With US and NATO’s unceremonious exit from Afghanistan, many allies and opponents have questioned the US hegemony across the globe. The Biden administration thus planned to redirect its energies towards the containment of China in the Indo-Pacific, while poking the bear in Eastern Europe. The United States of America signed a strategic partnership pact with Ukraine last year in November, suggesting prospects for Ukraine to join NATO, something President Vladimir Putin has declared a red line since his time in office. And as the great American theorist, John J Mearsheimer himself pointed out, the conflict in Ukraine is a result of US actions; not understanding and accepting Russia’s legitimate security concerns is the first blunder itself.
A special United Nations General Assembly emergency session was convened on 28th February, to discuss ways to mitigate this crisis from unfolding into Europe’s third possible deadliest war. But one thing is for sure, if not all, then most of Asia is not willing to be part of Europe’s past…becoming its future.
Read more: Europe’s largest nuclear power plant on fire as Russia-Ukraine fight intensifies
Understanding the matter better
Much of the attention was drawn to the voting choices of South Asian countries that abstained from the UNGA resolution but condemned the situation otherwise. Soon after, the United States of America and Europe started to mount pressure on countries like Pakistan to take a stance against Russia. Even before that Pakistani Prime Minister, Imran Khan’s visit was painted as Pakistan choosing a bloc, when clearly Pakistan’s latest National Security Policy abstains from bloc politics. As a non-party to the conflict, Pakistan has taken a principled stance on the matter, emphasizing on dialogue and diplomacy to be the way forward.
In normal circumstances, this visit would have been championed as a great prospect for regional cooperation and connectivity. Pakistan’s abstention from the resolution does not imply it choosing sides but it shows a conscious choice made by the sovereign state of Pakistan against any sort of public/global banishment or endorsement. South Asian countries like Pakistan and India understand.
Meanwhile, China has asserted that it understands Russian “ legitimate security concerns” given NATO’s eastward expansionist agenda, and also willfully caters to commitments toward territorial “sovereignty” and “integrity.” China had presented its Five-Point position on the crisis on 25th February, in conversation with representatives of the European Union and separately with France as well.
Both Pakistan and China have urged the world to look beyond the Cold-war mindset, and both countries are against the situation in Ukraine. State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi has urged all parties involved to show “restraint” and that a “large-scale humanitarian crisis must be prevented.”
Read more: How Russian military invasion has shaken the Europeans?
Development versus Disruption
Contrary to the disruptive policies of the US and West to project and sustain their power in international affairs, China has offered the view of a shared community for mankind. As is with the growing polarization of the international community, there is a need to reflect upon actions and policies in order to re-emerge as a resilient community, especially with regard to the developing world. As a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council, China understands its responsibility to uphold international obligations, thus committing to connecting the world through its development agendas like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and President Xi Jinping’s Global Development Initiative (GDI).
The GDI reflects a people-centric approach to development and suggests that economic security and sustainable development should be on the global macro agenda, in line with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UN SDGs), and while doing so paying attention to the requirements of the developing world instead of rallying countries for militaristic campaigns.
President Xi Jinping has asserted on creating resilient financial systems to support the developing world, including policies like debt suspensions, aid, “with emphasis on addressing unbalanced and inadequate development among and within countries.” The Ukrainian crisis has already created global supply chain disruptions, food insecurity and an uncertain geopolitical atmosphere that does not favor China or the US, but only the military-industrial complex. Most commentary and analysis on the subject does not discuss that Ukraine merely works as a pawn on this chessboard, led by an “exclusivist nationalist” that has been unsuccessful in bringing Ukraine into a united entity. Of course, that does not make Russia’s attack rightful, yet painting villains and heroes in this new era of great power rivalry only simplify a problem that is quite complex.
Instead of enhancing technology for unimaginable destruction through warmongering, the GDI emphasizes the need to manifest “innovation-driven development” to support a nonexcludable environment with an equitable flow of science and technology across countries of varying calibers. The transition towards a technologically advanced world with a low-carbon economy is impossible without the cooperation of the developed world, the global community and the developing world.
Read more: European human rights group condemns anti-Muslim attacks in France
Thus given current global scenarios, the prism of development needs to be enshrined in the foreign policies of all countries. The international order of the west, that championed its free and liberal world order was already withering away, and with the events in Afghanistan and Ukraine, the facade has been unmasked. Military conflicts only cause suffering for the developing world, and the developing world has seen the lengths of the West’s hegemony and its hypocritical approach towards other non-western and non-white countries.
Written by: Javairyah Kulthum Aatif
The author is affiliated with Islamabad Policy Research Institute (IPRI). The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Global Village Space.