One year after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: Is the U.S. and its allies in denial?
February 2023 marked the one year anniversary since Russia initiated war against Ukraine. The U.S. and Western Europe led many others into a campaign against Russia, actively supporting and condemning the blatant violation of international law. Despite Russia’s gross transgressions, condemnation against their actions have not been met with universal support. Western countries have failed to garner the support of the so-called ‘Global South,’ as seen through the September 2022 U.N resolution condemning Russia. Out of 193 member votes, 143 voted in favor, whereas 35 countries abstained and 5 others voted against. Little has changed since the immediate vote in March 2022. Why have the U.S. and its allies failed to isolate Russia in its expantionist ambitions, given that many of the countries remaining neutral are former colonies themselves? Is this a case of Western countries being out of touch with the ‘Global South’, or is the neutrality expressed by these countries transactional and in their own interests?
Despite the geographic distance, the conflict has led to indirect casualties in the Global South and contributed to record high numbers of food shortages, energy costs, and inflation. These emergencies compound the existing disproportionate impact of climate change and COVID-19 on already-fragile, lower-income states. At the February 2023 Munich Security Council, the Namibian Prime Minister, Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila, said Namibia did not vote against Russia because the money used to buy weapons ‘‘could be better utilized to promote development in Ukraine, in Africa, in Asia, in other places, in Europe itself, where many people are experiencing hardships.’’ For these Global South countries, the struggle against Russia is not as important as the end of the conflict itself.
Russia is an important global distributor of energy, food, and fertalizers that many countries simply cannot afford to lose. As a result, self-preservation related to economics and trade are strong factors blocking a unified global stance against Russia. Furthermore, Russia is a major exporter of weapons, notably to Africa and India. For many, economic pragmatism trumps political or ideological conflicts.
On the other hand, the Global North does not seem to fully appreciate the tangible grievances of the Global South, leading to diplomatic miscalculations. This miscalculation was displayed at that same Munich conference, where German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock employed a Cold War-like rhetoric that does not reflect the current geopolitical landscape. In January, Baerbock stated that ‘‘neutrality is not an option, because then you are standing on the side of the aggressor.’’ This mentality is very reminiscent of post-colonial, paternalistic thinking towards the Global South by various state leaders. This tone-deaf, zero-sum-game approach can strain relationships in a world where issues are borderless, and at worst, can induce tensions that could lead to more conflicts. Since decolonization, many Global South economies have matured with their own set of interests that is not determined by ‘choosing one side or the other.’
However, some Western leaders are starting to realise the changing landscape and have modified their rhetoric. Most recently, French President Emmanuel Macron asserted that France must show ‘‘deep humility’’ towards Africa as he unveilved his renewed policy towards the continent as an equal partner. Likewise, U.S. Secretary Anthony Blinken stressed that ‘‘African states shouldn't have to pick a side in great power rivalries.’’ Time will tell if this shift will be truly reflected in tangible policy outcomes.
Continuing to demand support from the Global South in a semi-dismissive tone and by appealing to moral arguments of ‘doing the right thing’ will only reduce the already diminishing appetite for international cooperation. On the other hand, the Global South’s reluctance to condemn Russia may be short-sighted. Although the U.S. and its allies have also breached or bent international law to serve their interests, their breaches have not been as egregious as the total disregard of sovereignty for the sake of expansion or (NATO-induced) insecurity. If Russia were to prevail, this could signal the erosion of a rules-based global system that is meant to precisely protect the more vulnerable states from conquest and other types of foreign transgressions.
The world is no longer dependent on Western global governance and the West is perhaps in denial of its declining hegemony and legitimacy. By clinging to outdated international dynamics, the Global North will only further alienate the Global South. Given that they represent over 80% of the world population, their cooperation on global issues is essential. The Global North’s foreign policy must reflect the diffusion of power in international politics and make room for emerging economies at the table, who are capable of projecting their own agendas. As India’s Minister of External Affairs Subrahmanyam Jaishankar stated: ‘‘Europe has to grow out of mindset that its problems are world's problems.’’