A reversal of Western dominance

The unthinkable happened a couple of months ago when the majority of Britons voted to leave the EU. Understood as the biggest event in European history since the fall of the Berlin Wall, Brexit is also a symbolic event for what it represents and posits. If the fall of the Berlin Wall was followed by the advent of globalisation and dominance of the West over the rest, Brexit represents a definitive and emphatic rejection of globalisation and a reduction in international standing of Britain and the EU. How things change. In 1989, Western dominance was absolute. Its economic and political models were held as mankind’s salvation against poverty, ignorance and totalitarianism. The USSR (and later Russia) was in free-fall. China was still recovering from Mao’s Cultural Revolution. The US was seen as Rome of the modern age, while the EU started its eastwards expansion and moved closer to a political union.

Then came the 2008 financial crash in the US and Europe, which hurt middle classes on both sides. Moreover, the US and Europe became increasingly indebted to China. Today, China is on the verge of being a superpower. A rejuvenated Russia maintains its influence in eastern Europe and actively challenges Western interests. The US has to choose between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. Britain has entered a period of instability, and Marine Le Pen is touching the raw nerve of the disgruntled French in the same way as Nigel Farage did across the English Channel.

However, today Europe is also the most globalised continent. The free movement of goods, services and capital across borders is classical globalisation. While the EU backs Britain’s financial sector, helps French farming, energises German manufacturing and facilitates movement of labour from eastern Europe to the wealthier west, it also drives down the wages of British working classes and mounts pressure on the French welfare system. Globalisation creates winners and losers, and modern Europe is the strongest exhibition of it. Millions benefit from it, and many others see their livelihoods and living standards suffer because of it.

In Pakistan, we view the EU differently. We see it primarily as an economic union that has guaranteed peace in a continent that suffered because of wars for centuries. We haven’t understood its progression from an economic union towards a political entity. It is espoused as a dreamy alternative when the conflict-ridden and tragic state of our region is lamented in living rooms. Hence the rejection of the EU by 52 per cent of Britons astounded us. Nevertheless we ought to be clear that 52 per cent of the British public are not racists, xenophobes or imprudent. A vast majority of Brexit voters come from communities that have struggled because of globalisation. The moment they got an opportunity to vent their frustrations against an icon of globalisation, they did. This time it was the EU unfortunately. Talk of another referendum or search for legal obstacles to Brexit abound. Seems as if the elite don’t like direct democracy when it blows a rebellious trumpet. Much easier keeping things with elected officials who can be bought, sold, cajoled or ignored into towing the line rather than asking the man whose wages have been driven down by unrestricted immigration, and the economy he contributed to was wrecked by bankers.

But 48 per cent is a big minority. Theresa May’s cabinet has to agree a deal with the EU that takes note of a divided mandate. However, any rollback on Brexit, any attempts at derailing the process of leaving the EU will ignite a far-right reaction. The referendum was announced with a plain and simple enough question. An unfortunate answer was delivered. A pro-Remain vote of 52:48 would have been the end of discussion on Britain’s membership of the EU for decades. Similarly, why does a 52:48 Leave vote not guarantee Brexit? Lest we guess that some murky politicking is underway…

Brexiters have set their sights on trading beyond Europe and especially with the old Commonwealth. Time perhaps for us to be proactive for once and negotiate suitable deals with Britain and the EU, instead of lamenting afterwards.

We are living in unusual times. Will the next season of the globalisation horror series, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) be slipped under the radar and imposed upon populations without a democratic mandate? It might be at the doorstep before anyone realises. Why should we be worried about TTIP? Courtesy globalisation, a massive trade deal across the Atlantic will affect the manner and terms of trade globally. The concept of sovereignty of the nation state will be under threat by finance. If multinationals will be able to sue Western governments before tribunals of corporate lawyers determined to serve commercial interests, where will we stand with our meagre consumer protection regimes and feeble institutions? Insurrection against the politico-economic elite is how Western historians will remember the 2010s. The ballot box has the ability and legitimacy of curtailing corporate greed and reducing inequality. Democracy is the last hope, even when it delivers bitter results. Else, globalisation and merchants of vested financial interests will create further discord, inequality and conflicts. 

Published in The Express Tribune, August 22^nd,  2016.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.