Dr. Achut Gautam

A propaganda system will consistently portray people abused in enemy states as worthy victims, whereas those treated with equal or greater severity by its own government or clients will be unworthy,” write Noam Chomsky and Edward S. Herman in their book “Manufacturing Consent.”

The great rising power at present is China; the natural reaction for the US would be to see the end of its rise, as President Joe Biden had claimed “will not happen under my watch.” The US will readily employ every tool available to asset its global position – including, manufacturing consent. On March 26, Biden said that he would prevent China from passing the United States to become the most powerful country in the world, and vowed to invest heavily to ensure America prevails in the race between the world’s two largest economies. However, the geopolitical shift has already occurred and will continue to widen and deepen in the foreseeable future. Unipolar world of liberal hegemony has shifted towards a multipolar world characterised by multilateralism, rule of law and supremacy of the UN Charter.

Strategic rivalry
Chomsky and Herman, in their powerful book, “Manufacturing Consent” demonstrate that contrary to the usual image of the news media as cantankerous, obstinate, and ubiquitous in their search for truth and defense of justice, in their actual practice they defend the economic, social, and political agendas of the privileged groups that dominate domestic society, the state, and the global order. The state in conjunction with the media in the West design the consent and today, the consent manufactured has constantly portrayed China as a threat and raised rights issues in Xinjiang as worthy whereas those treated with greater severity by its own government or clients as unworthy. It is no surprise that the US has decided to boycott 2022 Winter Olympics as strategic rivalry intensifies - all within the rubrics of manufacturing consent.

President Biden’s Summit for Democracy has clearly intended to divide the world between countries that question the motives behind and disapprove the US liberal hegemony and its political prescription versus those that Biden defines as ‘democratic.’ To begin with, unilateralism and democracy are antithetical concepts. It would be an act of diplomatic vandalism to tear these international structures of law and cooperation for some temporary national advance. Yet that is precisely what the United States at times risks doing by its current impulse toward unilateralism, writes Charles W. Maynes. One must, therefore, hope that America’s friends will be able to persuade it to proceed more carefully in the future than it has in the recent past in trying always to get its way. Claiming to be democratic geopolitically with expectations that all nations should support its unilateral decisions and political prescriptions question its love for democracy.

In view of the US, political entities that read its political prescriptions with critical mindset should be dubbed ‘authoritarian regimes.’ Indeed, a very strange concept of a definition! Democracy and human rights go hand in hand with human responsibilities. In this regard, the West is failing from within, either in terms of strengthening democracy or delivering to its peoples - and responsibilities lie with the elected leaders. Now that China has done better and risen economically; the West sees this spectacular rise as a threat and has kept busy in manufacturing consent globally. After spending trillions in recent wars, the US could have learned more and done better.

During the time when Asia, Africa and Latin America are experiencing, besides, their best decade of economic growth, growth in infrastructure and development, are also simultaneously succeeding in managing their own affairs, effectively raising livelihoods of millions from abject poverty, the West is impatient; and sad to see the US, instead of contributing to the welfare of improvised masses and assisting in improving human conditions, has stepped aside, charged with the political agenda of “America first.” In doing so it has titivated the premise of “exceptionalism” for maintaining its primacy in global affairs. Multipolarity does not provide space for unilateral policies and lopsided judgements, rather warrants cooperation, multilateral engagements, primacy of institutions and processes and the respect for the rule of law-including the international law and the UN Charter.
There are five consents being manufactured in the US and Europe to justify the Summit: First, the core machine of this economic drive in Asia is China; its trade deals along with the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) have created opportunities and encouraged environment for investment, trade and development in the continent – which the US sees as ‘China threat.’ And second, due to the rising influence of China in Asia, Africa and Latin America the US is doubly bent on ‘containing’ it using every tool at its disposal. And thirdly, all of the allegations mounted on China beginning with the Trump era to the present have yielded very little impact.

Fourthly, Taiwan is an integral part of China which was separated following Sino-Japanese War of 1895 and Chinese regard this island as the final symbol of national rejuvenation. Similar are the cases related to the origin of COVID-19 and the volatile situation prevailing in the South China Sea. The sole motive to isolate China through this Summit will hurt the US even more since China is better engaged multilaterally. China has always respected sovereignty of all nations and believes in the principles of non-interference and peaceful coexistence. On the contrary and importantly, relationship between the US and its allies has never been based on equal footings.

Subservience
Lack of mutual respect drags down relationships to levels of subservience and domination and the unilateral policies and decisions of the US have favoured this mode of partnership as seen during the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. In the long run, slogans matter less, and nations should have the insight to conduct their own independent foreign policy as suited to the interests of their people rather than being dictated.

Biden and Chinese President XI Jinping agreed on “the importance of managing competition responsibly” during their summit on November 16. Biden further expressed the “importance of managing competition responsibly” emphasising that “the need for common sense guard rails to ensure that competition does not veer into conflict and to keep lines of communication open.” However, Biden’s Summit does not represent this agreement, and ignores the need for common sense guard rails. It needs to be pointed out that the Summit for democracy is also a process as well as product of a consent being manufactured.

(Gautam is a researcher and political analyst. achut.gautam@gmail.com)