Global politics and the further rise of anti-democratic forces

April 1, 2015, 8:20 pm 

A handout picture released by the Syrian Arab News Agency (SANA) on March 31, 2015, shows Syrian pro-government fighters sitting on an armoured vehicle in the mountains surrounding the city of Zabadani, some 50km northwest of Damascus, after they retook the area from the rebel fighters. Zabadani is considered strategic because of its proximity to the Lebanese border and the mountainous border region where many rebels sought refuge after being routed from the Qalamun area earlier this year. AFP

Looked at from this point of view, it could be said that Sri Lanka too has contributed quite substantially towards these pernicious trends in international politics. Particularly appalling in recent times was the anti-Muslim violence in some parts of Southern Sri Lanka two years ago, where governmental complicity was evident, in that nothing was done by the then central administration to quell the violence. It brought to mind the mind-numbing ethnic riots of July 1983 in Sri Lanka, where the then UNP administration was accused of ‘turning the other way’ and letting it all happen.

While it is indisputable that religion and ethnicity are markedly present in global politics and are proving increasingly divisive in their impact, what is equally thought-provoking is the unsettling emergence of sectarian violence in those regions where religion-fuelled armed militancy has been on a steady rise. A case in point is the Shia-Sunni divide in the Middle East. The cumulative impact of these trends in international politics could very well be the steady erosion of democratic politics globally and the institutions and values that go along with it.

Looked at from this point of view, it could be said that Sri Lanka too has contributed quite substantially towards these pernicious trends in international politics. Particularly appalling in recent times was the anti-Muslim violence in some parts of Southern Sri Lanka two years ago, where governmental complicity was evident, in that nothing was done by the then central administration to quell the violence. It brought to mind the mind-numbing ethnic riots of July 1983 in Sri Lanka, where the then UNP administration was accused of ‘turning the other way’ and letting it all happen.

The current administration in Sri Lanka is faced with the surmountable challenge of fostering and consolidation ethnic and religious harmony and in this task it cannot afford not to be forthright and plain-spoken about the chores confronting it. The clear answer to ethnic and religious strife is equality in its numerous dimensions and unless and until Sri Lanka is equal to the task of establishing a solid institutional basis for equality it cannot expect to manage ethnic and religion-based disharmony.

In other words, Sri Lanka cannot expect to launch the never- touched mega project of nation-building unless the issue of ethnic and religious equality is faced and resolved in the form of a state where all our ethnic and religious groups could live on the basis of equal citizenry. It needs also to be remembered that the Mahinda Rajapaksa administration was shown the door by the majority of local voters on account of its affiliations with religious extremists. Those so-called Leftist and ‘progressive’ political forces and individuals who consorted with the previous administration, stand accused too of turning the other way, while the government concerned enjoyed close, fraternal ties with extremists.

The other side of the coin, as it were, to the rise of religious and other forms of extremism, is the erosion of democratic governance and its connected institutions. The brutal intolerance of organizations such as the IS and Al-qaeda is proof of this tendency. Besides, some of these extremist political forces are backed by regimes the world over whose democratic credentials, if any, are very much in doubt. Some of these issues are currently coming to the fore in Yemen, for instance, where the Yemenese government is battling religious extremist forces which are backed by external quarters which have tenuous links with democracy and its institutions. The forces of extremism and their backers apparently have as one of their objectives, the weakening of the democratic process, which, if taken to its logical conclusion, should lead to the establishment and institutionalization of equality.

It does not follow from the foregoing that the West in general epitomises the essence of democracy. The latter system of government is essentially all about the steady empowerment of people in diverse ways. To the degree to which this happens, a state could be said to be democratic; to the extent to which this does not happen a state could be described as repressive. It ought to be clear that very many Western states do not answer to this description fully.

As this is being written, President Bashar Al Assad of Syria is reported as saying in an interview given to PBS television that Syria’s close allies, Russia and Iran, are seeking a ‘balance in the world.’ Clarifying the nature of Syria’s alliance with Russia and Iran, Assad said: "It’s not about Syria. I’m a small country. It’s not about having a huge interest in Syria. They could have it anywhere else.....So, it’s about the future of the world. They want to be a great power that has their own say in the future of this world.’

The Syrian President has said a mouthful about current developments in global politics in the plainest terms. In the current multipolar international political order, countries, such as, Russia, China and Iran are in a bid to counterbalance the power of the West ,led by the US; which power and control is on the decline. The rising power of states, such as , China and Iran, is something the West would need to continuously contend with, but the concern for the world ought to be the empowerment of peoples or citizens everywhere. To what extent are ‘ordinary people’ being provided their legitimate dues by their governments? This is the prime question which begs an urgent answer by rulers everywhere.

The latter questions are of the first importance because security issues which come in the wake of extremist violence in the developing world, have the effect of further eroding the rights of people and their empowerment. While sectarian violence further compounds a state’s security issues, the tendency of most governments in the face of these crises is to curtail the rights and freedoms of citizens.. The seemingly unending suffering of the people of Syria and Iraq, graphically substantiates this point. In most areas of the developing world in particular the people are facing exceedingly oppressive conditions, resulting from war and conflict.

Governments of the developing world would not be easing the lot of their publics by aligning themselves strongly with major powers who may be mostly engaged in consolidating their influence and control internationally. in relation to like actors. On the contrary, the developing world needs to reactivate organizations such as the Non-aligned Movement which have as their prime aim the furtherance of the wellbeing of ‘ordinary people’ everywhere. They would do better to re-energetically explore the possibilities of South-South Cooperation.