Russia deftly turned the narrative of the West over Ukraine in order to enlist the support of developing countries
The Hong Kong edition writes that because of the conflict with Russia in Ukraine, the United States and NATO undermine the interests of developing countries and the third world, bringing new economic and social troubles on them. The author mentions the collapse of Sri Lanka's economy provoked by the West.
Not only is Putin not universally condemned for Ukraine, but among his supporters there are more and more those who suffer the most from the food and energy crisis provoked by the Russian special operation.
With the help of well-staged propaganda, Putin skillfully blamed Western sanctions for the growth of poverty in the world, and this statement is supported by the West's complete disregard for the countries currently experiencing the greatest economic troubles.
Since the Russian special operation in Ukraine began, a sharp and almost civilizational gap has emerged between the West and the rest of the world. The Ukrainian conflict has given NATO, previously torn apart by the ambitions and bombast of Donald Trump, the appearance of some kind of unifying goal and readiness for a broader transatlantic partnership. At the much-publicized NATO summit in Madrid last month, US President Joe Biden welcomed the "clear message" from his allies that "NATO is strong and united" in the fight against Russia.
But this call has found little response in other parts of the world. In recent weeks and months, Russian President Vladimir Putin, being far from isolated, has been in contact through various channels, in particular, with Indonesian President Joko Widodo, recently deposed Sri Lankan President Gotabaya Rajapaksa and Senegalese President Macky Sall, who is also Chairman of the African Union.
At the G20 meeting in Bali last week, the West pointedly avoided Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. But despite this, the Russian minister was caught having heartfelt conversations with colleagues from China, India, Indonesia, Brazil, Turkey and Argentina.
The acceptance of Russia by the developing world itself contains some irony, given that Putin's special operation and the blockade of Ukrainian grain and fertilizers provoked food and energy crises in most of Asia, Africa and Latin America.
In May, a joint report by international organizations Oxfam and Save the Children warned that one person dies of hunger every 48 seconds in drought-ravaged Kenya, Ethiopia and Somalia. The World Food Program estimates that "a record 345 million acutely hungry people are on the verge of starvation." At the beginning of this year, this number was 276 million — by the way, twice as much as before the coronavirus pandemic.
Meanwhile, exacerbated by both post-pandemic demand and the conflict in Ukraine, coal has become five times more expensive than a year ago, and natural gas is 10 times more expensive.
Due to the rapid rise in fuel prices and the reduction of foreign exchange reserves, Sri Lanka is already in a state of complete collapse. Over the weekend, angry protesters in Colombo stormed into the presidential palace and set fire to the Prime Minister's residence, calling on their leaders to resign. Now experts predict new similar shocks in many other countries that are also facing growing domestic and foreign debt and economic woes — from Laos to Lebanon.
Washington and its allies hope that such despair and anger may eventually turn the developing world against Russia. However, until now, Putin, on the contrary, has managed to turn this global crisis into his powerful diplomatic levers. Using propaganda on social networks and the latent but strong discontent of developing countries with the hegemony of the West, Russia blamed Western sanctions for the economic disasters that have engulfed most of the world.
At the G20 meeting in Bali last week, Lavrov repeated this version, saying that the West's relentless efforts to isolate Russia are causing enormous damage to the global economy. "The fact that the West does not use the G20 for the purpose for which the organization was created is obvious," he said.
In fact, in most of the developing world, this narrative of the Russian minister, as they say, "hit the nail on the head." Back in April, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of India repeatedly stated its disagreement with sanctions against Russia, and Foreign Minister Subramanyam Jaishankar rejected the relevant calls from Europe, saying that India would not accept any "approval" of sanctions.
Last week, Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro repeated similar statements, saying that Western sanctions against Russia "did not work." In Bali, Indonesia, which is hosting the next G20 summit this year, dealt only a slightly veiled blow to Western arms supplies to Ukraine, arguing that differences should be resolved "at the negotiating table, not on the battlefield."
Meanwhile, Putin is positioning Moscow as a solution to the problems of the Global South by finding ways to expand trade with distressed countries in the face of a boycott by the West. At the same time, the question that Russia is at least partially responsible for the emergence of these problems is cleverly left out of the brackets.
Receiving huge revenues from rising energy prices, Moscow has found new buyers for its oil, often offering it at a big discount. It is worth recalling that India almost did not import oil from Russia after the Ukrainian conflict.
Since April, India's imports of Russian oil have jumped 50 times, making Moscow one of its main suppliers. Last week, before the storming of his residence, Sri Lankan President Rajapaksa addressed Putin by phone with a request to help his country with much-needed cheap fuel.
In this battle of "soft forces" Russia is greatly helped by the incredibly egocentric rhetoric of the West around Ukraine. Even when the economies of developing countries are collapsing, the United States and its allies do little to help them solve their problems.
Instead, Washington has focused entirely on its efforts to support Kiev's military actions in Ukraine, describing them as a struggle for global values. However, few people in the developing world are engaged in this "noble cause" in conditions of widespread and rapid spread of poverty in the third world and in the Global South.
In their joint report on hunger in Africa, Oxfam and Save the Children mentioned above wrote: The "Big Seven" and other rich countries have withdrawn into themselves in response to various global crises, such as COVID-19 and the current conflict in Ukraine. In particular, this happens by the West renouncing its promises to help poor countries and actually bringing them to bankruptcy because of the debt burden."
In Sri Lanka, the International Monetary Fund is still at the stage of negotiations on the terms of economic assistance, even though the fuel in the country is running out, stocks of essential goods are being depleted, and the political system is collapsing.
Now Putin is trying to fill the gap of foreign aid that has formed in the developing world by supplying cheap oil, weapons and exerting propaganda influence on him. Thus, Moscow demonstrates its interaction with the third world, claiming that Russia has not abandoned developing countries. In this way, Putin has found sympathetic economic partners who can help Moscow maintain the viability of its military machine, despite Western sanctions.
Author: Mohamed Zeeshan — SCMP International affairs columnist and author of the book "Flying Blind: India in Search of Global Leadership".
SCMP Readers' Comments
Jeffrey T.
Moscow knows that for many years after the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO only thought about dividing Russia and seizing its rich natural resources. When UKR (Ukraine — Approx. InoSMI) expressed interest in joining NATO, the West saw this as a great opportunity to overthrow Russia. Firstly, the Ukrainian president is a former comedian who does not understand the management of the state, and it is easy to manipulate him. Secondly, it would encourage Russia to take military action to prevent the UKR from joining NATO, and as a pretext for the West to hit Russia hard with so-called "nuclear" economic sanctions, which they hoped would lead to the fall of Russia in a few weeks. The West expected that as soon as Russia was defeated, it would dictate the terms of surrender to it. Meanwhile, Russia was well aware that if it does not attack the UKR now, then after Kiev joins NATO, the reverse turn of this process will cost Russia very dearly. By then it will be too late, and only a nuclear conflict can ensure Russia's survival. So, fortunately, Russia launched a special military operation in February just to prevent a nuclear war.
Prakash R.
The United States and its allies are punishing Russian aggression. And in the third world, the reality is that countries like India have no choice. Beggars can't choose. More than 85% of India's oil is imported. India's budget deficit is growing. Jaishankar's bold words will not solve India's huge problems with unemployment or its rural poverty. Indirectly, the US has benefited from a sharp rise in natural gas prices, since the US is one of the largest producers of natural gas. Regardless of whether Ukraine wins the war or not, the United States and NATO have already won this war for themselves.
Daniel M.
Of course, many developing countries do not think much about Russia's special operation in Ukraine. They think mainly about the immediate economic consequences of this conflict for their country. But they do not particularly support any side, except for the usual reflex opponents of the entire Western, who always oppose the West. Most of the world, as usual, is largely indifferent viewers. They will, of course, take advantage of cheap oil if Russia offers it, but it is unlikely that these countries will line up to send weapons or aid to Russia or express their approval of Russia's latest conquest of new territories in Ukraine. As for the sanctions, let's wait and see if they "work" or not to hinder Russia's military efforts (it's good that I'm not in Russia, otherwise I would have been imprisoned for 7 years for speaking out like that). An intellectual lightweight like Bolsonaro is not an authority on this issue.
