being crucial to the geopolitical challenges faced by Europe, EU Member States appear divided on the extent to which they should follow US foreign policy postures with respect to the Indo-Pacific region, particularly those aimed at containing China.

“While France is seeking to play an independent role in the Indo-Pacific Region, middle powers such as Japan and Australia have continued to be measured in their responses for fear of disrupting trade flows and escalating tensions within the region,” he said.

According to Phea, global geopolitics is in a fragile and increasingly tense situation. Rivalries between superpowers, and the division and struggle between the trends of multipolar-globalisation and unipolar protectionism, have made the future global order more complex and difficult to assess. Furthermore, such a trend could lead to a shift towards de-globalisation, with regionalisation becoming a new trend.

However, the P5 superpowers, emerging and middle powers, and other regional groupings play an important role in the global order, peace, stability, and prosperity. Their decisions will both positively and negatively impact the global economy, trade, and security, as well as diplomatic phenomena, leaving developing countries.

Yesterday’s forum featured three plenary sessions where academics, scholars, researchers, and government officials discussed a wide range of world order issues.

The first session on “New World: Rivalry between Superpowers” examined the current geopolitical landscape and the competition between the US and China, including economic competition, military posturing, influence on global governance, technological leadership, and ideological differences.

The second session, “The Tension in Europe and the Middle East,” focused on the tensions in Europe and the Middle East, including the Ukraine conflict and Middle East escalations. These tensions are not confined to these regions but are part of a larger global picture.

The final session, “Role of Superpowers in Promoting a Harmonious World,” analysed the role of superpowers in fostering a harmonious world through diplomatic efforts and conflict resolution.

Addressing the first session, Un Kheang, Secretary of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, highlighted the critical issue of national debt management, drawing comparisons between Cambodia’s approach and the challenges faced by other nations.

He emphasised the importance of responsible utilisation of loans and challenged the simplistic narrative of “debt trap” diplomacy often associated with Chinese lending practices.

Reflecting on the situation in Sri Lanka, Kheang noted, “When the loan became mature, the Sri Lankan government could not repay those loans. So they went to China asking for loans so that they could cover their debt.”

This scenario, he suggested, underscores the importance of how a country manages the loans it receives, whether from multilateral institutions or bilateral agreements.

Kheang was quick to point out that Cambodia has been cautious in its approach. “The Cambodian government has been very careful with how they use the loans that they get from bilateral and multilateral institutions,” he added.

He acknowledged the potential risks associated with mismanaged loans but emphasised that, with proper utilisation and planning, these loans can significantly contribute to economic development.

Citing the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB), Kheang highlighted that both institutions have consistently reported that Cambodia’s debt levels are sound and not in a situation of debt stress. He praised Cambodia’s focus on infrastructure development, noting that while this is a positive use of loans, it must be part of a broader strategic plan.

“Infrastructure development alone is not sufficient in order to utilise loans that we get from other countries,” he added, stressing the need for comprehensive strategies that integrate such developments into global value chains.

Kheang also took the opportunity to challenge the widely held belief that China’s lending practices are intended to create “debt traps” in other countries. “It is a mistake to assume that China has the intention to promote debt traps in other countries,” he argued, calling the notion “too simplistic.”

He suggested that the issue is multi-dimensional and depends heavily on the internal economic management and investment strategies of the recipient countries.

In addition, Kheang underlined the concept of “multilateralism” and how great powers utilise multilateralism to advance their political, security, and economic interests.

He noted that it encompasses traditional security issues, such as peace and international order, but also non-traditional issues, such as climate change, nuclear proliferation, and humanitarian issues, such as refugees.

“So when we look at the notion of multilateralism, it seems to be a benign concept. And actions promoted by multilateral arrangements seem to be neutral in the sense that they’re trying to promote the common good,” he said, citing historical experiences that show big powers often use multilateral institutions.

He said that multilateral arrangements emerged following World War II, during which the United States was the most powerful country because it escaped the war with no disruptions to its economy and infrastructure.

Kheang discussed China’s rise since the late 1970s when it liberalised its economy and joined the World Trade Organization (WTO).

“China’s economy has risen exponentially, emerging from one of the most backward economies in the world into the world’s second most powerful economy. And by various measures, China could actually surpass the United States in terms of GDP,” he said.

According to Kheang, China’s strategy involves not only working within current multilateral frameworks but also creating alternative institutions, such as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), to rival those established by Western powers.

He also touched on the response from the United States and its allies, who are working to contain China’s influence through the creation of new multilateral institutions and initiatives. This geopolitical competition, Kheang suggested, is leading to a more multipolar world, where power is distributed among several regional powers, including the United States, China, Russia, and the European Union.

For his part in the same session, Raimund Weiss, Associate Professor and Dean of the Faculty of Economics and Administrative Science of the Paragon International University highlighted the significant shift in the international economic order, largely influenced by China’s rise as an economic powerhouse.

“We talked a lot about the international economic order, which may be shifting more. And you see more changes and more challenges coming from China,” he stated, acknowledging the transformative impact China has had on global economics.

However, when it comes to international security, Weiss pointed out a notable continuity, with the current global security order largely remaining intact.

He emphasised that despite the ongoing war in Ukraine, which has seen Russia challenge this order, China has remained within the established framework. “China is very much within this order.

It has not explicitly condemned the invasion of Russia in Ukraine, but has also asked Russia to act with restraint,” he noted.

Weiss further elaborated on the complex relationship between the US and China, suggesting that the future of their relations—whether marked by rivalry or partnership—will significantly impact global stability. “At the end of the day, it’s about perceptions, trust, ideas, common visions developed by great powers which contribute to stability,” he remarked, underscoring the importance of diplomacy and trust in maintaining global peace.

Weiss also touched upon the lessons learned from the Cold War, drawing parallels between the US-China dynamic and historical US-Soviet relations. He suggested that the US’s military presence in the Asia-Pacific is crucial for maintaining balance and preventing conflict, akin to the balancing act that prevented a global war during the Cold War era.

As the global community navigates these complex relationships, Weiss expressed cautious optimism for the future, pointing to the importance of liberal institutions and multilateral forums, such as the upcoming COP 29, as platforms for dialogue and cooperation.