Translation Tag: global south
A prominent Russia scholar, Feng Shaolei, analyzes the conflict in Ukraine, arguing that it reflects deep structural changes in the international system. These changes include increasing polarization between Russia and the West and growing relevance of the Global South in international affairs. Feng suggests that following the war, what he terms an “Asian Mediterranean” or Eurasian economic sphere will emerge, attendant with Russia’s pivot to the East and what he sees as China’s strengthening position in the Asia-Pacific.
This report, written by a group of scholars at the Renmin University Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies led by Wang Wen, the institute’s president, takes stock of Russia’s war in Ukraine at its second anniversary. The chapters delve into geopolitical, economic, financial, and military dimensions of the war, and draw conclusions for China. They recommend Beijing strengthen technology self-reliance, enhance the security of its energy supplies, improve its diplomatic narratives, and take a more active role in global economic standards-setting.
Feng Yujun, a leading scholar of China-Russia relations, outlines Russia’s evolving geopolitical posture and outlook two years into its war in Ukraine. Feng explores how Russia is adapting diplomatically and economically to war-induced isolation from West, including by expanding its relations with the Global South. Moscow’s relations with Beijing remain strong, Feng argues, although framings of the partnership as “limitless” have ceded from official Chinese discourse.
Zhang Jie, a prominent scholar at the Xi’an International Studies University, suggests India’s intensified engagement with Global South aims to amplify New Delhi’s voice in global governance, compete with China for geopolitical influence, and deepen ties with Washington. Zhang suggests other Global South countries are unlikely to be receptive to this engagement, given their inherent suspicion of India’s growing ties with the West and fear of friction with China.
This article, penned by scholars from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and Tongji University, explores how China can use the BRI to navigate U.S. trade and technology controls. Drawing on three case studies of BRI projects in Southeast Asia, the authors suggest Beijing can better insulate itself from the impact of U.S. controls through deepened economic integration with BRI partners. They also argue it will be important to ensure BRI projects benefit partners in areas from technology upgrading to human capital development, to challenge what they see as Western efforts to discredit the BRI among China’s neighboring countries.
Niu Haibin, a foreign policy scholar at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies, explains the rising international influence of the Global South and assesses implications for China. Niu recommends Beijing amp up efforts to frame itself as a member of the Global South and publicly push for expansion of BRICS and other initiatives, which can enhance China’s ties with individual members of the Global South and build perceptions of China as a leader of among them.
Ren Lin, a global governance scholar at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, suggests Washington is selectively engaging the Global South in ways designed to intensify contradictions and antagonisms between its membership. This strategy, Ren assesses, ultimately aims to isolate China and reduce the effectiveness of BRICS and other groups that threaten U.S. agenda-setting in global governance.
A prominent scholar of China-Africa relations argues that other major powers with a presence in Africa are increasingly wary of China’s activity on the continent. Since continued economic and political engagement in Africa is in China’s interests, Zhang argues, Beijing should maximize its room for maneuver by allaying such concerns. While Beijing should tailor strategies by country, Zhang advocates showing “due consideration” for other countries’ goals in Africa where they do not impinge on China’s core interests, pursuing opportunities for cooperation where they present themselves, and limiting unnecessarily provocative activities.
Researchers at Yunnan University and East China University of Political Science argue China’s aid and investment to Africa are inaccurately portrayed by Western countries as “debt trap diplomacy,” exacerbating sovereign debt risks in African countries and driven primarily by strategic rather than commercial objectives. To rebut and limit the reach of such arguments, the authors suggest Beijing seek ways to diversify Chinese investment and aid across sectors and projects, help Chinese enterprises assess investment risk and follow laws and social norms of host countries, better target aid to national development conditions, and strengthen media engagement in Africa and the West.
A scholar from the Shanghai Institutes of International Studies argues that China’s economic engagement in Africa has become more complicated given a mix of external and internal factors – including souring relations between China and Western powers, and the shifting demands and expectations of African countries. As a prognosis, the author suggests that Beijing should enhance the complementarity and tangible impact of its global initiatives, devote greater attention to green development and other emerging development needs in Africa, and develop consultation mechanisms with African countries to address “pain points” as they arise.