Singapore, 26 January 2026 – A growing chorus of analysts and commentators argues that the United States, particularly under President Donald Trump, is leading the West in undermining the post-World War II rules-based global order, reshaping international norms and alliances amid rising geopolitical competition and unilateral policy moves. This narrative has surfaced prominently in international commentary, provoking debate about the future of global governance and strategic stability.
The argument begins with a shift in major power behaviour: recent U.S. actions on trade, security and foreign policy have departed from longstanding commitments to multilateral cooperation and collective frameworks. These actions include aggressive tariff threats against allies over disputes involving Greenland, personalised and confrontational diplomacy, and a renewed focus on America First strategic priorities that critics say favours narrow bilateral leverage over broad institutional cooperation.
Erosion of the Rules-Based System
Critics assert that the old world order, sustained since 1945 around U.S. leadership, institutions like the United Nations (UN) and World Trade Organization (WTO), and a network of alliances, is showing signs of erosion as great powers increasingly pursue national interests outside of established norms. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, for example, told delegates at the World Economic Forum in Davos that the rules-based global order, long the backbone of international security and economic governance, is facing a “rupture” rather than a smooth transition, driven by growing unilateralism and great power rivalry.
This perspective resonates with broader concerns that economic integration, once hailed as a shared global benefit, is being weaponised through tariffs, sanctions and supply-chain measures, practices that some analysts see as undermining multilateral frameworks and replacing cooperation with coercion.
Impact of U.S. Strategic Shifts
Part of this critique centres on how U.S. policy choices affect global perceptions of stability. Commentators note that moves such as tariff threats against European partners, shifting security postures, and reliance on economic pressure over diplomatic consensus signal a retreat from traditional leadership roles. These actions, while aimed at securing immediate national interests, can create broader uncertainty about the durability of alliances and international norms.
For many observers, the result is a strategic environment where great power competition — particularly involving the United States, China and Russia, drives international relations, rather than shared institutional governance. This realignment fuels speculation that the global order may evolve from one anchored in U.S.–led multilateralism to a multipolar system with competing centres of influence.
A Broader Global Debate
This narrative has sparked discussions across diplomatic and policy forums. Supporters of a rules-based order warn that abandoning collective frameworks could increase geopolitical risk and diminish the mechanisms for peaceful dispute resolution. Advocates of a new model argue for the need to adapt to contemporary realities, where emerging powers, regional organisations and networks of middle powers play a greater role in shaping secure and equitable global governance.
Whether the current trajectory represents the collapse of an old system or the deliberate dismantling by major powers, including the United States, remains a topic of intense debate among scholars, policymakers and international relations experts.
