The Dual Challenge of Global Governance

By Thorsten Benner

Call it multipolarity, non-polarity or just a messy world – one thing is clear: we are witnessing a geopolitical transition. Countries such as China, India, Indonesia and Brazil are on the rise. The country club of those with power to make a difference in world affairs (for better or worse) is changing fast: less Western, fewer common interests, more ideological diversity.  Managing this geopolitical transition is a major challenge for global governance. 

History offers few grounds for optimism. It was Thucydides, writing on the Peloponnesian War, who observed that, “The growth of the power of Athens, and the alarm which this inspired in Sparta, made war inevitable.” The rise of new powers has pretty much led to the same result ever since. True, Britain ceded power to the US rather peacefully, but this is the exception rather than the rule. World order did not survive the rise of Germany and Japan – and millions lost their lives as a consequence.  Therefore, by historical standards we should be content if we can avoid major international conflict as part of the ongoing geopolitical transition. A “peaceful rise” of new powers within the existing world order would be a major achievement. 

It is an achievement that seems within the realm of the feasible; no rising power has expressed any interest in overturning the existing order. And while there certainly are risks that could change this (i.e. the Taiwan question), powerful indicators, such as economic interdependence, point toward an overall peaceful integration of new powers.

But peaceful rise alone, however great an achievement by historical standards, will not be enough to pull the world back from the brink. Peaceful rise alone will do nothing to deal with runaway global problems such as climate/energy, nuclear proliferation, population growth and financial stability. This is the dual challenge of today’s global governance: dealing with the geopolitical changes while addressing momentous trans-border problems. 

While our record on the first part of the challenge might give reason for cautious optimism, the picture on the second part is dismal. The “noughts” were on balance a lost decade for dealing with trans-border challenges. No decisive action on climate change, half-baked efforts to fulfil the Millennium Development Goals, significant setbacks on nuclear proliferation and disarmament and terrible miscalculations on financial risk management. In addition, efforts to change international institutions in a forward-looking way have lagged way behind the pace of change on the ground. 

Optimists argue that dealing with trans-border challenges offers an opportunity to further cooperation with rising powers that are also affected by climate change, financial instability and nuclear proliferation. Through a virtuous cycle, rising powers become joint stakeholders in global governance. However, the more likely scenario is that this virtuous cycle would only result from bold leadership on the part of all major players. Political leaders will have to withstand the temptations of short-term populism that work against jointly addressing long-term global governance challenges. 

Moving global governance forward also requires a new level of societal ties, political and cultural knowledge and joint thinking between the established and rising powers. It is the goal of the GG2020 program to make a small contribution to this huge challenge. In the coming months, the GG2020 fellows will present their often very diverse points of view on how to make global governance work in the critical areas of nuclear proliferation and disarmament, finance and climate change.

Thorsten Benner is co-founder and associate director of the Global Public Policy Institute (GPPi) in Berlin, which initiated and co-organizes the GG2020 program.