The Russia-Ukraine war has quickly turned into a global conflict. One of the likely outcomes of this war is the very
redefinition of the current world order, which has been in effect, at least since the collapse of the Soviet Union over
three decades ago.
Indeed, there is a growing sense that a new global agenda is forthcoming, one that could unite Russia and China and, to
a degree, India and others, under the same banner. This is evident, not only by the succession of the earth-shattering
events underway, but, equally important, the language employed to describe these events.
The Russian position on Ukraine has morphed throughout the war from merely wanting
to “demilitarize” and “denazify” Ukraine to a much bigger regional and global agenda, to eventually, per the words
of Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, “put an end to the unabashed expansion” of NATO, and the “unabashed drive
towards full domination by the US and its Western subjects on the world stage.”
On April 30, Lavrov went further, stating
in an interview with the official Chinese news agency, Xinhua, that Russia’s war “contributes to the process of freeing
the world from the West’s neocolonial oppression,” predicated on “racism and an exceptionality.”
But Russia is not the only country that feels this way. China, too, even India, and many others. The meeting
between Lavrov and Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi on March 30, served as a foundation of this truly new global
language. Statements made by the two countries’ top diplomats were more concerned about challenging US hegemony than the
specifics of the Ukraine war.
Those following the evolution of the Russia-China political discourse, even before the start
of the Russia-Ukraine war on February 24, will notice that the language employed supersedes that of a regional
conflict, into the desire to bring about the reordering of world affairs altogether.
But is this new world order possible? If yes, what would it look like? These questions, and others, remain unanswered,
at least for now. What we know, however, is that the Russian quest for global transformation exceeds Ukraine by far, and
that China, too, is on board.
While Russia and China remain the foundation of this new world order, many other countries, especially in the Global
South, are eager to join. This should not come as a surprise as frustration with the unilateral US-led world order has
been brewing for many years, and has come at a great cost. Even the Secretary-General of the United Nations, Antonio
Guterres, though timid at times, has warned against this unilaterality, calling
instead on the international community to commit itself to “the values of multilateralism and diplomacy for peace.”
However, the pro-Russian stances in the South - as indicated by the refusal
of many governments to join western sanctions on Moscow, and the many displays of popular support through protests,
rallies and statements - continue to lack a cohesive narrative. Unlike the Soviet Union of yesteryears, Russia of today
does not champion a global ideology, like socialism, and its current attempt at articulating a relatable global
discourse remains, for now, limited.
It is obviously too early to examine any kind of superstructure
- language, political institutions, religion, philosophy, etc - resulting from the Russia-NATO global conflict,
Russia-Ukraine war and the growing Russia-China affinity.
Though much discussion has been dedicated to the establishing of an alternative monetary system, in the case of Lavrov’s
and Yi’s new world order, a fully-fledged substructure is yet to be developed.
New substructures will only start forming once the national currency of countries like Russia and China replace the US
dollar, alternative money transfer systems, like CIPS, are put into effect, new trade routes are open, and eventually
new modes of production replace the old ones. Only then, superstructures will follow, including new political
discourses, historical narratives, everyday language, culture, art and even symbols.
The thousands of US-western sanctions slapped on Russia were largely meant to weaken the country’s ability to navigate
outside the current US-dominated global economic system. Without this maneuverability, the West believes, Moscow would
not be able to create and sustain an alternative economic model that is centered around Russia.
True, US sanctions on Cuba, North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Venezuela and others have failed to produce the coveted ‘regime
change’, but they have succeeded in weakening the substructures of these societies, denying them the chance to be
relevant economic actors at a regional and international stage. They were merely allowed to subsist, and barely so.
Russia, on the other hand, is a global power, with a relatively large economy, international networks of allies, trade
partners and supporters. That in mind, surely a regime change will not take place in Moscow any time soon. The latter’s
challenge, however, is whether it will be able to orchestrate a sustainable paradigm shift under current western
pressures and sanctions.
Time will tell. For now, it is certain that some kind of a global transformation is taking place, along with the
potential of a ‘new world order’, a term, ironically employed by the US government more than any other.
- Dr. Ramzy Baroud is a journalist and the Editor of The Palestine Chronicle. He is the author of six books. His latest
book, co-edited with Ilan Pappé, is “Our Vision for Liberation: Engaged Palestinian Leaders and Intellectuals Speak
out”. Baroud is a Non-resident Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Islam and Global Affairs (CIGA). His website is www.ramzybaroud.net