Diarmuid Breatnach
(Reading time: 3 mins.)
EU Vice-President Kallas referred to a number of state leaders meeting in China as ‘autocratic’, accusing them of challenging the ‘rules-based order’ of the Western states. But what is that ‘order’ and what are the ‘rules’ upon which it is based?
Kallas, in the course of her mostly economic briefing on behalf of the EU: While Western leaders gather in diplomacy, an autocratic alliance is seeking a fast track to a new world order. Looking at President Xi standing alongside the leaders of Russia, Iran, and North Korea in Beijing today.
These are not just anti-Western optics; this is a direct challenge to the international system built on rules. And it is not just symbolic: Russia’s war in Ukraine is being sustained by Chinese support. These are realities that Europe needs to confront.1
Who are the ‘western leaders’ to whom Kallas is referring? Presumably they are leaders of the “Western states”, a term usually understood to describe a bloc of the European Union, UK, the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.
A number of the European Union collection of states are imperialist and some of those are generally considered to be the leading members of the whole EU, in particular Germany and France.
Most of the European states also have a recent record of colonialism and some still rule those external colonies in part or wholly, viz: UK, France, Spain.
In addition, some have practised internal colonisation, forcing nations to submit to their integration within and submission to the particular European state; in this regard there should be added Italy and Belgium in addition to the three examples above.2
The principal non-European states of the western alliance are all European settler colonies in origin, all having practised genocide upon the indigenous people, all with a record of racism towards their indigenous and other people and one, the USA, having stocked huge slave plantations.
Given the record above, it is not surprising that these states also have a record of colonial wars and even wars upon their neighbours. In WWI, Germany and Austria fought the UK and its Dominions of Australia, New Zealand and Canada, along with France, Belgium and the USA.
In WWII, Germany and Austria with some allied states went to war with most of the remaining states of Europe and the USA and countries further afield in North Africa and the Middle East.
SINCE WWII, the UK3 has fought 41 external conflicts and a three-decades war internally (against the Resistance in a colonised part of Ireland);4 France fought 34 external conflicts5 and the USA 57.6 The vast majority of these conflicts have been fought in lands outside Europe or the US.
So, on past historical threat record, how do these “autocratic states” compare to the states Kalas complains of? They don’t even come close, of course. Ah, but wait, we are told that they do things by rules – they are part of a “rule-based order”, which those “autocratic states” are not, apparently.
The rules under which the Western states operate for decades have not prevented them supporting – including in many cases with actual arms — a European settler colony carrying out apartheid, constant war crimes and recently genocide against the indigenous people in Palestine.
The rules have allowed these Western states, as distinct from “autocratic states”, to censor news and twist media reporting into Zionist propaganda, to forbid Palestine solidarity demonstrations and beat up participants, categorise solidarity actions as ‘terrorism’ and jail Palestine supporters.
The rules have permitted the state hosting the United Nations building to decide who cannot attend; to regularly veto votes of the majority member states; to ignore decisions of international courts and sanction its officials and to have the UN humanitarian agency de-funded and staff killed.7
In fact, we have been taught that this ‘order’ is based on the following rules: Any member of the Western states club can do what it likes so long as a) the club leader, the USA agrees to it and b) the other members of the club don’t take any real practical adverse action (which they haven’t).
End.
FOOTNOTES
SOURCES
1Full text in Sources.
2Arguably Scotland, Wales, Cornwall, Isle of Man and the Six Counties in Ireland are nations or parts thereof colonised and incorporated into its state by England; Brittany, northern Basque Country, Corsica and Pau by France; southern Basque Country, Galicia, Catalan Countries, Andalusia, Asturies by Castille/ Spain; Sicily by Italy …
3The UK includes the nations of Scotland, Wales, Cornwall and part of Ireland, essentially ruled by England and by that understanding the 30 Years War in Ireland was ‘internal’. The Isle of Man is not formally part of the UK but is effectively under its control. France also fought an ‘internal’ war against the Basque national Resistance but that was nothing like the degree of intensity of the British one in the northern Six Counties of Ireland.
4https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_Kingdom
5https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_France
6https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lists_of_wars_involving_the_United_States
7https://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/official-statements/unrwa-commissioner-general-gaza-summary-execution-among-more-310-unrwa
rebelbreeze 