Daily Times

At the outset, let me explain the term ‘Neo-politics’ because, in an era of ever-green geopolitics and evolving geoeconomics, it will be difficult to digest yet another new terminology. Neo-politics is a hybrid employment of geopolitics, geostrategy, and geoeconomics.

States successfully employed their geography in international politics over the centuries even when the term geopolitics had not been in use. While each element of geography merits great consideration, but location and size of the state stood tall when it came to asserting regional or global politics in international relations. New Zealand, one of the most advanced states in the world is unable to play a significant role in international affairs primarily due to its remote location. Whereas a much smaller state in the Gulf, Qatar effectively plays its role as a peace facilitator among the warring nations and groups.

Geopolitics, which, in essence, applies the precepts of realism when it comes to power, security, and interest, based on the essential elements of geography, will perhaps continue to dominate international relations, even if geoeconomics has gained a lot of ground. However, what neo-politics does is different in terms of geography.

Since more and more states are joining the Chinese Camp for want of development through cooperation, there is a higher probability that neo-politics will replace geopolitics, geostrategy, and geoeconomics into a single-term.

States, in the 21st Century, are not relying on geography alone anymore, but looking for opportunities to maximize gains in terms of economic benefits, security, and political stature. Unlike the era of the Cold War where the lines were drawn, adversaries were known, and states had taken a certain position for political and strategic reasons. In the realm of neo-politics, states are more pragmatic, open, decisive, and undeterred by any force to make their own decisions. Barring a few smaller and weaker ones in the economic domain, states exercise their options more freely than before.

Europe has been at war since Russia decided to enter Ukraine on February 24, 2022, and two years on the ongoing war is likely to expand both horizontally as well as vertically. Likewise, the Middle East has not rested since Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990, and wars and conflicts in the region have reached the Red Sea with more and more extra-regional players joining the arena.

Africa has also started to assert itself and revolted against its colonial master, France. China, under the banner of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), has entered Africa in a big way with money alongside Russia which will provide the much-needed muscle with its arms and ammunition, if required.

Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), BRICS, and Group of 77 are seriously challenging Europe’s supremacy in geopolitics, geostrategy, and geoeconomics. Because neo-politics is giving states an option to choose the path that is best suited to their interests. The Bretton Woods arrangements that have exploited the Global South for over seven decades are likely to lose their grip in the coming decades because China has enough liquidity to support the needs of these nations through investments in much-needed infrastructure and public utility projects that were long denied by the colonial masters. Moreover, China and Russia are encouraging states to do their business in local currencies or exchange of commodities to gradually reduce the demand for the dollars. The process of de-dollarization has already started but certainly will take more time before the dollar loses its colour in essence.

What I am suggesting is that several Cold War terminologies need a serious review by academics and practitioners because the international system is undergoing rapid change, and the world will not be the same again as it was during the Cold War or in the post-9/11 phase. The US-led dominance of international organizations and institutions is coming to an end, if not immediately, shortly, for sure.

For this purpose, I am introducing neo-politics to generate a debate. The hybrid employment of all the previous terminologies, methodologies, and techniques is paving the way for more prudent options for the states and reducing the dependency syndrome to make more independent decisions. One might argue that the developing states were dependent on their colonial masters who had now led by the US since the end of World War II, and now they will be dependent on China so how will it change for them?

The short answer is that it will not be so, because, at the global level, it’s a clash of two philosophies: the Chinese view of ‘development through cooperation’ and the Western view of ‘with us or without us.’ Since more and more states are joining the Chinese Camp for want of development through cooperation, there is a higher probability that neo-politics will replace geopolitics, geostrategy, and geoeconomics into a single term which denotes hybrid employment of all other elements of geography to maximize their gains in terms of economy, security, and politics.

Let’s begin an academic debate!

The writer of this article has authored three international books: “Nuclear Deterrence and Conflict Management Between India and Pakistan” “South Asia Needs Hybrid Peace” and “Understanding Sun Tzu and the Art of Hybrid War.”