The Peoples Born with Scars and Searching for a Place Beneath the Same Sun
In 1915, British writer William Somerset Maugham published Of Human Bondage, one of the great novels of the twentieth century. Inspired in part by his own experience, the work tells the story of Philip Carey, a young orphan who must learn to live with a deformity in one of his feet while attempting to find the meaning of existence, love, freedom, and his place in the world. Philip’s physical limitation never completely defines who he is, but it conditions much of his journey and forces him to confront obstacles that others will never know.
Something similar happens to numerous peoples and nations. No country chooses the moment of its birth, the borders it inherits, the resources it possesses, or the wounds history leaves upon its territory. Some are born marked by centuries of colonialism, slavery, wars, artificial divisions, or economic dependence; others move forward from more stable institutions and favorable historical circumstances. Initial scars do not necessarily determine destiny, but they do condition the point from which each nation begins its journey.
This column does not seek to reinterpret Maugham’s extraordinary novel from a literary perspective, but rather to use it as a metaphor through which to observe a broader reality. Just as Philip Carey struggled to build his own destiny without remaining a prisoner of his limitations, many peoples continue attempting to free themselves from the scars history imposed upon them in order to finally find a dignified place beneath the same sun.
“Not all human beings begin the race from the same starting line; neither do nations.”
The Deformities with Which Peoples Are Born
Unlike Philip Carey, whose limitation was physical, the deformities accompanying many peoples were produced by human decisions accumulated over centuries. Colonialism divided continents without considering cultural identities; slavery turned millions of people into commodities; and numerous borders were drawn with a ruler across a map, separating communities or joining peoples that had never shared the same state.
Today, those historical deformities are intertwined with a new geopolitics. The United States, China, Russia, the European Union, India, and other powers project influence through investment, trade, technology, energy, infrastructure, military alliances, and access to strategic minerals. For the most vulnerable countries, the challenge is to take advantage of those opportunities without replacing old dependencies with new ones. Political freedom alone does not guarantee economic or technological autonomy, nor the genuine capacity to determine one’s own destiny.
“Some wounds disappear; others learn to call themselves history.”
Africa and the Continent of Inherited Borders
Few regions represent the scars of history as clearly as Africa. Between 1884 and 1885, during the Berlin Conference, the European powers divided much of the continent on maps drawn thousands of miles away. Those lines ignored peoples, ethnic groups, languages, cultures, and histories shared over centuries. Many states inherited borders that hindered the construction of stable national identities and left conflicts that still survive in new forms.
Africa is now returning to the center of the global chessboard. Its reserves of copper, cobalt, lithium, manganese, uranium, rare earths, oil, and gas are fundamental to the energy transition, the technology industry, and global supply chains. The United States, China, the European Union, Russia, and India are increasing their presence through investment, infrastructure, military cooperation, and resource agreements. The continent faces an old question with new protagonists: how to transform its wealth into its own development without once again being administered from abroad.
“There are maps that still bleed because they were drawn without listening to those who were meant to inhabit them.”
The Middle East and the Wounds That Remain Open
If Africa inherited borders born from colonial partition, the Middle East was marked by the reordering that followed the collapse of the Ottoman Empire after the First World War. Mandates, agreements, and new territorial boundaries shaped a map whose stability has been tested for more than a century. National, religious, ethnic, and strategic identities overlap there, while old wounds continue feeding conflicts that each generation inherits without having chosen them.
In that environment, the United States, Russia, China, the European Union, and various regional powers converge in search of security, influence, energy, and strategic depth.
Washington maintains a historic military and diplomatic presence.
Moscow participates on several fronts.
Beijing expands its investments and energy ties.
The European Union views the region through the lenses of security, supply, and migration.
The result is one of the most complex chessboards of the twenty-first century, where every external intervention can alter extremely fragile internal balances.
“When geopolitics forgets people, borders end up being written with the suffering of nations.”
Latin America Between Independence and Dependence
During the nineteenth century, most of Latin America achieved political independence after long emancipatory struggles. However, breaking with the old empires did not automatically bring economic, technological, or scientific independence. The region continued exporting raw materials, depending on foreign capital, and building fragile institutions. Many republics changed their flags without completely transforming the structures that concentrated wealth, limited development, and subordinated their decisions to foreign powers.
Latin America’s challenge is not to choose a new center of dependence, but to build strong institutions, add value to its resources, promote innovation, and invest in education, science, and infrastructure.
“Political freedom reaches its full meaning only when there is also autonomy to build one’s own future.”
Asia and the New Center of Gravity of Global Power
While the twentieth century was marked primarily by the Atlantic axis, the twenty-first century is witnessing a gradual shift toward Asia and the Indo-Pacific. A significant share of the world’s population, some of its principal manufacturing centers, and a growing scientific, technological, and military capacity are concentrated there. China has consolidated its industrial and commercial weight; India is expanding its demographic and technological influence; Japan and South Korea maintain leadership in innovation; and Pakistan retains importance because of its geographical position, nuclear capability, and connection with Central Asia and the Indian Ocean.
The Indo-Pacific has become the arena where the United States, China, India, Japan, Australia, and other powers converge. Freedom of navigation, global supply chains, semiconductors, energy, and critical minerals explain its importance. The Straits of Malacca and Hormuz function as arteries of global trade: any disruption alters prices, production, and security across numerous countries.
“The twenty-first century does not revolve only around continents; it revolves around oceans and straits through which power travels.”
The Great Lions Observe the Chessboard
The great actors do not merely observe the international chessboard. They establish alliances, protect maritime routes, contest technologies, finance infrastructure, and compete for markets, energy, and strategic minerals. The United States maintains an extensive military, financial, and technological network; China projects its manufacturing and commercial capacity; Russia retains nuclear, energy, and military weight; the European Union exercises economic and regulatory influence; India strengthens its strategic autonomy; and Pakistan occupies a geopolitical position that greatly exceeds the size of its economy.
Competition among these lions extends across Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Asia through loans, investment, weapons, trade agreements, digital networks, and control of infrastructure. For smaller countries, every offer can become either an opportunity or a dependency. When a power finances a port, supplies energy, or guarantees security, it does not merely provide resources: it also builds influence over future decisions.
“The lions change from one generation to the next; the savanna remains the same.”
The True Deformity
Returning to the figure of Philip Carey raises an inevitable question: what is the greatest deformity that can accompany a person or a nation? It is not always poverty, a lack of natural resources, or the size of the territory. There are small countries that have achieved high levels of development and others immensely rich in oil, minerals, water, or biodiversity that have failed to transform that abundance into well-being.
The great powers project influence using economic, financial, technological, diplomatic, and military tools. For smaller countries, the challenge is to engage with all of them without losing strategic autonomy. This requires reliable institutions, education, science, innovation, infrastructure, and negotiating capacity. The true deformity begins when a people ceases to believe that it can decide, accepts dependence as destiny, and allows others to determine what it should produce, what it should sell, and where it should go.
“The deepest dependence begins when a people ceases to decide its own destiny.”
The Search for Peace and Dignity
Throughout Of Human Bondage, Philip Carey discovers that his greatest battle does not consist of erasing his physical limitation, but of preventing it from completely defining who he is. That lesson transcends literature. Nations cannot alter the scars inherited from colonialism, wars, territorial divisions, or economic dependence either, but they can decide what they will do with that legacy. History explains the starting point; it should never be allowed to impose the destination.
Peace, development, and dignity are not achieved once and then guaranteed forever. They require strong institutions, responsible leaders, international cooperation, and an informed citizenry. When tensions among the United States, China, Russia, the European Union, India, Pakistan, or other powers alter the global balance, the most vulnerable countries usually pay first. Only when geopolitics places the human being at the center will it cease to be merely a game of power and become a tool for coexistence as well.
“Scars explain the past; they should never imprison the future.”
Final Reflection
At the end of Of Human Bondage, Philip Carey understands that freedom does not consist of erasing the wounds of the past, but of preventing them from governing the future. That reflection can also be applied to nations. No people can alter the scars inherited from colonialism, wars, imposed borders, or economic dependence, but it can decide how to confront them and what legacy it wishes to build for future generations.
The twenty-first century presents a paradox. Humanity possesses the greatest scientific and technological development in its history, yet it continues to face wars, strategic rivalries, humanitarian crises, and profound inequalities. The United States, China, Russia, the European Union, India, Pakistan, and other actors will continue defending their interests. The essential question is whether that power will be used to build balance and cooperation or to reproduce new forms of bondage over peoples still searching for a place beneath the same sun.
Perhaps William Somerset Maugham never imagined that the story of one man could serve as a metaphor for understanding the destiny of so many nations. More than a century later, Philip Carey continues reminding us that inherited limitations need not become a permanent sentence. Individuals can overcome their own forms of bondage; peoples can do the same when they strengthen their institutions, cooperate with others, and preserve the freedom to choose their own path.
“Great empires will continue to rise and disappear. The lions will change their names, flags, and languages.”
“But the true measure of civilization will not be how many territories they conquered, but how many peoples ceased to live in bondage.”
“Because peace does not consist of the silence imposed by the strongest, but of the possibility that every nation may freely write its own History…”
Brief Bibliography
• W. Somerset Maugham, Of Human Bondage
A novel published in 1915 that inspires the central metaphor of the column: Philip Carey’s struggle to prevent an inherited limitation from completely determining his identity, freedom, and destiny.
• Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson, Why Nations Fail
An analysis of the influence of political and economic institutions on the development of nations, and of the ways in which extractive structures, historical dependencies, and domestic decisions can perpetuate inequalities and limit the autonomy of peoples.
