In the geopolitical competition between global powers, it is hard to differentiate democracies from dictatorships. The Americans, the supposed global torchbearers of democracy, have repeatedly intervened in other countries to remove democratic governments and install their own puppet rulers. In this they are no different to the totalitarian Soviet Union that in its heyday dotted the world with its own puppet communist regimes, or the modern-day China trying to ‘buy’ influence abroad. By the same token, nor is the democratic India’s desire to maintain its absolute hegemony in South Asia out of place.
This is the central thesis of ‘How They Rule the World: The 22 Secret Strategies of Global Power’, a new book by Pedro Baños, a Spanish army colonel and an ex-member of the EU’s counter-intelligence corps. With the help of his knowledge gained working for various security organizations, Baños says powerful democracies and dictatorships alike use one or many of the same 22 strategies to get a leg-up on their competitors. He argues that on the global stage there are basically two types of countries: “the dominant” and “the dominated”. The first group “exerts control on a regional or global scale” while the second group is “controlled… in various ways—militarily, economically, culturally or technologically”. As the big powers try to get even more powerful, to avoid being devoured by this rivalry, the comparably smaller powers have no option but to fall in behind one of the big powers, or to join an alliance of like-minded countries.
But what are the strategies the big powers use to remain ahead of the pack? They may use the strategy of deterrence (‘winning without fighting’) or the strategy of encirclement (‘outmaneuvering adversaries’). Or they may feign and conceal (‘mastering deception’) or sow seeds of discord (‘defeating enemy from within’). The bottom-line is that these powers have the military and economic strength to compel smaller powers to do their bidding.
Baños says every geopolitical decision, from forging alliances to declarations of war to imposing economic sanctions, has an ulterior motive. “Concepts such as ‘human rights’ may be referred to, but countries will always act out of self interest.” What is ‘good’ or ‘bad’ is highly subjective in international relations, he says, and wants us to know of how we are being systematically manipulated. The author’s end-goal, however utopian the idea, is to build an international order “that strives for and prioritizes human security over national security.”
It’s an interesting, breezy read for anyone interested in big power politics. But the book is also a little disorganized. The 22 strategies comprise just one of the four parts of the book and they don’t always mesh well with the other three parts, each of which analyzes this politics through its own framework. A useful primer on the subject though.
