Contenu du sommaire : Vers un ordre international alternatif ?

International norms and standards are being challenged by a number of countries which have themselves benefited from those very standards in order to become recognised within the international system. The difficulty is that such questioning often originates comes from authoritative regimes which are unlikely to take account of public opinion.

Competition in outer space has existed since the launch of Sputnik on 4 October 1957. Many standards brought into effect since then have managed the use of space, but with the development of New Space they risk being called into question. Could the new race for the moon lead to reinterpretation of the principle of non-appropriation?

After many years spent constructing an order which has limited the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the normative instruments which permit control over their development are now being criticised. The current crisis, accentuated by the war in Ukraine, is unsettling, and legal constraints supported by verification mechanisms are necessary.

The international order has been progressively constructed through treaties, conventions and organisations which support the principle of the sovereign nation. Though often somewhat complex, these standards have permitted discussion and rendered solutions possible, but they are being called into question by a number of powers which seek to impose their will upon others.

When considering current wars, such as that in Ukraine, the law that covers armed conflict is clearly more essential than ever. The status of the combatant must be maintained despite attempts to challenge it, and the role of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), which resulted from the 1949 Geneva Convention, must be reconfirmed and strengthened.

Drones have acquired sufficient technological maturity to be deployed widely in all current operational theatres and conflicts. Unmanned technologies benefit from dual civil and military use and are leading to the development of systems of an increasingly hybrid nature which, in turn, risk being permanently employed in power struggles between states.

Digital information technology (IT) has afforded emerging powers the opportunity to establish a place in a rapidly-changing international order. Small countries have been able to capitalise on digital technology to preserve their independence and even to strengthen their sovereignty. Having digital influence is essential in today's world.

International trade has undergone considerable change since 2008 and has become a new theatre of strategic conflict and rivalry between powers. The principles of free trade are being tested in a war of technology and economics, waged in particular between the United States and China. Globalisation of the economy is suffering.

The greatest ocean depths are still largely unexplored and contain immense resources likely to attract the interest of state and commercial operations. They could well become new areas of conflict despite the broadening of the Convention on the law of the sea piloted by the UN.

The alternative ‘truths' of conspiracy theorists (especially American ones) are attempts to upset the international order. Social networks enable every opportunity to be exploited, aided by many highly active, if minority, trends and movements. Russia has clearly been seeking to manipulate these alternative visions to its advantage.

Vladimir Putin's Russia is seeking to present itself as a fortress besieged by a hostile Collective West that wishes to wipe out Russian civilisation. This vision of the world is being used as ideological justification for the war being waged against Ukraine since 24 February 2022 in complete contravention of international law.

Beijing's ambitions regarding Taiwan are posing great difficulties for the countries of South-East Asia. Though anxious about preserving their sovereignty and independence, often with military support from the United States, they at the same time want to maintain good relations – especially economic relations – with China.

China shows particular concern for its dispersed overseas communities, and seeks to assimilate populations of Chinese origin. For Beijing, the latter should act as relays of Chinese influence, albeit at the risk of upsetting some Asian countries which deplore such manipulation to geopolitical ends.

Erdoğan's victory in the May presidential elections will allow him to pursue his foreign policy aimed at building Turkish independence on an international level, with regard to NATO and the United States in particular. His approach puts the Syrian question at the heart of Ankara's projects.

Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have developed their foreign policies in the desire for increased autonomy in line with the priorities of their national interests. The search for better-balanced multiple partnerships is underway, including those with both Russia and China; this will compel the United States and the EU to take better note of the needs of Gulf countries.

African countries such as Mali have been looking for alternative foreign policies. France has been used as a scapegoat to Russia's advantage through the intermediary of the para-military Wagner Group. That aside, these countries have recently evolved through their search for closer ties with their regional neighbours in order to escape from their isolation.

The Islamic Republic of Iran conducts a complex foreign policy which combines permanent challenge to the international order with the desire to be accepted within it in order to ensure the survival of its regime. Increased effort on its relations with Russia is a new trend to be kept under close observation.

Mao's communist China lost no time in manifesting its regional ambitions in Asia. Quite another question was its ambiguous relationship with the USSR, at the time the world reference for communism, which fluctuated between cooperation and rivalry. All of which was against the background of the Cold War and the presence of the United States in the region.

The question of a stable world order has been raised again and again for decades. The creation of the UN after the Second World War resulted from the need for diplomacy to triumph over the use of brute force. For all that, the Cold War called into question this desire for peace. There is still a need for this stability.

Whilst today the concept of a Third World no longer truly exists, it is no less interesting to take a historical approach and look at the problems of development. In the 1970s there was much ignorance of the realities on the ground since the idea of national unity was an illusion once the inequalities between citizens were taken into account.

In the summer of 1981, after the election of François Mitterand, the North-South dialogue was presented as the major French foreign policy direction. The context at the time was of a United States notable for its liberalism, and a USSR reducing its development aid to the least-developed countries.

The year 1990 was a tipping point, marked by the collapsing of the politico-economic system of the USSR and its satellites. The liberal economic model seemed then to have become the international norm, along with a rejection of protectionism. It was the start of globalisation supposed to bring widespread progress for all peoples.

The Warsaw Pact was designed around a model imposed by the USSR on its satellite countries, which espoused identical doctrines and equipment. NATO, on the other hand, worked on developing standards that allowed forces from different cultures to fight together without imposing a single, rigid framework.

The return of president Lula at the head of Brazil is seeing new activity on the international scene. His third term could be an opportunity for Brasilia to recover its place in the world and assume a form of leadership among the BRICS countries and on the South American continent.