The concept of World Order

The term ‘order’ may be interpreted as an arrangement of things, as against dis-order. It could also mean a particular way of distribution of goods of values among the units-people or nations-such that a pattern or structure emerges.

• In the context of international relations, the value distributed could be power. The pattern that emerges could be egalitarian where consensual cooperation could be a feature governing relations. It could be hegemonic where domination may be the governing feature or in an oligopolistic structure exploitation may characterise international relations. Or, it could even be a variant of these.
• These patterns, for their survival and successful operation would prescribe rules or conditions that are logical. All this assumes that there exists close and frequent interaction between nations on different planes, If nations are isolated, as they were in primitive, ancient or premodern times the question of pattern would’ not arise.  
• As a result of a rise or decline in the power of nations these patterns may change. The Order is not permanent. Thus, at the end of the Gulf War 1990-91, George Bush Sr., then president of the US, suggested that such a change had occurred and a new order was emerging.
• Morton Kaplan in his book, System and Process in International Politics postulated six types of hypothetical models based on distribution of power. These systems can be arranged as a continuum on the scale of integration from Unit-Veto to hierarchical system. From these he deduced rules for their structure, survival or remaining in equilibrium. Frequent violation of these rules would herald a change in the system. To put it briefly
• The Unit Veto System; 2. Balance of Power System: 3. Loose Bi-polar System: 4. Tight Bi-polar System: 5. Universal System; and 6. Hierarchical System.
• in a Unit-veto system, each nation would be totally like to accept or reject an obligation and no rule would be valid without its acceptance.
• In a Balance of Power System. two or more states form alliances to prevent the emergence of a hegemon or a dominant power.
• In a Bi-polar System essentially the nations form two opposing groups or alliances Depending upon the discipline and solidarity. within these groups, it would be termed tight or loose Bi-polar System.  
• In a Hierarchical System. one nation is pre-dominant e a Colossus stalking the earth.
• Universal System is an idealised version of a world government ruling with the aid of international law.

These: of course, are ideal types and do not necessarily correspond with ground realities. However, it helps us in understanding the concept and operation of international system.

 All could describe the post-Second World War situation as a bi-polar one-its nature (solidarity) varying over time. moving from tight to a loose bi-polar system.