The new world order, version 2.0

2026-02-13 - 22:06

THERE have been many forms of order in the world, all introduced with the aim of bringing salvation, peace, and social stability. This historical process can be traced back to the Renaissance, a period when not only literature but human society itself underwent a profound transformation. The Renaissance foregrounded human rights and dignity, and humanism emerged as a guiding philosophy. This, in turn, gave rise to a civilizational consciousness that emphasized security, culture, respect, and honor, the values that were expected to be exercised wherever possible. The trajectory continued through the eighteenth-century Industrial Revolution and later through major global conflicts such as the First and Second World Wars. Institutions like the League of Nations and, eventually, the United Nations were established to safeguard peace and human rights. However, this apparent global consensus was disrupted abruptly by the events of September 11, 2001. The United States, perceiving itself as attacked and brutalized, introduced what it termed a “new world order.” In pursuit of restoring control and security, numerous wars were fought and several regimes were toppled. Yet war failed to resolve global conflicts. Instead, the new world order signified a shift from a bipolar world to a largely unipolar one. This development did not end there. The unipolar world order granted overt and covert powers not only to the United States but also to several other states, which began exercising power to settle old scores driven by national interests, whims, and ideological attitudes. For instance, India attempted, though unsuccessfully, to conduct preemptive strikes against Pakistan. Similarly, the United States, Russia, and other powerful nations adopted coercive strategies to suppress opponents in pursuit of strategic objectives. As a consequence, human rights became one of the most exploited casualties of global politics. No version of the new world order was able to guarantee the protection of human rights. From Palestine to Ukraine, from Kashmir to many other regions, it was once again ordinary human beings who suffered the most. Rather than stability, the new world order brought increased poverty, hunger, and destitution across large parts of the globe. More recently, the leadership of the United States has promoted yet another version of global order, often described as “strongman politics.” This approach assumes that nations and territories entrusted to leaders through democratic votes are personal domains to be guarded, expanded, and exploited at will. Examples include aggressive policies toward Venezuela and discussions surrounding the acquisition of Greenland. Observing such developments, countries like China and Russia have also sought to reclaim lost territories and reassert their influence. At the same time, the world has begun to recognize that the United States is no longer the sole superpower. Several Asian, African, and other emerging economies have gained global importance by strengthening their economies, investing in technology, and mobilizing human capital. However, this newfound strength has often enabled leaders to exercise power for personal or national gain without adequate regard for human rights, culture, or civilization. Consequently, the new world order has produced more disorder than harmony. Moreover, two transformative phenomena now threaten both traditional order and disorder imposed by political elites and powerful states: environmental degradation and the advent of artificial intelligence. Environmental crisis affect every region of the world indiscriminately, regardless of power or wealth. Although poorer populations suffer disproportionately, even the most powerful nations cannot escape long-term consequences. Artificial intelligence represents a second major revolution. Contrary to earlier assumptions that technology would only benefit elites, AI is increasingly accessible to ordinary people. Many developing countries are generating employment and economic opportunities through AI-driven innovation. Technology has begun to mitigate certain global challenges, yet if a new disorder is imposed through unchecked power politics, it will only intensify instability rather than resolve it. In this context, the world appears to be moving away from linear progress toward what can be described as non-linear development. Truth, borders, migration, power, weakness, poverty, and wealth have all become fluid, echoing Zygmunt Bauman’s concept of “liquid modernity.” Simultaneously, humanity is rapidly entering what Ulrich Beck described as a “risk society,” increasingly shaped by uncertainty and manufactured risks. This trajectory has also given rise to what Achille Mbembe terms a “necropolitical world,” where power determines who may live and who must die. In such a system, absolute obedience is demanded without guaranteeing human rights. Given these realities, it has become imperative for nations like Pakistan to reassess their priorities. Pakistan must embrace technology at every level of daily life and invest in training its human capital, following the examples of countries such as China and Japan. With effective use of technology, Pakistan can significantly improve its global standing. As an agricultural country, Pakistan has the potential, through strategic use of human resources, capital, and technology, to become a global breadbasket and one of the wealthiest nations. Equally important is widespread education, which will prepare the population to participate meaningfully in the next technological century. It is, therefore, high time to abandon prejudice, personal interests, and authoritarian tendencies. Instead, power must be devolved to the people through the protection of fundamental rights. Pakistan should not replicate the disorder propagated by global power politics but should adhere to human rights as demanded by its religion, faith, and social values. Once equality of rights is ensured, there is a strong possibility of overcoming the disturbances currently afflicting the country. —The writer is a Professor of English at Emerson University, Multan, and has a vast international exposure. (zeadogar@hotmail.com)