The DOI matches its Crossref record.
After liberal world order
Abstract
In recent years claims about the end times of the liberal world order have gathered force, with the talk of order giving way to disruption. While there are different accounts of these disruptive dynamics and their causes, it is nevertheless a rare moment in International Relations when all mainstream theories concur that the hegemony of the liberal world order is over and that there is considerable uncertainty about the global architecture that will take its place. Yet claiming that the liberal world order is in trouble is just a starting-point—a deeper account is needed to show how each interrelated element ‘hangs together’. We examine two interrelated patterns to liberal world ordering—internationalism and imperialism. After unpacking each of these interrelated ideas which constitute liberal world order, the narrative will focus on the politics and practice of humanitarianism. Humanitarianism is, of course, deeply intertwined with liberal assumptions about an ethic of care for peoples who are either at risk of, or worse still suffering from, large-scale natural disasters and politically-induced atrocities. Our inference is that the condition of humanitarianism provides a good indication of the state of the liberal world order—its limits and possibilities.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Neither the national security strategies adopted by the George W. Bush and Obama administrations in the US, nor the first-ever security strategy document of the EU adopted in 2003, mentioned great power competition and ideological polarization as potential threats to liberal international world order. 5”
From Turkish Foreign Policy in a Changing World Order (2019) · cites this paper as [5]
Citations
Cited by
Challenges to the Liberal Order: Reflections on International Organization
Lake, D. A., Martin, L. L., & Risse, T. (2021) · International Organization · doi:10.1017/s0020818320000636 · Cited by 547
“See different interpretations in Acharya 2014; Duncombe and Dunne 2018; Ikenberry 2012, 2018; Jahn 2018; Reus-Smit 2013.”
BackgroundLet's talk about the interregnum: Gramsci and the crisis of the liberal world order
Babić, M. (2020) · International Affairs · doi:10.1093/ia/iiz254 · Cited by 170
Zhang, C. (2019) · European Journal of International Relations · doi:10.1177/1354066119850253 · Cited by 181
Is this the end? Resilience, ontological security, and the crisis of the liberal international order
Flockhart, T. (2020) · Contemporary Security Policy · doi:10.1080/13523260.2020.1723966 · Cited by 96
“Today, the liberal international order is widely believed once again to be in crisis and its foundations to be contested (Duncombe & Dunne, 2018; Ikenberry, 2009, 2018; Mearsheimer, 2019), but where previous contestations and crises were ultimately productive in the sense that they led to…”
BackgroundAn Epochal Moment? The COVID‐19 Pandemic and China's International Order Building
Smith, N. R., & Fallon, T. (2020) · World Affairs · doi:10.1177/0043820020945395 · Cited by 52
“The cracking of this international order has been, in part, self-inflicted as the United States engaged in disastrous wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well as numerous other foreign policy blunders (Duncombe and Dunne 2018).”
Background
Metadata
- Authors
- Duncombe, C., & Dunne, T.
- ORCID
- Duncombe, Constance
- Venue
- International Affairs
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2018-01-01
- Volume
- 94
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 25-42
- ISSN
- 0020-5850 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2346
- OpenAlex
- W2782124047
- Cited by
- 151
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 13 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 18 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 34 · 2019: 17 · 2018: 8
- FWCI
- 79.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Affairs (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › International Relations and Foreign Policy
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Global Peace and Security Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Peacebuilding and International Security
- Keywords
- liberal international order, internationalism, imperialism, humanitarianism, humanitarian ethics, global governance, humanitarian intervention
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.