The increasing relevance of economic pragmatism
May 4, 2016
The world has the evidence of its eyes that extreme Rightism, including economic nationalism, would be playing an increasingly ineffective role in inter-state relations, although it may be enjoying a new lease of life in even parts of Europe currently, in the domestic politics of states. On the other hand, economic pragmatism and the shunning of narrow nationalism by states, are contributing towards the constructive engagement of countries.
For example, Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida was in China recently for top level talks with his Chinese counterpart and others who matter and the theme of his visit was ‘cooperation and not confrontation’ in China-Japan relations. This development ought to surprise those sections that have been conditioned to believe that there could be no easy thaw in Japan-China ties.
‘The two countries need each other at a time when uncertainties are growing in the international economy…. We really want to regain relations in which we can visit each other frequently, Kishida was quoted as saying during his China visit. In turn, China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi said: ‘We certainly wish to develop healthy, stable and friendly relations with Japan.’
These developments are a virtual slap in the face of those sections that have been overplaying and sensationalizing perceived tensions in Japan-China ties. Among these quarters, elements among the international media play a dominant role. Since narrowly conceived nationalism is a species of extreme Rightism, it could be said that nationalism of this kind hardly plays a role in shaping Japan-China relations, although it may be present to a greater or lesser degree in the domestic politics of these principal states of East Asia. However, even in the case of the internal politics of these states, extreme nationalism does not play a pivotal role, it could be argued.
These observations acquire some salience against the backdrop of the simmering territorial and other disputes in Japan-China ties. While there is no disputing that such tensions exist, it cannot be argued that the states concerned would ‘go to blows’ over them in a precipitous and irrational way. This is mainly because it is mutually-beneficial economic ties that are being seen as important by major states today in their relations with countries. Both states in question would stand to lose much more than they would gain by permitting strained ties to continue. Being major economies in Asia, Japan and China just cannot afford to ‘spoil for a fight’ in the current highly volatile international economic environment.
Accordingly, fence-mending, rather than prolonged aggressive postures, is likely to be the principal feature in the inter-state politics of major powers anywhere. The plain truth is that there is much more to lose for these states, in economic terms, than any gains to be achieved, through a prolongation of tense bilateral relations.
The same goes for US-China relations. Given the considerable economic interdependence between these countries, in these fluid times in the economic sphere, they would be undermining their national interests by seeking to be at loggerheads with each other for long. These are points US presidential hopeful Donald Trump may need to ponder on. Extreme Rightism, including xenophobia, that prevents the easy building of mutually advantageous economic ties among states is a luxury states could ill-afford. Such policy postures could prove highly counter-productive and the principal powers know this fully well.
Fortunately for Sri Lanka, its present government realizes this fully well. This is seen in the Sri Lankan state’s efforts to mend ties with the West, which were badly impaired during the tenure of the MR administration, and in the state’s endeavour to broad-base economic ties with the US in particular. It would have been self-destructive for Sri Lanka to continue on a collision course with the US considering that the bulk of this country’s exports go to the US. Seen from this perspective, the former government seemed to have lacked even the plainest common sense, besides not having finesse in foreign policy thinking. Non-alignment, understood as friendship towards all countries, remains the most advisable foreign policy foundation for Sri Lanka.
At the time of writing, a cruise ship carrying American tourists of Cuban origin has arrived in Cuba to a rousing welcome. Such an event would have been unthinkable even two years ago, given the strong hostility that attended US-Cuban ties over the decades, until the US and Cuba considered it in their best interests to normalize relations. Once again, it is the perception that the two countries could gain in economic terms which has brought about this ground-breaking change in bilateral ties. Such developments are strongly supportive of the thesis that economics drive politics. And so strong and transformative are economic forces today that Cold War characterizations of the US and the ‘capitalist West’ may not seem to hold any water at all. Economic considerations are transcending in the most stunning manner ideological polarities of the past and proving them inadequate and ineffective in the task of understanding current global realities.
It is also to economics that one must go in order to understand the substantial changes that have occurred in Iran’s ties with the West. Economic pressures were chief among the reasons that compelled the West to push for an accord with Iran over issues growing out of the latter’s nuclear programme. Besides, Iran considered it advantageous to end the state of strife with the West. Today, as a result, Iran is forging economically beneficial relations with the West.
Consequently, the Rouhani administration has won a resounding vote of confidence from the Iranian people. Reformists and democrats, and not Rightists, are increasingly winning seats in the Iranian parliament. The pragmatic path President Rouhani has chosen to traverse is being progressively supported by Iranians of most walks of life. Besides, women are winning increasing representation in the legislature. This is proof that Iran is evolving towards an inclusive state.
Accordingly, whether it be East Asia, the Middle East or Europe, it is economic pragmatism and political moderation that are being favoured more by states and publics. It does not follow from this observation that the world is going to see an easy end to Right wing extremism and other anti-democratic tendencies, but the forces of progress seem to be making some headway in areas which were only yesterday, as it were, bogged down in repression.
