The principles-based orthodoxy which has sustained the worldwide order because the finish of World Battle II in 1945, concurrently anchored on liberal democracy in progressive climes, is witnessing, like by no means earlier than, a scientific deconstruction. By rules-based orthodoxy, is supposed the constant software of the rule of regulation because the foundational foundation of the administration of justice, governance, and laws, in home and international affairs.
Distilling that proposition implies utilising worldwide regulation, and establishments emanating thereof, just like the United Nations, and key organs viz the Safety Council, the Worldwide Court docket of Justice (ICJ); the World Commerce Organisation, World Well being Organisation, the Worldwide Legal Court docket, and others, as a cornerstone for consensus-building, international coverage growth, and worldwide dispute decision.
Philosophically, it encompasses freedom, liberty, and the constant software of human rights. The inference being that worldwide peace and safety is optimally enhanced through transnational cooperation, demonstrable justice, and fairness; which provides a modicum of certainty, and order, in international affairs in a demonstrably chaotic, albeit interdependent world.
Crucially, the rules-based international order doesn’t usurp sovereign energy. Analytical buy for that proposition is established within the preamble to the1945 UN Constitution.
It gives inter alia: “We the peoples of the United Nations decided to save lots of succeeding generations from the scourge of conflict, which twice in our lifetime has introduced untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm religion in basic human rights, within the dignity and value of the human individual, within the equal rights of women and men and of countries giant and small, and to ascertain situations below which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and different sources of worldwide regulation could be maintained, and to advertise social progress and higher requirements of life in bigger freedom; … to apply tolerance and reside collectively in peace with each other pretty much as good neighbours, and to unite our power to keep up worldwide peace and safety; and to make sure, by the acceptance of rules and the establishment of strategies, that armed pressure shall not be used, save within the widespread curiosity, and to make use of worldwide equipment for the promotion of the financial and social development of all peoples.”
Compelling? Completely! Related? Sure! Effectiveness? Variable! The actual query then is why? Cleisthenes, the Athenian thinker, in 507 B.C. characterised democracy or “demokratia” because the “rule by the folks” Abraham Lincoln in his 1863 Gettysburg handle, articulated the idea because the “authorities of the folks, by the folks, and for the folks” Nigeria’s visionary nationalist and thinker, Obafemi Awolowo, in 1960, contended that democracy is the elemental goal of civilised authorities, the place that aspiration is the ethical, bodily, and non secular welfare of the folks.
And which manner ever democracy is analysed in current occasions, the truth stays that it’s in a poisonous collision with aggressive authoritarianism or authoritarian constitutionalism in liberal democracies. But, the elemental thesis of enlightened liberal democracy, is the brigading of democracy, liberalism, freedom, liberty, human rights, free and truthful elections, clear justice, and the rule of regulation. It’s evidenced by real separation of powers between the manager, legislature, and judiciary, the place every arm of presidency is really impartial, albeit exercising constitutionally outlined coordinate jurisdiction, sustaining corresponding checks and balances; such that nobody department thereof wields absolute powers; thereby changing into unaccountable!
Throughout the assemble of aggressive authoritarian regimes, formal democratic establishments are perceived because the principal technique of acquiring and exercising political authority and disproportionate energy is concentrated within the govt/incumbents. By goal baseline requirements for democracy, incumbents, and establishments below their management in aggressive authoritarian “democratic” regimes persistently violate the rule of regulation, for instance through repression, strangulating opposition events, free speech, freedom of affiliation, press freedom, human rights, and train quasi-dictatorial media management.
To the extent that aggressive authoritarianism and constitutional authoritarianism are underpinned by authoritarianism, they’re related. Nevertheless, the important thing distinction between aggressive authoritarianism and constitutional authoritarianism, is considered one of diploma. The latter exploits constitutional processes like edicts, decrees, expansive or restrictive govt orders, pronouncements to embed authoritarianism. Merely put, it creates a spectre of actual democracy, when actually, it’s authoritarian in substance. Accordingly, this critique utilises each phrases interchangeably for brevity!
Examples of aggressive authoritarianism in West Africa in 2025, embrace Burkina Faso below Ibrahim Traore, Mali below Assimi Goita, and Niger below Abdourahamane Tchiani. Nigeria’s Babangida’s army regime (1985-1993), which for a interval, had elected civilian governors below the Nationwide Republican Conference and Social Democratic political events, suits this invoice. Different situations embrace Croatia below Franjo Tudjman (1990-1999), Serbia below Slobodan Miloševic (1989-1997), Russia below Vladimir Putin (2000 to current); Ukraine below Leonid Kravchuk (1991-1994) and Leonid Kuchma (1994-2025), Peru below Alberto Fujimori (1990-2000) and so forth.
In How Democracies Die (2018), Harvard College political science professors, Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt, argued that because the American Civil Battle (1861-1865) no U.S. politician had come near Donald Trump in posing a harmful authoritarian threat to the US’ democracy.
Their thesis was based mostly on 4 markers: 1.) Rejecting or exhibiting weak dedication to democratic guidelines; 2.) Denying the legitimacy of political opponents; 3.) Encouraging or tolerating violence; and 4.) Readiness to stifle or restrict civil liberties of opponents, together with media. Levitsky knowledgeable Newsweek on the time that “Trump was simply identifiable as somebody who isn’t dedicated to the democratic guidelines of the sport…There’s actual trigger for concern for the well being of our democratic establishments.”
Nonetheless, incumbents main aggressive authoritarian regimes aren’t from the moon in any case. What’s it about them that instructions standard assist? Within the capricious competitors for public training, housing, healthcare and jobs, in developed and creating economies, have the united goals of justice and the rule of regulation been sacrificed on the altar of xenophobic nativism and racism?
What’s the prognosis for the rules-based orthodoxy of the final eighty years post-WWII? In Africa, what are the sensible dividends of democracy given ravaging by ethno-religious terrorism, crushing poverty, illness, and hunger? Has the so-called liberal permissiveness, gay, lesbian, transexual rights supplanted cultural originalism and heritage? Is the world witnessing an period of subjugation of sovereign energy of weak states by tremendous powers? In brief, has liberal democracy failed?
These are as a lot rhetorical as they’re sensible questions affecting life as we all know it globally. And there aren’t any straightforward solutions. Liberal democracy definitely has important limitations.
First, the unanimity precept inherent in liberal democratic fashions can heighten inertia and efficient resolution making. Second, liberal democracy can escalate inequality and social unrest, because the safety of particular person rights and freedoms can result in unequal distribution of wealth and public sources.
Third, liberal democracy heightens the likelihood of nativist political leaders exploiting the fears and anxieties of abnormal folks, with poisonous propaganda to push extremist ideologies and specious mantra below the guise of populism.
Fourth, liberal democracy, like aggressive authoritarianism; could be corruptly uncovered to particular curiosity teams, which may utilise their monetary leverage to reframe coverage, thereby undermining democratic credibility.
Lastly, bilateral and multilateral worldwide treaties, and associated authorized frameworks scarcely adapt to the velocity of sociological evolution, the speedy advance of algorithmic social media and Synthetic Intelligence, which mixes and disproportionately shares, informative and poisonous messages throughout huge populations and limits.
In different phrases, opinions and at occasions outright lies could be unfold quickly for a specific agenda.
For instance, the July 2024 UK riots, triggered by a mass stabbing incident wherein three kids had been killed, had been exacerbated by lies, misinformation and disinformation on social media.
Is liberal democracy blameworthy?!Hypothetically, native authority A, in nation B, has 50 social housing items making use of a strict lawful criterion of real want. There’s a ready listing of three years and a whole bunch of locals have queued. Real refugees, are granted a fifth thereof, on the idea of destitution, homelessness, safety of kids, and crucially, compliance with the cornerstone 1951 UN Refugee Conference. Locals stage violent demonstrations.
Has the native authority A breached any regulation? No! Can locals protest? Completely! Violently? No, that’s illegal! These are simply a number of the ethical dilemmas in typical liberal democratic societies. Nevertheless, aggrieved locals on this illustration, would are inclined to gravitate in direction of nativist political events and political leaders, who exploit their fears and anxieties.
Within the remaining evaluation, the deconstruction of the liberal democratic order is actual. Russia unlawfully invaded Ukraine on February 24, 2022; setting a harmful precedent for international peace and safety, while wantonly violating Article 2(4) of the UN Constitution, which stipulates that each one members shall chorus from the risk or use of pressure towards the territorial integrity, sovereignty of any state.
Russia, a everlasting UNSC everlasting 5 member justified the invasion on geopolitical grounds. The USA, a superpower, which has itself threatened to amass Canada and Greenland, engaged in a high-level rapprochement with Russia on geoeconomic grounds once more, signalling to the world, that its strategic pursuits and realpolitik override any rules-based orthodoxy and liberal-democratic credentials; opening a grim diplomatic chasm with European and NATO allies.
Nevertheless, what do these dynamics portend for warlords, and crucially, peace-building efforts, in Israel, Gaza, Sudan, Congo, Rwanda, Nigeria, Yemen and so forth?
Likewise, severe questions are being requested by nations as to the efficacy of worldwide asylum and refugee protocols, as they cope with socio-economic challenges and neighborhood cohesion tensions; the place of heritage in coverage formulation; and the frontiers of minority rights.
Moreover, given U.S. President Trump’s commanding mandate from the American citizens on the 2024 elections, he has issued a slew of controversial radical govt orders, pushed by his “America First” ideology with far-reaching international and home ramifications on vitality, immigration, nationwide safety, and healthcare.
For instance, Government Order 14203, “Imposing Sanctions on the Worldwide Legal Court docket”; and the US withdrawal from the WHO; justify the declare that some superpowers view the worldwide rules-based orthodoxy, liberal democracy disdainfully, while accentuating ideological pre-eminence and overriding strategic nationwide pursuits.
Does the foregoing suggest finish of liberal democracy as we all know it and the pre-eminence of aggressive authoritarianism? Not essentially. Nevertheless, international orthodoxy and liberal democracy are on extraordinarily shaky foundations given the ideological stance of highly effective leaders with authoritarian inclinations. While nuanced constructive engagement on mutually helpful pragmatic phrases is a strategic possibility, however, isn’t that appeasement?!
Ojumu is the Principal Companion at Balliol Myers LP, a agency of authorized practitioners and technique consultants in Lagos, Nigeria and the creator of The Dynamic Intersections of Economics, International Relations, Jurisprudence and Nationwide Improvement.
