A Non-Aligned Movement for a New World Order

https://consortiumnews.com/2023/06/19/emergence-of-a-new-non-alignment/

A New World Order is emerging but it's not the one predicted by George HW Bush in the early 1990's. In fact this is the order he was trying to prevent, the nightmare scenario US power-brokers have been trying to stave off since that time. Ironically, they brought it on themselves but that's a long story - one that cannot be explored here.

This article by Vijay Prashad nicely lays out what is emerging – a new Non-Aligned Movement not seen since the Cold War. From 1991- until the 2010's there was no real polarity in the world – the United States dominated every global institution and sphere. But with the emergence of China and a revived but still second-tier Russia, the smaller nations of the world have another pole to look to, and other options for security and investment.

This process has accelerated in recent years and was given a tremendous boost by Donald Trump. Boasting about 'Making America Great Again' his administration began to dismantle relationships and mechanisms of US control that had dominated for decades. Weakening America, he created a vacuum and Russia, China and even to some extent the EU were quick to fill it, and now the US faces serious rivals on the international stage. The dreams of American Unipolarity which emerged in the 1990's and were at their apex post-9/11 are now effectively dead. Even the media seems to grant this in its coverage of China and US foreign policy.

As such, with a bi- or multi-polar order emerging we also see new paradigms in the realms of security, finance, and trade – hence the SCO and BRICS. And many countries are seemingly eager to join these organisations which give them options apart from Western (or G7)-dominated institutions such as the IMF and World Bank – and the intrusion and threats brought on by an increasingly assertive and aggressive NATO.

During the Cold War (1945-1991), the Non-Aligned Movement (which emerged in the early 1950's) was formed of nations that rejected the ideological absolutism and political control of both Eastern and Western blocs. But they were not overtly hostile to either and were willing to engage in trade and diplomacy with both. The USSR was fine with this but it outraged the Americans and there was almost a special and vigorous ire directed at such nations and their political leadership. The language of 'you're either with us or against us' made famous by George W Bush in 2001 was merely a reiteration of what had been unofficial US policy since 1945.

The media presently makes much of China's Debt-Trap Diplomacy but as previously stated this is intrinsic to the nature of finance capitalism, and it's a tool long employed by Western powers and in particular the United States. This is why Lower Manhattan was as much a target as Washington DC on 9/11. Bin Laden (it might be argued) understood (in a way far more profound than the average American) that Wall Street is as much the capital and power-centre of the American Empire as is the District of Columbia two-hundred miles to the south.

Prashad refers to The Triad – which evokes memories of David Rockefeller's Trilateral Commission which when referenced all too often gets bogged down in conspiratorial frameworks, and yet there is a conspiratorial element to all of this – but it's quite in the open. Today, the Triad can also said to be represented by the G7 nations. And yes, there is alarm in those quarters over recent developments and how much of the world is rejecting their overarching narratives concerning reality, ethics, and political inevitability.

India under Modi represents a nation that has triangulated and as such the US is attempting to woo him as seen with his recent visit to Washington. Biden received him in the grand style even while his Hindutva-driven and increasingly authoritarian government relies on paramilitaries to crush minority dissent. Modi once again demonstrates that capitalism does not necessarily have to function within the framework of liberalism. Many such contradictions are able to exist in the real world even when on paper they seem problematic. And let it be said, a nation like the United States is one thing on paper or in theory and quite something else in reality – even if the media, political class, and the academy refuse to acknowledge this.

Modi wants to retain economic ties with the West and continues to cast a wary eye on his northern neighbour as China (allied with Pakistan) represents a real threat to his nation. However beyond this, he is not willing to bow to the interests of the American Empire and as with South Africa, China, and Brazil, New Delhi has resisted the narratives concerning the war in Ukraine and NATO's role in it.

Prashad interestingly suggests a triadic order that places the world not just into East-West blocs but adds the Global South. He posits that as a non-aligned bloc it can pursue its own interests. It's but another way of framing the development of the new geopolitical framework but may be at least in part misleading and too tied to race narratives. And in fact there are seeming contradictions in his statements as China is on the one hand the leader of the Eastern Bloc but then later is categorised as part of the resistant South.

Regardless of how it's framed, these developments bear watching as the world is changing. From my vantage point it will be interesting to see how (over time) this affects the political and cultural projects being spearheaded by Western Churches. With more options available in terms of economic opportunity and immigration, the default pro-USA position of many Christians in these parts of the world might change. While there are problems to be sure with how many of these Christians view Christianity (often in terms of economics and sociological liberation), the overall result may prove to be a net positive.