Global Security System as History: Westphalian, Philadelphian and Anti-Utopian

Security: Theory and Policy

Abstract

In this articla the author argues that into the new millennium three competing frameworks govern the global security framework; Westphalian, Philadelphian and Anti-Utopian. The Westphalian framework was the dominant framework for the last two centuries especially this century. It is characterized by state sovereignty as its basic premise, order within and anarchy without as a systemic feature, and balancing and bandwagonning as its behavioral modalities. The Philadelphian framework existed in the United States between its colonial period and the Civil War. It has been resuscitated globally in the last quarter of this century in quite a resilient fashion, incorporating much of the Westphalian framework into it. It is characterized by popular sovereignty as its basic premise, liberal democracy as its systemic feature, and binding and hiding as its behavioral modalities. The Anti-Utopian framework existed until the mid-20th century as the colonialist framework. It has been revived as it has remolded itself as a global, humanitarian mission undertaken by major powers international organizations non-governmental organizations, by stripping itself of its erstwhile territorial aggrandizement component. It is characterized as loss of sovereignty as its basic premise, failed or failing states as a systemic feature, and hollowing out and collapsing as its behavioral modalities. These three frameworks compete vigorously in all actors of global politics and the manifestation of varying weights in the coming evolution of global politics needs to be carefully analyzed in order to see the shape of global politics in the next millennium.