Ou articles A description for the current world
In a special gesture External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar participated in the National Day celebration hosted by the German ambassador on October 30. Congratulating Germany and its people Jaishankar said: “It is a great pleasure to join you all today to celebrate the national day of the Federal Republic of Germany, the day of German Unity…”. He went on to say “This year also marks the 25th anniversary of our Strategic Partnership. And while this is an occasion to appreciate the many achievements of our ties, perhaps it is also one to contemplate the future”. Jaishankar’s remarks about the future, not only of India-German ties but also of global affairs, need consideration.
Jaishankar said, “We are entering an uncertain – the Ambassador used the word unruly, I would say uncertain at least - period in world affairs. Both strategic unpredictability and economic volatility are on the rise. Our two nations have an important responsibility for stabilizing the global order and promoting peace, progress and prosperity. That is best done by expanding our convergences and taking forward a mutually beneficial agenda”.
There is a basic difference between the words ‘unruly’ and ‘uncertain’. Hence, the German ambassador’s use of ‘unruly’ for the present international situation merits attention. ‘Unruly’ means the absence of ‘discipline’; a synonym for ‘unruly’ is ‘lawless’. As the Germans are known for their commitment to order it is not surprising that the German ambassador used the word unruly to describe the contemporary global situation. This is because, in the first place, for the Germans, as for other Europeans, US President Donald Trump’s transformation of the Transatlantic Partnership which was put in place after the Second World War has truly made their world out of order. But, at a deeper level, it also shows that for the Europeans the world has become ‘unruly’ because under US leadership they are finding it difficult to set the rules for world order.
The European powers set the rules during the colonial period. That was the age when Europe was the metropole and its colonies were the periphery to be exploited for the benefit of the metropole. Europe justified this exploitation because it asserted that it was civilizing ‘lesser breeds without the law’.
Later, after, the end of colonialism, the world entered the period of the cold war. Its decades were marked by ideological contestation between the so-called ‘Free West’ and communist bloc led by the Soviet Union the world. In these decades too, the erstwhile colonial powers and, to an extent, the Soviet Union set the rules of global order. The end of the cold war in 1991 witnessed the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Western Powers had won. The Transatlantic Alliance led by the United States reigned supreme.
In the 1990s it seemed that world would continue be run according to the rules set by the US and Europe. Hence, it would remain disciplined and orderly. That was not to be because of the diffusion of science and technology (S&T). Ultimately it is leadership in S&T that gives power to countries. With some of the major countries of the Global South gaining greater expertise in S&T it was inevitable that global power and, with it, rule making for global order would not remain only the preserve of the US and Europe .
Thus, other power centres that came up, including India, Brazil, South Africa but above all China questioned some of the old rules. In particular China refused to play by the play book of the West. Now, as the first quarter of the 21st century is coming to an end, the supremacy of the West and, therefore its rule making ability, is under challenge. Naturally for the Europeans and, in particular the Germans, the world has become ‘unruly’.
Jaishankar’s preference for the more neutral word ‘uncertain’ arises out of India’s situation. Unlike China, which has made phenomenal progress and has outstripped Europe to such an extent that the US now considers that the primary grouping in the world is G2—consisting of China and itself, as Trump proclaimed before and after meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping in Seoul last month—India straddles the developed and the developing world. Hence, it wishes that the rules of the old order continue in the areas where it suits it and are changed where they do not. Hence, it is concerned with both strategic unpredictability and economic volatility.
India was seeing the world becoming multipolar with itself as a major pole. It has all the wherewithal for that status. Of course, the US would remain the principal pole but it would be restrained by the other powers. Now strategic unpredictability has set in. This is because China has outstripped the other powers and has come almost in the same league as the US. And, India’s adversarial relations with China makes the situation worse for India.
Trump has upset global economy and commerce with the weaponisation of tariffs. The US is a major market including for Indian labour intensive goods. India is searching for other markets but nothing can truly replace the US market. That has made global economic volatility dangerous for Indian ambitions. Even when the India-US trade deal is reached India will have to carefully operate the new economic world order.
India has a difficult navigational task. The way ahead lies through a complete focus on becoming a leading S&T power. There is no alternative for India.
Finally, India and Europe have to avoid obsessing about past glories whether recent or remote.
