Politics of Power and the Erosion of Rules-Based Order

Why in Discussion ?

• Recently, particularly in the context of Venezuela, unilateral military actions by the United States have reignited global debates about violations of international law and the weakening of the UN-led multilateral order.
• These events have raised the question of whether the current global system remains effective in upholding a rules-based international order.

In Today’s Article:

• Background of international law.
• United Nations Charter and restrictions on the use of force.
• Unilateral military actions and legal challenges.
• Erosion of the balance-of-power principle.
• Pre-emptive military doctrine.
• Impact on the global order.
• Implications for India’s foreign policy.

International Law and the Use of Force

The foundation of international law is based on two key principles:

1. Sovereign equality of states, and
2. Prohibition of the use of force in interstate relations.

After World War II, these principles were codified through the United Nations Charter to prevent unilateral military aggression and ensure lasting global peace.

Provisions of the United Nations Charter

• Article 2(4): Complete prohibition on the use of force or the threat of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state.
• Only two valid exceptions:
  1. Use of force authorized by the UN Security Council,
  2. Right of self-defense under Article 51, and that too only in the case of an armed attack.

Despite these provisions, justifications by powerful states for military interventions beyond these limits indicate the erosion of the international legal framework.

Violation of the United Nations Charter Framework: The Venezuela Case

Recent U.S. Military Action against Venezuela:

• Carried out without the approval of the United Nations Security Council,
• Does not meet the legal criteria for self-defense (Article 51),
• Thus constitutes a direct violation of Article 2(4).

Implications of this step:

• Weakens the principle of non-intervention in internal affairs,
• Questions the legitimacy of multilateral institutions, and
• Exposes global security to unilateral decision-making.

Erosion of the Principle of Balance of Power

Cold War Era (Bipolar World):

• A bipolar structure between the U.S. and the Soviet Union,
• A system that balanced each other,
• Served as a check on the unchecked use of power by any single state.

Historical Examples:

• 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War: Soviet counter-deployment neutralized the influence of the U.S. Seventh Fleet.
• 1973 Yom Kippur War: Soviet warnings and U.S. DEFCON-3 status prevented escalation of the conflict.

Post-Cold War Era (Unipolar Moment):

• After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991,
• The U.S. emerged as the sole superpower,
• Leading to increased military interventions in the absence of external constraints (Iraq, Libya, Syria, etc.).

Pre-emptive Military Doctrine

In Contemporary U.S. Foreign Policy:

• • Terrorism,
  • Proliferation of weapons,
  • International crime,
• are used as broad and vague justifications for pre-emptive action.

Venezuela Context:

• The “narco-terrorism” argument is legally weak; the main source of the fentanyl crisis is not Venezuela. Instead, Venezuela’s vast oil reserves are the primary strategic attraction.
• This raises serious questions about the proportionality and necessity of military action.

Impact on the Global Order

Consequences of persistent disregard for international law:

• Decline in the credibility of the United Nations,
• Normalization of unilateralism,
• Creates dangerous precedents for other powers.

Emerging Scenario:

• China is seen as a potential counterbalance,
• Russia-China cooperation is limited but significant,
• Still, a stable multipolar order in the near future remains uncertain.

Implications for India’s Foreign Policy

This scenario provides several important signals for India:

• Risks to sovereignty in a weakened rules-based system,
• Limitations of traditional reliance on international law and multilateralism,
• Need to strengthen strategic autonomy.

Way Forward:

• Investment in the defense-industrial base,
• Diverse strategic partnerships,
• Building credible military and economic capabilities.

In a rapidly unilateral global order, protecting national interests requires not just moral appeal but practical power.