The United States is a constitutional republic founded, in principle, on the separation of powers and the rule of law. However, its conduct in certain international affairs is often interpreted as reflecting a tendency towards unilateral decision-making, supported by its political and military weight and its influential position within the United Nations Security Council and other international institutions.
This reality raises fundamental questions about the boundaries of legitimate influence and the distinction between global leadership and collective responsibility. While international institutions are expected to serve as inclusive frameworks ensuring balance and fairness, in practice some decisions appear to be shaped more by power dynamics than by strict adherence to international legal principles.
In this context, several real-world and widely discussed examples are often cited. These include proposals related to post-conflict reconstruction in Gaza, as well as arrangements concerning maritime security in the Gulf region, including insurance mechanisms designed to cover war risks for vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz. While the objectives of stability and the protection of global trade are legitimate, such initiatives raise questions regarding inclusiveness, legal grounding and the balance of roles between international and regional actors — particularly coastal states such as Sultanate of Oman and the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Another critical dimension is governance. International standards of good governance emphasise the necessity of avoiding conflicts of interest and ensuring full transparency in public affairs. This includes scrutiny of arrangements that may raise concerns about the use of public office for private or familial advantage, or the involvement of close relatives in official or state-linked transactions that could generate personal benefit. Such issues, when raised, inevitably affect institutional credibility and public trust at both domestic and international levels.
On the international judicial front, enforcement remains one of the most persistent structural challenges. The International Court of Justice has issued several landmark rulings, yet their implementation has often been partial or politically constrained. A notable example is the case of Nicaragua v United States, where the Court found the United States in violation of international law; however, the judgement was not effectively implemented.
Similarly, the Avena and Other Mexican Nationals case highlighted the gap between legal rulings and domestic execution. More recently, the provisional measures issued in South Africa v Israel have reignited debate over the capacity of the international system to ensure compliance in politically sensitive disputes, particularly in the context of divisions within the Security Council and the use of veto power.
These cases underscore a structural reality: international law often intersects with geopolitical interests, where enforcement is influenced not only by legal obligation but also by the distribution of global power. This dynamic continues to challenge the credibility and effectiveness of the international legal order.
At the same time, the global landscape is undergoing significant transformation towards multipolarity. The rise of economic and strategic groupings such as ASEAN and BRICS reflects an increasing diversification of global partnerships and a gradual shift away from concentrated centres of influence. This evolution does not necessarily imply confrontation, but rather a rebalancing of the international system towards greater plurality and strategic autonomy.
In parallel, the international financial architecture is expected to evolve, with increasing development of alternative payment systems and settlement mechanisms that may gradually reduce exclusive reliance on the US dollar. However, such a transition — if it occurs — will likely be gradual and structural rather than abrupt, given the dollar’s deep integration into global trade and finance.
The international system stands at a pivotal juncture: either it continues along a path marked by concentrated power and growing legitimacy challenges, or it gradually transitions towards a more balanced order grounded in partnership, transparency and respect for international law. Ultimately, the central challenge is not merely who leads the world, but how the world is governed in a way that ensures stability, justice and shared prosperity.
Murtadha M J Ibrahim al Jamalani
The writer is a Muscat-based insurance expert & economics researcher.
Oman Observer is now on the WhatsApp channel. Click here
