Madman Theory in International Relations
After bombing key nuclear sites in Iran US president Donald Trump posted on social media: if the current Iranian Regime is unable to Make Iran Great Again, why wouldn’t there be a Regime change??? His Defence sectary Pete Hegseth some days before told a news conference that the “mission Iran was not and has not been about regime change”. During his first election campaign Donald Trump said “We must as a nation be more unpredictable”. Donald Trump calls Indian Prime Minister Mr Modi as a great friend for a long time but at a critical time in India-Pakistan relations post Sindhoor, Mr Trump is honoured to host General Munir of Pakistan”. Trump called North Korean leader Kim as a rocket man and promised that USA will totally destroy North Korea. After some time, Trump said that he and Kim fell in love”. Mr Trump in 2018 while discussing North Korea called himself a “madman”. Can some Guru of International relations make all this understandable for students of IR. The fact of the matter is that the theory of madness in circulation for a long time is being leveraged by Trump administration to further American interests.
Madman Theory
For a long time, leaders and experts have discussed the ‘madman theory’. The idea is that by acting in a very volatile, transactional and unpredictable manner you can frighten rival states into conceding. During cold war strategic experts suggested that by appearing unstable a US leader might prompt communist states to take US nuclear threats more seriously. For my students I have no other way to explain it except invoking a typical Kashmiri adage: “Mout Laight Chuck Sala Bata Khavan” i.e. you are relishing Kashmiri wazawan by feigning as Dervish who is otherworldly. The roots of madman theory date to 1517 when Florence thinker Machiavelli argued that under certain circumstances it is very wise thing to simulate madness. But the modern notion of madness was developed in mid-20th century in the midst of threat of nuclear weapons. Some theorists also hold the opinion that a convincingly mad leader could threaten large risks. The American nuclear strategist and author of “Thinking About the unthinkable” Herman Kahn claims that “when dealing with a nuclear armed leader who appears to be stark, staring mad opponents must yield to his demands or accept getting annihilated”.
The theory in its application means that as a leader you behave in a manner that you persuade other leaders to make concessions they otherwise would not make. That you sound irrational for rational purposes. It is a strategy of deterrence whereby a leader appears irrational and unpredictable to convince his enemies that it is better to stay away from him and avoid trouble. The former president of united states Richard Nixon scared erstwhile Soviet Union and other communist regimes during the height of cold war. However, the critics like neo-realists assume that people are rational and consider the consequences of their decisions. States too are rational actors and do consider the consequences of their actions. All said and done the theory does find resonance in contemporary global disorder.
Trumpian World
From Canada during recent G7 meeting Donald Trump rushed to Washington to attend General Asim Munir of Pakistan. He had no time for his friend Prime Minister Modi which has caused high anxiety in India. The media commentary too is awesome. The national security expert Praveen Swamy claims: US wants Islamabad to fight its regional conflicts with the prospect of a deal on Kashmir with some lashings of aid to persuade General Munir to take up the job”. General Atta Hasnain comments: US may be planning for renewed contingency operations in Afghanistan, hedging against China’s BRI or managing risks in Iran and Central Asia. Pakistan is relevant in all situations and circumstances due to its geography”.
Be that as it may there is of course no attraction for oil as America is quite self-sufficient but let me hasten to add that pentagon pays heavily for keeping the Strait of Hormuz open. Why is all this happening speedily? The fact of the matter is that geopolitical rivalries have paralysed the international institutions and global governance is in terrible crisis. The United Nations Security Council is effectively non-functional. Russia has vetoed fourteen draft Security council resolutions on Gaza, Mali, Sudan, Syria, Ukraine. China has vetoed eleven of these draft resolutions. America virtually abdicates G20. The WTO with 160 members cannot find consensus on any issue. It has failed to stop China and USA from weaponizing trade against each other. American political scientist Michael Beckley argues: United States is becoming a rogue superpower neither internationalist nor isolationist but aggressive and increasingly out for itself”. What can India do in these circumstances when according to Ashley Tellis (former advisor to George Bush administration) India has great power delusions and its grand strategy thwarts its great ambitions.
India Way
Foreign Minister Mr Subramaniam Jaishankar in his book “The India way: Strategies for an uncertain world” argues that New Delhi should advance its national interests by identifying and exploiting opportunities created by global contradictions to reap the benefits from as many ties as possible”. The operational implications of this approach are very clear to those watching the unfolding regional and global tensions. We saw how India suffered terrible isolation during the 100-hour war with Pakistan. We also see how sanctions on Iran have affected India as far as international North-South Transport corridor and the development of Chabbar port are concerned.
The Indian investments are huge and these projects provide connectivity to Afghanistan and Central Asia. Let us also remember that former US president Joe Biden refused to attend India’s Republic Day parade and USA also commented on arrest of Arvind Kejriwal and democratic deficit India has suffered over the years. Right from our student days we were told that in IR there are no permanent friends or permeant enemies there are only permanent interests. My sense is that revival of SAARC can provide better way for India at this point of time in history to effectively navigate troubled waters of international politics.
SAARC Way
Non- consultative and unilateral foreign policy has left India without safe neighbourhood. We shouldn’t allow domestic politics to influence foreign policy. The paradox of India’s global rise is its regional decline. On the positive side with so much noise on nuclear issue India and Pakistan have observed the agreement on prohibition of attack against nuclear installations and facilities that was signed in 1988 exchanging list of sites annually and pledging not to attack them. PM Modi in 2014 expressed surprise that just 5 percent of global trade takes place between south Asian countries. During SCO meeting in Pakistan former PM Nawaz Sharief told visiting Indians that both sides have grievances and we have lost 75 years in mutual enmity. It is apt to conclude this column by revisiting what late Prime Minister of Pakistan Z A Bhutto said during the Simla talks in 1972:
Dushmani Jamkar Karo Lekin Ye, Gunjaish Rahe,
Jab Kabhi Hum Dost Ho Jaayen Toh Sharmanda Naa Ho
(Keep pursuing bitter enmity but let there be a little scope, that when we become friends, we must not feel ashamed)
Prof Gull Wani is Kashmir based political Scientist and Honorary Senior fellow Centre for Multilevel Federalism New Delhi
