The Global Questions Series: Number 11 - The Good, The Bad, and The Irrational

Winners, Losers, Heroes, Villains, and How To Break Through The Geopolitical Noise

Contents

1. Introduction

2. Heroes and Villains

3. Winners and Losers

4. Characteristics of Irrationality

5. Irrationality Case Studies

6. Narratives In Geopolitics and The Roles We Play

7. Power and Shifting Structures

8. Concluding Remarks

---

Bitesize Edition

• Our perception of the world is a vital aspect of geopolitics that is often underappreciated or not considered. As we enter a world with many rising geopolitical powers, whether these countries are considered heroes or villains is no simple matter.

• As we reflect on the past, historical narratives are determined by the winners of conflict. It's stated by the winners after the conclusion of any conflict that such a conflict can never arise again as we can’t risk such potential costs. The losers of such conflicts often receive the short end of the straw and are left in a worse position than before the conflict. Frequently, they don’t share the sentiments of the winners throughout history and as perception influences geopolitics, the winners pedal their chosen narrative and losers can be viewed as more villainous than heroic.

• I question if painting geopolitics as a world with heroes and villains, or winners and losers, contributes to the many flawed methodologies in how we perceive the world. With this in mind, is there a better way to interpret the world of geopolitics, so we don’t slip into the psychological appeal of simplistic explanations of what is a complex world? This complex world is also constantly changing, an idea we must adapt to.

• How can we today seek to reduce decisions that will one day be perceived as irrational, and what examples of geopolitical events throughout history are now perceived as irrational? Are there signs today that we ignore red flags that could one day be determined as irrational? Let’s dive into all these questions in today’s piece.

---

Introduction

In a recent piece I wrote, I discussed China and its rise as a technological and geopolitical superpower. In this piece, I argued that perception is a vital aspect of geopolitics. A country developing technologically through manufacturing could be perceived by rivals as said country attempting to undercut the domestic industries of other nations or to exert control over global supply chains. Alternatively, it could be seen as the pursuit of developing the entire world and providing greater opportunities for growth for the underdeveloped world.

This got me thinking about perception in geopolitics on a wider basis. What aspects of geopolitics and life generally influence how we view nations or geopolitical actors as heroes and villains?

---

Heroes and Villains

Perception influences how we view heroes and villains in geopolitics. The notion of heroes and villains is also shaped by ideology, personal interest, and national interest. In geopolitics, there are no universal truths, only narratives that differ from person to person. Anybody who threatens your interests is seen as a villain. A liberator in the eyes of one can be an oppressor in the view of another.

Ideologies compete for global influence. The fight against communism was a trend throughout the Cold War, and it heavily influenced heroes and villains. I’ve also hinted at differences between personal interest and national interest in the past, especially noticeable today with Benjamin Netanyahu who seeks to avoid personal consequences with his corruption trial while pursuing Israeli national interest that is currently in the global limelight.

Heroes and villains also depend on the timeline of history. The winners paint the final image and hence are self-perceived as the heroes. In the World Wars, the winners stated that peace had to be maintained and a war of such magnitude could never happen again. The losers often receive the short end of the stick and sit unhappy with how things turned out. They often would want another war to rebalance the power. Who we judge as heroes and villains is relative, but in this case, the natural inclination is of course that somebody who pursues war is a geopolitical villain.

Hence, with all these blurred lines surrounding perception, how can we break through these views? How can we determine right from wrong in geopolitics?