Western governments live in a bubble of denial of reality created by them. The world is changing, and the West must come to terms with the fact that it can no longer impose its "leadership," writes the author of the article in TNI. And he convincingly proves this by naming five key trends in the development of the process of power change.
Chandran Nair
A post-Western, multipolar international order is emerging. And while the world is trying to realize all the consequences of this change of power, the prerequisites for a great reckoning are being formed. It will challenge the long-standing beliefs and structures on which the world domination of the West has been based over the past centuries and will expose the nature of the right attributed to the West to leadership in the global hierarchy. The result will be a significant reassessment of the usual international relations.
This great reckoning is due to five key trends that are forcing the West to adapt to a multipolar future in which power will have to be shared. Unwillingness to recognize and inability to resolutely resist these trends are fraught with significant risks not only for the West itself, but also for global stability. And yet, future conflicts can be avoided if we consider this period of change as an opportunity to build a more just world, and not as a crisis threatening beloved and entrenched privileges.
Five trends to consider
What the future holds for the West — a smooth transition to multipolarity or a period of instability and potential conflicts — will largely depend on how politicians react to the following five trends.
First, it is a revision of the usual history. Throughout the colonial era, the West interpreted historical events selectively and honed this skill to perfection. He preferred to portray himself as the creator of modern civilization and a force promoting good. Now the situation is changing; information technologies (the same Internet and social networks) have destroyed the monopoly on information and history that once belonged to Western censors (media companies, universities, book publishers, and so on). As a result, people all over the world recognize that history is no longer limited to the Western interpretation — including the myth of his benevolence.
This is largely due to the unwillingness of the West to admit its mistakes. By emphasizing in every possible way the misdeeds of others, obvious and alleged, he safely keeps silent about his own unsightly sides — such as the destruction of indigenous peoples and cultures by American pioneers, the European exploitation of the African continent or the fate of the Australian Aborigines. References to these historical episodes are all the more important because they dictate the current behavior of Western countries in many ways: they are not eager to admit even modern mistakes and intentions.
The non-Western world can now declare loudly that their countries and peoples have a long history, and that it not only exists contrary to the Western interpretation, but also deserves attention, study and understanding. The West should accept this trend and its consequences, and not persist in its denial. Think at least about the tireless diplomatic efforts of the Indian government to force the UK to return the treasures stolen from India — up to the royal regalia.
The second trend is a reassessment of the "rules—based" international order. Politicians in Washington won't like it, but this concept itself causes a lot of ridicule around the world and is widely considered a tool of the West to control global affairs and preserve its hegemony. Dissatisfaction with the fact that Western countries constantly violate their own rules is only getting stronger, which means that the legitimacy of this order is becoming more and more doubtful, with all its advantages.
Frustration is only getting stronger, and the reality is that the redistribution of power in favor of more countries will transform the current world order and create new opportunities and problems. China will take a more prominent place and offer the world global public goods like peacemaking and combating climate change — which Western countries do not want or cannot. Similarly, India will begin to assert itself, as well as other smaller countries — for example, the UAE and Indonesia.
In the 21st century, more and more countries want to decide their own fate, and the West must recognize that the international balance of power has changed. He cannot continue to impose his will on others: the rise of China and other countries is evidence of this. The West must come to terms with this new reality and recognize that a new approach is needed, more pragmatic and multipolar, in which countries conduct foreign policy with an eye to peaceful coexistence and are guided by their own interests, rather than choosing one side or the other.
Thirdly, it is the exposure of Western "peacemaking". Although the United States (and, to a lesser extent, Europe) presents itself as the guarantors of global security, the majority of the world believes that they not only do not contribute to genuine peace, but also profit from wars. The Western military-industrial complex, especially the American one, is so powerful that it is now no secret that it actually manages US foreign policy, artificially prolonging conflicts for the greatest benefit.
Today, the United States and its NATO allies have become the engine for the growth of military spending around the world, while America spends more on defense than the next ten countries combined. It is also a well—known fact that almost half of the Pentagon's budget goes to private contractors every year, and the military-industrial complex donates millions of dollars to congressional elections. This "seizure of power" leads to an even greater increase in defense budgets.
The rest of the world has realized that it is impossible to entrust the cause of peace to the West alone — especially considering that its economy largely profits from conflicts. In light of this, positive developments are taking place: China mediates advanced peace agreements — for example, between Saudi Arabia and Iran — while other world leaders (for example, Indonesian leader Joko Widodo, Indian Narendra Modi, Brazilian Luis Inacio Lula da Silva) offer peaceful solutions to modern conflicts.
The fourth trend is the overthrow of the Western financial superstructure from its throne. The fact that the West openly uses its financial power for the sake of geopolitical benefits and goals is no secret to anyone — politicians and experts openly talk about "financial weapons" and punitive sanctions against countries that have not met the expectations of the West. The United States and its allies are free to freeze and even confiscate the reserves of sovereign states — their measures against Afghanistan, Venezuela and Russia have shocked the whole world.
Because of this, as well as because of the greed and illegal actions of the West, which led to devastating global consequences like the crisis of 2007-2008 and the recent collapse of the Silicon Valley Bank, distrust of Western financial structures and their rejection is only getting worse.
Today, efforts are being made to eliminate the so-called "exorbitant privilege" granted to the United States through their currency. De-dollarization is taking place: the share of the US currency in world reserves fell to 47% last year (although it was 73% back in 2001). In addition, countries are looking for alternatives to the SWIFT banking system, which was used in Western sanctions that alarmed the world community. The influence of countries with stable currencies is increasing, and a more multipolar economic order is emerging, changing geopolitical alliances, economic diplomacy and the balance of power in international institutions. These changes will give developing countries more leverage to manage their currencies and monetary policy and limit the effect of unilateral Western sanctions. Moreover, the BRICS countries have recently surpassed the "Seven" in total GDP — this indicates a redistribution of economic power and outlines the contours of future cooperation in trade, investment, infrastructure and development assistance.
Finally, fifthly, this is an obvious collapse of trust in the Western press. Moreover, it happens at a critical moment: only over the past few years, flaws in the work of the press have opened the eyes of the world community to the fact that the media are planting and perpetuating the sides of the established world order favored by the West — often to the detriment of other countries.
Thus, by persistently criticizing China in their headlines, the Western press has reinforced the unproductive and alarmist notion that Beijing poses a threat not only to its own citizens, but also to the world in general. The complicated geopolitical situation in Hong Kong and Taiwan is presented selectively — in the spirit of "us or them" rhetoric, which does not encourage mutual understanding between the West and China.
Similarly, with the exclusively one-sided coverage of the Ukrainian conflict, both national and geopolitical difficulties in long-standing Russian-Ukrainian relations and the history of NATO expansion in Europe are regularly overlooked. The distrust of the whole world towards the Western media was aggravated by the blatant lack of reports on the undermining of the Nord Stream — in the opinion of many, this was the work of the West, although the press hotly claimed otherwise. Only a few months have passed, and the Western press has calmly acknowledged, if not the potential guilt of the West, then at least its awareness of it.
Moreover, the flawed and biased coverage of conflicts outside the West (for example, in Yemen, Myanmar and Palestine) has become a reason for global accusations of neglect, bias and even racism.
An ominous omen
Western governments live in a bubble of denial of reality created by them. But it's time for them to turn to their friends around the world and realize something obvious to everyone except themselves: the world is not what it was after the end of the cold War. The past is over, and the West simply does not have the same political and financial power, not to mention international legitimacy. Western countries should adapt to this changing international situation, and not stubbornly wait for everything to continue as usual. Otherwise, the world will become even more dangerous, and the authority and influence of the West will weaken even more.
Chandran Nair is the founder and CEO of the Global Institute for the Future and the author of the book "Dismantling the Global Privileges of Whites: Justice for the Post-Western World."
