If Ukraine falls, it will be a catastrophe for the West. It will be the end of western hegemony . . .
–Boris Johnson
https://youtu.be/FtMJ85fvvKU?t=21
BORIS JOHNSON: If Ukraine falls, it'll be a catastrophic turning point in history - and an utter humiliation for the West... Why the hell are we waiting to give this heroic nation the weapons it needs? | Daily Mail Online
Johnson’s comments contrast with those from western leaders back in 2022, which emphasized that the war in Ukraine was a fight to protect freedom, democracy, and national sovereignty. Are the different statements of objectives compatible?
For background, here are the dictionary definitions for hegemony and democracy:
hegemony:
Domination, influence, or authority over another, especially by one political group over a society or by one nation over others.
hegemony - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
democracy:
Rule by the people, especially as a form of government; either directly or through elected representatives.
democracy - Wiktionary, the free dictionary
My observation is that hegemony is not consistent with democracy, freedom, and national sovereignty. That is certainly true for states under the domination of the hegemon. Hegemony means that they must put the wishes of the hegemon above those of their own electorate. Likewise, vassal states must restrict freedom of speech, trade relations, foreign policy, etc. to protect the interests of the hegemon instead of those of their own people. National sovereignty is naturally severely restricted in a hegemony.
Even in the case of the US and its closest allies, hegemony arguably serves the interests of the ruling elite not the population as a whole. If you doubt that, consider the response from the elites in Washington and London when voters voted “the wrong way” on Brexit and the Trump election in 2016.
Is western hegemony something worth protecting at all cost as Boris Johnson claims?
Or is western hegemony really a threat to democracy, freedom, and national sovereignty?
