Daily Times

There is broad agreement among scholars and professionals that the state continues to function as a singular, unified entity in the current international system, which is outdated and lacks a recognized authority. Every state has at least three fundamental components: population, territory, and a recognised government.

The states have their interests usually referred to as national interests, however, these interests may or may not always be in sync with the public interests. One of the areas for the clashing interests could be the government’s decision to go to war with another country citing national interests but the same is not in public interest for obvious reasons.

There is no denying that wars have been an important part of state policy to expand territory, increase influence, and maximize own security since time immemorial. In modern times, territorial expansion has become difficult due to certain limitations imposed by the international system, however, the same has not deterred the relatively stronger states from waging wars against the relatively smaller and vulnerable states even against popular public opinion.

If we only take some of the 21st Century wars and conflicts into account, the Iraq War II, The Yemen War, the prolonging of the Afghanistan War II, Qatar’s Blockade of 2017, the ongoing wars in Ukraine and the Israeli offensive on Gaza, cannot be in the public interest of either the invading country or the defending country. Some of these wars have ended but without resolving the conflicts because wars can only cause deaths, destruction, and devastation.

Soldiers on the front and the people in the streets have suffered immensely from the wars and conflicts.

Interestingly, the 21st Century Wars were initiated by the relatively stronger states against the Unequal Military Powers (UMPs). The century began with the tragic events of 9/11, but the US response against Afghanistan was out of proportion, particularly once the US decided to extend its stay in the country even after Osma Bin Laden had been killed on May 2, 2011.

How this war affected the public interest could be evaluated by doing a cost-benefit analysis of the two-decade-long stay of US-led NATO in the war-ridden state of Afghanistan. Finally, US President Biden, who was responsible for a hasty withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan said, “After more than $2 trillion spent in Afghanistan – a cost that researchers at Brown University estimated would be over $300 million a day for 20 years in Afghanistan – for two decades – yes, the American people should hear this: $300 million a day for two decades.”

While the US was busy in Afghanistan and Iraq in unnecessary wars, it perhaps lost track of China’s rise along with Russia and now together they are challenging the sole superpower status of the US, which is neither in its national interests nor in public interests.

Likewise, the Israeli offensive on Gaza in response to Hamas’ actions of October 7, 2023, is not in the public interest even if the Zionist regime calls it in the national interest. Because, if the Palestinians are being martyred, schools and hospitals are destroyed, and their land is being forcibly occupied, the Jewish community of Israel is also not living in peace. Perhaps this is one reason that the people of Israel regularly protest against the genocidal acts of their armed forces because they know they will be subjected to possible retaliation by resistance groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis.

Historically too, the wars have never been in public interest even if it was in the national interest for some pressing reasons, like the Falklands War, in which the British thought the territory must remain under its rule to protect its people. Otherwise, in all wars, it’s the people who suffer the most, perhaps more than the soldiers who lay down their lives in the line of duty.

In the ongoing wars in Russia-Ukraine and Gaza, none of the decision-makers who sign the orders has been killed because they are the first ones to go into the bunkers. However, the soldiers on the front and the people in the streets have suffered immensely from the wars and conflicts under the broad heading of national interests.

In my opinion, if wars remain an instrument of policy to resolve conflicts, the public interest will not get a priority for the governments who assume that they are the state. Likewise, until the people are considered the most important element of the state, the governments will continue to exercise the option of war without seriously adopting the peaceful means to resolve the conflict, particularly against the UMPs, because for them a military victory is assured even if political objectives are not accomplished.

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.”