TRANSITIONAL WORLD: PRESENT DAY GLOBAL SCENARIO AN ARTICLE BY ATUL KUMAR PUBLISHED IN WORLD AFFAIRS JOURNAL

TRANSITIONAL WORLD: PRESENT DAY GLOBAL SCENARIO

AN ARTICLE BY ATUL KUMAR PUBLISHED IN WORLD AFFAIRS JOURNAL

1.         Already one and a half decade has passed since the end of  the  Cold War,  symbolised  by  the disintegration  of  a Super  Power, breaching  of the Berlin wall and consequent embrace  of   market economy  and  political pluralism by the ex-communist  states  in Eastern   Europe.  In Aug 1991 with the falling apart of the Soviet Union, like nine pins, the peoples witnessed the emergence of an uni-polar world where the power would now be in the hands of a single super power, at least in the near future. However, economic globalization is decentralizing power widely and regional power centres with credible military capabilities are emerging.  The  Uni-polar  Movement  which  appeared to crystallise remains valid in the strategic realm, but assertion by new  and emerging economic players like India, China, Japan  the  East Asian ‘tigers’, as also the regional formations, makes uni-polarity fragile. 

2.         The tendency now is to form adhoc groups of countries with similar interests.  During the Cold War era, it was possible for the third world countries to exploit the rivalry between the superpowers and take advantage of it in trade, aid and technology transfer.  But now the situation has changed.  Today, trade and market conflicts do exist, but they are between developed and richer countries.  As major players the developed and the rich countries have greater independence and initiative than the developing and poor countries, which generally remain at the receiving end.   International economy based on new technologies has influenced every country.  Environmental and trade - related issues have emerged as major thrust areas under the present international conditions. The strategic challenge has become manifest, coming now chiefly from China and also from a wounded Russia as well, still in possession of arsenals of global reach.  Multiple  scenarios are  presented,  some  overtly  pessimistic  to  others   blandly optimistic,  leading to conjectures unlikely to  be  fulfilled,  The countries of Asia, with new - found prosperity have begun  to lecture the West and the latter, fearful of the Asian challenges, seek to put their houses in order.

3.         Significantly,  the  world is  passing  through  one  of   the momentous  periods in its history, more significant  than  French and  American revolutions, and more explosive than the  first  or second  World Wars.  The First World War resulted in an uncertain and unjust peace; the second led to the Cold War.  The end of the Cold War has brought some confusion. The  present transition could be seen  as  a  period  of globalisation of the world, which has brought new areas into  the spheres  of  science,  technology, economics  and  development,  eventually promising to erase the divide between the East and the West. The key structure of old order- bi-polarity-is gone, but Cold War perceptions continue, partly because of previous linkage and partly also because the old order is deliberately planted to continue some of the cold war structures like NATO. The previous order remains and a new one is not yet fully manifest, leading to confused perspectives and blurred visions in several crucial areas of the world politics.

4.         With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the USA is pursuing, more vigorously, programs like CTBT and other disarmament measures.  But the breakdown of the bipolar system and the diffusion of political power have given added impetus to rivalries between regional states.  Consequently, many countries are still engaged in and are likely to use military measures to solve problems amongst themselves.  Hence, they are always trying to build up their own stocks of armament and thus, in a way cold war still exists among them. Therefore, in such a situation, security perceptions of the developing countries may not permit them to accept these disarmament proposals, advocated by the powers that already possess and can use these deterrent weapons themselves.  India is also under constant pressure, mostly from the nuclear power states to sign the NPT / CTBT.  Although, India is not opposed to nuclear disarmament, and is in fact, a strong advocate of it, but in view of the present security environment, it finds it difficult to sign such a partisan and discriminatory treaty.       

5.         The transitional world is built around the following features:-

(a)       The immediate Post Cold War world is in a state of both order and disorder.  The former comes because of the sea - changes in the wake of the momentous transformations and the latter due to freed forces of ethnicity, racism and fundamentalism which have come into the open because of end of the Cold War.

(b)       Seventy long years of communism and more than four decades of Cold War, which blurred thinking, created physical and psychological walls, changed the political systems, and divided people, could not be wiped out so soon. Building of new institutions, a different mind- set, and emergence of clearer perspectives will take time.

(c)        The transitional order is volatile; the fluidity is worrisome, appearing as shadows of a conflictual past. International terrorism has emerged as a global problem affecting countries in all regions. This is a particularly grave problem in situations, where terrorism is sponsored by States across national frontiers against other countries in quest for territorial expansion.

(d)       The major powers are without clear directions about their power projections.  The US is still rotating between flashes of isolationism, selective involvement and overt power projection. This is more so in the aftermath of 9/11 tragedy and its so called ‘war against terrorism’. Germany thinks between an autonomous role and a European identity; Japan between a pacifist role and accepting responsibility of a full- fledged power, and China between its Super Power aspirations and the miles it has to go before it can hope to be one.

(e)       Democracy, the central ideology of the transitional worlds, will have too many takers; only few can succeed in a short span; others rotating between variations and distortions of democracy, patches of militarism, fundamentalism and occasional outbursts.

(f)         Regional formations will play considerable role in the economic sphere without emerging as new power centre as such.

6.         With the US-led war on terror going into its seventh year, the expectations set in 2001 have fallen far short of their goals. In the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attacks there was widespread sympathy for the people of the US and what they had experienced. An analysis published by Oxford Research Group immediately after the 9/11 attacks (The United States, Europe and the Majority World After 11 September, October 2001) argued against a strong military response and quoted a perceptive paper by Walden Bello, Director of Focus on the Global South in the Philippines. This view found no favour in Washington, since it represented a fundamental contradiction to the prevailing "control" paradigm. This paradigm would ensure US security and economic dominance in the Middle East, especially in the Persian Gulf region. Given the increasing significance of the region’s oil reserves, and the rapidly rising oil import dependency of the US and China, this would be a hugely welcome outcome. Above all, the idea of the New American Century that was at the heart of neoconservative thinking in the US would have been solidified. Indeed, the threat to that idea posed by the atrocities of 9/11 would not just have been eliminated, but the very demonstration of power and determination shown by the vigorous pursuit of the global war on terror would now demonstrate American world leadership. Six years after 9/11 and as we move into the seventh year of the war, the reality is extraordinarily different. The al-Qaida movement is much dispersed but its very dispersal makes it far more difficult to track and counter, especially as support comes from within Diasporas across Europe. Osama bin Laden, Ayman al Zawahiri and Mullah Omar all remain at large; there have been attacks in numerous countries, including Britain, Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Egypt, Turkey, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Kenya, Pakistan and Indonesia; and there has been a marked rise in anti-Americanism across the Middle East and beyond. While the great majority of Muslims deplore the violence of the movement, there is deep anger at the manner in which the US and its dwindling coalition have fought the war. Regional satellite TV news channels such as Al-Jazeera and Al-Arabiya give round the clock accounts of the violence in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere, often focusing on civilian casualties. Full casualty figures are not known but they are likely to have exceeded 100,000 civilian deaths in Iraq alone.

7.         The coming world order, thus, combines strategic, economic and cultural aspects.  There is order as well as disorder, scope for co-operation and to be on guard to avoid conflict.  The ideological scenario itself is in flux.  The security agenda  in coming  decades  has to take into account  the  multidimensional factors  which  shape  policy, enormous  possibilities  exist  for expanding co-operation, regionally and globally. Thus the present world order of uni-polarity will gradually result in multi-polarity and regional forums will gain prominence. Geo-economics will replace geo-politics and all nations will vie for greater economic ties with one another.

8.         Although the UK Secretary of State for Defence, Des Browne, said that negotiations with the Taliban will be necessary, there is little or no sign of any substantive change of outlook in the US, at least for the next fifteen months. In no small measure this is because there is still a belief that those original aims of the war on terror are essential to US security. Furthermore, they are essential to the wider aim of world leadership. Among the supporters of the idea of a New American Century, whether neoconservatives or assertive realists, even the unpopularity of the Bush administration is not enough reason to give up on this aim. That this is unlikely to be the case owes much to the original expectations of the war on terror. It is easy to forget that prospects seemed so bright in early 2002. There seemed every likelihood of success, with this leading to the resumption of a US global leadership that had been so shocked by 9/11. Remembering this is essential in any attempt to understand why it will be so difficult for any US administration, present or future, to move away from the current security paradigm.

9.         US led ‘war against terrorism’ will make countries like Pakistan important allies of USA to increase its footprint around Middle East and Central Asia. USA will also increase cooperation with the new pole of the future China while maintaining a balance of power in South Asia by promoting India as the countervailing power. In this India will be found to be a willing partner due to long history of sufferance at the hands of Pakistan sponsored terrorism and need for economic and energy security. There is considerable American and Western concern and even anger at the role that Saudi Arabia has played in spreading Islamic fundamentalism worldwide. Even in Indian neighbourhood, Saudi Arabian organisations like the Rabita and the Motammar have funded terrorist organisations like the Lashkar-e-Toiyaba and the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen and promoted the cause of separatist outfits like the Hurriyat Conference. One can only hope that as the American war against terrorism proceeds, the Saudi rulers will be persuaded to curb the activities of outfits promoting fundamentalism abroad.