Rising Neo-Nationalism Threatens Social, Economic Progress Worldwide

Nationalism is on the rise worldwide. A new form of nationalism has emerged in the last decade that pits nativists, xenophobes, and populists against an increasingly globalized world. “Neo-nationalism” as the trend has become known is leading to increasing belligerence between nations and an uninformed suspicion of the “other” that could lead to far-reaching international confrontation.

Three countries exemplify this trend like none other, with deepening consequences to their national reputation and diplomatic standing in the world. India’s Hindu nationalism is leading to an economic boycott of its most important trade partner, the disastrous pandemic response in the US is diminishing its standing, and Israeli nationalism is bringing it ever closer to annexation.

US nationalism meets COVID-19

For decades US politicians have considered their country to be the best of all, solely based on GDP and military might. Even though the US slipped in important metrics, including education and healthcare, it remained a taboo for politicians to declare the US anything but number one. The US is now not even in the top 10 in most fields that would be considered to be signs of “being the best.”

The US now ranks 27th in education in health, down from 6th place in the 1990s. The country is the 19th happiest country, and the 42nd most corrupt. The country is now the 27th in social mobility, which means that there are 26 countries where citizens are more likely to achieve the “American Dream,” or work their way up from poor to rich.

But amid this collapse of living standard and public services, amid a crumbling infrastructure that needs $4.5 trillion worth of repairs and maintenance before 2025, American nationalism has maintained the fiction that the US is the best country in the world. This mistaken analysis was evident in its approach to COVID-19 that has now cost 125,318 American lives.

The US has considered its privatized and decentralized healthcare system more than capable of resisting a shock that caused much more accessible healthcare systems in Western Europe to tremble. The country’s misplaced nationalism meant little extra effort was mobilized even as evidence of the pandemic’s severity emerged from Europe, leading to a disastrous and deadly failed response that has severely diminished the US’ standing in the world.

Israeli annexation fueled by nationalism

There are few people in the world as familiar with the dangers of unfettered nationalism than the Jewish diaspora. The rise of nationalism in Europe led to increasing antisemitism that concluded in the barbarous mass murder of millions of innocent Jewish people. But history is doomed to repeat itself as Israeli hardliners now fuel a similar type of nationalism within their own nation.

Far-right media continuously turn the native Palestinians into a dangerous “other” and push the country further right. Israeli neo-nationalism is visible on a daily basis in publications such as the Netanyahu-aligned newspaper Israel Hayom, and more mainstream publications such as the Jerusalem Post or the Times of Israel regularly feature highly problematic opinion pieces.

One feature of neo-nationalism that is visible from Hungary’s Prime Minister Victor Orban to Brazil’s President Jair Bolsonaro is the rapid mainstreaming of nationalist thinking. By employing marketing strategies and exploiting social media, neo-nationalists create a world of alternative facts for their supporters.

The world of alternative facts has turned UN-declared illegal settlers into “brave pioneers” and oppressed native people into “dangerous terrorists.” iI has turned the country’s nationalists against the United Nations, through which Israel was founded in the first place. Now misplaced nationalist zeal could lead Israel to commit a blatant violation of international norms and turn itself into a global pariah as nationalists urge Netanyahu to go further and annex even more Palestinian land.

Indian radical nationalism

India’s Hindu nationalists are transforming their country away from the legacy of Gandhi and Nehru and into a dangerously volatile chaos of misinformation, mob violence, and an increasing war fervor against neighboring China. India’s media has enthusiastically whipped up resentment and even violence against local minorities, blamed COVID-19 on local Muslims, and framed an undisciplined scuffle between border troops as a casus belli.

Indian neo-nationalism is likely the most entrenched form of the trend found globally. Mainstream politicians, news reporting, and the government itself continuously misinform and manipulate public frustrations.

The rise of mainstream nationalist fervor could be seen in Indian Prime Minister Nahendra Modi’s 2019 electoral campaign. After his first successful campaign focused on economic development, whipping up nationalism proved easier to deliver. “We were nationalist, we are nationalists and we will remain nationalists,” he said in a campaign speech.

Similar to neo-nationalism in Israel and the US, Indian nationalism is producing a dangerous feedback loop that could turn disastrous.

When a hand-to-hand fight between a few dozen Chinese and Indian border troops led to casualties, there was no critical media left to see the event as what it was. Troops showing poor discipline that should have been court-martialed instead became national martyrs as ill informed masses cried for war against a country with a far superior military and economy.

Divide and conquer

In the end neo-nationalism serves but one purpose: It masks the negative effects our global neoliberal economics have on the poor and middle classes and instead pitches them against each other. By fueling resentment and hatred of the “other,” neoliberal leaders such as Modi, Netanyahu, and Trump can hide the continuous wealth transfer from the poor and working classes to the rich.

Misinformed working-class Indians, Israelis, and Americans have much more in common with those who they are manipulated into hating, than the millionaires and politicians that foment this discord. Neo-nationalism has become the favored approach by politicians who can no longer promise economic development through neoliberalism, as that theory has again and again been roundly disproved.

“Divide and conquer” appears to be the political mantra of our era, with potentially disastrous consequences for us all.

What is Behind Rising Tensions Between India and China?

The two most populous nations on earth are again facing a diplomatic stand-off over their disputed border in the Himalayas. Tempers among border troops have resulted in several undisciplined bouts of hand-to-hand fighting in recent years, with one such scuffle now resulting in casualties.

Fueled by nationalism and an increasingly skewed worldview, the governments of India and China appear to have lost control over their own narrative as political posturing amid a lack of facts is bringing both nations closer to a war neither country wants, and neither country could win.

Scuffles

Twenty Indian soldiers have died after fighting broke out between Indian and Chinese infantry in the isolated mountains of the Himalayas. Soldiers from the two nuclear armed nations threw rocks, used bamboo sticks with nails, and fists in an uncontrolled scuffle that had little to do with any military objective.

Weeks of high-level talks between the top brass of the two nations has now been undone, with few repercussions for the soldiers involved who are being hailed as martyrs by Indian media.

Three soldiers were reported dead on Tuesday June 16, but a further 17 injured Indian troops have succumbed to hypothermia following the brawl. In a world that is littered with contentious borders and disputed territory, the two Asian giants appear to be unable to maintain discipline within their ranks.

The uncontrolled tempers of border troops is now being presented as a major escalation as both countries present opposing narratives while high-level military officials attempt to de-escalate.

History

Tensions on one of the world’s longest borders stem from a 1914 border drawn by the British who then ruled India. The “McMahon line” has been disputed by China since its conception, but India has considered it the legal border since the country was granted independence in the 1947 partition of India and Pakistan. The dispute led to a 1959 disagreement during a meeting between the countries’ leaders that rapidly escalated.

Three years later, in 1962, the two nations fought an inconclusive month-long war that set the stage for the continued militarization of the border in decades to come. In 1967, the two countries again came to blows as both countries exchanged artillery fire and infantry combat that would be the last shots fired between the two countries.

But China outgrew India economically, aligned itself with India’s traditional foe Pakistan, and started expanding its soft power in the south-Asia region through major infrastructure projects.

India meanwhile became a central fixture in the US Indo-Pacific strategy aimed at curbing Chinese influence in Asia. In 2017, Indo-Chinese relations again deteriorated after a stand-off over a strategic plateau in the Himalayas, leading to the military build-up that resulted in the recent brawl.

Nationalism

The primary fuse of today’s heated tempers was lit by growing nationalism in both countries. The Chinese and Indian governments took wildly different approaches in economic development and methods to control their enormous populations.

The Chinese government chose to rapidly increase Chinese living standards by lifting millions out of poverty, but the “Chinese miracle” came at the price of surrendering free speech and increased state control over citizen’s lives. In 2020, China expects to have completely eradicate extreme poverty, but citizens are controlled and monitored like never before.

India took another approach. Indians enjoy far greater personal freedom and the state has little control over its 1.3 billion citizens, but millions of Indian citizens remain trapped in class-based poverty. Even though relative success was achieved in reducing poverty, the country was unable to match the dramatic improvements in healthcare, education and living standards that China’s government realized.

Poverty and limited opportunities led to an increase in Hindu nationalism in India as tensions with its Islamic neighbor Pakistan produced increasing xenophobia, mob violence and religious intolerance. After Indian prime minister Nahendra Modi rose to power, the government has done little to stop this worrying trend, instead opting to fuel the flames.

In China, state-control over media and increasing international prominence led to a different form of nationalism as economic results and a consolidation of power in Beijing produced a renewed national belief in Chinese power and influence on the global stage. With reporting on Chinese government decisions tightly controlled, citizens increasingly see their country as the next global superpower.

Political posturing

Chinese government officials have mostly tried to cool tempers by highlighting both countries’ mutual interests and emphasizing de-escalation and high-level talks. Indian military officials similarly tried to diffuse rising Indian anger by emphasizing a diplomatic resolution.

India’s politicians have shown no such restraint, however, with India’s defense minister stating that the brawling soldiers had “displayed courage and valor.”

Yet, increased self-confidence in both populations has created echo-chambers in which newspapers present only the national perspective. Chinese media have reported little on the May 15 scuffle that led to casualties, while India’s media have reported on the issue as if it were a battle in a war, fueled by its increasingly belligerent politicians.

While China has attempted to hide the embarrassment of the undisciplined brawl, India’s politicians have attempted to re-frame the event as a moment of Indian bravery in the face Chinese aggression.

The three deceased Indian military members who were initially reported as the only casualties have been hailed by politicians as martyrs who died fighting for their country. Some politicians and political commentators have called for an all-out war with China in response to the scuffle.

Media landscape

Chinese broadcasters have published official statements with little additional commentary or analysis as the amount of Chinese injuries or casualties in the brawl still remains unclear. China’s Global Times published an editorial that blamed Indian “arrogance and recklessness” as it downplayed the event as “confrontational sentiments.”

India’s media has applied no such restraint as its media which regularly publishes dangerous Islamophobic conspiracy theories and fuels inter-religious tensions now cries out for a military “push back.” The Hindustan Times published statements calling its brawling border troops “great heroes” to which the country “is in debt.”

The few Indian commentators that have highlighted that the event was likely triggered by individuals in India’s army have been met with an avalanche of criticism on social media. As Indian media makes it impossible for its military to discipline its troops, increasing the likelihood of another violent confrontation led by emotional young men on its borders.

Military strength

While the Indian media has pushed for a military response, its military will be well aware that such an act could trigger a full-blown conflict with an emerging global superpower. Both nations have a large population and available manpower, and both countries have large nuclear arsenals, but the similarities end there.

China’s defense budget of $237 billion stands in stark contrast to India’s $61 billion annual spending. While China has been rapidly modernizing its military in recent years, the Indian armed forces have not been able to keep up. India, instead, relies on its central position in the US Indo-Pacific strategy instead.

China has a distinct advantage when it comes to essential elements of modern warfare, having more than twice the amount of combat aircraft, a tenfold advantage in attack helicopters and 3,800 pieces of self-propelled artillery compared to India’s 235. China possesses a wide variety of missiles, including advanced Intercontinental ballistic missiles while India’s arsenal is far more limited.

China’s navy is significantly stronger and its fleet is more than twice the size of India’s. The Chinese have triple the destroyers, four times more frigates more than double the amount of frigates that the Indian navy has. The one advantage India holds is the location of its military assets and infrastructure, which are primarily located on its northwestern border, while Chinese assets are spread out across the country.

The impossible war

China’s technological military advantage would however count for little in a conflict in the Himalayas. A war in the “roof of the world” would have to be fought by infantry and light arms as the high-altitude region is ill suited for tanks or even heavy artillery. The few roads that lead through the mountains would provide for perfect choke-points where mechanized forces would suffer heavy casualties.

Because of the high-altitudes, both countries’ air forces would have little impact and any advances would have to be realized by combat between infantry units and light artillery. China’s navy would have to travel for thousands of kilometers through choke-points like the strait of Malacca or the Sunda strait, which would be relatively easy to defend for India’s naval forces.

The only way for both nations to advance would be through the treacherous mountain ranges. Once either military manages to make it through however, they would face the other country’s more advanced military units once they descend from the mountains.

The only feasible result would be a bloody stalemate with marginal territorial gains in the Himalayas. Because both countries possess a nuclear arsenal, no decisive victory could ever be realized without creating an unparalleled human tragedy for both nations.

The Chinese and Indian military appear to be fully aware of this situation and have emerged as the primary source of de-escalation in the current heated debate. Persistent nationalist attitudes in both countries mean it is unlikely that such news would reach their populations however, creating a sense of an emerging conflict that in reality is very unlikely to materialize.