OPINION: The need for a democratic global grouping sans China
By CA Krishnan
The world is living through unprecedented human tragedy and economic upheaval. A total reset of the parameters that were till now considered ‘normal’ is inevitable. As we are still groping in darkness with no idea how deep we are in the COVID-19 tunnel, it is natural that many of our analysis, predictions and bouts of wishful thinking about the future may end up being totally off the mark and even outlandish. Notwithstanding that, we still need to indulge in it as outlandish actions may be required to fix many of the problems that would confront the world post-COVID-19.
Let us take the UN for example. We had the ‘League of Nations’ created after World War I by the Treaty of Versailles. It came into being in 1920 and lasted about 26 years before it became redundant and had to be dissolved in 1946. Post World War II, the United Nations was born on 24 October 1945 and was tailored to meet the changing dynamics. The UN has been in existence now for almost 75 years. It has remained relevant far longer than its predecessor. Considering the revolutionary and transformational changes the world has witnessed since the UN’s inception, such as the end of colonization, the flowering of new democracies around the world, and the quantum jump in scientific, technological and economic developments, it is remarkable that the UN is still in existence. Having given it due credit for what it has achieved so far, we must proceed to examine its relevance today.
Out of the 195 countries of the world, 193 are members of the UN with the state of Palestine and the Holy See enjoying non-member observer status. The Preamble of the UN Charter states that the UN is determined to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.”
The constant power play by the world powers combined with the helplessness of the UN due to the clash of interests and contradictory agendas of the ‘permanent five’ have, However, resulted in a steady erosion of the UN’s credibility. Viewed in the background of the preamble of the UN Charter, it is a travesty that China recently shot down a proposal in the UN Security Council to initiate a discussion over the spread of COVID-19 and the resultant loss of lives, threatening peace and security of the world. The Chinese intervention to block the discussion appears inexplicable and the UN has effectively been stymied by China.
Under the circumstances, the rest of the world is more than justified in suspecting clear Chinese complicity in the spread of COVID-19 and even in the shady origin of the virus. It is equally inexplicable for the world to understand the naked predatory economic raids that the Chinese have unleashed across the world which has attracted a vehement but disjointed response from shocked nations from the US to Europe to Japan and even India. How much more will the world suffer in silence? How do we respond to these irresponsible and aggressive acts of China?
At least in the foreseeable future, there is no military option against China, even if the rest of the world were to team up together. Even an economic option seems limited. The McKinsey Global Institute Report of July 2019 titled ‘China and the World’, examines the mutual exposure of China and the rest of the world on trade, technology and capital; while China’s exposure on the aggregate index declined from 0.9 in 2007 to 0.6 by 2017, the rest of the worlds aggregate index rose from 0.4 in 2000 to 1.2 in 2017 due to the re-balancing of China’s economy towards domestic consumption.
The McKinsey report further states that the “increasing exposure of the rest of the world to China reflects China’s increasing importance as a market, supplier, and provider of capital. China accounts for 35 per cent of global manufacturing output. Although it accounts for only 10 per cent of global household consumption, it was the source of 31 per cent of global household consumption growth from 2010 to 2017, according to World Bank data. Moreover, in many categories including automobiles, spirits, luxury goods, and mobile phones, China is the largest market in the world, accounting for about 30 per cent (or more) of global consumption.”
It is therefore evident that any economic measures will result in causing greater pain for the rest of the world. The world was expecting that as China’s remarkable economic growth progress gets underway, it will transform itself into a responsible world power and also choose to gradually drift towards a democratic, capitalist system, albeit with a distinct Chinese imprint on it. This expectation has been totally belied. If anything, China’s belief in its closed, autocratic model seems to have been strengthened even more. Further, while flexing its economic muscles, China also seems to be attempting to project and export its closed, autocratic system as a counter to the democratic, capitalist system, which it believes has proved a failure.
H.R. McMaster, a former White House Security Adviser, recently wrote in The Atlantic that China clearly feels “profound insecurity” and “inner apprehension” about its internal threats as much as its external threats. He concludes that China’s fears and ambitions are inseparable and believes that this explains the reasons for the Chinese Communist Party’s obsession with control -both internally and externally.
If the world cannot respond militarily or economically to the ‘aggressive means other than war’ that China has unleashed on it with devastating effect, what other realistic options do we have?
Can we create a new global grouping of the democratic nations of the world? To do so, we may need to neutralize the UN. Can we do that?
It is interesting to note who the main resource providers of the UN are. As per a letter from the President of the UN General Assembly dated October 23, 2018 addressed to all permanent representatives and permanent observers to the UN, the top ten providers of assessed contributions to UN budgets including voluntary contributions to UN funds, programs and agencies and the standing peacekeeping fund, are as follows:
Average yearly Contribution (based on contribution in 2015, 2016 & 2017 in $ Billions) by top ten contributors :
Source: Letter from the President of The UN General Assembly
Likewise, the top ten providers of military and police personnel for UN peacekeeping missions are as follows:
Top ten providers of Military and Police personnel for UN peace keeping missions. Average Annual Numbers provided (based on three year data) :
Source: Letter from the President of the UN General Assembly
A close look at the above tables reveals the meagre Chinese contribution to the UN. Except for a negligible share, the resources are almost entirely contributed by the democratic countries of the world. It is unbelievable that a country like China which contributes less than 5 per cent to the UN in terms of funds as well as manpower, holds it to ransom by exploiting its structural weaknesses. In many ways, China is waging a war against democracy using resources contributed by democratic countries and it is exploiting the freedom and liberty that democracy provides.
So, coming back to the question, can we create a new global grouping? My answer is ‘yes’. The way forward may be easier said than done and obstacle- ridden, but it is a question of saving the free world and the concept of democracy itself. No price is too high for a common cause such as this.
The time is ripe for serious consideration of this option. It would imply setting up a global body comprising of all democratic countries of the world, based on democratic principles and structures, while simultaneously rendering the UN redundant by starving it of resources. The option of granting ‘observer’ status initially and full membership subsequently, to non-democratic countries, subject to making time-bound and specified structural changes in their internal systems, may be considered.
Imagine the democratic countries of the world coming together and executing a drastic cutting down of their contribution in terms of funds, manpower and other resources to the UN with immediate effect and following it up by totally stopping their contributions in about five years. Simultaneously, a corresponding contribution to the new global body commences.
It is for the democratic countries around the world, including the most powerful, the largest and the smallest to decide whether the perceived need to render the UN redundant and to establish a global union of democratic nations of the world is outlandish, or whether it is the need of the hour.
The author is a former Deputy Chief of the Army.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors’ and do not purport to reflect the opinions or views of THE WEEK.
Originally published at https://www.theweek.in.
