In a recent interview with The Economist, US journalist and podcaster Tucker Carlson said: "If Europe is not an ally of the United States, then China rules the world."
Whether this statement proves accurate or not, its meaning lies in what it reflects: a renewed tendency to interpret global politics through a strictly geopolitical lens — a lens that reduces international complexity to rival power blocs and shifting balances of influence.
In this context, it is often argued that the so-called "rules-based international order" is in terminal decline. This view, however, is exaggerated. Although trust in the norms and principles that underpin this order has clearly weakened, the system itself has not disappeared. Key components — such as trade regimes, security arrangements and international legal frameworks — remain in place, albeit operating less consistently and facing increasing contestation. Rather than a clear transition from order to chaos, what we are witnessing is a gradual process of fragmentation, characterized by selective conformity and increasing political friction.
Carlson's statement is therefore less of a prediction than a simplified argument about how global power operates. It highlights a fundamental insight of international relations: power is rarely exercised in isolation, but is shaped and limited by alliances, institutions, and models of cooperation. Seen in this light, such statements raise central analytical questions: How is the global order formed and maintained? What factors make it stable or unstable? And how do material capacities, institutional structures and ideological change interact in shaping the outcomes of world politics?
Rather than signaling the decline of international relations as a field of study, the current shift from a relatively coherent rules-based order to a more fragmented system of competing power centers underscores its enduring relevance. It reinforces the need for a careful analysis of how order is constructed, maintained, and sometimes lost under conditions of profound uncertainty. At the same time, it calls for overcoming broad universalistic assumptions and taking a closer look at how material capabilities, strategic alliances, and contested norms interact in shaping global politics.
For students of international relations, this moment is not one of decline but of opportunity: an opportunity to critically confront a changing world and to develop the analytical tools necessary to understand — and perhaps shape — the future of the global order.