The information density of this book is enormous. This took quite a bit of perseverance in the beginning but I got used to it later in the book. The angle from which Kissinger views the balance of power and the different perspectives in cultures and peoples is very enriching. His style is very readable, although I did have to read a lot of sentences twice or even more to grasp his intention. The best thing about the book were in my opinion the absolute highlights at the end of particular paragraphs where he asks just the right questions that point towards the critical items of world order. He was rather elaborate on the US, but this isn't very surprising nor disturbing. Recommended for everyone who is interested in the history and evolution of contemporary power and its balancing in today's world. This book is a magisterial historical explanation of the different perspectives of world order from the different regions of the world. It tries to explain where we have been and where we are likely to be in the future in terms of a political international arrangement. The current and dominant framework of world order is the nation state established in Westphalia in 1648 as a result of the thirty years war. It is based on respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty of each state. Out of that framework, European states managed to take care of its differences through a balance of power system which managed to maintain relative peace for almost three hundred years. But as European powers became colonizers and acquired power and dominance all over the world, the Westphalian nation state became the norm throughout the world. This, however, does not mean that the nation-state construct is the preferable framework for other peoples of the world. In fact, as the west loses relative power and influence and as other nations like China and India rise in the world stage, the world order based on the nation state will face multiple challenges. Whether it remains the preponderant structure of international relations remains a big question mark. As Kissinger maintains, the existing world order has been shaped mostly by European traditions and in the last 100 years by American might. This does not mean, however, that it is the world order that other nations support or aspire to. As China and other nations rise in importance and influence, they will try to shape a different kind of world order, one that does not necessarily share American traits. Let’s take China for example. China will undoubtedly has become a mayor power. With its growing economic might, China will pose a challenge to America’s dominant position. China does not promote or even believe in human rights as an international principle, America does. China wants to be the hegemon in Asia at the expense of other nations like Japan and Vietnam, among others. But America is an established power in Asia and the rise of China could cause dislocation of America and its allies. How the US and China deal with the rise of the latter will shape world affairs for decades to come. There is a risk of war, Kissinger contends, if diplomacy fails in this restructuring of Asia. Asia has become the largest economic region in the world. China sees itself historically as the preeminent power where all the countries of the region must respect and acknowledge. In other words, he who has the most power in Asia has the most power in the world. In the Middle East, will America allow Iran to establish itself as the hegemonic power, or will it challenge Iran? The Arab perspective of world order calls for an implementation not of agreed upon borders but of Islam as the defining ideology throughout the Middle East. This does not bow well for American security, so, to what extent will America remain committed to a middle east conducive with American interests is the question. The world is changing and America’s role in it will not be the same as in the past 100 years. We are accustomed to being the most or one of the most important nations in the world. We will still be powerful, influential and important. However, the way we deal with the challenges mentioned in this book will define world order for the foreseeable future. It might not end up being the Westphalian framework that we are accustomed to but it can be a hybrid, one were we can continue pursuing our interests and our values.
What do You think about World Order (2014)?
Intelligent, informed overview and analysis of the reasons the world is in the mess it is.
—alexander
The. most interesting part is about governing at the age of Internet
—Lexy
I will probably read anything Kissinger writes. True story.
—Chanta
Super intensive book written by someone who knows so much .
—alida
