Author: Abu Ayesha
Nationalism (Part 39)
The Phenomenon of Internationalism and Its Objectives:
Introduction:
The law of the world dictates that whenever a phenomenon arises and spreads among people, a counter-ideology or school of thought will eventually emerge in opposition to it. This is because conflict and contrast are inherently rooted in human nature, and no ideology can dominate people’s minds forever. After the emergence of nationalism and the inclination of some people toward this political ideology, internationalism—its ideological counterpart—also came into being. Like nationalism, internationalism has passed through various stages and forms, experiencing both ups and downs.
In previous sections, we discussed nationalism and patriotism in detail—what nationalism is, its objectives, and the negative consequences and impacts it has on the world. In this section, we aim to discuss internationalism: its origin, emergence, types, and various dimensions.
What is Internationalism and Why Did It Emerge?
The term has an ambiguous meaning and is used in various contexts. However, in general, it refers to beliefs and policies that emphasize the shared interests of different ethnic groups and nations while opposing aggressive and harsh nationalism. Unlike nationalism, internationalism leans toward supranational interests based on higher standards than nationalistic ones. Therefore, it advocates for a type of global governance. Nonetheless, internationalism does not have a precise, universally agreed-upon definition shared across all its schools of thought. Various theories have been proposed about it, but generally, a cloud of ambiguity surrounds the concept. Nevertheless, all agree on its focus on global interests and the necessity of international unity. In opposition to nationalism, internationalism holds that the well-being and prosperity of humanity require nations to cooperate, regardless of ethnic, regional, or tribal biases.
Internationalism—or supranationalism—refers to policies that lead to shared interests among different nations and ethnic groups. This belief opposes aggressive nationalism. Internationalists argue that if intergovernmental cooperation is not possible, then cooperation among peoples of different nations should be pursued. The school of internationalism seeks to awaken humanity to the awareness that every individual belongs to a global community. Contrary to nationalism, internationalism envisions a broader identity for individuals—one did not confine to narrow nationalistic standards that place national or ethnic interests above all else. Internationalism views issues from a global perspective and condemns nationalistic sentiments.
Internationalism, unlike nationalism, emphasizes the common interests of diverse peoples and nations. It is built on the belief that, to avoid conflict and to ensure peace, security, and prosperity, countries must increasingly cooperate. Its core principles include:
1. Every person, while being a citizen of a specific country, is also a member of a global society.
2. Individual countries alone cannot provide security or welfare, and meet other needs of their citizens—these matters increasingly transcend national capacities and take on an international character.
3. To prevent conflict and to ensure security and welfare, countries must join international organizations established for these purposes.
Internationalism, in opposition to nationalism, is the belief that the highest form of possible cooperation between the world’s nations guarantees the prosperity and well-being of humankind and ensures global peace. Some internationalists foresee the formation of a vast global government encompassing all nations on Earth, without violating their internal sovereignty or freedom—so long as their actions do not threaten global peace or harm other nations.
Barriers to Achieving Internationalist Goals
Although many internationalists have advocated for the creation of a unified global government and have presented arguments in favor of this, they face significant obstacles. As modern internationalists argue, the world has grown increasingly interconnected due to rapid air travel and other forms of communication, necessitating closer ties among nations. Their ultimate goal is to establish one unified world government. However, several major obstacles stand in the way of achieving internationalist objectives, including:
1. National interests
2. Political interests
3. Economic interests
4. Military affiliations
5. Disparities in development and progress
Firstly, to elaborate on these obstacles: many countries have achieved self-sufficiency and independence in various fields. In contrast, other nations remain impoverished, lacking basic facilities, and have long been exploited and colonized. The main hindrances to their progress are often the very countries proposing internationalist ideals. So, if all nations were to unite under one government, could they truly live together in harmony? The answer is clearly no. Those living in prosperity and comfort can never coexist easily with people burdened by misery and hardship—unless they relinquish all their possessions and yield their countries to the disadvantaged.
Secondly, if the entire world were to become a single country under this ideology, what laws would govern it? Would Muslims be allowed to freely practice all the commands of Allah and live by their religious beliefs? Could they enjoy the same rights and privileges as others? Could they live as they wish? The answer is, again, no. Western countries and supporters of various ideologies would never allow Muslims to freely worship and live in accordance with their faith. One only needs to observe the current condition of Muslims living in Western countries to confirm this.
Thirdly, as mentioned earlier, the national, political, economic, and military interests of certain countries will prevent the establishment of such a government. In today’s world, most people prioritize their own interests, and some are even willing to harm others to protect those interests without hesitation. Even if a neighboring country becomes secure, prosperous, and begins training elite forces, many of its neighbors will view it with suspicion, assuming secret plots or ambitions. Therefore, in this era, internationalism or the formation of a single global government is neither feasible nor beneficial.
Fourthly, some argue that the United Nations and other international organizations were founded for this purpose. In response, it should be noted that the outcomes of these organizations primarily benefit powerful nations, while the rights of smaller countries—especially Islamic nations—are routinely trampled. History provides many such examples.
Continues…
References:
[1] Ashouri, Dariush. Political Dictionary. Morvarid Publications, n.d., p. 33.
[2] Sadat, Mohammad Ali. Schools and Political Terms. First Edition, 1981 [Solar Hijri 1360], p. 26.
[3] A Treatise on the Study of -Isms in a Brief and Simple Language. Author unknown, n.d., p. 32.
[4] Kaveh, Mahan. From Nationalism to Fascism. 2020 [Solar Hijri 1399], p. 11.
[5] Nazifi, Nazanin. Interaction and Confrontation of Nationalism and Islamism in Iran After the Victory of the Islamic Revolution. Published in Strategic Policy Research Quarterly, Vol. 2, No. 5, Summer 2013, p. 212.
[6] Shokouri Joshqan, Reza; Nasiri Zarghani, Arash. A Study on the Compatibility of the Concept of the Islamic Ummah in the Theories of Internationalism and Cosmopolitanism, n.d., p. 4.
[7] Pazargad, Dr. Baha al-Din. Political Schools, n.d., p. 35.
[8] Ibid., p. 35.
[9] Ibid., p. 35.
