westernization

The rest must follow the West’, some individuals love to argue.

For many in our part of the world, development entails the application of Western ideas and ideals. But a certain class of development practitioners think otherwise. For them, borrowed ideas cannot solve indigenous problems.

The argument is simple. Just as one size doesn’t fit all, one political or economic variable doesn’t fit into all equations. The overemphasis on Western ideals oversimplifies complex problems. Whether it is the application of liberal democracy or capitalism, Westernisation does not guarantee the same GDP rates or per capita income as found in these states. It also does not guarantee the same health and educational standards. Two principal factors underscore the failure of Western ideals in non-Western settings.

The first one is intrinsic.

Every state has its own set of cultural values, social ethos and ideological underpinnings that shape the broader contours of societal interactions and socio-political developments. In this way, every country is unique and different from others. What is good for one country may not be feasible for another. This is an area that Western pundits and protagonists of Western political and economic philosophy often fail to understand.

One of the reasons for the failure of these ideals in the South has to do with the social structure of these countries. Tribal instincts and class differences are quite pronounced in many non-Western countries. Consider Afghanistan for example – a country mired by ethnic, sectarian and tribal divisions. To ask for Western-style electoral democracy in these conditions is self-delusionary. For functional democracy, Afghanistan first needs to find an end to its ethno-tribal fissures and cultivate a strong sense of nationalism among its citizens. Without doing so, democracy will remain dysfunctional as it does today – existing only in name and not in reality.

Yet, many in the North easily overlook these peculiarities. Their firm belief in the righteousness of Western ideals, coupled with a lack of knowledge about local settings, leads them to propose actions that instead of providing solutions often end up creating more complications.

The second factor is of an extrinsic nature and involves the vested interests of foreign countries.

There is a genuine desire among many developing countries to emulate the rate of growth and development achieved by the West. To achieve the same results, governments often hire foreign consultants or consultancy firms to chalk out policies and strategies for their people to attain the same lifestyles as their Western counterparts. However, despite paying hefty sums to these consultants, many states have failed to witness any marked improvement in the living conditions of their people. In fact, some of them became worse off.

This is essentially because these so-called experts make them chase a mirage. Their proposals for social and economic transformation are a farce. The PowerPoint presentations based on concocted projections and statistics are only meant to paint a rosy picture and stir wild and unrealistic aspirations. In the end, the consultants depart with a bag of exorbitant fees and leave behind a tale of misery and deceit. Their host governments lack the knowledge and expertise to call their bluff, and only long after they are gone do they come face to face with reality. By then, it is too late and the damage is done.

Investing in indigenous methods can help mitigate these challenges. Solutions that conform to the religious and cultural norms of a society will have wider social acceptance. Hence, they will also be more enduring than a system imported from abroad and forced upon people. Likewise, cultivating local experts is essential to shed dependence on foreign consultants who neither have adequate knowledge of local settings nor the genuine desire for improving livelihoods of the locals.

Nonetheless, this article is not meant to be a general charge-sheet against all things foreign or Western. In fact, there is still plenty to learn from the West’s development experience. There is also no denying the fact that many Westerners have made invaluable contributions to global peace and prosperity.

Yet, loathing one’s own cultural traditions and values in awe of the West isn’t an advisable approach. This does not lead a nation to the path of growth and prosperity. It only makes us ethnocentric victims of an inferiority complex.

So, instead of looking at the West for solutions to each and every one of our problems, we need to think of alternative methods that have roots in our own traditions and are backed by knowledge of local settings. Such solutions will be more effective in addressing development issues in our areas and improving the standard of living of our populace. Development should be an indigenous process, not an import from abroad.

Javaria Nisar is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected].

Design Credit: Mysha Dua Salman

Images: Online sources


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

Space-Enabled Warfare in the 21st Century: Pathways for Developing States

Space has emerged as a distinct domain of warfare alongside land, sea, air, and cyber. Developed countries like the United States, Russia, and China possess offensive and support capabilities in space. In the shadowed expanse of Low Earth Orbit (LEO), where satellites operate like silent custodians, the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine transformed the nature of modern conflict. As Russian troops marched forward, the commercial satellites like Maxar and Planet, which are operated by Western firms, captured high-resolution imagery of Russian troops, providing real-time intelligence to Ukrainian commanders, unlike ever before.

Read More »

The US-Israel War on Iran: Objectives, Strategy, and Escalation Management

Zahra Niazi
‘States tend to overestimate themselves or the benefits and swiftness of war, and to underestimate their opponents’ capabilities, intentions, or the costs and duration of war.’ If anything, the 2026 war initiated by the United States and Israel against Iran shall be remembered in the annals of warfare among the most visible manifestations of this dynamic.
The war, immediately preceded by the January mass protests in Iran, did not represent a sudden rupture but rather the continuation of a 47-year-long confrontation and a more intense phase of the June 2025 war.
The US Secretary of War, Pete Hegseth, defined the war’s objectives as being laser-focused: to destroy Iran’s missile capabilities and its security infrastructure, while ensuring that it could never develop nuclear weapons. Beyond these stated objectives, among the priorities on the continuum also lay the objective of regime change, with both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu explicitly calling on the Iranian population to take over the government at the outset of the war.

Read More »

Marka-e-Haq to the Peace Talks: Pakistan’s Middle Power Status

On 7th May 2025, Pakistan’s military forces took the international security community by surprise when it demonstrated operational superiority against its larger belligerent adversary India with its rapid and coordinated response. The Four-Day conflict proved to be a watershed moment for Pakistan, marking its rapid emergence as an important player in the region. In recent years, amidst the ongoing global competition between the United States and China, Islamabad has adopted a position of ’Strategic Balancing,’ where it maintains ties of cooperation with both Beijing and Washington. Deft diplomacy, emphasis on geo-economics, and credible conventional and strategic deterrence have remained the foundational pillars for Pakistan’s ambition as a rising middle power

Read More »