For several centuries, the Western liberal order has claimed not only political dominance but also moral authority in shaping the global system. Today, that authority is increasingly under strain. Economic power, political influence and normative legitimacy – once concentrated largely within the Western world – are gradually diffusing across regions and cultures. What is unfolding, therefore, is not merely a geopolitical shift but the gradual unravelling of an ideological and institutional framework that long presented itself as a universal model of global governance.The present moment marks a phase of transition in which this inherited order is being questioned, its contradictions exposed and its structures reconfigured in ways that remain uncertain.Historically, the liberal international order emerged within Europe. Its intellectual foundations lay in Enlightenment ideas emphasising individual rights, rationality and economic freedom, while institutionally it evolved around the state-centric system crystallised after the Peace of Westphalia (1648). Over time, this political framework became intertwined with capitalist economic structures centred on individualism, private property and expanding market relations and opportunities.Yet the universal claims of the liberal order coexisted with enduring structures of domination. Colonial conquest, racial hierarchies and systematic economic extraction accompanied the global expansion of Western power. European colonialism, often justified through claims of civilisational superiority, subjected vast regions of Asia, Africa and the Americas to political subordination and exploitation. In this sense, liberalism functioned not only as a set of normative ideals but also, at times, as an ideological framework that helped legitimise and sustain Western predominance while obscuring deeper patterns of structural inequality. In practice, the liberal order thus operated not merely as a universal framework of values, but also as an elite system serving dominant interests.This contradiction was particularly evident in the economic sphere. The doctrine of “free trade”, presented as a universal principle of economic liberty, was at times enforced through coercive means to serve colonial interests. The nineteenth-century wars against China to compel the continuation of the opium trade remain a stark illustration of how liberal economic ideals could be used to legitimise practices that were ethically indefensible and socially destructive.Such episodes reveal how the language of economic freedom coexisted with – and at times masked – structures of domination and extraction.The moral foundations of this order were frequently articulated in utilitarian terms: policies were justified insofar as they served the perceived “greater good”, often defined by dominant elites. Yet the very definition of this “greater good” was itself shaped by those interests, raising enduring questions about whose welfare was prioritised and at whose expense.Within capitalist economies, wealth accumulation and market expansion often took precedence over social justice, human dignity and ecological balance, leading to vast inequalities, recurring crises and environmental degradation.The liberal order also displayed a persistent ethical duality. While principles such as democracy, human rights and the rule of law were upheld within Western societies, their application in international relations was often selective. Colonial domination, racial discrimination and economic exploitation stood in tension with professed universal ideals. Democracy itself, at times, functioned as a legitimising façade for deeper structures of geopolitical power.The twentieth century dramatically exposed these contradictions. Two devastating world wars originating in Europe revealed the destructive capacities of the supposedly “civilised” world, while the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki underscored the extent to which modern warfare could disregard not only humanitarian principles but human life itself. Yet these crises also prompted limited processes of institutional reform within the Western system.The devastation of Europe during the Second World War accelerated decolonisation, weakening Western control over vast regions and enabling newly independent states to pursue more autonomous trajectories. Although constrained by inherited structures and continued Western dominance, the post-colonial moment nonetheless opened new possibilities for political and developmental reorientation.Despite decolonisation, the post-war international system remained largely centred on Western power. Institutions such as the United Nations, alongside the consolidation of international humanitarian law and the human rights regime, reflected a recognition of the need for collective security and normative restraint, even as their structures reproduced existing hierarchies. Similarly, the Bretton Woods institutions – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank – sought to stabilise the global economy while preserving Western influence over its direction.In Europe, integration culminating in the European Union aimed to transcend earlier rivalries. With the decline of European empires, the United States emerged as the principal architect of the liberal international order. During the Cold War – and especially after its end – it positioned itself as the defender of a “rules-based international order” grounded in liberal democracy and capitalist integration. For a time, this system appeared largely unchallenged.Over time, however, its contradictions became increasingly visible. The claim of Western moral superiority has come under growing scrutiny, particularly in light of the selective application of international law and humanitarian principles. Conflicts ranging from Korea and Vietnam to Afghanistan and Iraq have often revealed a gap between proclaimed norms and strategic practice.At the same time, the diffusion of nuclear weapons has introduced a profound paradox: their indiscriminate destructive capacity undermines the very humanitarian frameworks that the liberal order claims to uphold.Recent conflicts further illustrate the limits of military power. From Vietnam and Iraq to Afghanistan and the ongoing war in Ukraine, technologically advanced states have struggled to translate military superiority into durable political outcomes. The human, economic and political costs have been immense, often eroding the very legitimacy such interventions seek to sustain.President of the German Bundestag Julia Klockner, and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy meeting in Kyiv, Ukraine, March 11, 2026. Photo: AP/PTI.The continuing conflict in Palestine has intensified these perceptions. Unconditional Western support for Israeli policies, despite widespread civilian suffering and disregard for international law, has raised serious questions about the credibility of Western commitments to human rights. Israel’s military campaign in Gaza following the attacks of October 2023 has come under particular scrutiny for its scale and humanitarian consequences, especially among civilian populations. The magnitude of destruction has generated global concern and protest, including within Western societies themselves, where established political alignments are increasingly contested, particularly by youth and women.These developments underscore the moral and political costs of overwhelming military force. Even where strategic superiority exists, prolonged conflict has often resulted in declining legitimacy and growing resistance. At the same time, they have revived global discussions around alternative political solutions, including renewed attention to the two-state framework.The timing and conduct of escalatory actions – particularly in relation to Iran – have further raised questions about the consistency of commitments to diplomacy and peaceful resolution. For many observers, such patterns reflect a recurring tension in which strategic imperatives – often ill-conceived – override normative commitments.Beyond their immediate political effects, such conflicts carry significant economic consequences. Instability in the Gulf region, particularly around critical chokepoints such as the Strait of Hormuz, poses systemic risks to global energy flows and the wider economy. Even ongoing and attempted disruptions of transit through this route have already impacted global energy markets, triggering price volatility, inflationary pressures and economic instability. These effects are especially severe for energy-importing economies in the Global South, where such shocks carry far-reaching developmental and social consequences.More broadly, these developments point to an ongoing diffusion of global power. While the United States remains a central actor, its capacity to shape outcomes unilaterally appears increasingly constrained. This has created space for other powers, most notably China, to expand their influence through sustained investments in strategic sectors such as artificial intelligence, advanced manufacturing, renewable energy and digital infrastructure.At the same time, shifting alignments reflect growing strategic autonomy among states. Emerging platforms such as BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, alongside evolving regional partnerships, signal a gradual reconfiguration of global cooperation beyond traditional Western-led frameworks. Even longstanding alliances are showing signs of differentiation in response to changing geopolitical realities.The crisis of the liberal order is not only institutional but also moral. Recent public scandals in the United States involving powerful elites, combined with institutionalised political corruption, have reinforced perceptions of a widening gap between proclaimed ethical and democratic values and actual practices, deepening concerns about accountability and the integrity of governance.Taken together, these developments reveal widening fissures in the Western monopoly over political, economic and normative power. At the same time, the emergence of new centres of power and expanding spaces of resistance suggests that the world may be entering a phase of systemic transformation.Moments of crisis, however, also contain the seeds of renewal. The diffusion of power across regions and cultures may open possibilities for a more pluralistic and genuinely universal global order. The growing engagement of youth movements, civil society networks and women’s activism reflects an emerging demand for norms that transcend partiality and narrow geopolitical interests, moving toward genuinely universal application.Such a transformation will not unfold without resistance. Entrenched interests and geopolitical rivalries remain formidable obstacles. Yet the broader direction of change appears increasingly clear: the concentration of power and moral authority once claimed by the Western world is gradually eroding.An important dimension – and a key driver – of this transformation lies in the democratisation of media. The expansion of global communication networks, particularly the diffusion of social media, has disrupted longstanding monopolies over the production and dissemination of information. This has enabled the emergence of diverse voices and counter-narratives, reshaping global discourse while also raising new challenges of credibility and fragmentation.The world thus stands at a moment of profound transition. The Western-defined liberal international order faces a legitimacy crisis, even as a more diffuse and contested configuration of power begins to take shape. Whether this transition leads to a more just and stable system will depend on the capacity to construct an inclusive global order grounded in universally applied principles of dignity, equality and justice.In this sense, the present conjuncture represents not only a geopolitical shift but also a deeper challenge to the political, economic, military, technological and, most significantly, epistemological hegemony of the Western order. The critical question concerns the direction of this transformation. If current trends toward pluralisation persist, the emerging order may prove more inclusive and less hegemonic, particularly in an increasingly informed and emancipatory world characterised by diffuse centres of power that open new possibilities for the weak and the vulnerable.An enduring global order can no longer rest on dominance but must instead be grounded in justice and inclusivity of genuinely universal application. This trajectory is rooted in the longer historical process set in motion by decolonisation in the mid-twentieth century.Noor Ahmad Baba, a political scientist and International Relations expert, is former Dean, School of Social Sciences, Central University of Kashmir.