An emerging debate on the response of the "Global South" to Russia/Ukraine. Instinctive assumption by many that countries outside western orbit are hedging because of anti-western sentiment. I beg to differ. They are hedging primarily because its how they read their interests. 1/
2/Anti-western sentiment, charges of hypocrisy, what about Palestine, etc etc, are convenient garb in which they clothe their pragmatism. When they want to align their behaviour with western preferences, they sure do, regardless of the west's historical iniquities. 2/
3/The danger here is that we conceive the "Global South" (a condescending name in itself) as aggrieved cultures, not as ruthlessly self-interested nation-states. Hence the calls for better messaging, more cultural sensitivity, decolonising this or that.
4/In the world that exists, those states juggle identities as it suits them. They buy arms where they see the best deal. They close ranks with the U.S. against a local aggressor if it threatens them (see Gulf War 90-91, see ISIL).
5/Case in point, South Africa, where I'm lucky enough to visit. With widespread poverty, near-collapse of its energy infrastructure & lights going out, they value a relationship w/ Russia & China. Ukraine's cause is not all-important, & more remote than crises before their eyes.
6/This would likely remain roughly the same, even were President Biden to prostrate himself before them with a fulsome apology for all historical wrongs. These are real countries, not just victims bearing wounds.
Loading suggestions...