What are the potential risks to the world hidden in the current unipolar system of US hegemony?
Introduction
Hegemony is used to demote the increased prevalence of one state on a global platform with regard to domination of its world power in terms of economic power, socio-cultural supremacy, political influence and economic power (Ikenberry 52). The present unipolar state of United States hegemony implies that there is no single state or a regional block that has the potential of challenging United States power. The unipolar nature of the United States hegemony commenced after the collapse of the Soviet Union, leaving the world with only one super power whose influence is felt across the major global spheres including economic and political influence. It is has been projected that in future, coalition of the Republic of China, India and Russia could impose significant challenges on the United States hegemony (Ikenberry 55). The unipolar nature of the United States increases its dominance in almost all global economic sectors and technological sectors (Mastanduno 135). The unipolar hegemony of the United States poses potential risks to the world. The main purpose of this paper is to explore the potential risks to the world associated with the unipolar United States hegemony.
The unipolar United States hegemony poses a significant threat to the aspect of international order under the international system. The international system comprises of poles that are determined by the resources available to the state to achieve their goals, the size and population of the state, economic capability, military and economic power, governance and institutional competence and resource endowment (Burman 104). A unipolar system puts the United States in a position that it can jeopardize the coexistence of the international system through a violation of the international law and the generally accepted codes of conduct during international relations. This is notable in the cause of United States use of force against Iraq and Afghanistan, which can be mainly attributed to its unipolar hegemony due to institutional competence. Such a position questions the motives of the unipolar hegemony of the United States and whether the country can compromise international order at the expense of national interests. A notable trend is the continuous involvement in other country’s affairs by the United States, which may threaten their sovereignty at the expense of the national interests of the single superpower, which in this case is the United States. In addition, unipolar hegemony puts the United States in a position that it can refuse to consent to the provisions of the international law and order, implying that the actions undertaken by the US cannot be questioned using the provisions of international legal frameworks (Michael and Georg 254). The situation is worsened by the fact the United States may be antagonistic against states and regional coalitions that are potential threat to its superpower through engaging in preventive wars. Preventive actions by the US are only a stopgap in the effective functioning of the United States. This evidence can be used to claim that an imminent risk associated with the unipolar hegemony of the United States is that it threatens the existence and core functions of an international system and society (Edward 105).
The second imminent risk associated with the unipolar United States hegemony is that the decisions that the country can impose widespread global impacts. The widespread dominance of the United States in most of the global spheres implies that any decision that the nation makes spirals to a global perspective. This implies that any failures in its social, economic and political system are likely to be felt globally. For instance, the Great Depression and the recent global recession mainly originated from the economic failures in the United States and spread to other parts of the world due to its economic dominance (Huntington 155). In addition, cultural transformations in the United States are likely to be felt by the conservative countries due to the increasing globalization, which serves to strengthen the unipolarity of the United States hegemony. This implies that the current unipolar hegemony of the United States imposes has the capability of spiraling impacts associated with the failure of the various systems in the United States (Thomas and David 54). This is in turn increases the potential of various societies rising against the unipolar hegemony, something which can be argued to have contributed to the increasing cases associated with terrorism. It is notable that terrorism in the United States is mostly directed against the widespread cultural and political influence of the United States in Islamic countries. It is arguably evident that the unipolar hegemony of the United States imposes significant constraints on the functions of the systems of a state due to the global impacts associated with the failures of the United States systems of governance (Lobell 115). This can be argued to have played a significant role in accelerating the recent global recession of 2008 to other parts of the world, mainly due to the failures in the United States economic system. The primary areas of concern is with regard to the unilateral decision making of the United States, which poses significant concerns relating to the infallibility of the United States decisions on other countries. This has resulted to cases associated with United States embarking on the promotion of self interest at the expense of the international law, fair trade, the environment and disregard of the accepted human rights standards. It can be summed up using this evidence that the unipolar United States hegemony poses significant constraints on global stability (Huntington 155).
Another imminent risk associated with the unipolar hegemony of the United States is that there is no balance of power, as in the case before the Cold War. The previous bipolar hegemony was notable by mutual deterrence among the superpowers, with each of the superpowers offering collective security to their various allies. This balance of powers played an integral role in regulating economic and political systems (Layne 160). This is not the case with the present unipolar hegemony of the United States, which comprises of a global collective action undertaken by a single actor that is strong and undertakes its security and political actions unilaterally. The lack of balance of power compels some states to rise against the hegemony of the United States because there is no counterpart superpower that the United States can compete against as in the case before the collapse of the Soviet Union. The inference that can be made from this approach is that we are an era whereby the United States constantly challenges the collective good for its self-interests (Layne 165). This is mainly due to the fact that the United States perceives its antagonists as constraining its responsibilities while others are a potential threat to its national and global security. Such an approach only serves to increase the global susceptibility to instability and security. In the attempts to outperform the unipolar United States hegemony, the concept of soft balancing has been adopted by countries with the main objective of frustrating, delaying and undermining the implementation of the United States policies at the global platform (Mastanduno 130). This has resulted to the onset of second-tier and emerging powers that are relying on economic interests and reinforcing regional security as a strategy for curtailing the hegemonic impacts of the United States (Wohlforth 160). It is arguably evident that the current age of globalization and terrorism, outcomes of unipolar hegemony by the United States, has resulted to indirect exchange of the indirect threats among countries and the terrorist organizations. This results to the creation of a somewhat volatile environment, especially in regions and places where elements of the United States are visible such as embassies and global NGOs under the United States (Lobell 110).
Conclusion
This paper has discussed the potential risks associated with the present system of unipolar United States hegemony. The paper has identified that the risks include a significant threat to the aspect of international order under the international system, the decisions that the country can impose widespread global impacts and that there is no balance of power. An integration of the above factors imposes significant constraints to the attainment of global stability and security because there is no competing superpower and that emerging power and second-tier powers are using soft balancing as a method for offsetting the hegemonic impacts of the United States, which in turn has the potential of resulting to increased volatility in the global arena.

Works cited
Burman, Stephen. America in the modern world: the transcendence of United States hegemony. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.
Huntington, Samuel. “The Lonely Superpower.” Foreign Affairs (1999): 155.
Ikenberry, George. America unrivaled: the future of the balance of power. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002.
Layne, Christopher. “The Waning of U.S. Hegemony—Myth or Reality?: A Review Essay.” International Security (2009): 147-172.
Lobell, Steven. The Challenge of Hegemony: Grand Strategy, Trade, and Domestic Politics. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, 2005.
Mastanduno, Mark. “System Maker and Privilege Taker: US Power and the International Political Economy.” World Politics (2009): 121-154.
Michael, Byers and Nolte Georg. United States hegemony and the foundations of international law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Edward, Brown. New global dangers: changing dimensions of international security. New York: MIT Press, 2004.
Thomas, Mowle, and Sacko David. The Unipolar World An Unbalanced Future. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007.
Wohlforth, William. “The stability of a unipolar world.” International Security (1999): 145-165.