“The Age of Insecurity,” the title of the most recent report by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), one of the most influential think tanks in the United Kingdom, predicts a significantly bleaker decade ahead. In the report, the escalation in both the quantity and rapidity of armaments among nations is identified as the primary cause of the threat[1]. In reality, this conception of international relations, which prioritises military accumulation and power as means to guarantee survival and security, is not a novel one. The environment at this stage bears a resemblance to the one before the Second World War. In light of the adage “History repeats itself,” there are present-day concerns regarding the potential onset of a third world war. With the Russia-Ukraine war on the one hand, the Hamas-Israeli war on the other, and Beijing’s assertions of ascendancy in the South China Sea on the other, local conflicts in diverse geographies of the globe are all the time more – and conceivably from the very outset- evolving into worldwide issues that pose a threat to the entire planet. In addition to causing unrest in the former Soviet hinterland, Moscow’s military actions are also causing unrest in the Indo-Pacific. To the extent that, as emphasised in the IISS report, this unease currently motivates Asian nations (e.g., South Korea and Japan) to pursue stronger defence alliances, while Australia and Taiwan augment their offensive and defensive capabilities. Conversely, China’s newly established relations and the tensions it encounters with both its neighbours and more distant nations, including the United States, are developing into a source of unease in another region. Why, then, do these states allocate such a significant proportion of their budgets to security-related expenses? To be more specific, what is the reason for their arming?
In this age of digitalization and industrialization, which neoliberal transformation policies have ushered in, a small transnational minority group, known as the global elite, invests in artificial intelligence technology to control the majority of the world’s wealth[2]. However, the progressive exacerbation of economic inequality is being brought about by neoliberalism, which keeps global capital in the minority. Amidst the current inflationary climate, real incomes are declining and economic inequality is steadily increasing. Naturally, the effects of this global trend are not felt to the same degree by the wealthy at the top of the income scale and the impoverished at the bottom. Therefore, neoliberalism cannot support the virtues of democracy in the face of an economic bottleneck.
Years ago, I conducted research for my master’s thesis on the Bosnian War in Bosnia-Herzegovina. One of my interviewees’ responses to my inquiry regarding the possibility of reestablishing the multiculturalism that characterised Yugoslavia’s golden age in Bosnia-Herzegovina in the midst of such a violent war remains with me to this day: “No one is concerned with the religious beliefs, political affiliation, or ethnic background of others when money is abundant and there are no economic issues; however, in times of economic turmoil, neighbourly disputes become the foremost concern when such matters arise”. Hence, the acquisition of limited resources serves as a means of ensuring survival, and disruptions or obstructions in the capitalist flow inevitably result in regional ethnic conflicts and instability. Economic instability, in conjunction with ethnic and domestic instability, induces mass migration, particularly in the northern direction. Despite the allure of the North’s welfare level for individuals migrating from the South, the point that is insufficiently discussed is that the Northern countries currently have unsatisfactory incomes for the general populace, while the elite, comprising 1% of the population, possesses the majority of the wealth. Although this is an obvious fact, to shift attention away from the issues at hand, economic stagnation and unemployment in the North are attributed to immigration policies and immigrants. Furthermore, this framework demonstrates efficacy in mobilising governments that share this perspective.
Conversely, the global elite cannot be described as homogeneous in its composition. This minority group lacks internal consensus. They are engaged in combat using distinct states. This situation has led to the Cold War-era conditions that exist in the current international system. The United States is actively striving to diminish the potential for China to exert influence over other nations through the utilisation of its technological and financial prowess[3]. It is also possible to interpret this state of affairs as the struggle of China-based Alibaba against America-based Amazon.
Contemporary nations are psychologically fortified against domestic and global conflicts by means of populist governments. This calls for additional armaments. Thus, for an increasing number of nations, states of emergency are becoming the norm. The issues are interconnected and escalating in a spiral of securitization. Nevertheless, a potential consequence of the elites’ inability to reach a consensus is that we risk being propelled into the Third World War. This is also predicted by the IISS report.
Pandemics, wars, and crises continue to specifically target and eradicate the economically weak, as is the case at present. This state of affairs is now evident. Concerning the elites’ strategy for handling this circumstance, as “Survival of the Richest: Escape Fantasies of the Tech Billionaires” by Douglas Rushkoff explains, the ultra-wealthy, who comprise an extremely small fraction of the global populace, have already begun preparing for impending catastrophes.
Dr. Burcu Albayrak Dönmez
An independent researcher. The dissertation “Hegemonic Masculinity in Turkish Right Politics: The Case of the AK Party” earned her a doctorate from Bolu Abant İzzet Baysal University in 2023. Gender studies and conflict dynamics are among the areas of interest to her within the field of international relations.
[1] IISS, “The Military Balance: 2024” https://www.iiss.org/publications/the-military-balance/2024/chapter-1-era-of-insecurity/ (Access date: 18.02.2024).
[2] Ak, Nazlı Berivan (05.01.2024) “Daron Acemoğlu: Teknolojinin Dizginlerini Elitlerin Elinden Almak Gerek”, Gazete Oksijen, https://gazeteoksijen.com/yazarlar/nazli-berivan-ak/daron-acemoglu-teknolojinin-dizginlerini-elitlerin-elinden-almak-gerek-198960 (Access date: 19.02.2024)
Weltschau 
Leave a comment