India and China have used the current world order for their rise, there is no alternative based on Asian nationalism
Liberalism and nationalism mean different things to different people, and the two concepts are often considered mutually exclusive. More than 70 years after Indian independence, it is worth recalling that the British claimed that their empire rested on liberal foundations and the transfer of power to the nationalists is proof of this claim. But liberalism often clashed with anti-colonial nationalism; The greatest material support for anti-colonial movements during the Cold War came from the liberal Soviet Union.
A ‘Cause’ of War
After the rise of the nation state, wars were attributed to the power and expansionist policies of the nations. In Europe, nations were in almost constant conflict, and Japanese nationalism led to wars, particularly with China. In the early part of the last century, nationalism was considered the root cause of war, but this was an oversimplification, as many, especially Marxists, would argue that capitalism, which led to colonialism, was primarily responsible if not was equally. In Europe, as national thought spread, it became ethnically-oriented and increasingly conservative, with one exception being the nationalist activism of Giuseppe Mazzini.
early decade
Before Indian independence, nationalism was viewed with suspicion; Rabindranath Tagore considered it a maladaptive ideology, making a subtle distinction between the nation of the West, which he criticized as a mechanical and soulless, and the spirit of the West representing the Enlightenment values of internationalism and universalism. . There were alternative aspects of thinking; Vinayak Damodar Savarkar likened his support of Hindutva nationalism to that of Buddha’s universalism, the latter’s non-violence being seen by him as undermining Indian patriotism, as “the center of gravity of Buddhism was nowhere”.
Jawaharlal Nehru saw merit in nationalism as the focus of the independence movement. In 1950, he asserted that “the strongest insistence in Asia is … anti-colonialism and its positive side is nationalism”, and in 1953, “nationalism has been and is a very good thing. It has been in some stages of the country’s history.” I have been a great liberating power.” Nevertheless, he feared that extreme nationalism among the colonialists could turn into fascism and expansionism.
The dogma of Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s party traces back to the thinking of Savarkar and MS Golwalkar, who represent Indian cultural nationalism and attempt an impossible balance between the projection of hard power and the promotion of peace. Nationalism can take various forms but essentially, it is about collective identity, whereas liberalism means the defense of individual liberty and self-determination, the role of the state to protect the private sector. In practice, liberalism has advantages and disadvantages; It may outline the natural laws of universal rights and Adam Smith’s economics, but its appeal is primarily to the professionally educated class, and it lacks the sentimental appeal of nationalism.
Asian Democracy
Asian politics is politically conservative when the economy is booming, as shown by lengthy autocratic governments in China, Singapore and Vietnam, while the Asian financial crisis of 1997 created intermittent democratic impulses in Taiwan, Indonesia, South Korea and Thailand. did. Democracy in Asia is not shaped by the liberalism of the West; The centrality of civil and political rights is less dogmatic and state intervention is considered acceptable when it comes to individual autonomy.
The liberal tradition contributes to the post-World War II international order, ideas that embrace democracy, free trade, international law, multilateralism, environmental protection and human rights. Problems arise when such ideas become a principle for nation-building, with the consequences of Western interference and upheaval in developing countries and Islamic extremism and terror. The recent example of Afghanistan is an example of this.
power hierarchy
Liberalism is now attacked in the West by far-right populism, illustrated by former US President Donald Trump, and left-wing representations such as Senator Bernie Sanders who see the global situation as the neo-liberal patronage of the rich and powerful. Despite American diplomatic rhetoric, there has never been a community of mutually supportive liberal democracies. International relations operate on the axial point of an egalitarian order of law and a hierarchical order of power: the United Nations represents this tension in the various principles on which the Security Council and the General Assembly are based. This is why the reform of the United Nations to include India, Japan, Germany and a few others as permanent members of the Security Council proves so difficult to achieve.
in Asia of the future
How will nationalism and liberalism be reflected in future Asia? Both India and China were at the height of Western imperialism and emerged as supporters of the principles of international society reflected in Panchsheel, namely sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-intervention. This means rejecting Western efforts by making sovereignty dependent on the protection of human rights. The Non-Aligned Movement and Afro-Asianism were attempts to present a soft power model, but soon China, India and Pakistan joined the hard power nuclear weapons club. The two major Asian nations, India and China, used the current world order for their rise, opposing control of the United Nations and world financial institutions, but made no substitutes based on Asian nationalism. Their current rivalry makes such a desirable outcome a distant prospect.
Krishnan Srinivasan is former foreign secretary
.