Pragmatic Indifference: Why the Global South Won’t Choose Sides in Ukraine

Irritations in the West

In the aftermath of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine, the European Union and a handful of its Western allies did not hesitate to condemn the Kremlin’s actions. Over the following years, the West imposed a series of far-reaching economic sanctions on Russia. Furthermore, huge financial and material aid has been, and continues to be, provided to Ukraine to support its defensive efforts on the battlefield. As part of their strategy to increase the pressure on Moscow, Western states also attempted to integrate states from the Global South into their coalition. Officials in Brussels, Paris, and Washington expected developing countries to fall in line and mirror their criticism and measures against Russia. However, these expectations largely remained unfulfilled, as most states in the Global South displayed reluctance to condemn Russia’s war of aggression. This discrepancy was even more pronounced regarding sanctions, as developing nations appeared unwilling to participate in Western sanction regimes. But where does this resistance to take punitive action against Moscow stem from? And why have most players from the Global South adopted a neutral (if not pro-Russian) stance?

Pragmatic Indifference

To understand the Global South’s position on the conflict in Ukraine, one fundamental aspect must be considered. Most countries’ non-alignment is rooted in their foreign policy strategies of focusing on their national interests. For instance, numerous African states, like South Africa, Nigeria, or Senegal, have traditionally pursued a foreign policy approach of non-alignment. Since they are dependent on both sides, not directly aligning themselves with one bloc will guarantee their greatest political and economic benefit. The current war in Ukraine is viewed as a proxy war between the West and Russia.

The rationale behind this becomes clear once the deep economic relations between Russia and the Global South are considered. Especially regarding the imports of arms, oil, wheat, grain, and fertiliser, African countries and others, such as Brazil, are highly dependent on Russia. Sanctioning Russia by imposing embargoes on these goods would cause huge economic and social crises and would therefore contradict their national interests.

This has been described with a new term: pragmatic indifference. Two prominent cases of countries that have adopted this policy stance are South Africa and Brazil. By following a strategy of pragmatic indifference, they hope to achieve two goals. First, continued growth through the maintenance of economic relations with Russia. Second, they anticipate serving as mediators between Russia and the West and thereby increasing their standing in the international arena.

Western Hypocrisy

Another factor explaining developing nations’ unwillingness to side with Ukraine is their deep-rooted frustration with the West’s past (and present) behaviour. In light of the West’s past treatment of the Global South, calls for condemnation were perceived as deeply hypocritical and interpreted as a form of neo-colonialism. It seemed like Europe and the U.S. were still stuck in the belief that they had the authority to dictate the policies of their former colonies. The persistence of this attitude became evident in the 2022 ‘Countering Malign Russian Activities in Africa Act’. This legislation passed by the US House of Representatives was designed to punish African governments that refused to condemn and/or sanction Russia over its actions in Ukraine. However, this Act had the exact opposite effect and only fed into the Kremlin’s narratives of the “neo-colonial West” trying to force its values and norms on the Global South.

Reflecting this notion during a conference in June 2022, India’s foreign minister S. Jaishankar lamented: “Europe has to grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems, but the world’s problems are not Europe’s problems.”

Furthermore, a deep frustration with Western- and US-led institutions can be observed within the ranks of developing nations. Brazil, for example, is signalling frustration with the current design of the World Bank and the IMF, both of which are dominated by Europe and the US. Simultaneously, South Africa frequently voices harsh criticism of NATO. Pretoria not only accuses the alliance of provoking the Ukraine war, but it also (alongside other African states) denounces its alleged hypocrisy by referring to its 2011 intervention in Libya.

Shared Goals with Russia?

While the Global South has long been frustrated with the Western-imposed post-Cold War world order, it has realised that it shares a central rationale with Russia. Bringing an end to the US/Western unipolar world and replacing it with a system of multipolarity. As the strengthening and expansion of alliances, such as the BRICS+, which welcomed Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates in 2024, has demonstrated, countries of the Global South are increasingly turning their backs on the West. Instead, they are aiming for cooperation with their peers. Meanwhile, Russia needs continued cooperation with developing countries to evade Western sanctions. To widen political rifts between the Global South and the West, Moscow employs an anti-colonial rhetoric and reemphasises the USSR’s past backing of decolonisation. These efforts became visible in February 2024, when Russia held a conference named ‘For the Freedom of Nations’ forum. This event was attended by 400 delegates from 60 countries and intended to forge an alliance with the Global South against “Western neo-colonialism”.

Critical Future Role

Rising powers from the Global South, such as Brazil, South Africa, or India, gain influence and appear increasingly confident to act as independent global players. However, for developing nations, navigating through the conflict between Russia and the West is also a delicate balancing act that produces contradictory foreign policy positions. While vigorously defending the principles of national sovereignty and anti-imperialism, countries of the Global South continue to widely refuse to criticise Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that the Global South’s (most notably the BRICS states) influence on a potential resolution of the conflict is significant.

Should they decide to embrace a more critical stance on the Kremlin and participate in a concerted sanction regime against Russia, Russia’s ability to sustain and justify the war in Ukraine would decrease substantially. Therefore, it is clear that both Russia and the West need cooperation with the Global South to achieve their long-term political and economic goals in Ukraine and beyond. The upcoming years will show which side will emerge victorious in this highly consequential struggle.

Written by Felix Plattner, Edited by Konstantin Philipp

Photo Credit: Max Kukurudziak (uploaded August 13, 2019) on Unsplash.