Corona Covid-19 pandemic: death knell for the post-war world order?

Once upon a time the world – or at least the Free World - was led by Reagan, Thatcher and Mitterand. Leaders with presence, standing and most important of all, respect. They were even respected by opponents.

British Prime Minister Thatcher, US President Reagan, French President Mitterrand and
West German Chancellor Schmidt at an international summit meeting (L to R)

During those times the US and its likeminded 'friends,' e.g. Britain and France, ran the world using a combination of bribery and force. They lorded over other lesser nations through a series of interlocking multilateral security arrangements and an economic institutional framework comprising of entities like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank.  

In a nutshell, that was the post World War Two world order.

But those were different times. The developed world had money and delivered on promises. Other countries believed them.

The US, as the undisputed leader of the 'Free World,' provided a security blanket for its satellite states. In return for ceding a part of their national sovereignty to the US, the US provided clear leadership, especially in times of crisis.  

That was the 1980s. Much has changed in the ensuing four decades.

The Berlin Wall - the symbolic Iron Curtain dividing the world's two Superpowers (the US and the Soviet Union) - came down in 1991. That same year the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) morphed – nay collapsed – and became the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). (The CIS structure was a graceful way for the USSR to exit the Russian Empire's historic obligations and focus on saving Russia itself.)

Socialism all but died with the Soviet Union. Today all countries engage in private enterprise and global trade. Meanwhile Socialism has been discredited though significant parts of socialist philosophy have made their way into mainstream thought, e.g. public healthcare and social safety nets.

China's Belt and Road Initiative reflects China's aspirations as a global trading power

As for the global economy, the US is no longer the undisputed master. To be sure, the US Dollar remains king but its throne is a little shaky.

In the past it was said, "If the US sneezes then the world catches a cold." Today, if the US sneezes, the rest of the world simply says, "Bless You" and moves on. The risk of catching a cold is remote – at least not an intense life threatening cold resulting in mass unemployment.

In 2020 the communist party managed People's Republic of China (PRC) has the world's largest economy. Based on data released by the IMF, World Bank and the CIA, China's economy is significantly larger than its closest rival. Indeed, China's gross domestic product (GDP) surpasses the GDP of the combined European Union (EU) nations.

The deterioration in the US position has not been only in the economic domain.

Extraordinary leaders create and husband prestige. Prestige is an invisible halo which adds to the 'je ne sais quoi' aura of rulers. It is built up over decades but can be lost quickly. 

American prestige reached its peak during the first Iraq war with Operation Desert Storm in 1991 and Powell's 'Shock and Awe' tactics of overwhelming force. Since 1991 a series of events have diminished US global standing.

Militarily, the downtrend started with the 1993 failed US intervention in Somalia, Operation Restore Hope and the casualties suffered in the Battle of Mogadishu. Then came the 9/11 attack, which taking place on US domestic soil was a watershed moment. The subsequent War on Terror, especially the Iraq war and the present scramble to exit Afghanistan, did little to help stem the dissipation of US prestige.

Simultaneously a succession of other minor events, though not as individually significant as the 9/11 attack, cumulatively resulted in tarnishing America's sheen. These include the US federal government shutdown in 2018 – 2019 (35 days) and 1995 – 1996 (26 days) and the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.

Despite the signs of decay, many still placed the mantle of leadership squarely on the US and its small coterie of European friends. However, with recent events surrounding the Covid-19 pandemic it has become increasingly clear the US and its 'friends' no longer rule the roost.

In its management of the Covid-19 pandemic, the world has seen the US's dysfunctional soul. While state governors are at loggerheads with the federal government over steps to contain the crisis the US Covid-19 death toll and infection numbers rise uncontrollably. As of April 2, 2020 US deaths attributed to Covid-19 have surpassed China, the original epicentre of the virus.

Through an unending sea of social media content, the world has witnessed the complete disarray in the US (and most of Western Europe) caused by the pandemic. Most revealing are not the lack of resources available to these governments' in tackling the virus but more so the lack of national leadership and policy implementation through state bureaucracies.

The world is used to headlines decrying poor governance, weak infrastructure; limited resources, etc. Such news headlines are common across large swathes of the world. However, they are more normally reserved for parts of Africa or developing Asia than for the US or Europe.

The Covid-19 pandemic has hastened post war global structural changes. The US and Europe, though still powerful, are less relevant international players. 

Following a steady erosion of economic and military power the irreparable loss of reputational prestige due to the management of the Covid-19 pandemic, neither the US nor Europe are able to provide global leadership. For example, there will be no Group of Seven summit resulting in a Baker Plan or issuance of Brady Bonds to save the world's economy from the ravages of the Covid-19 catastrophe. It's every nation for herself.

Until further notice, the world suffers a leadership vacuum.

China may vie to fill the position but it's not ready yet - perhaps in a few decades. More likely, second tier regional powers like India, Russia and Turkey will temporarily fill the void in their respective neighborhoods until a more stable arrangement is reached. 

No matter what the coming new world order looks like, one fact is clear: Trump, Boris and Macron cannot fill the shoes of Reagan, Thatcher or Mitterrand.

__________________

Imran is a Singapore based Tour Guide with a special interest in arts and history. Imran has lived and worked in several countries during his past career as an international banker. He enjoys traveling, especially by train, as a way to feed his curiosity about the world and nurture his interest in photography. He is available on Instagram (@imranahmedsg); twitter (@grandmoofti) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

The 'Post 9/11' era and periods in history

World history is conveniently divided into periods. It is likely September 11, 2001 marked the end of the post-war period and the beginning of a new era. The events of 9/11 are a handy reference point for a 'before' and 'after' comparison.

'Before' included a relatively stable economic order buttressed by the Bretton Woods Agreement; a political structure based on clear demarcations between the Communist bloc led by the Soviet Union (remember the USSR?) and the Free World led by the US.

Developing nations joined either the American or Soviet camp. In return for supporting either the capitalist or communist systems these countries were given economic and military aid, a form of clientelism. Ostensibly, the aid delivered by the patron Superpower was meant for development. To be sure, much of the aid did trickle down to the masses, positively affecting the lives of millions. However, a large part of the aid money was recycled back into Western economies. Corrupt politicians pocketed aid money and deposited these funds into bank accounts say in London and Geneva. Once in the international banking system, the money returned to the developed economies.

While the 'Eastern bloc – Western bloc' system may not have worked for all, it worked for some. Certainly it worked for those at the top who managed it.

Then came the demise of the USSR. And the evolution of 'Socialism with Chinese characteristics' in Deng Xiaoping's China. The Communist bloc disappeared almost overnight. If that weren't enough, 9/11 happened.

Suddenly, the world was reeling from violence underpinned by a so-called Islamic ideology (even if the ideology is decidedly un-Islamic to most Muslims). One thing led to another and before sane people could blink, the US and its Coalition of the Willing implemented Operation Enduring Freedom and invaded Iraq in 2003.

US soldiers enter a palace in Baghdad, Iraq in 2003 (Source: Wikipedia)

The Iraq invasion precipitated a chain of events which continue in motion until today. Already a tinderbox due to the Palestinian question, the Middle East erupted into a cacophony of wars, revolutions and ever changing political alliances.

Shia Persia – contemporary Iran – viewing itself as a historic regional power adeptly filled political vacuums in Iraq and Syria thereby adding to its already strong foothold in Lebanon via Hezbollah. Simultaneously, Sunni Islam's Al-Qaeeda virus transformed into a more deadly disease called Islamic State (IS). IS, mainly through its involvement in Syria and Iraq, fueled the symbiotic relationship between extreme versions of Sunni and Shia Islam. Ultimately influential state actors were sucked into the conflict.

Saudi Arabia, along with its new best friend the United Arab Emirates (UAE), initiated a military expedition in Yemen with sideshows in Bahrain and Qatar. All three operations avowedly designed to block Shia Iran's expanding influence in the Arab world. Indeed, it now appears a tacit alliance between Saudi Arabia and the Arab world's historic 'Mother of All Enemies' i.e. Zionist Israel, is in the works to counter Iran's regional strength.

Throw in a hot-headed 32 year old ruler – Saudi Arabia's new Crown Prince – and a fiery anti-Western Turkish Islamist politician – President Erdogan – and the ingredients for prolonged instability are truly in place.

An Al-Qaeeda affiliated fighter in the Sahel region of Africa (Source: Wikipedia)

On the bigger global stage, a reprise of the 1970s Cold War is taking place in the form of renewed conflict between the US and Russia (and China). Meanwhile, 'Red' China has transformed itself into an economic and political powerhouse. Indeed, the health of the global economy hinges on Chinese growth rates. If China sneezes the world catches a cold. Buttressed by its new found economic clout, China now employs a more muscular foreign policy in order to project its strength. The South China Sea dispute is evidence of China's new approach.

The world is in a new 'Post 9/11' phase. It is doubtful there were many certainties in the past. Now there are even fewer certainties – simply many questions which only time can answer.

It is in this context that I enrolled for the online course, “Understanding 9/11: Why 9/11 Happened and How Terrorism Affects Our World Today” offered by Duke University. The course should provide me with information about recent changes. Undoubtedly, like any humanities course, there are biases in the material and its presentation. However, I intend to soak in the knowledge in order to make better personal judgments about the subject (isn't that the purpose of learning?).

To complete the course I am required to submit two papers. The first assignment – a maximum of 1,000 words – is about 'Radical Islamic Fundamentalism.' Through the document I must explain key elements of Al-Qaeeda's philosophy, its origins and the radicalization process to my local police chief.

Below is my paper in its entirety.

____________________________________

To: The Commissioner,

Singapore Police Force,

Republic of Singapore.

From: Imran Ahmed,

Policy Consultant,

Radical Islamic Fundamentalism Expert.

Subject: Origins and key elements of radical Islamic fundamentalism and the radicalization process

Date: November 18, 2017

'Radical Islamic Fundamentalism' has the potential to drive individuals towards violence. One dangerous strand of radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology is provided by Osama Bin Laden's (OBL) Al-Qaeeda and its offshoots such as ISIS and Jemaah Islamia (JI). These fringe Islamic ideologies form a critical part of any individual's radicalization process and must be understood as they potentially pose a threat to Singapore as a plural multicultural society.

Origins of Radical Islamic Fundamentalism

Radical Islamic fundamentalism relies on specific interpretations of historical and contemporary conditions found in the Islamic world. These conditions can be categorized into three broad headings: political and economic decline; 'un-Islamic' religious practices; and Westernization of Muslim societies.

Firstly, radicals believe the political and economic decline of the Islamic world is directly attributed to non-Muslim Western nations, e.g. the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and related Islamic Caliphate. Western colonialism is also blamed for the demise of Islamic nations and dividing the Islamic Ummah into arbitrarily defined nation states.

Secondly, radical Islamists consider contemporary Islamic beliefs and practices to be tainted by centuries of influence from 'un-Islamic' ideas. Consequently, present day Islamic society and religion is believed be fundamentally 'corrupt.'

Lastly, these radicals believe Islamic societies have been 'Westernized' through centuries of contact with 'un-Islamic' Western nations. That is, Islamic societies are diffused with un-Islamic cultural and social practices. In recent years, this belief has been compounded by the forces of globalization.

Al-Qaeeda Ideology: Some Key Elements

Al-Qaeeda believes there is a war taking place between Islam and the West, including the US. It is therefore a religious duty of all Muslims to wage war – a lesser Jihad – against Americans and Westerners in order to protect the Islamic world and avenge its mistreatment by the West. Moreover, any Muslims not participating in this war are deemed un-Islamic and, hence, legitimate targets under OBL's call for jihad. The ideology makes no distinction between civilian and military combatants, all are potential targets in this holy war.

In OBL's 1996 Declaration of Jihad, he built on ideas expounded by an Egyptian Islamist thinker named Sayyid Qutb in a book titled Milestones (1964). In Milestones Qutb wrote, “Our whole environment, people's beliefs and ideas, their habits and art, rules and laws - is Jahiliyyah [an age of barbarity or darkness predating Islam].”

In the Declaration, OBL appeals to economic, social and political grievances within the Muslim world to advance his argument. He states Muslims and Islamic nations have been humiliated by Western nations in many ways, e.g. through war, occupation and plunder.

In 1998, in a bid to gain more credibility, OBL joined forces with several known religious figures and issued a statement under the World Islamic Front banner. In this 1998 call to action, Al-Qaeeda focuses more openly on America. He refers to the US 'occupation' of Holy Lands in Saudi Arabia – a reference to US soldiers stationed in Saudi Arabia. Further, the statement speaks of ongoing injustices such as United Nations and US sanctions against Iraq following the 1991 war. In a final bid to convince his audience, Bin Laden attempts to associate the US with Israel, using Israel's general unpopularity within the Islamic world.

Al-Qaeeda's radical Islamic ideology urges violence against American and Western persons and interests. Indeed, the ideology goes further by exhorting Muslims to fulfill their religious duty by undertaking such violence, even against other Muslims who are seen as passive bystanders in this holy war against the US. The 9/11 attacks are the most poignant examples of such violence.

Radicalizing Individuals to Violence

Radicalizing individuals to commit acts of violence is a complex process. There is no predetermined, rigid or formulaic path by which an individual moves from being a non-violent individual to one ready to commit violence in the name of Islam, even if the person is sympathetic to radical Islamic fundamentalist causes.

There are multiple routes towards radicalization and many use forms of social media. Likewise, there appears to be no one type of individual who tends to radicalize.

A review of known radical Islamic terrorists demonstrates diversity across national, ethnic, linguistic, educational and socioeconomic backgrounds. Hence, it is difficult for law enforcers to detect potential terrorists based on a specific racial profile. Nevertheless, evidence indicates that most terrorists tend to be young males.

Some individuals radicalize because they experienced a traumatic event, e.g. death of an acquaintance or family member. Consequently, they may wish to avenge the death and turn to terrorism. Alternately, the individual may identify with a larger group (e.g. Iraqi Sunni Muslims) which he somehow seeks to defend from an 'enemy.'

There are several other known theoretical tracks to radicalization discussed by radicalization expert Clark McCauley. These include thrill seeking by young persons. Another is based on Group Dynamics. Here individuals within a group tend to move towards extremes and ultimately all members of the group are radicalized. Group isolation, where a group is isolated from society and hence strengthens bonds to such an extent where violence becomes acceptable is another possibility. Mass politics is another method. Here if a group is attacked then it may respond in ways – i.e. violence – which otherwise it may otherwise have considered inappropriate.

It is important to state that most sympathizers of radical Islam seem not to take the final step towards violence.

Conclusion

As has been seen by the capture and detention of several Jemaah Islamia (JI) terrorists and radicalized individuals, Al-Qaeeda's extreme radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology has the ability to influence Muslims in Singapore towards extreme violent behavior. (JI is the Al-Qaeeda offshoot active in Southeast Asia.) Radical Islamic fundamentalist ideology espouses violence against open societies such as Singapore and even against Muslims who have integrated into a pluralistic, tolerant society. While there is no single route to radicalization, it is known that the largest group of potential terrorists are young males. Hence, It is important Singapore curbs their ability to seek out and imbibe radical Islamic ideological thought and the individuals / groups which espouse such thought.

Imran is an adventurer, blogger, consultant, guide, photographer, speaker, traveler and a banker in his previous life. At the time of writing, Imran is living in Rashidabad, Pakistan as a volunteer teacher at the SST Public School. He is available on twitter (@grandmoofti); Instagram (@imranahmedsg) and can be contacted at imran.ahmed.sg@gmail.com.

China plays the ‘Russia Card’

During the Cold War in the 1970s, United States President Nixon played the 'China Card' against Soviet Union. The 'China Card' was powerful enough to trump most anything played by America's Soviet opponents. The US won that hand. That was several decades ago.

In 2013, Red China is adeptly playing its own game of global diplomacy. China watchers have replaced yesterday's Cold War Kremlin watchers.

Modern China holds several strong cards. Global financial markets analyze each and every statistic – no matter how trivial – released by the People's Republic of China (PRC). Every move of influential members of the Communist Party of China is analyzed. Hence, when the new Chinese president makes Russia the destination of his first foreign trip, theories about the tour's significance abound. However, the reason for the visit is simple.

China is playing the 'Russia Card,' directed against the US. China is signalling to the US that the world is not completely unipolar; that public hacking allegations against the Chinese military may have consequences.

The US may be the only nation with the ability to intervene militarily in countries far from its own borders, like Iraq, but even the US has constraints. Those restraints come partially in the form of Russia and China.

To be sure, Russia and China are neighbours with shared interests. Close relations between the two erstwhile communist neighbours makes sense. Nonetheless, Russia and the US clearly feel the need to form a loose alliance against the current dominant world power. Neither country wishes to grant the US a license to ride roughshod over the world – something the US did spectacularly unsuccessfully in Iraq.

History is destined to repeat itself, often only with changed names and dates. Surely that is the case with the present Sino-Russian relationship? The American-Chinese relationship of the 1970–80s was something similar: a marriage of convenience built on a mutual mistrust of the Soviet Union. In the new millennium, a 'China-Russia' axis has been partly catalyzed by shared suspicions about US foreign policy actions.  

__________________

Imran is a business and management consultant. Through his work at Deodar Advisors and the Deodar Diagnostic, Imran improves profits of businesses operating in Singapore and the region. He can be reached at imran@deodaradvisors.com.