The West is useful, but now less important

Gibson Nyikadzino, Zimpapers Politics Hub
Nearly 30 years ago, before countries embarked on foreign policy positions, they would first ask: “If we do this, what will Washington say?” Today, the same countries are now asking: “What will Beijing, Moscow, Tehran, Ankara, and New Delhi or Brasilia say?” It simply tells us that the world is changing.

This reinforces the idea that the United States and the collective West are no longer as important as they used to be. Today, any country can talk about the idea of security without the collective West, even though the world has not exclusively reached that stage.

We are living in very uncertain yet curious times – probably the most dangerous period since the Second World War. What makes contemporary times more dangerous is that the whole concept of collective peace and security seems to be paralysed.

It is becoming evident that there is a need to have a change of the global security concepts, which is the concept of international security.

One of the major problems was the collapse of the Soviet Union in December 1991, to which the United States felt triumphant and that this was the end of history. After that, the US also felt it had become the ultimate power or the hyper power, as some at that time would call it.

Since then, it has gone far beyond its previous positions concerning international law and international issues. Even at the United Nations Security Council, which is no longer relevantly democratic because Western permanent members dominate it, it no longer has anything that the US respects.

Today, if the US wants to go to war, it goes to war. If it wants to occupy a country, they could occupy a country. In 1999, it led NATO to bomb Serbia; it led the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001; occupied Iraq in 2003 and now is fighting Russia using Ukraine as a proxy. Soon it will militarily confront China over Taiwan.

It is evident that the arrogance of power in the West increased substantially after the collapse of the Soviet Union. What we are now seeing is a major shift in the balance of power. The US and the collective West are becoming less important, not that they are no longer useful countries. They are still useful in many ways.

The US is still, in many ways, the most powerful country in the world. However, relatively speaking, it is no longer the US of 20 years ago. Nor is the Europe of today the one of two decades ago.

This is something that the collective West does not seem to be able to accept. Hence the changes, for example, that Western policymakers are making about nuclear weapons, increasing their military budgets and defence spending and the circumstances under which nuclear weapons or tactical nuclear weapons will be used, are all dangerous issues that the US is now pursuing.

In addition, the centre of gravity for these challenges is culture. Many of the global problems emanate from the lack of understanding of other cultures, lack of readiness to accept other cultures, other identities. This leads to lack of trust and then to problems.

It has to do with the collective West trying to preserve its dominance, and countries like China, Iran and Russia or others that feel dissatisfied with this US predominance, are showing resistance. What therefore makes non-Western countries so strong is their sense of justice and standing up to injustice.

As the collective West grows less powerful, the other regional and global powers are using this moment as an opportunity to change the discussion about how the world must be. Instead of competition, they speak of cooperation.

Instead of unilateralism, they advance multipolarism, and in that context, they are helping change the traditional global political and economic architecture. The key issue is to have a harmonious international relationship, to address a number of conflicts and to try to prevent conflicts in mutual understanding.

This explains why the most important geopolitical and geoeconomic project that could change many things is the Chinese Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It is already fully under development in many parts of the world.

The BRI is something that not only will be able to create wealth for global South countries, ensure stability and bring huge amounts of the human population out of poverty; it is bringing about new situations.

That China is leading the BRI is interesting for a host of reasons. One is that it is reviving the historic Silk Road, which connected China and western Asia and extending to Europe. This is a reminder that China is reviving the economic connections and interactions it had long back, bringing them back into existence.

Secondly, China, Asia and Europe represent old civilisations that have been around long before the US existed in 1776 in any way or form. In reviving the Silk Road, China is showing its capacity to control key trade routes for the benefit of other partners.

China is providing new opportunities for others to develop and this enhances the importance of all the countries who are part of its BRI at a global level.

Contrary to Western narratives, the existence of the BRI increases the importance of Asia, Europe, Africa and Latin America and their relationship with China.

It is undeniable that the agenda of the global South towards multipolarity is moving in a direction that will make the collective West, in particular the US, become less significant in the fate of global affairs in the coming years.

It will be evident that countries that do not have a stake in the BRI like the US would like to hinder this progress. However, the US should be deeply concerned over the impending multipolar world that it should begin mutually cooperating with other civilisations and states in that regard.

It is not the time to designate adversaries. Doing so means the world will remain in a cycle of danger than what it experienced during the Cold War.