Discrepancy Invites Disorder

Last fortnight’s Trump-Xi meeting that was followed by a Putin-Xi meeting tells it all. Putin has visited China 25 times—a record no other foreign leader matches. In fact, the two have had 20 meetings in person or through phone calls since 2022 alone, the year Russian troops entered Ukrainian territory. The two leaders pledged a “partnership without limit”. US-led global order no longer works the way it did for 80 years. Beijing buys US-sanctioned Russian oil. Moscow purchases manufactures from the neighbour. Both are engaged in dollar-free transactions.

Power accompanies the vulnerability of arrogance, boosting the prospect of missteps. Military-driven power spikes complacency to delude the mighty that all it surveys or wishes are its.  The dominant defines and interprets democracy, vital interests and red line—all that fits its intention of the moment. Too much power, some people think, affords them the leverage of perennial expediency.

US President Donald Trump in spring derisively dismissed China and India as “hellhole”. Neither of the two most-populous and immediate neighbours issued any strong rebuttal. The derogatory remark from the world’s No. 1 superpower’s executive head once again reiterates an unwritten but well-understood claim that the US bears the right to exceptionalism—to say anything and do anything that suits its convenience and rage. 

Horrific hegemony

The agendas the traditional hegemons set and the space specified for other lesser powers is what the world legacy order has operated with virtual impunity since the end of the First World War. This goes against the very inherent grain of human nature not to be in bondage to any outsider. The resultant latent discontent oozes and spills all over when the lid of patience blows off and an opportunity for appropriate response is sensed.

Colonisation was the shameful exploitation of the militarily weak or squabbling rulers manipulated or made to submit in exchange for the safety of their lives and wealth. The dominant groups don’t want to let off their hold on the practice of pushing their agenda through persuasion, if possible, and through force, if simply talk does not work. This was the basic theme of the two World Wars and other scales of wars thereafter. 

It is futile to bring up moral missiles against the countries the big powers consider as their allies, whatever the inherent injustice claimed. The attacks on Iraq on charges of Baghdad possessing weapons of mass destruction were wanton and ruthless, just as 20 years of NATO presence and war in Afghanistan were against the basic principles of statehood and sovereign right of an independent country. If the definition of “humanitarian considerations” is valid, why does NATO recoil from a repeat in Afghanistan today? Once bitten, thrice frightful. 

On the New World Order, Henry Kissinger authored a book that is far and away the best of his books; it is with 1000-plus pages carrying nuggets of information. Although his role during the Vietnam War was despicable, the analyst and intelligence in his sharp mind, with critical eyes on many other global issues, make for highly informative reading. 

Once the dent begins to display for the world to see, disorientation sets in to offset big power arrogance. Power struggle does not get lost. It springs to another corner, as it won’t allow a vacuum to step in for long. Iran has stood up to the February 28 US-Israel invasion, made with a declaration that the war would end within a week. The war continues in its fourth month. Side by side with the US as the No. 1 superpower, China emerges as a close competitor to reckon with. If Iran, with highly limited leverage, can hold the US-Israel combine for more than three months, what would be the status of China vis-à-vis the US can be imagined.

Just before he set out for his umpteenth visit to China in May, Putin described as “a truly unprecedented level of strategic partnership” between the two neighbours. The visit reaffirmed bilateral ties and subtly brandished the same at adversaries. At the same time, Putin tried to allay fears generated by rumours that Moscow might launch an attack on Europe. Dismissing the wild speculation about an imminent Russian invasion of a European country as “complete nonsense”, Putin has offered Europe to give in writing a guarantee against any Russian attack on Europe.

In a bid to allay European fears that Russia is preparing to launch an attack on Europe, Putin in November offered to guarantee in writing against any such act. But scepticism against Moscow’s intent continues, echoing the deep distrust between the two camps. The Russian president ridicules fear-mongers engaged in “complete nonsense” and fanning “a lie”.   

Staggering loss

Political analysts cannot forget how NATO’s US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 under a blatantly false allegation of Saddam Hussein wielding weapons of mass destruction, which even the UN inspection team’s regular trips to that oil-rich Muslim majority country could not confirm. The United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Tony Blair went along with Washington, although he very well knew that the charges trumped up by US President George W. Bush were only a black lie.

After retirement, Blair was rewarded for backing the war “whatever”; Bush the Junior wielded his influence to secure for the faithful British buddy as the United Nations special envoy to West Asia. The UN job did not take into account the staggering number of civilian deaths and vast destruction of Iraq’s basic infrastructure. According to human rights proponents of European origin, between 500,000 and one million Iraqis perished in the initial weeks of the attack. And the Hague-based International Criminal Court does not raise a credible finger against the monstrous misadventure. 

Even today, more than 20 years after the shameful invasion of Iraq, not even suggestions for restitution in Iraq are made by the very countries that pontificate to the rest of the world on the ideals of democracy, fair deal and humanity.

(Kharel writes on int'l affairs & media.)