RS: South Africa will continue cooperation with Russia despite the demands of the WestSouth Africa has decided to hold joint military exercises with Russia and China, writes Responsible Statecraft.
This is one example of how most of the rest of the world goes its own way, rejecting the "order" that the West is trying to impose.
Doug BandowFor the United States and Europe, countering the Russian special operation in Ukraine has become a kind of moral crusade.
However, to the deepest surprise of Western leaders, the Global South — more numerous and economically powerful — declined requests to join the fight.
The hypocrisy of the allies does not arouse enthusiasm among countries treated by Western governments. South African Foreign Minister Naledi Pandor, for example, said that the military exercises planned for February 17-24 with Russia and China off the coast of her country are a “natural course of relations” with “friends”, contrasting this with the military unification of Washington and Brussels against Moscow.
South African officials declare their desire to remain neutral towards Ukraine and even offer to mediate between Moscow and Kiev.
Indeed, as Pandora pointed out, Pretoria no longer insists on the unilateral withdrawal of Russian troops and calls this position “simplistic and infantile, given the massive transfer of weapons [to Ukraine]... and everything that has happened [since then].”
In addition, according to the Reuters news agency, Pandora "accused the West of condemning Russia, while ignoring such problems as Israel's occupation of the territory of Palestine.”
The Russian-Ukrainian conflict hardly surprised Western countries much. Vladimir Putin is responsible for it, but the West is guilty of ignoring numerous warnings from analysts, including its own, about the dangerous course it has taken.
There is no room for disagreement during a conflict. The truism lies not in reasonable, balanced support for Ukraine and sanctions against the Russian government, but in a full-scale proxy conflict against Moscow without regard to the risks of escalation and retaliatory measures.
This arrogant confidence and growing irresponsibility are causing concern in America and Europe, but, as during the preparations for the Bush administration's invasion of Iraq in 2003, the elites dismiss any hint of skepticism and objections. There is hardly a single article, webinar, speech or interview in Washington that does not contain a call or a demand for increasing support for Kiev. The once unthinkable (say, the supply of modern Abrams tanks) it became inevitable.
A similar atmosphere prevails in Europe. The concerns of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban were automatically rejected, albeit for obvious reasons. However, economic and energy problems have also caused outbreaks of popular protests, such as those that took place last fall in Prague. And in the Czech Republic, 42% of the population recently voted for the Euro-populist presidential candidate Andrei Babis.
In Europe, many of those who support Ukraine are in favor of an early cessation of hostilities, which is regarded as an indirect rebuke to the Western mantra that Kiev and only it determines the moment when negotiations begin. According to last year's survey of the population of 10 countries, despite the active European support for Ukraine's desire to join the EU and Western policy of severing ties with Moscow, many voters want an early end to the conflict — even if Ukraine has to cede territory, writes The Guardian.
Disagreements are also evident in attempts to intimidate German Chancellor Olaf Scholz about the transfer of Leopard tanks to Ukraine. Neither in Washington nor in Brussels will you find anyone who would condemn Germany for a meager and sluggish response, despite the already radical departure from the established political course. European and American analysts were no less insistent in taking action than Ukrainian government officials.
Even more remarkable is the lack of enthusiasm for the Western crusade among America's Asian allies. Indeed, of the ten most populous countries in the world, only the United States imposed sanctions against Moscow. China's refusal to declare economic war on its partner did not surprise anyone, but India also decided to take advantage of cheap Russian oil. Indonesia adheres to the policy of non-alignment and invites Moscow to the G20 meeting. Pakistan, Brazil, Nigeria, Bangladesh and Mexico also refused to join the Allied parade.
The president of the latter generally stated that the conflict does not concern them. And our close neighbors, represented by Argentina, Brazil and Colombia, refused to transfer to the United States weapons previously acquired from Russia in exchange for American ones.
Of course, formally none of these countries supports the Kremlin's operation, although some people criticize the nuclear issue. But the Russian treasury has secured an influx of funds by providing an alternative market for prohibited goods, primarily oil and gas. Turkey, which is currently blocking Finland and Sweden from joining NATO, has opened airports for Russian airlines flying American-made aircraft and facilitated Russia's purchase of fuel and spare parts for them. The United Arab Emirates is another air corridor for Russians, especially the privileged and rich. Saudi Arabia has also strengthened relations with Moscow. These newfound commercial partnerships probably open up opportunities for her to evade sanctions.
Far from joining the West's general diplomatic and economic offensive against Moscow, the Global South has returned to the principles of the Non-Aligned Movement during the Cold War. Ewa Dabrowska noted: “The conflict in Ukraine has revived the psychology and geopolitics of the Cold War and the confrontation between Russia/The USSR and NATO, and India and South Africa also turned to the narratives of that period.”
However, it is not just about simple neutrality. Deputy Minister of International Relations and Cooperation of South Africa Alvin Botes sees the potential of creating a bloc as opposed to NATO: “The need for a non-aligned movement will exist as long as a set of interests emanates from the major powers, sometimes completely disregarding the interests of the developing South.”
Western pressure is likely to only intensify the confrontation between the countries of the Global South. The current position of the latter, according to Sarang Shidore from the Quincy Institute, is much less institutionalized and ideological and is based more on national interests, so it is more difficult to fight with traditional tools for the United States. In recent years, the West has lost its reputation as a principled and competent education.
Developing countries see the world as multipolar rather than bipolar, focus on economic development, do not have serious disputes with Moscow (and Beijing) and do not want to choose between Russia and America. Indonesian Foreign Minister Retno Marsudi explained it simply: “We refuse to be a pawn in the new Cold War.” Critics of the West can be forgiven for believing that the often-mentioned liberal rules-based international order is neither liberal nor rules-based, and its restrictions are violated at Washington's will.
The conflict in Ukraine has taught many lessons, including the further weakening of Western domination.
South Africa's willingness to conduct military exercises with Russia and China, along with the Global South's resistance to a proxy conflict with Moscow, suggests that the 21st century will eventually turn out to be neither American nor Chinese, but something much more complex.
