Lorenzo Maria Pacini
The return of identities and values, their reaffirmation, and their reintegration into educational processes mark the advent of a world different from the one shaped by the Anglo-American hegemon.
Fukuyama was wrong
In 1989, Francis Fukuyama put forward his famous thesis of the "end of history," arguing that the triumph of liberal ideology and values had marked the definitive culmination of humanity's political evolution. According to this interpretation, the end of the Cold War represented the victory of liberal democracy as the optimal form of government and of market capitalism as the most effective economic model, thus putting an end to major global ideological conflicts. The figure of the "last man," described by Fukuyama as content, prosperous but devoid of higher ideals, hinted at the birth of a universal and "post-historical" identity.
The subsequent evolution of international relations, however, has revealed the limits of this perspective. U.S. "democratization" policies in the Middle East, inspired at least in part by this vision and often paying little attention to local political and cultural specificities, have contributed to a series of interventions and revolutions that have destabilized the entire region. At the same time, while liberal values have frequently been employed by some states as a political tool or as a justification for certain actions, there has been a growing revaluation of national and traditional values in numerous parts of the world, including Western countries themselves.
The demand for alternative political models, perceived as more equitable and respectful of local particularities, has found expression in platforms such as BRICS and the SCO. The Ukrainian crisis has also highlighted how the confrontation between Russia and the West has increasingly taken on the contours of a clash rooted in values and worldviews, rather than a mere post-Soviet ethno-political conflict.
Western-led economic globalization has ultimately fostered the rise of new power centers in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. This process has fueled regionalization dynamics that, in many cases, have strengthened regional collective identities. Countries such as Russia, China, India, and Turkey increasingly draw on a civilizational narrative in their domestic and foreign policies, and some of them explicitly define themselves as "civilizational states."
These developments are just a few examples that refute the vision of a "homogeneous universal state" of international relations imagined by Fukuyama nearly forty years ago. They demonstrate that regional, national, and local contexts continue to play a central role, perhaps even more significant than in the past.
Contemporary international trends have generated a growing demand for alternative political perspectives and distinctive forms of self-identification, in opposition to cultural and political homogenization. Liberal universalism is increasingly balanced by a phenomenon that can be defined as "authentic pluralism." Alongside the multipolarity of international relations, a new dimension is in fact emerging: the "multipolarity of meanings."
This does not point to a postmodern world dominated by purely subjective interpretations, but rather to a reality characterized by the growing complexity of international processes. It presupposes a pluralism of political ideologies and value systems, capable of simultaneously reflecting universal and national perspectives, as well as the freedom of individuals and communities to identify themselves based on their own historical and cultural heritage.
In other words, ideology, values, and identity are assuming ever greater importance in contemporary international relations, highlighting the need for a broader use of constructivist approaches to understand their dynamics. The following case studies demonstrate how these factors influence the foreign policies of various states and how they can be utilized as tools for political action.
The return of political Ideology beyond the Paradigm
In contemporary international relations, ideology is frequently regarded as a secondary variable compared to factors such as material capabilities, security needs, or economic interdependence. Such an approach, however, risks overlooking the role played by shared meanings, normative assumptions, and socially constructed conceptions of legitimacy in shaping world politics. As the liberal international order faces growing challenges, ideology has returned to the center of theoretical and analytical debate, no longer as a rigid and all-encompassing doctrine, but as an interpretive framework through which states understand the world order, define their political identity, and justify their foreign policy choices.
From a constructivist perspective, ideology serves as a link between values, identity, and state behavior. The renewed centrality of bloc dynamics constitutes a particularly significant example of this phenomenon. New forms of international alignment are often explained by reference to the redistribution of global power or strategic considerations. Although these factors are certainly relevant, they are not sufficient to fully explain contemporary patterns of cooperation and aggregation.
The formation of today's blocs reflects not only changes in the material capabilities of actors but also differing interpretations of sovereignty, democracy, development, and global governance. These divergences emerge with particular clarity in relations between traditional liberal powers and the states commonly included in the category of the "Global South," where historical experiences and postcolonial trajectories contribute to the construction of alternative visions of the international political order.
In this context, ideology once again assumes a fundamental role as an interpretive category. From a constructivist perspective, the resurgence of bloc politics cannot be explained solely through shifts in power relations or the distribution of resources. It also reflects transformations in the ideational structures that influence how states perceive the international environment, define what they consider legitimate behavior, and construct their collective identities.
Ideology can therefore be interpreted as a shared system of meanings that shapes expectations, fosters forms of collective positioning, and delimits the range of foreign policy options considered acceptable. Contrary to what some post-Cold War analyses predicted, ideology has not disappeared; it has simply altered its modes of expression.
Contemporary blocs are no longer organized around rigid doctrinal oppositions, but around shared narratives that challenge or reinterpret fundamental aspects of the liberal international order. These narratives propose different conceptions of sovereignty, political legitimacy, and models of development. From this perspective, ideology functions not so much as a comprehensive, all-encompassing project, but rather as a constitutive element of international political discourse.
Particularly significant is the role played by the concept of the "Global South." It does not simply represent a geographical category, but an identity construct endowed with strong political and normative significance. The invocation of colonial history, structural inequalities, and marginalization within global governance institutions contributes to the formation of a common language through which states advance claims for autonomy and greater representation.
Within this discursive framework, practices such as non-alignment, the strategic diversification of partnerships, and selective participation in sanctions regimes are presented as coherent expressions of broader principles linked to national sovereignty and strategic independence.
The ideology thus operates on multiple levels. On the narrative level, it influences how states explain their actions and respond to external expectations. At the institutional level, it helps shape support for new multilateral organizations or for the reform of existing ones. At the behavioral level, it manifests itself through practices such as flexible multilateralism and the formation of thematic coalitions. These behaviors are influenced not only by material incentives but also by shared conceptions of appropriateness, legitimacy, and justice.
New bloc configurations can therefore be interpreted as attempts to renegotiate the normative structure of global governance. They do not necessarily seek to completely replace the existing international order, but rather to achieve greater inclusion of different political, institutional, and development models. In this sense, ideology continues to hold considerable analytical relevance, as it helps define how states understand their role within a transforming international system.
Identity and Values, the great return
Identity represents one of the fundamental concepts of the constructivist approach to international relations. It allows us to understand how world politics is not determined exclusively by the distribution of material power, but also by socially constructed meanings, collective memories, and shared cultural references.
An analysis of identity helps explain why states with similar material conditions may adopt profoundly different behaviors and why cultural, historical, and normative factors can exert an influence equal to, if not greater than, that of military or economic power. Identity, in fact, plays a decisive role in defining national interests, shaping foreign policy, and configuring global interactions.
In the case of macro-regions, the existence of a shared identity often forms the foundation of regional cooperation processes. However, such identities can come into tension with universalistic, globalist visions, generally associated with values promoted by the West.
One of the main tools through which Western values are disseminated globally is educational cooperation. The training of new foreign elites constitutes a long-term investment that serves strategic geopolitical interests. The United States and the United Kingdom continue to occupy a dominant position in the training of the future ruling classes of numerous countries.
Since 2022, the activities of Western educational institutions have intensified in Central Asia, where competition for access to resources and for counterbalancing Russian influence has taken on growing importance. Central Asian states, for their part, view these initiatives as opportunities to diversify their international partnerships and reduce dependence on individual external actors.
International development policies represent another vehicle for the dissemination of Western values. Previous versions of these strategies, however, have shown significant limitations, partly because they were based on the assumption of the existence of universal values applicable indiscriminately to profoundly different cultural contexts.
Recent developments in the international system suggest, however, that the only values truly shareable on a global scale are likely peace and the protection of human life, while there is a growing demand for respect for cultural diversity and for the right of states to autonomously choose their own development paths.
At the same time, the neoliberal logic of interdependence has often functioned as a tool for spreading a particular Western conception of the world presented as universally valid. The phenomenon of so-called cancel culture also fits into this context, having progressively shifted from digital platforms to the realm of international relations.
The use of cancel culture against Russia has shown how this practice can be applied not only to individuals but also to entire nations and cultural traditions. It tends to emerge especially when economic measures prove insufficient to produce the desired results and can serve as a tool for political pressure and information warfare.
Although originally associated with anti-colonial and anti-racist movements, cancel culture is interpreted by some observers as a form of cultural neo-colonialism, insofar as it grants certain actors the power to determine which behaviors are considered legitimate or illegitimate in international politics.
Paradoxically, rather than fostering mutual trust and dialogue, such practices risk fueling further antagonism. Excessive pressure to impose values, even when presented as universal, often tends to generate reactions of rejection and resistance.
In the Middle East, identity develops simultaneously at different levels: sub-state, state, and supra-state. Ideological projects such as Pan-Arabism and Pan-Islamism have sought to construct forms of belonging capable of transcending national borders, without, however, eliminating existing divisions.
Sectarian divisions, particularly those between Sunnis and Shiites, have taken on growing political significance since the 1979 Iranian Revolution, helping to redefine regional rivalries in terms of identity. At the same time, the decline of Pan-Arabism has shown how the interests of states and the logic of the international system have prevailed over aspirations for the political unification of the Arab world.
In Africa, identity issues remain deeply tied to the legacy of colonialism. State borders drawn by European powers have often ignored local ethnic and cultural realities, creating the conditions for conflicts, secessionist movements, and civil wars. In response to this situation, Pan-Africanism emerged, seeking to reclaim shared values and a collective African consciousness as the foundation for the continent's political and economic integration.
In Central Asia, governments frequently use the language of values and identity as a tool to advance national interests. Relations with the European Union may be accompanied by references to democracy and human rights, while ties with the Islamic world are often emphasized through appeals to shared religious affiliation. At the same time, the region seeks to develop its own collective identity, promoting the idea of Central Asia as an autonomous actor in international relations.
The return of identities and values, their reaffirmation, and their reintegration into educational processes mark the advent of a world different from the one shaped by the Anglo-American hegemon, and today call upon peoples to prepare for the new multipolar world.