North Korea and the World: Two Perspectives on the Debate of American Decline and the Future of the Hegemonic Order

YouTube Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nD_cfYznga4

■ Author: Park Won-gon _Director of the EAI Center for North Korean Studies. Professor at Ewha Womans University.

■ Contact and Editing: Lim Jae-hyun_EAI Researcher

    Inquiries: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 209) | jhlim@eai.or.kr

Video Script

The Background and Debate Surrounding the Emergence of American Decline

Even in the 1980s, the United States was seen as a beacon on a hill, truly a representation of democracy, and the occurrence of such events in that country is a significant shock. Hello, and thank you for watching Park Won-gon's North Korea and the World. Today, I would like to discuss the decline of the United States. It is not the America we once knew. The former America was a beacon on the hill of democracy, a symbol of liberal democracy, and as one of the world's superpowers, it has been creating the international order since 1945, an order based on the liberal international order or a normative international order that we are familiar with. This order, which encompasses free trade, the rule of law, opposition to changes in the status quo through force, and human rights issues, can be seen as closely related to the identity of the Republic of Korea. However, the various aspects that the United States has shown in the past decade have drifted far from this, especially during the first term of the Trump administration, and even more so in the second term, we have seen a more aggressive undermining of the so-called liberal international order.

These aspects suggest that the United States' image as a superpower or as a unipolar state in international politics is significantly weakening. When discussing this unipolar system, the core concept often mentioned is that a state maintaining the system of the world's strongest power provides public goods for the global economy and security. In terms of security public goods, the United States has formed treaty alliances with about 50 countries, including South Korea and NATO, guaranteeing their security and intervening to rectify issues in cases of illegal invasions or armed conflicts that violate international norms. This is a characteristic of a system with a pole. Economically, when a global financial crisis occurs or a virus spreads, the United States has played a central role in problem-solving, which is what we refer to as a unipolar system.

However, the United States we have seen has displayed very different aspects in the two areas mentioned earlier. In terms of alliances, it constantly views them through the lens of transaction costs, and regarding economic public goods, it continues to demand tariffs that do not align with the principles of free trade. Observing these trends, it becomes evident that this is not the America we once knew, but rather a reflection of the overall decline of the United States. Therefore, today I will summarize the debate surrounding this decline of America. Is the United States truly in decline? We can certainly see signs of this decline, but to what extent and in what form is it progressing, and will another force capable of replacing the United States emerge? This ultimately leads to discussions about China. I will synthesize these points to examine the decline debate. One thing is certain: the United States can be viewed as the country that has exercised the most extensive and multifaceted hegemony in human history. This July 4th marks the 250th anniversary of American independence. The capabilities that the United States has demonstrated include military power, economic power, and institutional...

...influence, and cultural appeal—have clearly established an unparalleled hegemonic position. No other nation could match these four aspects. Previous hegemonic powers, such as Rome or the British Empire, exercised dominance in specific regions or dimensions. However, the United States, after World War II, designed and led a rules-based or liberal international order on a global scale, which is why its significance as a hegemonic power is undeniable. Nevertheless, entering the 21st century, there are indeed many doubts about whether the United States can continue to maintain its hegemony.

The Basis for the Theory of American Decline: Military Overexpansion and Economic Polarization

When discussing the onset of America's decline, it is typically associated with the War on Terror that began during the George W. Bush administration. Engaged in this War on Terror for over twenty years, the United States has experienced what is termed overexpansion, consuming a significant amount of national power through this endeavor. Moreover, the neoconservatives at the time believed that by transforming other countries' systems into liberal democracies, they could ensure American security and global peace, which has clearly led the United States into the quagmire of overexpansion. Furthermore, it is argued that the inability to properly contain China, which emerged as a significant power during this period, has accelerated the decline of the United States.

Another perspective predicting the decline of the United States is the financial crisis that occurred in 2008. The financial crisis originating in the United States is often referred to as a twin crisis alongside the September 11 attacks, which analysts argue weakened American hegemony. The 2008 financial crisis was a result of the neoliberal wave that began in the Clinton administration in the 1980s, during which the United States, once a manufacturing powerhouse in the 1970s, saw much of its manufacturing shift to countries like South Korea, Japan, and China. Consequently, capital moved away from manufacturing to the financial sector, seeking higher short-term returns. This led to the emergence of financial capital epitomized by Wall Street, accompanied by deregulation of financial markets and the proliferation of derivatives. Additionally, the stability of jobs for workers in manufacturing deteriorated, leading to stagnation in real wages and a reduction in consumer capacity, which was artificially inflated through mechanisms like mortgage loans.

This reflects one aspect of neoliberalism, where the choice was made to maintain consumption through such means. However, as the accumulation method continued to rely on finance and debt without a foundation in the real economy, it became inherently unstable. This ultimately led to the collapse of the subprime mortgage market and the onset of a significant financial crisis originating in the United States. Thus, this crisis is not merely a temporary phenomenon or cyclical recession. It is viewed as a period of decline that fundamentally weakens American national power. A particularly notable study was published in 2019 by the Council on Foreign Relations in a special issue of Foreign Affairs titled 'What Happened to America's World?' The conclusion was that the decline of the United States was inevitable, citing three reasons: the first being the overmilitarization that began after the September 11 attacks, the second being the deepening economic polarization, and the third...

the resulting hindrance to national unity. As mentioned earlier, neoliberalism and the 2008 financial crisis have shown that the lives of white individuals with a high school education or less, particularly in the declining industrial regions, have become increasingly difficult. Nevertheless, the United States still presents itself as the wealthiest and most prosperous nation in the world. This is due to the financial capital represented by Wall Street in the East and the high-tech companies represented by Silicon Valley in the West, allowing the United States to remain a global power. However, the middle class in the manufacturing-centric Midwest has been declining, leading to a situation where those who were once well-off are becoming even wealthier, while many engaged in manufacturing are becoming poorer. This deepening economic polarization has become a fundamental factor in the overall decline of American national power.

Counterarguments to the Theory of American Decline and the Possibility of Reconfiguration

The third reason is the dysfunction of the American political system. I believe a single example suffices to illustrate this point. Many will remember the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot. In the 1980s, the United States was seen as a beacon on a hill, a representation of democracy, yet the occurrence of a riot at the Capitol is a significant shock, clearly demonstrating the extent to which the American political system is no longer functioning as it once did. The three factors—overexpansion, economic polarization, and dysfunction of American democracy—are recognized as core drivers of American decline. Conversely, there are counterarguments to the theory of American decline. Is the United States truly in decline? While the liberal international order led by the United States has fundamentally weakened compared to the past, a group of scholars argues that rather than collapsing, it is more likely to be reconfigured and sustained.

Therefore, it is suggested that this is not so much a decline as a process of reconfiguration. The primary reason for this is that the United States still maintains overwhelming military power, the dollar as the central currency, a financial economic system, and a network of multilateral alliances that remain effective. The military power, economic system, dollar hegemony, and alliance structure continue to constitute a core part of the global order. It is also argued that no country, often mentioned as China, can replace this structure.

Moreover, despite the many challenges faced during the second term of the Trump administration, it is clear that allied nations still prefer the various powers that the United States possesses. Therefore, the notion of American decline does not imply a complete collapse but rather a process of reconfiguration. It is believed that the United States can still regain a significant position. Additionally, American hegemony continues to operate strongly through soft power and network power. Beyond military and economic power, cultural influence, education, research, technology, media, and popular culture remain substantial assets that uphold the United States, and its influence remains formidable.

Consequently, despite the existence of challengers to the United States, particularly China, the structural conditions necessary to replace the American hegemonic order have not yet matured. Thus, it is argued that the United States will maintain its superiority within the overall power structure. However, there are also strong claims that the Trump administration has engaged in self-destructive decline by undermining many of the advantages that the United States possesses. Secondly, those opposing the notion of American decline argue for the resilience of American democracy. As mentioned earlier, while there are signs of dysfunction in American democracy...

some argue that this is one of the three factors of decline, while others believe that despite the current situation, American democracy can overcome these challenges. Although there are indications of dysfunction in the internal political system and economic polarization, these are seen not as precursors to the collapse of American hegemony but rather as factors providing incentives and momentum for the reinvention of the liberal order. The United States has faced similar crises in the past and has successfully reestablished its hegemony through institutional reforms and renewed cooperation with allies. Therefore, it is argued that the decline of the United States is not a short-term phenomenon and cannot be completely replaced.

To summarize, the economic, financial, military, institutional, and cultural assets that the United States possesses remain unparalleled as a single superpower. Other countries currently lack the capacity or willingness to replace the American-led order. Furthermore, the United States has historically overcome crises and reestablished its hegemony through institutional reinvention. Thus, it is suggested that American hegemony is not fundamentally in decline but rather in a phase of adjustment and reconfiguration. I agree with this assertion. Therefore, let us evaluate and summarize. Is this an absolute collapse or a relative reconfiguration? As I have already indicated, the likelihood of relative reconfiguration is high. This is because the current phase is more likely to be viewed as a process of reconfiguration rather than the end of hegemony. As mentioned, there are clear signs of American decline, and the material state of superiority is significantly different from before. While China and many other countries may not be able to maintain the material superiority that the United States enjoyed in 1945, I believe that the institutional and normative foundations still possess considerable resilience. The reconfiguration of economic foundations, limitations of military influence, and erosion of normative leadership are acting in concert to create a relative weakening of hegemony.

Future Scenarios for the International Order: Managed Reconfiguration, Competitive Multipolarity, and Rapid Hegemonic Transition

Its military influence has also weakened, as mentioned earlier, in its capacity to provide global security public goods. Furthermore, the normative leadership is being eroded, as seen in the Trump administration's actions that harshly undermine the liberal international order. However, these developments indicate a relative weakening rather than a complete collapse or dismantling of hegemony. Therefore, three scenarios are being discussed regarding the future of the United States. These discussions concern the global order as well. The first scenario is 'Managed Realignment.' This assumes that the U.S. recognizes its current structural vulnerabilities and engages in self-reflection. Specifically, it posits that following the Trump administration, the U.S. will learn from its mistakes and, through active reforms, maintain a significant degree of hegemonic superiority while gradually adjusting and adapting to the changing international environment. This path requires the U.S. to navigate a political process that addresses the chaos of the Trump administration.

If a minimum institutional consensus can be restored between the Democratic and Republican parties, rather than engaging in extreme polarization and conflict as seen currently, and if the United States can regain its leadership in innovation in sectors such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, clean energy, and strategic technologies, while decisively revitalizing NATO and various alliances including South Korea, then the first scenario suggests that the United States could certainly rise again as a hegemonic power through managed reconfiguration. The second scenario appears to be the most realistic. It can be termed competitive multipolarity, where the current trend continues without significant shocks. In this scenario, the United States maintains its status as the strongest unitary state, while China, the European Union, and India transition into a genuinely competitive multipolar system. Consequently, while the United States previously held monopolistic influence over norms and order, it would now lose some of that influence, and international institutions would evolve into products of negotiation and compromise among multiple actors rather than being solely driven by the United States.

This situation has often been compared to the European cooperative system established after the French Revolution, centered around five countries: Britain, Austria, Russia, Prussia, and France. Importantly, if such a situation arises, it would lead to a loss of the relative stability that the unipolar system of the 1990s enjoyed, increasing the likelihood of regional conflicts and the risk of proxy wars between great powers. Additionally, it could accompany instability in the provision of international public goods.

However, the United States still possesses key assets such as nuclear deterrence, the dollar as the central currency, technological superiority, and an alliance network. Nevertheless, it can no longer function as the sole architect of the international order, capable of designing and managing it independently. This scenario is likely to be the most realistic basic scenario for the next 10 to 20 years. The final scenario is a rapid hegemonic transition. This is the most destructive and least likely path, but it cannot be entirely ruled out. It involves multiple structural shocks occurring simultaneously. For example, if China embarks on military adventurism in the Taiwan Strait and the United States fails to intervene or avoids intervention, this could lead to a serious challenge and crisis of trust in the dollar hegemony, resulting in a rapid weakening of the U.S.-led alliance network and potentially leading to its disintegration. If this path materializes, the international community may no longer trust the role of the United States as the existing hegemon.

Choices in American Domestic Politics and Determinants of Future International Order

In such a scenario, the United States would demonstrate a loss of both capability and will. Given this situation, the world could descend into chaos, as no new hegemon capable of fully replacing the United States, such as China, would have emerged. The likelihood of this scenario is low, but if it were to occur, the impact on the world would undoubtedly be very negative. In conclusion, these three paths are not predetermined. Since the future cannot be predicted, I have presented them as scenarios. What, then, is the most critical variable influencing these paths? I believe it ultimately lies in the political choices made within the United States.

Will the United States reconstruct its political will to challenge its own hegemony and restore its institutional and normative foundations? Or will it become mired in the internal conflicts and fragmentation seen during the Trump administration, continuing to erode that foundation? Ultimately, the question is whether the United States can overcome the dysfunction of its democracy and address the issue of polarization, thereby establishing a social foundation that allows it to engage with the world. This will be the most decisive variable in these three scenarios. Today, I have discussed the decline of the United States, the various debates surrounding it, and how this may unfold through three scenarios. Thank you for watching.