1、 Problem posing

We discussed the global agenda of promoting the "liberal international order" by the United States after the end of the Cold War, as well as the crisis and challenges faced by this order in the US strategic community after more than 20 years of practice. In 2016, the journal Foreign Affairs published an article by Joseph Nye Jr. expressing concerns about the "liberal international order". Subsequently, well-known American think tanks and academic journals also published a series of related papers and reports, believing that the "liberal international order" dominated by the West is facing increasing challenges. The Biden administration has announced the end of the post Cold War international order and needs to readjust its foreign strategy and policies. A deep understanding of the discussions in the US strategic community about the "liberal international order" is of great practical significance for comprehensively grasping the direction and logic of US strategy.

2、 Cognitive evolution

The evolution of the perception of the "liberal international order" in the US strategic community was discussed. Since the end of the Cold War, the perception of the US strategic community has gone through three stages: from confidence and identification to questioning and reflection, and then to re understanding and adjustment. Between 1992 and 2015, the US strategic community was confident in liberalism and advocated for the promotion of the Western "liberal order" globally. However, after Brexit and Trump's election as the President of the United States in 2016, the US strategic community began to question and reflect on the feasibility of the "liberal international order". Since 2020, the debate on the "liberal international order" in the US strategic community has reached a climax. Faced with internal and external challenges, some scholars advocate for the re consolidation of American democracy to maintain order, while others believe that the international order should be adjusted and changed to cope with new challenges. The American strategic community generally believes that after the end of the Cold War, the "free international order" faced increasing internal and external challenges, which were due to changes in the global power structure and doubts about the decline of American hegemony.

3、 Cognitive differentiation

The discussion of the "liberal international order" in the US strategic community focuses on its nature, crisis roots, and development trends. Liberals view it as a normative international system, emphasizing free trade, democratic dissemination, and human rights, believing that it protects and promotes Western values, while realists view it as a power distribution arrangement designed by the United States based on post Cold War power comparisons. Both factions agree that the "liberal international order" is facing a crisis, but liberals believe that the crisis stems from the decline of liberal consensus and internal and external challenges, while realists believe that it is due to the power changes caused by the excessive expansion of the United States and the rise of China. Liberals advocate reviving liberal ideology and competing with authoritarianism, while realists believe that the future direction depends on power competition among major powers, advocating for maintaining American superiority and adjusting the international system appropriately.

4、 Policy orientation

Although there is controversy in the US strategic community over the issue of "free international order," the common goal is to maintain the US's global dominance. The policy orientation includes: restarting strategic competition among major powers, containing strategic competitors, and maintaining the global leadership position of the United States; Liberals emphasize the moral superiority and normativity of the "liberal international order", advocate for ideological competition with countries such as China and Russia, and consolidate the international recognition of liberal principles; Realists believe that the United States' international dominance comes from its national strength, and advocate for strategic competition among major powers such as China and Russia to maintain its power advantage. The US strategic community advocates restarting factional confrontation and adjusting the alliance system. Liberals advocate building a new "liberal camp", while realists advocate building a cross ideological alliance system based on geopolitical and geo economic interests. The US strategic community also regards the revitalization of domestic society as a prerequisite for maintaining the stability of the "free international order" and American dominance. Liberals advocate restoring democracy and reducing the cost of hegemony, while realists advocate strategic contraction and returning to a multipolar order. These proposals in the US strategic community reflect the continuation of the Cold War's "zero sum thinking", the rejection of symbiotic cooperation and open and inclusive cultural concepts, and an attempt to maintain unipolar hegemony through factional confrontation and great power competition.

5、 Trump's Return and Future International Order

Discussed the complexity of the post-war international order, including the connection and contradictions between the international order supported by the United Nations Charter and international law and the "liberal international order" promoted by the United States. The discussion of the "liberal international order" in the US strategic community reflects a questioning of the liberal internationalist strategy, especially Trump's populist, isolationist, and unilateralism policy tendencies, which pose an impact on international multilateral cooperation and freedom and openness. Trump's' America First 'policy may lead to intensified struggles between unipolar and multipolar in the international order, increasing the challenge for developing countries to establish a new order. Experts predict that Trump's policies will reduce the emphasis on international law and organizations, and increase oppression of allies and opponents to gain benefits. Trump's return is believed to accelerate the decline of the existing world order, putting pressure on the world order centered around the United Nations Charter. Trump's domestic and foreign policies have the nature of anti liberal order, which may endanger the security, interests, and power of the United States, while increasing opportunities for China and weakening American advantages. The chapter emphasizes that the "anti globalization" triggered by the isolationist, protectionist, and unilateral actions of the United States will impact the multilateral open international order and increase systemic risks. China will face even more severe challenges, and Trump's policy towards China will continue to exert "maximum pressure". At the end of the chapter, it calls for the necessity and urgency of international cooperation. China and countries in the global South should support the international system with the United Nations at its core, maintain international peace and stability, advocate multilateralism with open cooperation, oppose group politics with closed confrontation, and promote the construction of a peaceful, stable, just, and reasonable new international order.