Arms and the West

The Ukraine invasion by Russia has shocked many Westerners who had this naive belief that the horrors of war would never revisit Europe – a continent that witnessed two terrible conflicts in the 20th century, resulting in the death of more than 70 million people.

Even though those two wars were ‘global’, they mainly affected Europe. For instance, of the three countries that witnessed the largest numbers of casualties, two of them were European. The Second World War pushed the continent towards a conflagration that incinerated almost everything, removing all traces of modernity and reducing the urban areas of Europe to ruin and ashes. The countries’ physical infrastructure worth billions of dollars – or possibly trillions of dollars – crumbled within no time. The war brought death and misery across the continent.

The mass slaughter of the 1939-1945 period created a strong desire in the West for peace and prosperity. They started detesting the very word of wars, conflicts and armed struggles and preferred talks over fight, sorting out their differences through negotiations and dialogue. Many institutions were set up at the global and regional levels to address political issues. The people of the continent made hectic efforts to forge unity among themselves, forcing their ruling elites to forget their past differences and move forward in a bid to create cohesiveness. This helped create a European identity, which believes in cooperation and mutual respect rather than confrontation.

This approach turned out to be beneficial for the West. The continent did not witness any major conflict during tensions between the USSR and the capitalist world – apart from the Greek civil war that was snuffed out following the principle of give and take. Hardline left-wing parties were encouraged to be part of parliamentary politics. The continent’s working classes were also extended a modicum of a decent living standard, that quelled discontent among them without Western states having to resort to sledgehammer tactics.

The state of peace greatly contributed to progress and prosperity of the West, with the US emerging as the greatest economic power contributing over 30 percent to the global GDP in the aftermath of World War II (WWII). Europe also quickly recovered, emerging as the second-largest industrial, commercial and financial hub. With time, states promoted trade and people-to-people contact, creating a sense of cohesiveness among Europeans. The French and Germans – who used to be sworn enemies – started getting along. The US, which used to be a colony of the UK, pardoned the sins of its master, helping it assume a position of respect and honour in the global comity.

Unfortunately, this rhetoric of peace and a strong desire for prosperity remained confined to the European continent and Western democracies. The flames of wars, conflicts and armed struggles emerged as the order of the day in several other parts of the world where Western powers fomented differences among various sections of society.

While Western colonial powers talked about peace and prosperity in Europe, urging to short out political differences through dialogue and negotiations, they carried out brutal repression of the people in their colonies even in the aftermath of the Second World War. The UK committed gross violations of human rights in Kenya where freedom fighters had revolted against the tyrannical rule of London. France unleashed a reign of terror against the people of Algeria and Indo-China, who had risen to break the shackles of slavery.

The West that craved to see peace and prosperity in Western democracies imposed wars, conflicts and civil strife on developing countries. Western colonial powers first sowed the seeds of discord by carrying out unilateral changes to the geographical boundaries of third world countries and later encouraged these states to settle their disputes through wars and military might. On the other hand, they wanted European states to live in peace and harmony with their neighbours. Such policies were also visible in other Western democracies, but, unfortunately, their policies in third world countries and newly liberated states pit one country against its neighbour, prompting them to settle their differences through military means.

Such an approach greatly benefited the Western military-industrial complex that thrived on these conflicts, supplying weapons to all belligerent states in the Global South and prompting their ruling classes to divert the much-needed funds that could have been used for health, education and housing to military purposes.

American and European powers prevented a genuine leadership from emerging in the third world countries that could have challenged their global hegemony. Those who dared to follow an independent policy were either ousted or taught a tough lesson. They toppled the elected government of Muhammad Musedeq in Iran, staged a coup against Allende in Chile and taught a tough lesson to Jocobo Arbenz in Guatemala. This was in addition to Western democracies’ support for hundreds of dictators and autocratic monarchs.

Such policies of the West created mayhem in several parts of the world, plunging several states of the Global South into civil wars and terrible conflicts. Western powers that are bemoaning the Ukrainian conflict on their soil today adopted criminal silence over the conflicts in Asia and Africa. Instead of extinguishing the flames of wars, they fomented the same by supplying weapons to armed groups and warring factions. Their concern for Ukrainian refugees is worth appreciating, but their indifference to the plight of Afghan, Syrian, Libyan, Iraqi and Yemeni refugees is unfortunate.

The Ukraine war has exposed the sanctimoniousness of the West, which seems to believe that humanitarian catastrophes should not be paid heed when it befalls on a Western state. Russian blitzkrieg against Ukrainian cities is condemnable, and it should definitely prompt concern in the West, but what about the destruction of Iraqi and Syrian cities and the carpet bombing in Afghanistan? Should it not have created as intense sense of outrage as the bombing of Ukrainian cities is creating? The killings of a few hundred Ukrainian civilians cannot be justified on any ground, but how can the murder of more than 500,000 Iraqi children be ignored, which was unabashedly defended by Madeleine Albright – former state secretary of the US?

The Ukraine invasion implies that the Western ruling elite only considers the people of Western countries as human beings. They only dread a conflict when it knocks on their doors and desire peace when a war ravages their sense of calm and peace. They only want to become pacifists when they are embroiled in a conflict. This hypocrisy needs to be given up.

If the West really wants peace and prosperity for all states, it must dismantle its own war machinery. It is not only the West that wishes to see no war and conflict on its soil in the 21st century, but other states also desire the same. To turn this dream of peace into a reality, Nato should be dismantled, a global effort for denuclearisation should be made on a war-footing basis, and arms manufacturing units should be converted into consumer goods manufacturing units. France, the US and the UK are among the top manufacturers and suppliers of weapons. As long as they keep on churning out weapons, wars will continue erupting.

Email: egalitarianism444@gmail.com