Maria Francheska M.

Garcia March 22, 2018

The Oughtness of the Liberal International Order in line with Cicero and Polybius

The Liberal International Order was established at the end of World War 2 to increase
international cooperation in the sphere of economics and governance because it ought to be
impartial, equal and respects the sovereignty of each nation. In their separate writings, Polybius
and Cicero both believed in the existence of a mixed constitution as the best form of government
and both would conceive an idea of the modern-day principle or idea of separation of powers. Of
course today, and I mean the 2018, concepts such as mixed constitutions and separation of powers
are not uncommon nor or are they simply theory but is something even the

In 2017 the Aurea Foundation hosted their semi-annual Munk Debate in Toronto with the
chilling question on whether the Liberal International Order (LIO) was really over. However,
before going into the debate and some of the points that were brought up by the contestants, one
detail is important that needs to be take of note of; the undisputed existence of a Liberal
International Order. In the wake of the second World War the United States and other similar
western countries that boasted of having a liberal government established the LIO with the
principles of “openness, multilateral institutions, security cooperation and democratic solidarity”
(Ikenbery. 2018, p.7). Mazarr et al. (2017, p. xiii-xiv) examined many of today’s examples of these
institutions would be the United Nations, North Athletic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the
World Trade Organization (WTO), all of which involve the cooperation of various liberal countries
in the international stage with one another, and noted that due to a combination of factors that the
LIO has become weaker compared to when it was first established. In their debate Niall Ferguson
and Fareed Zakaria based their arguments heavily on whether the existence of LIO is benefitting
the world as a whole rather than just its principle benefactors. Without going into too much detail,
one debater focused on the differences between the world to what is was hundred or even before
WWII and found it better while the other focused on the multitude of issues facing and experienced
by various countries due to the LIO. A commonality found in both debaters presented was their
discussions on what the world is presently like due to LIO but not what it ought to be. Not too
surprising considering that it was not the topic of their debate however in order to understand what
the LIO is supposed to be then the writings of Cicero and Pylibius come into mind.

One of the key functions or features of the LIO is on international cooperation. This is
evident in its institutions and its roles like NATO and WTO which are about economic competition
and cooperation while the UN is about coming up with peaceful solutions faced by the world and
in individual countries. In his writings Cicero’s one of companions firmly stated that man should
be concerned with the world outside themselves unless they wish to live in ignorance (19 p. 60).
This belief comes from the Stoic philosophy that the universe is for men and the gods is a common
subject raised in Cicero’s ‘On the Commonwealth’. As stated earlier, both Cicero and Polybius
believed that the traditional classification for political systems were doomed to degenerate into
their lesser forms. Cicero (43-45 pp. 69-70) believed that in monarchies and aristocracies the rights
of the people are not kept in mind in that in the former the people do not have “access to shared
justice or to deliberative responsibility” and in the latter it is the same since only a few of the
people get to share in it. In regards to democracy however, when everybody has a voice or opinion
to state then there is no “recognition of status”. Because of these deficiencies, all of these systems
would eventually degrade to their lesser forms of tyranny, oligarchy and rule of the mob. This idea
can be related to the LIO in three ways; a.) No single country can claim ownership or dominion of
any of the institutions, b.) Countries stand on equal footing with one another and c.) Though the
systems in the United Nations, for example, are designed in such a way that it is democratic there
are procedures in place to make the process more efficient. Moving on to the ideas of Polybius. In
his writings, Polybius presents the basic idea of separation of powers. He does so by enumerating
the functions and roles of three important members of the Roman state; the Consuls who handle
the administrative matters of the state, the Senate who are responsible for the treasury and the
distribution of funds and lastly, the people who have the most important of holding society together
through honor and punishment which he continues by saying only then can “decide on matter of
life and death” (12-14, pp. 10-11). Each of these members would then be responsible for keeping
each other in check in that the Consul needs the support of the Senate and the people to perform
their duty, the Senate needs the approval of the people for certain matters and the Tribunes could
declare veto and the people need to obey the orders of the Consuls and the Senate for peace and
order to be achieved (15-17, pp. 12-13). He goes on to say that the result of these is the duty to
correct abuses and give aid to one another (18, pp. 13-14). In regards to the LIO, it can then be
surmised that it ought to avoid being a unitary institution in the sense that it could infringe on the
sovereignty of nations but it ought to move towards the common good of all. The UN is a perfect
example of this in that it cannot make unilateral decisions without the agreement of its members
and it has to respect the autonomy of countries.

One might wonder whether Cicero and Polybius ideas can even be applied to something
like the United Nations in that it is not a government per se in the sense in that its citizens don’t
belong to a single state but a multitude. That way in thinking is limiting in that Cicero and Polybius
never could have imagined an institution or body such as the UN because the idea at that time that
different states with different leaders could work together for the common good was even possible
since he lived in a time where the Roman Republic was attempting to extend its reach through
territorial expansion. The quality that makes thinkers and writers such as Aristotle, Plato, Cicero,
Polybius and many other great names so relevant even hundreds of years after they died is their
ideas. Questions on governance, human nature and on society are universal because they affect
man every single day of their lives so the ideas of great philosophers or men will be remembered
and configured to answer the problems of today. In the case of today’s problem on the weakening
LIO then it becomes more imperative to understand what the problem is and reconnect it to what
it ought to be which is encouraging international cooperation but remaining as an institution that
is impartial, equal yet respectful of to each nation.

Reference List

Cicero. ‘On the Commonwealth and On the Laws’. In J Zetzel (ed.). Cambridge Text in the
Political Thought. Cambridge
John Ikenberry, G 2018, ‘The end of liberal international order?’, International Affairs, vol. 94,
Issue 1, Pages 7–23
Mazarr, J, Cevallos, A, Priebe, M, Radin, A, Reedy, K, Rothenberg, A, Thompson, J, Willcox, J
2017, ‘Measuring the Health of the Liberal International Order’. RAND Corporation. Santa
Monica, CA
Polybius. 2002. ’The Histories of Polybius’. In Parenthesis Publications: Greek Series.
Cambridge, Ontario