global order Quotes

The sovereignty of states must be subordinated to international law and international institutions.

The principal role of the President of the United States is the security of the country and participating in trying to stabilize the world.

I think that running empires as a way of ordering the world is a flawed model.

A Trump presidency - neutral between dictatorships and democracies, opposed to free trade, skeptical of traditional U.S. defense alliances, hostile to immigration - would mark the collapse of the entire architecture of the U.S.-led post-World War II global order.

One thing worse than an America that is too strong, the world will learn, is an America that is too weak.

The path to democratic capitalism ended the previous world order of empires..

I'm not a multilateralist against anybody. I'm a multilateralist because I believe in a multilateral order.

Most of the conversation about how geopolitics is changing in the 21st century focuses on the shift from west to east and on how we're moving from the bipolar power equation of the Cold War to a new bipolar relationship, that of the U.S. and China, that determines the mood music for everyone else.

For nearly 7 decades United States has been the anchor of global security. This is meant more than forging international agreements. It has meant enforcing them.

Only together do Europe and the U.S. stand a chance of keeping liberal democracy as the central doctrine for organizing world affairs.

I believe that if America does not lead, others will - others who do not share our interests and our values - and the world will grow darker, for our friends and for us.

To solve the problem of organizing world peace we must establish world law and order.

World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimisation.

The strength of our economy allows us to maintain the mightiest military in the world, effectively enforcing a Pax Americana.

I believe the liberal international order is under assault from Russia, and from other authoritarian regimes, and it is being questioned from within the West by nationalists, by nativists, and by people who doubt our - doubt the values of the West. We've gone through periods like this before; in the '70s, after Vietnam and Watergate, and certainly in the '30s, when people thought liberal democracy was dead, and the future belonged either to the fascists or the communists.

From the end of WWI to today, American economic might would be the decisive factor in the shaping of the world order.

In a shrinking world, the absence of order among nations is becoming less and less tolerable.

Russia and China completely disagree with the international order that was established after World War II, and they're trying to take it apart right before our eyes.

ISIS is attempting to rebrand Islam as an ideology that justifies violence and brutality. It rejects the kind of global order our nation has sacrificed so much to achieve.

Unlike President Obama, I would say that I support the long-standing bipartisan post-war belief that American global strength and leadership secures our national-security interests, and it also promotes order and stability in the world. And it gives us immense influence in the world and deters our adversaries and reassures our allies.

We need Trump to lead the liberal democratic order around the world. No other nation can do that the way we can, and it's going to be very hard for Congress to do it over his opposition.

The current world order was built largely without Chinese participation, and hence China sometimes feels less bound than others by its rules.

Wars are not all evil, they are part of the grand machinery by which this world is governed.

In the long march of history, at least two poles of attraction and antagonism have been the norm in world politics. Rarely has only one nation carried the burden of leadership. The unipolar world of the 21st century, dominated for the past two decades by the United States, is a historical anomaly.

In the longer run, I happen to think that Russia really has no choice but to become gradually more associated with the Euro-Atlantic community. Because if it isn't, then it's going to find itself essentially facing China all by itself, facing the Euro-Atlantic community all by itself.