Saturday, December 15, 2007

An understanding and analysis vis a vis dialectics of the the West

A look at the new global order as espoused by the West as seen in light of their political theories:
An understanding and analysis vis a vis dialectics of the the West .

A concept paper by Roque Yusuf Morales



As the collapse of the cold war, we have seen that a new world order has unfolded in the eyes of the West, however, as this world ored unfolds, the West has been in a dilemma on how to define the parameters of this order. Indeed, numerous theories and political analysis has been proposed by the so called "enlightened scholars " of the West. But the Question now arises: how does Islam and us, the global Ummah look at this world aroder and how do we also define our parameters today?

We as members of the Global Muslim Ummah, may have to look at different angles as well as from different perspectives if we may arrive at a conclusion. This may not be conclusive for all times, it is our humble effort, so that we may be able to move forward in todays age and leave a legacy for other Muslims to come.

As one looks at the different theories expressed and espoused today, I cannot but help but remember the ideals left by those who have come before us, like Hazrat Imam Khomeini (rahmatullahi alayhi) when he wrote the then president Mikhail Gorbachev and predicted the demise of the Soviet Union, saying; that the lac of a spiritual and moral ascendancy of socialism, being materialistic in nature will ultimately lead to the collapse of the socialist world order. And as one American Scholar has said, as the current trend of Modernization proceeds, the fundamental human value from the worship of God and the virtues of Tqwa, Imaan and Ihsan are replaced by values like vice, vanity, personal interests over the others, self over others, there appears a ever and more stronger need for us Muslims to propose the need also for the West to study the high, lofty and ethical values of Islam.

In the traditions of the late Ali Shariati's Ruhshanfekr being today's enlightened individuals , we will attempt to dissect the theories of the new global world order proposed by the West and their worldview and how we must propose to interact with the world in a move to propose also our own concept of a just and humane society baed on Tawheed and Adalah.

II. How the West views todays Global order

After the demise of the Soviet Union as predicted by Hazrat Imam (rahmatullahi alyh), the West has seen that the eternal archenemy of Capitalism and Democracy, i.e. Socialism as represented by the Soviet Union has collapsed; corollary to this the collapse of the Iron Curtain in Germany, the concept of collectivism and state owned enterprises as espoused by communism has eventually became a thing of the past, and even the Sleeping Giant China, has awakened from its slumber to partake in the eventual Capitalization of the world.

As there appeared a clear and present need to define a new global order, a prominent think tank from the West, Samuel Huntington in a response to this need defined a new context, civilizational fault lines... in short, where cultures clash, civilizations and nations would clash. This was the eventual definition of this paper, "clash of civilizations and the rise of a new order".However, another known Western scholar Edward Said views that the presentation of Huntington preposterous in the sense paranoic

This is the ineventual problem of the causality of Huntingtons concepts..... from a clash of civilizations, it is surmised that such a clash occurs whenever ignorance takes place. instead of understanding what causes cultures and civilizations to clash, why not also try to look at the parallel sum of things like universal human values that are treasured in every culture and civilization.

The same can be said of looking the the paralellism of anarchistic and terrrorist groups lingering in the different cultures like the Branch dravidian, Aum Shinyo or the Baader Meinhof gangs that are much alike the terrroristic manifestations of al-Qaeda or other groups like the Tamil Tigers and the Sin Fein in Ireland.

And as Said says, “But we are all swimming in those waters, Westerners and Muslims and others alike. And since the waters are part of the ocean of history, trying to plow or divide them with barriers is futile. These are tense times, but it is better to think in terms of powerful and powerless communities, the secular politics of reason and ignorance, and universal principles of justice and injustice, than to wander off in search of vast abstractions that may give momentary satisfaction but little self-knowledge or informed analysis. "The Clash of Civilizations" thesis is a gimmick like "The War of the Worlds," better for reinforcing defensive self-pride than for critical understanding of the bewildering interdependence of our time. “
What is needed for civilizations to understand each other is dialogue, pluralist persepective and an openness to the other.

As the West aims also in defining order, it also aims to define states that in its opinion are threats to the stability of the new global order, unconsciously defining these states as "rogue states" at the root of this definition is "viciousness,lack of principle and propensity to engage in unilateral action (Herman, 2006). it is clear that within that context, it is apparent that those that apparently falls out of context of the Western definition of universal Human values appears to be part of the target of Western Imperialist Hegemony. it then appears that even states that are merely guarding their legitimate interests and protecting their citizens is seen as rogue and therefore in the eyes of the West are viewed as axis of evil.

As the West aims also in defining order, it also aims to define states that in its opinion are threats to the stability of the new global order, unconsciously defining these states as "rogue states" at the root of this definition is "viciousness,lack of principle and propensity to engage in unilateral action (Herman, 2006). it is clear that within that context, it is apparent that those that apparently falls out of context of the Western definition of universal Human values appears to be part of the target of Western Imperialist Hegemony. it then appears that even states that are merely guarding their legitimate interests and protecting their citizens is seen as rogue and therefore in the eyes of the West are viewed as axis of evil.

What pushes the West to aggressively pursue this Global World Order at the expense of other smaller sovereign states? The answer lies in the fact that Neoliberalism and Globalization also has played a significant role in the pursuance and aggressive implementation of this policy.

Neoliberalism as a global phenomenon is manifested by the following : decreasing of government subsidies and privatization of government and owned and controlled corporations, free unrestricted trade by the lifting of tarriffs and barriers (giving rise to the entry of Multinational and transnational corporations ), and the non-intervention of Government in many policies to allow MNC and TNC's to operate as they wish. Neoliberalism also influences first world countries to focus on absolute gains over other nation states. This puts minor states like for example the Philippines, Sierra Leonne, Tunisia or even Egypt at a major trade disadvantage with Trade relations with the West. This normally would put out Muslims states who are currently at Economic hardships at the mercy of the West. This is coupled by Globalization which is the international economic manifestation of neoliberalism.

Neoconservatism or commonly termed as “Neocons” is a recent political orientation that has manifested itself in the
United States. Although its origins have begun much earlier that the Bush Administration, its current political
manifestations is clearly seen in the positions that the Bush Administration has adopted towards its foreign policy,
notably Iraq, Iran and other states as well.
In its principles it proposes that the United States should not be ashamed to use its unrivaled power – forcefully if
necessary – to promote its values around the world. Some even speak of the need to cultivate a US empire.
Neoconservatives believe modern threats facing the US can no longer be reliably contained and therefore must
be prevented, sometimes through preemptive military action.
As a corrolary fact neoconservatives believe that the US has allowed dangers to gather by not spending enough
on defense and not confronting threats aggressively enough. One such threat, they contend, was Saddam Hussein
and his pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. Since the 1991 Gulf War, neocons relentlessly advocated Mr. Hussein's
Most neocons share unwavering support for Israel, which they see as crucial to US military sufficiency in a volatile
region. They also see Israel as a key outpost of democracy in a region ruled by despots. Believing that authoritarianism
and theocracy have allowed anti-Americanism to flourish in the Middle East, neocons advocate the democratic
transformation of the region, starting with Iraq. They also believe the US is unnecessarily hampered by multilateral
institutions, which they do not trust to effectively neutralize threats to global security.
Although differring from the traditional conservative politicians on many issues, both conservatives and neocons
favor a robust US military. But most conservatives express greater reservations about military intervention and so-called
nation building. Neocons share no such reluctance. The post 9/11-campaigns against regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq
demonstrate that the neocons are not afraid to force regime change and reshape hostile states in the American image.
Neocons believe the US must do to whatever it takes to end state-supported terrorism. For most, this means an aggressive
push for democracy in the Middle East. Even after 9/11, many other conservatives, particularly in the isolationist wing,
view this as an overzealous dream with nightmarish consequences.
Neocons envision a new global world order in which in which the United States is the unchallenged superpower, immune to
threats. They believe that the US has a responsibility to act as a "benevolent global hegemon." In this capacity, the US
would maintain an empire of sorts by helping to create democratic, economically liberal governments in place of "failed
states" or oppressive regimes they deem threatening to the US or its interests.
In a neoconservative Utopia it views the entire Middle East should be democratized in the belief that this would eliminate
a prime breeding ground for terrorists. This approach, they claim, is not only best for the US; it is best for the world.
In their view, the world can only achieve peace through strong US leadership backed with credible force, not weak treaties
to be disrespected by tyrants.Any regime that is outwardly hostile to the US and could pose a threat would be confronted
aggressively, not "appeased" or merely contained. The US military would be reconfigured around the world to allow for
greater flexibility and quicker deployment to hot spots in the Middle East, as well as Central and Southeast Asia.
The US would spend more on defense, particularly for high-tech, precision weaponry that could be used in preemptive strikes.
It would work through multilateral institutions such as the United Nations when possible, but must never be
constrained from acting in its best interests whenever necessary.

At this point it would be worthwhile to point out that despite the fact that we Muslims have been a global Ummah, large and encompasses the whole world, has been unable to harness our collective strength to deal with this global behemoth of neoliberalism.

What makes this worse is in the words of Norman Angel another Neocon proponent, saying: "We cannot ensure the stability of the present system by the political or military preponderance of our nation or alliance by imposing its will on a rival.( Norman Angell, The Great Illusion, (1909) cited from 1933 ed. (New York: G.P. Putnam’s Sons),p. 137.)It only goes to say that in order for their global world order to survive, Global Bullying has become legitimized in the guide of protecting a nations vested interest. Never the less, Muslim states also possess the right to protect their collective interests as part of the Global Ummah as well as humanity.

At the head of this Global Order, is the United States, being today ruled by the NeoConservatives, this ideology has its ramifications to both US domestic and Foreign policies.

III. What do we intend to do with this current context?

What appears here is a complex web of complex concepts intertwined with each other which we may call the Four microcosms of the west.The current Global World Order as seen by the west is best dissected by what we can say as the Four Microcosms of the West. these are the ideological tools that they use to look at the world and interact with it.

After seeing that a new world order has arisen, the west as a policy has adopted what we may call as a POST WAR HEGEMONY STRATEGY in dealing with the world. within this context they have underlined a four--set in which they deal with the world which is as follows:


They define who are and can be their allies

They identify potential threats and enemies and define them as rogue states

they apply sanctions to countries which refuse to be bullied under their new world order

creation of economic sanctions by:

primary boycott of countries allied to the West of any economic transactions with the Country targetted

secondary boycotts by threathening Multinational corporations/Transnatrional Companies from transacting business with so-called Rogue States.

application of Political Sanctions by outmaneuvering international organizations like the United Nations Security Council

pressuring states allied with the West to apply pressure or expelling diplomats from rogue states.

they create scenarios of which they seek to manipulate the events to their own benefits

Political scenarios wherein they aim to create political tumoil by fermenting dissension in rogue states

International Diplomatic isolation by trying to either neutralize or pressure diplomats from the so-called rogue states for participating in international diplomatic and political actions by either exclusion/expulsion from membership or pressuring other states to actively support actions against these states.

By looking at this unipolar behemoth movement, we can ascertain that we can apply a new and novel appraoch of countering this unipolar hegemony. This we may now call a multi-polar approach.

As we all know that the New global world order as espoused in the West and articulated by the United states is that it is to globalized, consumer oriented and prone to machinations of the West who may attempt to influence smaller countries and economies through coercion and pressure .

we as a natural result, will also apply a series of steps aimed to nullify these actions and push for the following:


Creation and strengthening of a new non-aligned movement which will advocate the interests of smaller states.this may also lead the way for the strengthening of pre-existing regional forums where focus will be aimed at strengthening of local regions and states as well as political and economic cooperation among them.

Creation of "Centres of Dialogue and Understanding" that aims to popularize the dialogue of civilizations as a response to the Theory of "clash of civilizations".These centres of dialogues may be schools, academic organizations Non-government organizations shall be distributed regionally among strategic areas. they shall also be tasked to undertake researches and conferences in the aim of further propagating these concepts. special focus and emphasis shall be given to East-East and East-West Dialogue of civilizations.

Creation of fora that aims to include other non-aligned states on a regional basis paving the way for the creation multipolar spheres of influences as well as alignments to ensure that smaller states be not coerced by the west into concessions and that these regional states interests be pursued and protected.

Commissioning of regional researches involving an exhaustive study on Islamic pluralism and concepts of dialogue from a localized persepective that may equip Muslim scholars and laymen with the proper knowledge, tools and methodology of dialogue and proper interaction with other cultures.

No plan is perfect except with the Guidance of Allah, and insha Allah,. with proper guidance and leadership of the warasatul al-anbiya'a. mwe shall be successful in the implementation of these projects.




Beyond American Hegemony . By Michael Lind, New America Foundation The National Interest | May/June 2007

The clash of Civilizations. by Samuel P. Huntington .Foreign Affairs Summer 1993

The Clash of Ignorance. By Edward Said.,The Nation, October 2001 issue

U.S. Policy on Rogue States :The concept "rogue state" is highly nuanced. The U.S. does not fall into the category despite its terrorist attacks against Cuba for close to 40 years.

By NoamChomsky.,

Neocon 101. The Christian Science Monitor (source:

Beyond American Hegemony .By Michael Lind, New America Foundation .The National Interest | May/June 2007

No comments:

Free Domains