Asia's emerging giants.

PEOPLE allege that America is destroying peace in the garb of making peace. America's dream is to continue to be the leader of the world and to ensure that nations are kept divided. That is why some say that the American dream is becoming a "global nightmare," and why not? The West, led by America is, in effect, using international institutions, military power and economic resources to run the world in ways that will maintain its predominance, protect its interests and promote its economic and political values.

Our memory is not short enough to forget the statement of the "megalomaniacal and self- righteous clergyman (President) Wilson" when he expressed his blasphemous conviction that he was created by God to show to the nations of the world how they shall walk in the path of liberty. His idea was that there should be a world democracy based on the American example and led by United States.

It is surprising to note how Democrats approved of the Republicans' hawkish agenda that promoted its neo-conservative notion of absolute American supremacy and dominance. They did not even oppose Bush's policy of "preemptive strike" or "regime change."

It was Bill Clinton who first subverted the negotiation of the Kyoto Treaty on climate change, refused to sign the Land Mine Treaty, refused to support the International Court for Human Rights, supported Russia in its brutal war against Chechnya and threatened sanctions against South Africa if it did not abandon cheaper generic Aids drugs.

In consequence, the world had to choose between the war affirming rhetoric of the Democrats and war mongering declaration of the neo-conservative Republicans. This is probably why Gore Vidal remarked, "America is ruled by one oligarchy with two names, Republican and Democrat."

The other partners of the alliance led by United States did not lag behind in eulogising the "wisdom" of the American leadership for about ten decades since the first quarter of the twentieth century. Thanks to Uncle Sam for doling out dollars to help Europe resurrect its war ravaged economy. Isolated by the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, America had to link up with Europe more for economic reasons than for security.

Once the European economy got a push from the US, the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (Nato) was formed to protect the new-found affluence. Although Nato includes countries that ruled the seven seas and have abundant resources, they could hardly exert influence unless approved by the US as they depended on America for utilising their resources.

Some allege that ethical affinity also acted as a bonding factor. One now finds justification of the critics' assumption that they got together to thwart "Islamic resurgence" (militancy in their parlance) by declaring a crusade. The strategic game played by the European Alliance since the end of 1st World War to split Arab world by founding a grateful Jewish state sowed the seed of the apple of discord.

The West conspired to pit most of the oil rich tribal Bedouins in a fratricidal war by running with the hare and hunting with the hound. Thus they continued to maintain control over the sea-lanes that linked the Arab nations with the West. All attempts by the Arab nations to assert their freedom were subverted either by waging war or by toppling the "detractors" through coups-de-tat. Iraq, Egypt, Syria are a few examples.

Getting wind of the psyche of the victim nations, the West cajoled the power hungry leaders having middle class pedigree. Countries that have been marginalised as a power do not blame their leaders as they think that they are pawns in the hands of the powers in the northern hemisphere. But why?

General opinion blames US for the rising militancy. Present day American leadership seems to have forgotten President George Washington's advice to "avoid foreign entanglement," and follows the policy of using force "if necessary to oppose injustice and to protect freedom."

The West has intervened in Iraq and Afghanistan in the defense of justice out there. Alliance partners had to release billions of dollars to foot the war expenditure. Thus, not only is the American economy feeling the strain, it is also facing the wrath of the economically disadvantaged nations.

People in Afghanistan are imploring the Alliance forces, who are "killing hundreds for one dead" to "punish the guilty and not the innocent women and children."

I think it is the right time for the West to rethink their conduct "in defence of freedom overseas." There are numerous global hotspots where the policy of the West is controversial enough to feed the kind of rage that found vengeful expression at different times. One may ask how the policy of "preemptive first strike" corresponds to the values of democracy, or whether they practice what preach. Are these actions a harbinger of the West's decline? Maybe the fall of oil price is an early indicator.

Not many across the world think these days as did Beldrich Moldan, a Czech minister, who said: "As a European you may like US or may not like US but you know it is the future." From this one can assume that the West largely depends on its "guardian" partner. Is it not ironical for Americans note that "a strong correlation between US involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist activities against US" exists while Europe sits pretty as it is rarely targeted by "hostile elements." The ubiquity of the West's economic power is sliding which is eroding their political power.

One can now predict that if an alliance can be formed in the Southern Hemisphere the West's economy may find its glaze receding. If Asian countries threaten to withdraw investments the West may lose its grip on its economy, which feeds on Asian financial support.

Jagdish Bhagabati, an eminent Professor of Columbia University, said that Western, particularly the American, reaction to the rise of Asia had been petulant, degenerating into protectionism and panic. Japan bashing in the 1980's was succeeded by India bashing over outsourcing in the 1990's, and now we have the China bashing. He says the West must recognise the reality of the Asian economic upsurge.

Zbigniew Brezezineski thinks that an incisive analysis of the long-term implication of the ongoing shift in the global centre of gravity is necessary. Kishore Mahbubani feels that "for two centuries the Asians from Tehran to Tokyo and from Mumbai to Shanghai, have been bystanders in world history, reacting defenselessly to the surges in Western commerce, thought and power." That era, he thinks, is over.

Asia is returning to the centre stage it occupied for eighteen centuries before the rise of the West. He further says that Asians have absorbed and understood Western best practices in many areas from free market economy to the embrace of innovative science and technology, meritocracy and the rule of law.

I think the West must come to terms with emerging reality by recognising the incremental Asian capability to dash the western desire to maintain its preponderance in world economy and its hold on technological innovations. Asian nations have successfully developed technology to enrich uranium, utiliae fossil fuels and also to overcome environmental vagaries. Poor men's economy (micro-credit), disaster management and incredible development in outsourcing microchip expertise and technology are the outstanding sinews of Asia's rise to the current height.

Any endeavour by the West to resist the rise of Asia will be disastrous. The West must find ways to work hand-in-glove with Asia. While Asian nations should realise that the West will soon lose its prowess, and that is why they should close ranks with their neighbour for mutual benefit. The Arab world should serve the nations with its overspill funds and treat them as most favoured nations.

Leaders of Asia should leave no stone unturned to do matchmaking between warring factions in the Middle East. The Middle East should look to the East for political support to end the fratricidal wars that they have been thrown into by the West to pursue the divide and rule policy since the invasion by T.E. Lawrence, who became a hero by dint of Western publicity.

The West should rest assured because of the analysis of Mahbubani that Asia does not dominate but replicate. He suggests that the West should share power with Asia by giving up automatic domination of global institutions like IMF and World Bank. Let G7 and UNSC not be dominated by the declining West through curbing its role as the world's arbiter.

Asian giants like Japan, China and India are ready to reciprocate any consideration by the West to eschew the misgiving that kept them apart. Let us hope the dwindling West will break the emotional barrier of being the world leader and come forward to work in unison with the emerging stakeholders of Asian power.

Z.A. Khan is a former Director General of Bangladesh Institute of International and Strategic Studies.