Ulson Gunnar — East Must Provide Alternative to, Not Replace Western Hegemony

The issue is the rules governing the world economy under globalization. The West wishes to impose translational rules, whereas the East wishes to base the rules on the primacy of national sovereignty. The Western leaders are internationalists, but Western peoples by and large are not. 

The emerging nations are much more influenced by socialism and Marxism, which have been internationalist. However, now it the Eastern leaders, even the Communist Chinese, that pushing for multipolarism and national sovereignty.

The dialectic is now chiefly about who writes the rules of the game. To paraphrase President Obama, if America doesn't make the rules, a nation like China will. That puts it about as clearly as can be stated. This sets a collision course that can only result in conflict unless the US backs down from unipolarism.

New Eastern Outlook
East Must Provide Alternative to, Not Replace Western Hegemony

Ulson Gunnar

See also Vladimir Terehov, The results of the Regular Shangri-La Dialogue

On May 29-31 the (14th) session of the Shangri-La Dialogue took place in Singapore, which since 2002 has regularly been held under the auspices of the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies – one of the leading think tanks specializing in the assessment of the status and prospects of development of the political map of the world. 

The forum was initiated to discuss security issues in the Asia-Pacific Region. Its main participants are Ministers of Defense or high-ranking officials of the military departments of the leading countries in the region such as China, Japan, the US, Russia, India, Australia and others. 

For over ten years, the Shangri-La Dialogue has become one of the most important policy platforms in the Asia-Pacific region, that is attended and one’s vision of key regional problems is stated, it is considered essential by responsible representatives of all the major players.

The US is only in a position to impose its rules unilaterally as long as it maintains not only military superiority but also the credibility of using it without having to accept significant enough damage to act as a deterrent. The Chinese interpret the US position about freedom of navigation and airspace as really about control of the sea and air. That is, the ability to control trade routes rather than keeping them free.