Complexity and Regional Order; Regional Order Transition in the Complex International System

One of the core issues in the complex international system is the order management of phenomena within particular realms of the system. This study, premised on the complex phenomena within the international system, strives to address how regional order management along with regional regulation are achieved within the complex international system. The findings of this study suggest that systemic interventions, which impact the key variables of a regional system and are initiated by trans-regional actors, and hegemonic and regional power, are proposed as a means to manage issues within complex regions. However, the degree of these interventions can vary significantly, depending on whether the regions are symmetrical or asymmetrical. In symmetrical regions, given the heightened sensitivity and vulnerability of the actors involved, as well as the robust regional bond and coalition structures, there exists a Nash equilibrium, which serves as the focal point for resolving regional conflicts. In asymmetrical regions, due to the fragile nature of the bond and coalition structures and the contentious regional issues, conflicts tend to escalate. Moreover, this often leads to maximum interventions by trans-regional actors.

Introduction

Nowadays, the international security landscape is incredibly complex. The decision-making processes and conflicts within the international system are shaped by a diverse array of factors and actors, all of which exert mutual influence upon one another. While the centralization of power and the emergence of collaborative and shared structures among nations tend to reduce complexity, the increasing influence of supranational and subnational actors tends to have a somewhat opposite effect, thereby increasing complexity. Moreover, the systemic complexity has amplified the role of regional variables in shaping both international and regional developments. The question then arises: Given the complex logic that governs phenomena within the international system, how is the order management of phenomena within regional systems achieved? To put it another way, what demands does this complex logic place on the organization of regions within the international system? In response to this question, given the presumed complexity of the international system and the theoretical assumption that everything within complex systems is interconnected either directly or indirectly, it is observed that this interconnectivity heightens the sensitivity and reactivity of actors to surrounding events and phenomena. Given the significant influence of stimuli on phenomena, this will finally lead to the substitution of control management systems with classical control approaches. Therefore, the hypothesis is put forth that in complex situations, the role of fundamental and essential variables within the regional system is of utmost importance. This is especially true when considering the principle of sensitive dependence within systems for managing phenomena and achieving order. Consequently, the focus shifts towards methods that achieve order by influencing the fundamental variables of the regional system, taking into account the specific parameters of the regions. This approach replaces the classical macro control plans that were solely focused on the power of the actors. Based on this, the orderly development of the regions is shaped by changes in the fundamental and essential variables of the regional system. Furthermore, the impact of these variables becomes increasingly important for managing phenomena within these regions.

Theoretical Framework

This study centers on a systemic viewpoint and the theory of complex systems, aiming to elucidate the order within various regions. It leverages the mechanism of systemic intervention, a crucial principle in managing phenomena within complex systems. Typically, systemic intervention necessitates actions on a small series of system variables with the aim of guiding or managing the system. These variables are referred to as the fundamental system variables.
Based on this, managers and strategists should consistently employ a systemic intervention approach to review and redefine the desired value ranges of the fundamental variables within the regional system. Additionally, they should keep a close watch on the system path and the changes occurring within the systemic environment. Based on the agent’s intention behind the systemic intervention and the current systemic landscape, several level solutions emerge around the issue. Therefore, the selection of the fundamental variables within the regional system is a result of the agent’s perception or understanding of the system’s focal points and the context in which it is situated. Consequently, the selection of the system’s fundamental variables gains significance regarding the system’s operational scope, as well as its objective or abstract levels.

Research Method

Leveraging existing works/ literature and adopting a realist approach, this study centers on the concept of systemic order and complex systems, aiming to elucidate regional organization amidst complexity. The study utilizes the concept of systemic intervention to manage phenomena within profit zones. Depending on the nature of the zones, this intervention is minimally applied in symmetrical regions and maximally implemented in asymmetrical regions.
 

Result and discussion

From the complexity approach to regionalism, there are no natural regions. Instead, all regions are socially constructed and are subject to political competition among various actors. New regionalism also underscores the extent to which regionalism is a highly complex and dynamic process, one that encompasses a multitude of logics that are often in competition with each other. In complex scenarios, regions are subject to swift changes. While the attempts of various actors to tackle these changes have seen some success, they often encounter failure. An analysis of these failures suggests that the strategies regarding regional order, which are based on classical theories and assumptions, as well as general ‘one-size-fits-all’ strategies, are insufficient.
Most complex and oscillatory systems are governed by non-linear equations. Non-linear restoring forces are either symmetric or asymmetric. Within symmetrical regions, creating order takes place in light of their robust internal structures and the presence of interconnections and mutual dependencies among actors. These factors heighten the sensitivity and vulnerability of the actors and foster a sense of shared destiny. Moreover, various processes that alleviate tension and disorder are employed in this context. In symmetrical regions, the logic of strategic games is based on the Nash equilibrium. This suggests that no single regional actor has a dominant strategy that can challenge the prevailing rules of order within the region. Under the Nash equilibrium, each regional actor, given the rules that govern the region, is capable of gaining a relative understanding of the strategies employed by other regional actors. Therefore, the incentive for any one actor to deviate unilaterally from the optimal strategy is reduced. Europe and North America serve as a good example of such regions. 
In asymmetrical regions, a variety of values are present, and the regional actors find themselves in deep-seated conflicts. Within these asymmetrical regions, the logic of strategic games is based on a dominant strategy. Considering a dominant strategy, regional actors adopt a strategy that ensures their strategic advantage, without taking into account the interests of others. This strategy typically manifests in environments characterized by zero-sum games. While symmetrical regions may require minimal systemic intervention as needed, asymmetrical regions often see the application of maximal systemic intervention across all regional issues. The Middle East serves as a good example of such asymmetrical regions.

Conclusions and Recommendations

Within a complex scenario, there exist three strategies for transitioning regional disorder to regional order. This includes the presence of a hegemonic power or the concert of great powers, strong and cohesive regional governments, and finally, the presence of actors within the region who share common values. Therefore, strategies stem from three primary approaches; one is systemic, the other is regional. On a regional scale, there exists a pluralistic security community. Typically, these strategies are feasible in symmetrical regions. The third strategy is implemented at the systemic level and takes a macro view, signifying the commitment of major powers to maintain peace and order within the region. Considering the multitude of factors impacting the interactions between actors in asymmetrical regions, many of which are uncontrollable, a practical approach to tackle this challenge is to create an order with the presence or involvement of major powers. This approach which is used to bring a firm order within these regions, is achieved through ongoing engagement with the region’s existing phenomena.