Self-assertion and the will to dominate

At the recently held G7 summit, a resolution was taken by the concerned nations that China posed a serious security risk to the world. China’s increasing eagerness to take on the mantle of being the predominant global power has seen it threaten weaker neighbours with territorial belligerence, as also, take punitive action against detractors.

For instance, Australia’s lead in calling for an investigation into Covid-19 origins, its being vocal about China’s human rights transgressions in Xinjiang and Hong Kong, and its resoluteness at thwarting China’s intrusions into its institutional and bureaucratic landscapes, has resulted in it becoming the subject of economic reprisal from China.

Here the question arises: Is Australia, or any other nation, justified in braving out China’s onslaught at grave economic cost to their public?

The answer is, self-assertion is necessary, even if it entails being victimised for defying a more powerful adversary. Global powers have a tendency of bullying the impuissant. Carrots are appropriated to the compliant, and those that are not, are alienated and punished.

The history of humanity is replete with incidents of war, invasion, subjugation and intimidation, by the predatory, of lesser segments that take a stand against the seemingly unfair and unjust status quo.

Self-assertion can be defined in two ways. One, the act of asserting one’s rights, claims or opinions. And two, the act of asserting one’s superiority over others.

In the first case, there is an endless conundrum to be had when two tribes, races or groups have assertions that are contradictory or conflicting. As in the story of Palestine, which invokes the Palestinian people’s right at self-determination in contravention of Israel’s prerogative to exist, and what it perceives as its stake to its territorial integrity.

In Kashmir, that is a virtual tinderbox between two nuclear-armed neighbours, India and Pakistan, the Kashmiri peoples right at self-determination is counterbalanced by India’s entitlement to rule a Muslim majority state, because it has such a large population of Muslims within its boundaries. Conciliation and mediation, in these two instances, is at a virtual dead end.

From the 15^th century onward, European powers’ seeking to subjugate the world with colonialism, was typical of the second definition of self-assertion. Large territories across several continents were appropriated by colonial powers, that were predisposed to subjugating, impoverishing and controlling lesser nations. The ethos of the victimised countries was humiliated as a result. It took a massive struggle at self-assertion and two tragic wars to see these countries freed from colonialism.

Hitler’s ascendance in Germany was also typical of self-assertion of the second kind. His conviction that the Aryan race was superior to all others, and his endeavour to challenge the supremacy of Britain and France, led to the Second World War, at the cost of millions of lives. But it also led to the enervation of traditional powers, and the collapse of colonialism

In 1920, the League of Nations was formed after the debilitating First World War. And in 1945, the United Nations was set up, to lend voice to, and bring justice to, the needy. But the veto rights of a fistful of nations in the UN Security Council has put paid to the organisation’s aspirations at being the protagonist of a level playing field. Besides, that Britain and France, two nations on the wane, still preserve their seats on the UN Security Council, while countries like India, Germany, Japan, Brazil and South Africa are exempt, has invalidated its ability to having a balanced outlook.

It would be noteworthy to add here, that morality, balance and justice are still being imparted on the world by a handful of countries who want to maintain the oligarchy, even while they were the perpetrators of historical crimes against humanity.

Briefly, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the ushering in of detente, the world meandered its way to a semblance of unipolarism. The arrival of China as a superpower may polarise the world once again, as the Eastern giant seeks to propitiate lesser nations with its blitzkreig of investments.

A unipolar world has its downside in garnering too much power to one nation, but a multipolar world can see a surfeit of conflicting assertions, and lead to the great wars such as that Europe was witness to, in the past millenium.

Conflicts of interest and the need for self-assertion also arise when one global order is at the the brink of collapse and a new one dawns. The G7’s assertion on China is, perhaps, an effort to pre-empt China’s ascendance, albeit a feeble one. It also becomes pertinent as China’s role in the pandemic is still a matter of speculation. As well as, because China is so aggressive, both within its boundaries and without. A question to ask here is, did China premeditate the pandemic to hasten the arrival of the New World Order?

In the Cold War era, the two prevalent superpowers offered a perfect foil to each other, and gave lesser nations the option at expressing their own individuality. The Non-Aligned Movement was formed in 1961, by like-minded nations that did not seek to align themselves with either the US or the Soviet Union, but sought to remain independent or neutral.

However, the exercise of checkmate continued. The US’ support of the mujaheedin against the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, that gave rise to the evil Taliban, was an example of that. Post the Cold War, and in a more-or-less unipolar world, the US invasion of Iraq under the pretext that Saddam Hussein had amassed weapons of mass destruction , and that gave rise to the Islamic State, reeked of vested strategic interest. Equally, it was a display of priggishness.

Today, democratic nations are divided between the Left and the Right. It is fortunate that these countries have a right of expression through plebiscite, albeit a polarising exercise. Many nations have despotic governments, and many peoples of the world have no right to self-assertion. There is need to do the impossible – soul-searching for enlightenment in a divided world.

The collective consciousness of humanity has been historically divided and will be divided forever. Organisation of religion, race, ethnicity and tribes are a constant reminder that we speak different languages, of the Tower of Babel syndrome. We may share one planet, but we are not homogeneous, we are different. We construct boundaries, and worse, we trespass them. For it is a human trait to dominate and control, even to enslave, the strange and alien neighbour. It is not untrue to say that the altruism of a few lies crushed at the hands of the preponderant self-seeking. It is about time that a sense of propriety reigns in the minds of those with power, in a divided world.