Like in the West, voices of citizens will continue to count for less yielding their pre-eminent position to the voices of regional partisans like Joe Biden of the United States. Resentful citizens and weaker nations will be pacified with more short-term social protection measures and quiet rebukes respectively (to fall in line or be isolated in the group). In a few words, I disagree with Thomas L. Friedman’s assertion that, “We are moving from a world where the heavy eat the light to a world where the light eat the heavy” – (Understanding Globalisation: The Lexus and Olive Tree).
The domains of confrontation will be expanded from the military to technology, economy, and culture as I have earlier mentioned. I bet this is already happening as chips are not to be sold to China or Russia. The trade in other sensitive military technology has equally been restricted, in spite of the once popular advert in The Washington Post:
“Sooner or later, all tyrannies crumble. Those That Keep Putting Their Customers On Hold Tend to Crumble Sooner” (Thomas . L. Friedman; – Understanding Globalisation: The Lexus and the Olive Tree).
There will be nuclear proliferation in order to ensure the global spread or balance of terror. At the moment more Western countries have nuclear weapons than other regions of the world. However, a nuclear war will not be fought by the two countries with the most powerful nuclear arsenal, the U.S. and Russia. This, however, does not preclude the use of tactical nuclear strikes on some other vulnerable targets in the manner the U.S. bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
While the possibility of the Russia-U.S. nuclear show-down may be remote, much of it is contingent on the willingness of China to join the fray but it is doubtful that China which uses Russia as a learning curve in practically everything from opening up to taking back a break-away republic, will go for a nuclear war now. Perhaps, in the next seven to 10 years when it would have achieved nuclear parity with the U.S. But then, wars do drop from the skies sometimes. A nuclear war will not be different.
Due to the reckless use of its power of sanctions, conscious and sustainable efforts are already been made and will be further strengthened to downgrade the global dominance of the U.S. Dollar through “strange” alliances. This will take a while and a lot of conversation between common foes such as China and India, Iran and Saudi Arabia and other countries.
The unprecedented sanctions against Russia and its oligarchs invariably pitched the West not just against Russia but the rest of the world as well as presented the former as not a safe sanctuary for storing up fortune. However, what happens next is entirely in the womb of time but it is a certainty that a per cent age of global wealth will move from the West. However, where to and in what form, I do not know.
Contrary to popularly-held notions that governments’ power or influence will be minimised by the combination of multinationals and other social forces, governments in the emerging global order will re-invent themselves through ingenious alliances with dominant forces, good or bad, to perpetuate their strangle-hold on power. It will be a world more Machiavellian and dangerous, from North to South and East to West in the name of preserving or protecting the people or their civilisations. And especially because peer-review platforms or mechanisms will be non-existent, external pressures will count for nothing. It will be a world of bullies where might is right. It will equally be a world of infinite possibilities never before seen, but largely malevolent. And benevolent too! Patricia Clavin, Professor of Modern History at Oxford argues that:
“Turbulence can push individuals, institutions, and states to their limits. History shows that it simultaneously fosters creative, pluralistic and dynamic advocacy that leads to new modes of co-operation, often in history’s darkest hours.”
It could also be a world in transition as there could be a global power shift in line with the view that:
“Power is not eternal. No one in the world can remain strong all the time. Man is first a child, then youth, then maturity, old age. Such is the life expectancy of states as well” (Sheihk Ahmed Yassin,1998).
While this argument is consistent with historical changes of this magnitude, another school of thought says the West will not relinquish its strangle-hold on global power so easily, not without a fight! Even though Putin says the West has lost it, the odds still favour it.
Back to the question of where Africa will be in the new contestations for power or its aftermath?
Putin gives an idea about how to take advantage of the situation thus:
“Relying on your civilisation is a necessary condition for success in the modern world, unfortunately a disorderly and dangerous world that has lost its bearings. More and more states are coming to this conclusion, becoming aware of their owns interests and needs, opportunities and limitations, their own identity and degree of interconnectedness with the world around them” (Putin in Sochi). But does Africa have any civilisation left on which to rely as a condition and vehicle for entry and participation in this global ferment or arena?
In my view, Africa will be no more than a map, a patch on the earth—-the pliant giant, raped, abused and abandoned by those who love her or despise her. Mario Puzo (The Godfather) says that a race that allowed itself to be ground to dust is not one any would worry about.
Africa has attributed its inability to grow or develop like other parts of the world to slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism (which Nkrumah says is the highest/last stage of imperialism) and much more recently, globalisation.
Although the reading of Karl Marx, Lenin and more recent works such as How Europe Underdeveloped Africa (Walter Rodney), The Wretched of the Earth, Globalisation And Its Discontents (Joseph Stiglitz), other titles gives us an insight into the horrors of slavery, colonialism, neo-colonialism and the double-standards of globalisation, it is time to stop complaining about these phenomena. After an average of 60 years of independence, these are no longer acceptable excuses for Africa’s miserable backwardness. We cannot continue to accept the refrain of, “they took us away.” For how long? They also took the Jews away but they said, “Never again!” The narrative has since changed for them.
To be continued tomorrow.
