Skip to main content

Is Multilateralism the Answer to Preserving the Rules-Based Global Order?

It is evident that the world is changing. The strategic withdrawal by the United States from the global rules-based system has raised new questions about the future of global governance. Most nations continue to hold on to the principles of global collaboration, and for a good reason. The existing system has allowed for unparalleled economic growth in the post-World War II era through free trade. Can the rules-based system survive? I believe the existing global governance structure can be preserved through the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP). The CPTPP: A Shield and a Standard-Setter The CPTPP is one of the most sophisticated trade agreements in the world, encompassing free trade in goods and services, robust intellectual property protection, facilitated business travel, stringent labor standards, and government procurement opportunities. The trading block consists primarily of middle powers: Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile...

Trade as a National Security Strategy

US-China Relations


For years, the conventional wisdom among political and economic leaders has been that expanded global trade leads to peace. This belief, rooted in liberal theory, suggests that countries with strong economic ties are less likely to go to war. However, in an increasingly competitive world, this idea is being challenged. Trade is no longer simply a neutral economic activity; it has become a powerful tool of national strategy.

The Strategic Imperative of Trade Policy

The long-standing economic partnership of the United States (U.S.) with China offers a clear example of this new reality that many established democracies face today. While Americans have enjoyed the benefits of inexpensive goods from China, this engagement has also directly contributed to China’s emergence as a major global power and a military competitor. Since the 1990s, Beijing’s economic growth has funded a significant expansion of its armed forces and a shift toward manufacturing its own advanced military technology. This move from importing weapons to producing them marks a critical strategic development that cannot be ignored.

Beijing's Growing Regional and Global Influence

China’s assertive stance on the international stage presents a direct challenge to global stability. The country’s broad claims over the South China Sea—a vital waterway for nearly a quarter of all global trade—are not only legally questionable but also a source of ongoing tension. This aggression, combined with its long-held ambitions toward Taiwan, creates a potential flashpoint in the Indo-Pacific. U.S. officials have openly warned of the “devastating consequences” of a conflict. Furthermore, China's strengthening relationships with nations like Russia, Iran, and North Korea signal a coordinated effort to undermine Western leadership on a global scale.

National Security Implications

For the U.S., these geopolitical shifts mean that control over critical supply routes could be weaponized by an adversary, posing a genuine national security risk. While the U.S. has built a robust network of security alliances in Asia, the effectiveness of these partnerships depends on a foundation of stable economic relationships. Today, trade policy is not just about a country’s GDP. It is a source of leverage in the geopolitical arena.

A New Framework for Trade

The United States and other established democracies need to redefine their approach to global commerce. Instead of forging deeper economic ties with geopolitical rivals, they should prioritize partnerships with developing democracies that share their values, such as the Philippines, Thailand, and Indonesia. These nations offer strong manufacturing capabilities and political alignment. By reorienting supply chains toward these partners, established democracies, such as the U.S., can enhance both their economic resilience and strategic position.

Past agreements like the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) and the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) show that trade can be a tool for diplomacy and for strengthening political stability. While a full economic separation from China will be a gradual process, current global events make starting this realignment an urgent necessity.

Conclusion

In the modern world, trade policy must be built on the principles of resilience, shared values, and strategic foresight. To protect their democratic institutions and promote global stability, the developed countries must integrate trade and national security into a single, cohesive strategy.

Read the full article I originally published in Diplomatist

Integrating Trade with National Security Policy - Diplomatist

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Redesigning Foreign Policy: The Rise of "Fashion Diplomacy"

In the complex and often theatrical world of international relations, diplomats and world leaders have long employed a broad range of tools to convey messages, build alliances, and project national identity. Beyond the carefully chosen words of speeches and the solemn signatures on treaties, a more subtle yet increasingly powerful form of communication is emerging:  “fashion diplomacy”.  This term describes the deliberate and strategic use of clothing, accessories, and style by political figures to articulate specific messages, signal ideological stances, cultivate goodwill, or even instigate subtle provocations on the global stage. The recent appearance of Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in a vintage CCCP (Russian for USSR) sweater in Anchorage, Alaska, serves as a striking example of this emerging trend. Alaska and the Allure of the Past: A Sweater's Provocative Message The image of a top diplomat from Moscow wearing the emblem of the Soviet Union upon...

Trump's Tariffs: Truth or Fiction?

President Trump’s tariff strategy, aimed at revitalizing American manufacturing, continues to spark debate across economic and political circles. While the intent is clear, the broader implications raise important questions about its alignment with long-term economic trends. The U.S. manufacturing sector has steadily shrunk over the past five decades, falling from 23% of GDP in 1970 to just 9.7% in early 2025. Job losses have followed suit, prompting concern among policymakers and workers alike. Yet this decline is not unique to the United States. Similar patterns are evident in Canada , Germany , and Japan . Economists point to a natural evolution in advanced economies: agriculture gives way to manufacturing, which in turn is overtaken by services. In the U.S., the service sector has expanded from 71.8% of GDP in 1997 to 83.7% in 2025, driving employment growth and contributing to a low unemployment rate of 4.1% . While this figure suggests economic strength, it also signals...