Borrowing from the famous dialogue of the movie Lage Raho Munnabhai, “Yeh Wallet – ya Bullet, tu choose kar,” the latest rhetoric of Trump wanting to take over Canada, Greenland, or the Panama Canal—by use of force if necessary—and antics like renaming the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America, have revived the colonial mindset of the previous century. This thought process is neither alien nor new, as civilizations have historically prospered and expanded using strength (read Bullet), sheer economic power (read Wallet), or a combination of both. Be it the Heartland theory of Halford Mackinder, the Rimland theory of Nicholas Spykman, the Lebensraum or Living Space theory of Friedrich Ratzel and Adolf Hitler, or modern expansions under leaders like Xi Jinping or Donald Trump, these approaches consistently highlight brute force and economic power as tools for geopolitical domination. They also underscore geographical expansion achieved through force, coercion, inducement, or deceit.
Expansion has always been achieved either by outgrowing others or diminishing them. The East India Company, for example, flooded the markets of colonized India with textiles from Manchester and Liverpool, overwhelming the decentralized and unorganized cottage and medium textile industries of the 1800s. Another tactic was to suppress competition. India’s homegrown textile industry was destroyed through excessive taxation, repressive laws, and outright repression. Before colonization, India’s GDP constituted around 25% of the world’s total, a figure that plummeted to 4% by the time the British left. In 1600, India’s per capita GDP was over 60% of the British level, but by 1871, it had fallen to less than 15%, as noted in a study by Carnegie India.
Growth can also be achieved through the trade of niche products. Countries like Germany and Taiwan have excelled through precision manufacturing, while ancient India thrived on its spice trade. Similarly, in the corporate world, companies like Facebook, Amazon, Apple, Netflix, and Google (FAANG) continue to dominate through relentless innovation and differentiation. Conversely, history shows that diminishing the quality or value of superior products can also serve as a strategy for domination. Nalanda University, once a citadel of medical knowledge, was destroyed by Bakhtiyar Khilji, and the advanced Aztec civilization was obliterated by the Spaniards. Colonial powers often demeaned local languages as vernaculars, gaslighting native populations. Winston Churchill’s infamous disdain for Indians, describing them as “the beastliest people in the world,” epitomizes this cultural destruction. Paramahansa Yogananda aptly observed that there is no greater destruction of a civilization than the annihilation of its self-confidence and spirit.
Some nations have adopted brute force as their primary means of domination, such as North Korea, the Rashidun Caliphate, the Ghurids, and the Mongols. Others, like Saudi Arabia, China, and Japan, have used economic might. The ideal approach, however, is a blend of strength and economic power. The United States has mastered this art, often drawing from colonial history. Brute force has been modified through tactics such as military intervention in Iraq, Vietnam, and Yugoslavia or the dismantling of democratically elected governments, as seen in Bangladesh. Simultaneously, economic dominance has been reasserted through non-tariff barriers, environmental norms, and other policies that favor developed economies. For instance, the diamond trade was cartelized under the pretext of addressing “blood diamonds” from Sierra Leone, while China, despite its opaque and often exploitative practices, continues to enjoy trade privileges. The interplay of brute strength and economic superiority has long been indispensable, as evidenced by the rapid expansion of Islam in the Middle East between 700 and 1100 AD and the Golden Age of Islam under the Abbasid Empire, which followed the systematic elimination of adversaries.
Military strength is not solely a function of numbers. It requires innovation and differentiation to overpower adversaries. The Mongols introduced the stirrup, Turks and Mughals pioneered gun artillery, the British leveraged ship-mounted ammunition, and the United States now leads with predator drones and stealth technology. Internal strength is equally vital for external power, as no nation can project strength outward while crumbling inward. Trump has recognized this, prioritizing a swadeshi-style movement with job protection and restrictive tariffs, rallying the American economy before turning outward toward Canada and Denmark, countries that focused on economic strength while neglecting military power.
Innovation and economic might often require access to scarce resources. China’s dominance in solar power and the oil-rich Gulf countries’ economic clout illustrate this principle. Trump’s policies bear a resemblance to Germany’s Lebensraum theory, which sought expansion to achieve world domination. For the United States, the revival of its economy and job creation are critical. By creating fear and instability, Trump destabilizes the global order, indirectly bolstering defense exports. This strategy is already yielding results, as evidenced by Denmark’s recent pledge of $1.3 billion to enhance Greenland’s defense infrastructure.
For a nation to dominate and grow, a harmonious blend of military and economic power is essential. This interdependence remains a cardinal principle for global domination. India, too, must adopt this model by focusing on niche areas such as apparel, leather, agricultural products, and toys, while simultaneously strengthening its defense capabilities through rapid indigenization. As Swami Vivekananda aptly stated, “Strength is life; weakness is death.” This maxim resonates strongly in today’s chaotic geopolitical landscape.
Author of the article, Shri Abhinav Chandra, IAS, is a BE, MBA, and Research Scholar with 27 years of professional experience, including 23 years as an IAS officer. He currently serves as the Secretary of the Environment Department, Government of West Bengal.