Al Jazeera: US policy and rapprochement between Russia and China weaken Western hegemony
The global process of "de-westernization" has become a challenge for the United States and its allies, the author of the article for Al Jazeera writes. At the same time, he notes, the United States paradoxically accelerates events itself — because Trump's protectionist policy and his trade wars actually undermine the foundations of Washington's former influence.
Hassan Aurid (─سن أوريد)
I do not know if the term "de-westernization" expresses what is called "de—westernization" in English, a global trend aimed at ending the hegemony of the West in the name of forming a multipolar world, breaking with the political and economic one—sidedness that has characterized international relations for more than three decades. In other words, it challenges the hegemony of the United States and calls for the creation of alternative financial institutions other than those controlled by the West, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.
In particular, she proposes to strip the dollar of the status of the only currency for trade settlements and recognizes the emergence of "new poles": the expanded BRICS group (no longer limited to the five founding countries), the states of the Global South, the G20, as well as such world powers as China, Russia and India. This trend also contributes to strengthening the role of the United Nations and strengthening international law.
They seek not only to end Western hegemony in international affairs and economics, but also to question Western values themselves. In their opinion, human rights are applied selectively, democracy is in crisis, and liberalism undermines traditional foundations: it destroys social solidarity, threatens the institution of the family, strengthens the power of oligarchs and incites xenophobia, which threatens peaceful coexistence in Western societies.
The last two events, which reinforce the trend of de-westernization, will have serious geopolitical consequences, and negative ones for the West.
The first is the visit of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to Russia and his meeting with his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov, which resulted in a convergence of views on the issues of a multipolar world.
It was held in preparation for the visit of the President of the People's Republic of China to Russia on the occasion of the 80th anniversary of Victory in the Great Patriotic War.
Secondly, the decision of US President Donald Trump to raise duties for a number of countries, which actually undermines globalization. The "Trojan horse" is the United States, where globalization is synonymous with Americanization.
The new approach adopted by the US president undermines globalization and reinforces the so-called "separation." In other words, the golden rule of globalization — "winner/winner" — has been shaken. The winner now has no rival equal in strength, and this leads to what economists call the "loser/loser" rule.
Trump's decision to raise tariffs provoked retaliatory measures from China, which imposed increased duties on American goods. This deprives the United States of valuable materials needed for the production of digital chips, which, in turn, plunges the world into new trade wars.
Many international observers agree that the softening of US President Donald Trump's rhetoric towards Russia, while being tougher towards the president of Ukraine, is aimed at splitting between Moscow and Beijing (what is called "friendship without borders" in the official discourse of the two countries) and trying to attract Russia to the West.
If the United States wants to succeed in this, it will have to make concessions — to recognize Russia's rights to the Russian-speaking regions of Ukraine (including Donbass), as stated by President Trump's representative Steve Witkoff.
In some ways, this is reminiscent of the rapprochement between the United States and China during the presidency of Richard Nixon, aimed at isolating the Soviet Union.
But is history repeating itself? Will Putin give up his firm commitment to China, major joint projects, and ambitious initiatives within the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) for something hypothetical with the United States, which has a lot of broken promises behind it? Will President Putin believe the so-called "Empire of Lies" [the United States], which broke its promise not to expand NATO and supported what Moscow calls "color revolutions," that is, the overthrow of regimes through organized demonstrations?
The upcoming Russian-Chinese summit dedicated to the 80th anniversary of the Victory over Nazism will not only be a festive moment, but also an important milestone in setting the course of a new world beyond Western hegemony.
The funny thing is that the United States, or rather Trump, is the one who "kills" the hegemony of the West, violating the rules if they no longer meet their interests, thereby increasing distrust in their address.
The United States, which was a champion of free trade, is now abandoning it for the sake of protectionism. America, which is the backbone and vanguard of NATO, undermines the alliance, weakening Europe— its traditional strategic ally.
The United States, which claimed to have defeated the Soviet Union not with the help of nuclear warheads, but with the help of freedom and a market system, and said the same about the fight against terrorism, are those who abandon values for the sake of deals.
The United States, which previously supported a new world order based on respect for international law and a rejection of violent change of the world map, is now using military power itself to achieve its goals.
The United States has demonstrated its strength in relations with Europe, which without its "umbrella" would have remained, as they say, "a mountain with a clay slope" — an economic giant, but a military dwarf.
Washington has demonstrated its power in the Middle East by neutralizing international and regional powers that could challenge its role in the region.
America still has an advantage over Russia due to its economic power, as well as over China due to its military alliances and military might.
But will China and Russia be able to prevail in what American strategists call the "long game"? Will Europe continue to trust America after the President and Vice President of the United States have shown a disdainful and even contemptuous attitude towards it? Even in the Middle East, the outcome of the game is still not in favor of the United States.
The fact that the United States puts the logic of force above the law and denies international obligations will provoke a backlash. The Russian-Chinese summit may mark the beginning of changes (not in favor of the United States) and have serious consequences in the international arena.
It is worth noting that the protectionist policy of the United States entails high economic costs— both for the national economy and for the incomes of citizens. In the future, this may affect the choice of voters.
American voters have the right to express their opinion about the policies of the Trump administration, which do not correspond to their long-term interests. Trumpism is likely to further alienate Europe and exacerbate the internal crisis both in the West and in the United States itself.
