Beyond COVID-19 : What is the emerging world-order “symptomatic” of ?

As the potent COVID-19 virus careens across the world, sapping lives out of the breathless populace, one might pause to ponder the long-term ramifications of such a humongous outbreak, on the inter-play of geopolitics, structures of global governance or even the political economy. As a logical outcome, the emergence of a nascent yet neoteric global order might be palpable.

However, one might be snubbed as a laggard, for failing to discern the already changing contours of the global order over the past few years, and its subsequent transmogrification. The resurgence of nationalist agitations, revival of protectionist ethos, renewal of counter-globalisation drives compounded with an eroding faith in the multilateral arc, definitely insinuated towards a conspicuous departure from the conventional patterns of global engagement. A competitive dualism between, to quote Aarshi Tirkey, “the so-called American exceptionalism and Chinese revisionism”, simply expedited the departure. It remains to be seen whether, whether the invasion of a life-threatening pathogen, incapacitates the global processes further or propels the world to a more coherent course.

The prognostication of Francis Fukuyama, pre-empting the dismantling of Soviet Union, and a global embrace of liberalism, now seems panglossian at best. Assertive markers of identity, nurtured and fostered by hyper-nationalist leaders have surely given a safe space for the politics of resentment and tribalism to make inroads.

One of the most observable paradigm shifts, as posited by Samir Saran is the unmistakeable erosion of Pax Americana. For the longest time, the pandemic, as a global threat, has spectated a warped American leadership devoid of any consistency or vision. A fallacious distribution of assistance and aid, ideally to be premised on equality and equity, between the member states of the European Union, has only exposed the cleavages in the governance capacities of the developed West more broadly. The economic gulf between the Northern and Southern pockets of Europe, along with the chasm between its Western and Eastern counterparts over value systems seems well poised to widen. A watered-down transatlantic core of the liberal international order, might backslide further in the post-COVID-19 world.

But such a geo-political quagmire might not catapult a new global leader at the world stage. China, which according to many, is one of the front-runners to take up the reins, has faced a strong international opprobrium for a multitude of reasons, prominent among them being its slipshod medical stratagem to contain the virus spread. Notwithstanding, its efforts to preen its profile in the transnational forums, its nefarious proclivities to foster vitriol among the EU member states, its excessive high-handedness in tackling the Taiwan and Hong Kong problem and its racist overtones towards the African diaspora, has largely blighted its soaring ambitions.

Most nations are being lackadaisical in adapting to the emerging power calculus between China and the West, which are in a constant state of flux. There is a pervasive sense of disquiet amongst the East Asian democracies, who are watching things unfold with bated breath. It might be affirmed, that they would persist in pitting one against the other in the great game, while dextrously carving a space for themselves to operate. The inter-connected geographical ruptures, as captured by Saran, is directed towards a return of a traditional “strong state” with a mushrooming of hyper-masculine and staunchly nationalist premiers. Some national governments have used the virus outbreak as a smokescreen to shroud their nefarious designs of centralising and consolidating power, a case in point being Viktor Orban’s Hungary.

The coronavirus is surely a harbinger of what Ian Bremmer calls a “G-Zero” world- simultaneously multi-polar, bereft of leadership and bedevilled with burgeoning geo-political skirmishes. It is a world where the West has been dismembered from its universal credibility and moral legitimacy, one that Beijing strives to reorient through its visionary yet vicious Belt and Road Initiative, on where Kremlin would seek to marshal its clout to augment its geo-political stature in East Europe, West Asia and the Arctic. Finally, it will be a global theatre, where pygmy powers would have to pick a power alignment, either by constraint or compulsion.

As different facets of the world order reels under a pandemic of monumental proportions, with no signs of green shoots, the actions of the structures of global governance in general, and the World Health Organisation in particular, has been subjected to rigorous assessment.

From dragging one’s feet in designating COVID-19 as a “public health emergency of international concern”, to its hesitance in visiting China to monitor the ground reality; from its dithery acknowledgement of the human-to-human transmission of the virus, to not seconding the imposition of travel and trade restrictions, its laggard methodologies have drawn the irk of many.

Strikingly, the organisation’s overt yet fallacious eulogization of China’s COVID-management measures, and the allegedly eroded autonomy of its current Direct General Tedros Adhanom, has reeked of a clandestine Chinese influence on the body of the organisation, insinuating the politicisation of the WHO, as per many commentators and analysts.

An erstwhile Ethiopian minister of health and foreign affairs, Tedros’ victory in the 2017 WHO Director General Elections, as argued by scholars like Harsh Pant and Aarshi Tikri, could only be possible, owing to Beijing, pulling the strings from behind. Interestingly, after elected, he was unswerving in his avowed commitment, of upholding the “One China” principle, leading to Taiwan’s egress from the WHO. Tedros is even said to have met Chinese premier Xi Jinping on 28^th January 2020, lauding the leadership for its containment measures and statistical transparency. It was an extremely subservient move, especially in the wake of documented evidence of Chinese efforts to brush the actual figures under the carpet.

While the politicisation of WHO remains an area of consternation, Pant and Tikri, perceive it as a window of opportunity to rejig the foundations of the structure of global governance. While global institutions are moulded and remoulded by great power politics, its crumbling underpinnings must be refurbished at the earliest to preclude any unwarranted fragmentation.

The steadily rising fissures in the realm of the global political economy, piling up over the past two decades, and hitherto manifesting itself intermittently, are now out in the open for everyone to witness. Samir Saran and Jayant Sinha adroitly captures how China’s burgeoning ambitions in the global economic order, would have a decisive sway over the future course of globalisation. The misplaced optimism of the West, in engaging with Beijing, in a bid to liberate the latter from its authoritarian-illiberal school of politics, has suffered a heavy blow, in the wake of the pandemic. The conventional free and open liberal orientation, to quote Saran and Sinha, “has run into the great political wall of China” with inimical ramifications.

The scholars posit that the current state of “global flux” provides a moment to muse over, and assess the unfolding of what may be deemed as “Pax Sinica”, primarily driven by two monumental Chinese projects. The much-deliberated Belt and Road Initiative, redolent of Pax Britannica and Pax Americana, constitutes one of them. Through such a global endeavour, China seeks to capture the flow of raw materials and resources from Asia and Africa, through a plethora of supply channels and trade links, while flooding the markets of the world with their finished goods. Needless to say, through such a neo-imperial modus operandi, China wishes to keep its economic interests at the forefront, while projecting a misleading narrative of global growth, solidarity and development.

Yet another constituent of the Chinese expansionism is marked by its coordinated efforts in holding the reins of the global data economy. From crafting next-generation conduits of communication and digital spaces, to harnessing tools of vigilance for the authoritarian dispensations, Beijing, in all likelihood, harbours the technological acumen to transform the punitive, financial or even developmental dimensions of already existent administrations. Ironically, it precludes the penetration of these very global flows in its own society and polity.

The long-term aspirations of China, rests in reviving its pompous profile of predominance in Asia, and projecting an “opaque” alternative to the liberal international order. Thus, to counter such behemoth, the nations might engage only with those worthy of political trust, and subsequently disrupting the incessant flow supply chains. A resultant paradigm-shift from a global village of deeply entrenched communities to a form of “gated globalisation” premised on politico-economic familiarity seems to be in the offing.

It is a no-brainer that the world is afflicted with many uncertainties today, with a myriad of domestic and global skirmishes, owing global health, climate change, geo-tech rivalry and biological security. It is fool-hardy for a single power to address such elephantine challenges alone. An insurmountable task demands some fundamental re-posturing, even if it entails a deviation from the conventional. So, although it might be instinctive of humans, to fight each other, the post-pandemic world must see rigid ideologies and positions relegated to the backseat, with a cooperative-collaborative spirit at the forefront. Cohesion and competence must be the order of the day, to weed out the potential dangers that lie ahead.

References

1. “Order at The Gates: Globalisation, Techphobia and The World Order” by Samir Saran (https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/order-at-the-gates-globalisation-techphobia-and-the-world-order-65227/)
2. “What’s Ailing the World Health Organization?” by Harsh V. Pant and Aarshi Tirkey https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/whats-ailing-world-health-organisation-65126/
3. “Gated Globalisation and Fragmented Supply Chains” by Jayant Sinha and Samir Saran (https://www.orfonline.org/research/gated-globalisation-and-fragmented-supply-chains-65216/)
4. “The World Must Come Together Before the Next Disaster Hits” by Chen Xi https://www.orfonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/GP-ORF-Uncharted-Territory_June-25.pdf

Ratnadeep Maitra

Intern Asia in Global Affairs