Advice for the West from Kishore Mahbubani
Singaporean public servant Kishore Mahbubani
Markus Formel / March 3, 2021
5 min. read
Kishore Mahbubani is a Singaporian intellectual, writer, civil servant and diplomat. He has written more than half of the dozen books and he served as a member of Singapore´s mission to the United Nations and was its president of the security council. In his book Has the West Lost It? has pointed out a new strategy for western nations for the ages after the Western domination of the world’s - military and intellectual. Autor praises the Western philosophy for the destruction of feudalism, which has plagued the population of the World for centuries on every continent. determining the way of life of each individual before he was even born to his state on his deathbed. However, he points out that the age of Western domination is over and the West haven't even noticed.
Kishore Mahbubani attributes the blindness of the West to the “Rest”, by what he calls “western hubris”. In his opinion, the West has lost its focus when the Soviet Union has dismantled itself from within. Without firing a shot. Together with the proponent idea of that time that the fall of the Soviet Union will lead to the “end of history” where the liberal democracy has won and we can trigger autopilot and fall asleep. Then came the year 2001, the attack on the world trade centre, which the destruction of foreshadowed the proper destruction set on course by China and the World Trade Organisation.
Then another event distracted the West: 9/11, in 2001. Instead of reacting thoughtfully and intelligently, the prevailing intellectual hubris led to the disastrous decision to invade Iraq. America has the world’s best universities and think tanks, as well as the most globally influential professors and pundits, yet none of them highlighted or highlight now the fact that the most historically consequential event in 2001 was not 9/11. It was China’s entry into the WTO. The entry of almost a billion workers into the global trading system would obviously result in massive ‘creative destruction’ and the loss of many jobs in the West. (pp.25)
The West needs to rethink itself. Yesterday was late, tomorrow is even later. The longer it takes the more damage will the readjust period take upon the people and states. He proposes three-word medicine: Minimalism, Multilateralism and Machiavellism.
The era where the boots of the Western powers were to be shined by the countries of the Rest is over. The West is overextended, more than is capable of handling. He points out that, for example, some serious strategic errors - training the soldiers of Al-Qaeda against the Soviets has bitten its hand afterwards. Thus it is logical when the tables have turned and now the West is in a less favourable position the then-poor countries can and will change the rules of the game. And the game needs to have a level playing field of the diplomatic actors via regional conferences and unions - by strengthening the multilateral organisation. He views the UN General Assembly as a vital part of this change. The existence of the security council nevertheless undermines this platinum-brand multilateral organisation with more than 190 members by blocking and imposing resolutions upon the non-engaged states. The last ingredient to the new Western cookbook should be the thinking of Machiavelli. According to the author, Machiavelli is misunderstood in the West, having been a synonym for evil and vicious realpolitik.
...altruism never works in international affairs. The West will only change course and work to strengthen, not undermine, multilateral institutions when it concludes after hard-headed analysis that it is in its long-term interests to do so. This is why the third prong of a new Western strategy has to be based on a Machiavellian approach. What approach will best serve the long-term global interests of the West? (p.65)
His statement and proposals later in the book are to a European controversial to say at least. He states that, for Europe, the Middle East is the biggest threat to be dealt with, pushing away the narrative of the Russian threat, so often to be heard in the eastern parts of the EU. He sidelines China as a non-European threat and a force to cooperate with, in rebuilding the destabilised region of North Africa. He states that the US should withdraw their troops from the Middle East and let the region sort itself out as the region of south-east Asia did. Which was once called the “Balkan” of Asia, due to the complex ethnic and religious position of its people. If you agree or disagree with the author’s strategic view of the West, it is necessary to look abroad for self-reflection, because as of today not one major voice in Western intellectual life has expressed the need to go plunge into a serious self-reflection period, after which we can move forward as strong and innovative Western countries.
The crux of the problem facing the West is that neither the conservatives nor the liberals, neither the right-wing nor the left-wing, understand that history changed direction at the beginning of the twenty-first century. The era of Western domination is coming to an end. They should lift their sights from their domestic civil wars and focus on the larger global challenges. Instead they are, in various ways, accelerating their irrelevance and disintegration. (p.92)
