Akhtar Raja
In this article I discuss how the invasion of Ukraine set in train a series of events which now pose a real threat to world peace. Geopolitical battles can become ideological wars. Western media is in overdrive with Chomskian manufacture of consent. Are we heading towards nuclear war - Russia having been baited and the West’s plan going badly wrong?
A new post western world order is emerging. The US and the West will either have to learn to partner with culturally different powers or be drawn (whether intentionally or inadvertently) into nuclear conflict.
The risk of the war being enlarged with the use of nuclear weaponry is realistic despite efforts to play this down. The US has made sure of that, and the UK requires a distraction from its domestic woes and damaged international reputation. It feels the need to talk tall.
Sergey Lavrov has told us that five centuries of Western dominance is over and that has been reflected by the emergence new ‘powerhouses’: Turkey, Africa, Latin America, Egypt and the BRICS states. The Middle East and Far East are generally not averse to the creation and alignment of new powers. Most of these regions do not treat Russia as a pariah. India and China purchase oil freely from Russia. China places great store in the importance of supportive neighbourly relations and the sanctity of preserving sovereign integrity and security, including the ‘One China Principle’. China has declared a ‘no limits’ partnership with Moscow. For China, assimilating Taiwan is only a question of time and not an outstanding decision.
Although denied by the Kremlin, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has claimed (for what it’s worth) that Putin threatened a missile attack by saying “Boris, I don’t want to hurt you but, with a missile, it would only take a minute…”. While he was Prime Minister, Johnson did US’s bidding to mollycoddle President Volodymyr Zelensky and encourage rejection of a peaceful exit from the conflict. Zelensky had come to power on a peace ticket.
In the meantime, it shouldn’t be forgotten that North Korea launched a record number of missiles (including intercontinental ballistic missiles) last year. More recently it tested its Hwasal-2 strategic cruise missiles. The US refuses to withdraw its military assets from the Korean peninsula. Pyongyang says that is a declaration of war. The US and South Korea have undertaken joint exercises in the Pacific Ocean. North Korea has made known it is ready to react to any short and long term threat “with the most overwhelming nuclear force”.
The Ukrainian war is not a war about championing the ‘free world’. It is about dominance. But the ultimate result this time will be a new equilibrium with powers (of varying strength) operating in parallel. The change will bring with it annihilation in the West. The US has miscalculated its moves. It felt Ukraine was a good testing ground and launch pad to weaken Russia before confronting its direct competitor, China. However, if Russia feels its very sovereignty is at risk it will no longer care about resorting to its nuclear arsenal. Russia does not have sufficient conventional capabilities. The question will then be whether Russia strikes Ukraine, and the West concedes defeat or whether Russia strikes out at the West – probably the US’s cheerleader first, the UK. Either way Western retaliation is inevitable. Unless the US backs down on terms with Russia (whether open or secret) this will be a global turning point. Western imperialism no longer has the purchase it thinks it does.
Amid these complicated dynamics could the Muslims unite and form a new block? The prospect of the emergence of another new major power centre is not as remote as one may at first imagine. Whilst the US and Western Europe stare down Russia the countervailing desire for new power centres to find their place in the world is overwhelming. There is a window for Muslim states and Qatar is an obvious candidate to take the lead. It is politically, economically, and ideologically well placed. Moreover, Qatar has demonstrated maturity when it comes to international diplomacy and has also become a major Muslim state that can punch above its weight.
Let’s turn to the following reasonable assertions: International security includes military, political, and economic stability. This extends to the global economy, the alleviation of poverty and ‘developing a dialogue between civilisations. Democracy is the power of the majority’. The United Nations is the correct body to make decisions to use force as a last resort pursuant to its Charter. NATO and the EU (a political and military alliance) cannot rule supreme. They do not represent the international community. A state must avoid side-lining diplomatic solutions and resorting to the ‘hyper’ use of military force in international relations. International law must be observed. Abandoning all this drives nations towards the use of nuclear weapons as a necessary counter measure.
On the contrary, the following observations illustrate unfairness: NATO has failed to refrain from expansion and to give sufficient security guarantees to Russia. That undermines Europe’s argument that such expansion is a response to the self determination of democratic aspirations by states. The US doubtless has secret programmes to develop its own offensive weapons capabilities alongside sophisticated anti-missile defence systems to render nuclear capabilities less effective.
The statements in the preceding two paragraphs were made by President Vladimir Putin during his 2007 Munich speech. Of course, the US treated the occasion with its usual sarcasm – the type that comes with a feeling of absolute entitlement or ‘exceptionalism’.
As we all know, despite Russia’s stance NATO continued unabated with its expansion of its posse eastwards in 2004, 2009, 2017 and 2020.
Matters became complicated when in 2014 Russia annexed Crimea. Ethnic divisions in the country heightened between pro-Russian separatists and Ukrainians largely in favour of greater integration with the European Union. Until then the narrative was never about Putin’s imperial ambitions: the greater Soviet Union and capturing the Baltic states. That changed. The US had to justify presence on Russia’s borders.
In 2015 France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine attempted to negotiate peace through the Minsk Accords. In 2016 and 2017 NATO and the US continued to deploy battalions and army tank brigades in Eastern Europe. Sanctions on Russian officials and companies followed in 2018.
The difficulty now is that things are not going to plan. Russia is being provoked into extending the scope of war. Although the US has increased its military support and troop presence in Europe there are competing views at home. The Pentagon and seasoned politicians understand the dangerous pitfalls and consequences. Elections also beckon as does the recent memory of the US being chased out of Afghanistan with its tail between its legs. A diplomatic solution could involve Ukraine ceding some territory. That would create a moratorium. But for how long will the US and the West delay trying to fend off rising power blocks?
None of this is of course remotely any justification for the barbarity suffered by Ukrainians and the annihilation of their towns and cities. Torture, rape, murder, and the kidnapping of civilians have become the hall mark of the illegal conflict. That is the immediate grave crisis. It must stop. But will it?
During the recent photoshoot with President Biden on 20 February, Zelensky’s childlike excited facial expressions gave away his naivety. An American president who says he reaffirms the US’s ‘unwavering and unflagging commitment to … democracy, sovereignty, and territorial integrity’ normally represents the calling card of a merchant of death, destruction, and mischief. Ukraine is caught in a proxy war and incurring trillions of dollars in debt for military support. It is at serious risk of becoming a dysfunctional state. The burden of a crippling debt does not bring with it a guarantee of admission into NATO. Ukraine is not a geopolitical player. Once it has outlived its use the US and UK will lose interest. Look at Afghanistan, Yemen, Syria, Libya, Iraq and so on. Furthermore, the former inhabitants of the Marshall Islands and the Japanese symbolise the brutal reality of US’s actual humanity when it comes to using nuclear bombs – something which is now a real risk.
On the next day, 21 February, President Putin said that the West had escalated the conflict with Britain, the United States and Europe posing an existential threat to Russia. Putin described the attack as extending to culture and the Russian Orthodox Church and other traditional religions in Russia while the West descended into ‘spiritual catastrophe’. He claimed that the US was developing its nuclear weapons and pointed to a threat to Russia’s nuclear facilities as a result of which Russia suspended its participation in the New Strategic Reduction Arms Treaty: this was a ‘watershed moment… a time of cardinal, irreversible changes around the world…’.
UK has different considerations. It now needs, more than ever, some love in the Anglo-American special relationship. UK’s cousin has to come good. Meaningful trade agreements following Brexit have not materialised. The Windsor Framework is plaster over the crack to save the Good Friday Agreement and avoid antagonising Biden, who has ancestral links and loyalty to the Irish. Don’t forget Prime Minister Rishi Sunak was an avowed Brexiteer. The country is languishing in irreparable political and economic turmoil. UK’s imperialist DNA has always been stronger than its allegiance to democracy. Blair was happy to ride on America’s coattails, trot around the world to promote its war cries and then allow UK to join the illegal war in Iraq. He ignored citizens, misled parliament, and relied on false intelligence partly plagiarised from an article by a graduate student.
Sunak craves recognition and these days political integrity and intellectual honesty are dispensable. With Blairite fervour he and some British politicians relish taking the lead on the war against Russia. Other European states are far more anxious.
The French and Germans may well be riding two horses. France is committed to its adventures in Africa. Germany is still reeling from the cessation of the Nord stream project. Its success would have been bad news for US gas exports to Western Europe. It seems several pipelines were sabotaged by an elite US naval team with the assistance of the Norwegians in a sophisticated premeditated operation. This is consistent with Biden’s 23 February 2023 statement when he said ‘…we have closely coordinated our efforts to stop the Nord Stream 2 pipeline if Russia further invaded Ukraine.’ However, Germany supplying weapons to Ukraine along with its history of invading Russia does not bode well for the prospects of peace.
If Russia makes a move in Europe then China and North Korea will feel emboldened. Even Turkey has aspirations of reviving the Ottoman empire in south eastern Europe. Conflicts can inflate into ideological wars. That is not something new. Bush and Blair had Christian Zionist visions.
Hagia Sophia, was originally the largest Christian cathedral 1,500 years ago. It was later turned into a mosque by the Ottomans. In the past Russia carried a theological and political desire to succeed the Byzantine Empire and establish a “Third Rome” (after the original and Constantinople). Even today, for some Russian Orthodox, St. Sophia Cathedral is one of Christianity’s greatest sacred places.
Putin holds dear conservative values and the protection of the Orthodox Church. Putin’s last speech seems to indicate that US’s proxy war has inspired these emotions.
While the world is preoccupied can a new Muslim block sprout? Recently, at an annual 2023 conference, Pakistan’s leading thinker Professor Ahmed Akhtar Rafique proposed key strategic goals which, with time, could result in Muslim nations forming a new block.
The unification would include a united defence force. Pakistan defines its nuclear capability as being for the benefit and protection of fellow Muslim states. Once the toxic political detritus across the whole Pakistani political spectrum is cleared then Pakistan can emerge as the backbone of a united military defence force. China will not object once it has itself ascended the throne and got its Belt and Road Initiative operational. Muslims would need to commit to; the express constitutional inclusion of the concept of Islam; a Shariah Council comprising religious scholars and experts from every country; an agreement for the adoption of common principles to avoid schisms; a state of the art train (e.g. hyperloop pods) and transport infrastructure connecting Muslim territories; and world class education, health, and welfare systems. Added to this could be a gold backed common currency.
The logistics of this project can be initiated by one or more sufficiently equipped states. Commencement of the effort initially only need be modest. Importantly, the catalyst for this enterprise is the gradual replacement of the interest based banking system with a charity based system. This would guarantee (for theological and historical reasons) progress, momentum, strength, and success as well slow inclusion of remaining nations. Qatar can lead the charge.
Akhtar Raja, is a British lawyer based in London and Principal of Quist Solicitors
