The Shala Daily

Stephen Walt’s analysis of predatory hegemony in Foreign Affairs reads like a case study in what happens when avidya — fundamental misperception — drives policy. The premise is simple: if you believe the world is zero-sum, you’ll act like a predator. You’ll extract, exploit, demand tribute. You’ll mistake deference for respect and compliance for partnership.

Walt describes a shift from benevolent hegemony — where the U.S. helped allies prosper because their prosperity served collective security — to predatory hegemony, where every interaction becomes a transaction designed to maximize American gain, even at the expense of partners. Trade deficits become “rip-offs.” Alliances become protection rackets. The goal isn’t mutual flourishing. It’s making sure you always get the lion’s share.

This is aparigraha turned inside out. Where non-grasping teaches us that hoarding creates suffering, predatory hegemony operates from the belief that there’s never enough. That someone else’s gain is your loss. That power means taking more than you give.

⚖️ When Dharma Meets Dominance

Walt points out that all great powers compete for advantage. That’s not the issue. What distinguishes predatory behavior is the willingness to exploit allies and adversaries equally. A benign hegemon recognizes that its security increases when its partners thrive. It values stability, legitimacy, enduring rules. It understands positive-sum games.

A predatory hegemon sees only winners and losers. It demands symbolic acts of submission — public praise, formal tribute, ritualized deference. These aren’t just about economics. They’re about keeping others in a permanent state of subordination. About making dependence visible and inescapable.

This is where dharma becomes instructive. Dharma asks: what is your right relationship to power? Not what can you extract, but what serves the whole? When leadership becomes predation, when strength becomes coercion, the fabric tears. Walt’s conclusion is stark: predatory hegemony contains the seeds of its own destruction.

🌀 The Karma of Short-Term Thinking

The article traces how U.S. strategy evolved through three phases: Cold War benevolence (because allies were essential to containing the Soviet Union), unipolar carelessness (hubris without opposition), and now predatory extraction (leverage without wisdom).

Each phase reflects a different relationship to karma — action and consequence. Benevolence created durable alliances. Carelessness eroded trust and accelerated rivals’ rise. Predation? Walt predicts it will weaken both the U.S. and its allies, generate resentment, create opportunities for adversaries, and leave Americans less secure.

The logic is simple: in a multipolar world, other states have options. They can reduce dependence. They can build alternative partnerships. When you treat allies like vassals, they start looking for exits.

This is santosha in reverse. Contentment arises from recognizing sufficiency. Predation arises from believing you’ll never have enough, that every interaction is a threat, that power means extraction. But grasping tighter doesn’t create security. It creates brittleness.

🪞 The Mirror of Empire

Walt notes that predatory hegemony isn’t new. Athens treated its empire as a tyranny. Colonial powers extracted wealth from possessions. The Nazis imposed one-sided economic relations. The Soviet Union exploited Warsaw Pact allies. Each case ended in collapse or dissolution.

The pattern holds: systems built on extraction eventually exhaust themselves. Not because predators lack power, but because dependence breeds resentment and resentment breeds resistance. You can force compliance for a while. You can demand tribute. But you can’t force loyalty. You can’t coerce genuine partnership.

Maybe the real question isn’t about grand strategy. Maybe it’s about whether we can see beyond the zero-sum story. Whether we can recognize that in an interconnected world, your suffering eventually becomes mine. That exploitation has a half-life. That power without wisdom is just force waiting to meet its limit.

Walt’s analysis is a political scientist’s warning. But it’s also an old yogic truth: what you grasp too tightly, you lose. What you try to control, controls you. And the belief that the world is zero-sum? That’s not realism. That’s avidya — seeing things as they aren’t.

— MJH