When Power Overshadows Morality

M. Talha Zubair

Islamabad: Rational choice theory tells us that humans are rational beings, weighing reasons before acting. In the same way, after the Peace of Westphalia, states emerged as sovereign entities—strategic, calculating, and always justifying their actions. Whether it’s war, alliances, budgets, or diplomacy, states behave like rational actors pursuing their interests.

But here lies the split: unlike individuals, who are bound by religion, customs, ethics, and personal character, states rarely carry the same moral compass. For people, character ethic—the deeper moral foundation behind one’s actions, as Stephen Covey notes in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People—matters. For states, however, it is power, not ethics, that defines behavior.

The Politics of Power

At the heart of statecraft lies the politics of power. States act only when their interests are aligned with the pursuit of more influence or resources. Neutrality is often just a mask to protect their image. Historical revisionism, securitizing threats, or rewriting narratives are some of the common tools states employ to justify their moves.

Read More: https://thepenpk.com/pakistan-from-asian-model-to-economic-struggles/

Ayesha Siddiqa, in Military Inc., describes this cycle of power and interests as endless and self-feeding. What drives it? Greed—for resources, for political advantage, for economic dominance.

Politics plays out at every level—individual, societal, and global. Just as individuals maneuver for power in daily life, states do the same on the world stage. Allies are forged when interests converge, but these alliances collapse the moment interests diverge. A textbook case is World War II: the USA and USSR stood together against Nazi Germany, only to turn on each other once the war ended—ushering in the Cold War.

Perception as Warfare

In the 21st century, international competition has moved beyond traditional battlefields into what we call perception warfare. Winning is no longer just about territory—it’s about controlling the narrative. The battle is over who tells the better story and sways international opinion.

India’s portrayal of Kashmir is a clear example. By presenting Kashmiri Muslims as terrorists and framing the valley as a Hindu-majority heritage site through films like The Kashmir Files or Fighter, India shapes global perception. If we apply Copenhagen School’s theory of securitization, Bollywood itself becomes a weapon—used to turn a political conflict into an existential threat narrative.

In this war of images and words, tarnishing the enemy’s reputation can be as effective as winning territory.

The Crisis of Ethics

From Machiavelli to Morgenthau, the guiding principle of Realpolitik is simple: politics is amoral. Interests and power, not ethics, drive state behavior. This ethic-less politics has left its mark everywhere—from Kashmir and Palestine to Syria, Lebanon, Iran, and Afghanistan.

Read More: https://thepenpk.com/the-price-of-being-female/

Wars, in these regions and beyond, have been written in blood. Entire generations—martyrs, so-called “terrorists,” women, and children—have been sacrificed at the altar of state hegemony.

John Galtung’s theory of peace reminds us that while humans may have differences, their deepest, most universal need is peace. He distinguishes between negative peace (the absence of war) and positive peace (a condition where people are psychologically, socially, and economically fulfilled). While positive peace remains utopian, even the bare minimum—negative peace—feels out of reach in many conflict zones today.

For Palestinians, the demand is not wealth or luxury but simply survival: no more bombardments, no bullets, no hunger deaths. The demand is for the bare minimum of ethics.

The Historical Echo of War

History is littered with reminders of this imbalance. From Athens and Sparta to the Indo-Pak partition, from Kargil to Afghanistan’s “Operation Enduring Freedom,” war has consistently brought more destruction than resolution.

The intoxication of projecting power is so strong that even mass killings are defended as strategic necessities. Human values, ethics, and morality often vanish in the face of geopolitical gains.

Liberals, of course, hold on to hope. They argue for Wilsonianism—building international organizations, alliances, and cooperation. In their view, collective responsibility could usher in harmony. But realists quickly point out: power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Shifts in Power, But Not in Ethics

Every dominant power eventually falls, replaced by another. Many scholars today argue that the “Asian Century” is at hand. Some anthropologists even suggest that Asia’s clan-centric societies may foster stronger community ties and, perhaps, more peace.

Yet, for realists, this optimism is naïve. They insist that wars will remain tools of policy, abstract ideas for those far removed, but brutal, lived realities for those under fire.

Humanity’s Forgotten Voice

Lost in the noise of power struggles, the voice of humanity grows faint. Stephen Hawking, in Brief Answers to the Big Questions, wrote that from space we see no borders—just one planet, one human race. On Earth, however, those divisions bleed into wars, suffering, and inequality.

What remains is an open question: in a world consumed by power and resources, can morality ever reclaim its place? Or will anarchy continue to prevail?

If parallel universes exist, perhaps somewhere there’s a world where humans truly unite—not as “allies,” but as friends. A world not of crisis, but of compassion. A world where morality is not overshadowed by power.

The article is the writer’s opinion, it may or may not adhere to the organization’s editorial policy.

Muhammad Talha Zubair A Strategist & poet for whom stories beyond the sight are more vivid and audible.

The article is the writer’s opinion, it may or may not adhere to the organization’s editorial policy.

Muhammad Talha Zubair A Strategist & poet for whom stories beyond the sight are more vivid and audible