Only the dead have seen the end of war.
–George Santayana
As Russian forces pound Ukraine into submission, one remembers this oft-quoted aphorism, from one of the celebrated philosophers of our age.
On one side, Russia has always considered its bordering areas, along with the Caucasus and Central Asian Republics, as its backyard. With the Baltic already out of its hands; in terms of realpolitik, it cannot afford to let go Ukraine. On the other side, the USA keeps intact, and intends on expanding NATO; even after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, for reasons best known to it.
It loses moral high-ground to offer moral lessons. Worse, as political commentators have been pointing out – USA has invaded countries, bombed people, toppled democratic governments, installed dictatorships, and vetoed UN resolutions; despite International consensus.
Its bloody footprint goes far beyond its own backyard. From West Asia to Latin America, there is hardly any place that has not felt the tremors of US dominance. As such, it has led, and paved, the way in showing practical contempt for International norms. Russia, they say, has followed suit.
Just before the invasion, Putin in quite an atypical rhetoric questioned the very existence of Ukraine. Less like the head of a country, he sounded more like a Tsar; who wanted to regain the lost glory of his empire. Actions followed words. Though surprisingly, on the ground, Russian forces have faced commendable resistance from Ukraine.
Despite early gains, the blitzkrieg has not resulted in submission. The movable anti-aircraft batteries, it seems, have made the coveted Russian air force unable to dominate the Ukrainian skies. Stinger missiles have hit low flying targets.
Miles and Miles of stalled Russian convoys showcase that Russia is switching to Plan B – to a long haul, more vicious war, and reserve its best units for the last.
This, about the ongoing aggression! It might have disclosed the flawed idea of the Russian military, or American economic, invincibility. But, more so, what it did was to unfold the impotence of the International System.
As threats and counter-threats are being rifled against each other. As superpowers brandish nuclear arsenal, and ‘responsible leadership’ resorts to irresponsible brinkmanship – the world shivers with the thoughts of a world war – which may, as well, ring the bells of a nuclear doom! International institutions have been paralysed into inaction, except verbal condemnation.
As the West imposes strict economic sanctions, the results are awaited. If the past is to act as a judge, sanctions have affected common people, while leaving tyranny intact. For us, let’s hope, that sanity prevails, and countries resolve issues peacefully.
Having said that, what this war reveals is an essentially skewed international system; a power imbalance – Machiavellian realpolitik. Two giants (USA and Russia) fighting for power, with the rest of the world at stake. As the future of mankind hangs by a thread – some soul searching is in order.
Over the years, the world had shifted from a bi-polar to a multi-polar world. What this essentially means, is that countries with successful economies and big militaries bully smaller nations; as much as they can, as far as they can! Naturally, smaller nations are forced to seek patronage.
Like a street brawl, rival gangs fight for power, while the common man seeks protection, to stay out of the fight. In economic terms, we have global capitalism which sees everything from the prism of a balance sheet. It wants to make more money, no matter what it takes.
A permanent arms economy sustains an essentially unsound system; with surprisingly, former US President, Eisenhower, warning about the ‘military-industrial complex’, in his farewell address, more than 60 years back. On the other hand, weaker economies, barely coming out of colonial yoke and drainage of wealth, are coerced into giving concessions. This is the law of the jungle!
These are issues that the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) had always spoken against, upright! The first conference at Belgrade (1961), showcased possible scenarios of doom or cooperation; depending on what option we choose. While abhorring Cold-War politics, it demanded complete disarmament. It asked for equitable economic systems, and mutual respect and cooperation among countries.
This was in complete consonance with the earlier Bandung Conference, which declared abstention from military alliances and use of unjust force, preferring to resolve disputes under the UN Charter. This was not merely fancy rhetoric. Coming from impoverished countries, which required extensive economic support, eschewing power blocks, and standing for principles – demanded a firm resolve.
While NAM has expanded to 2/3rd of the UN Nations, its political workings have gone down in proportion. But the Ukrainian crisis, has once again, brought to the front the necessity of its humanistic principles.
While it was imagined that Europe had passed the Age of War, and military conflicts had found a theatre outside of Europe – Russian artillery bludgeoned the wishful thinking to ground. Once again, the world woke up to realise, how unsafe the planet was!
NAM had been formed by countries, which had faced colonial oppression, wealth drain, neo-colonial hegemony, and exploitation. It well understood the perils of global capitalism and war. Its principles naturally emanated from its experience. What Ukraine faces now, has been the common experience of the ‘third-world’.
As such, time demands that these countries, under the umbrella of NAM, take charge to salvage mankind from oblivion. True to its principles, it must work to make UN decisions participatory, engage in extensive South-South cooperation, steer global decisions that affect everyone, and espouse for its right place; not as a global ruler, but as a global leader.
It must fight for the rights of the disenfranchised and the disempowered. It must struggle to replace the rule of power, with the power of rule.
Writing on Nagaland, a person once wrote, 0.5% of Nagas are with Phizo, 1% are more moderate…while the 98.5% just want to be left alone.
This is generally true of every place and of all people. People wish for a normal and healthy life. No one wants to live under the threat of bombs. No one wants his loved ones sacrificed at the altar of ‘high-ideals’.
But, ‘political realism’ runs large in the international theatre. As a handful of countries; with huge economic recourses run the show on sheer might – It seems obvious, that mankind won’t be left alone!
To break through, to free mankind from the fetters of this inhuman international anarchy – NAM can, and must, play a huge role.
We may then well hope for humanity to live in peace and harmony – in a world, without poles!
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author.
The facts, analysis, assumptions and perspective appearing in the article do not reflect the views of GK