Beijing, peace and the global south

After a year of maintaining a position of prudent and pragmatic – but ambiguous – neutrality regarding the condemnation of the Russian intervention in Ukraine, last Friday, China presented a twelve-point plan to advance a political solution that will lead to a cessation of hostilities and a resumption of peace talks between both parties in conflict. The plan reiterates China’s position of respect for sovereignty, territorial integrity and rejection of the use of nuclear weapons, and calls for abandoning the Cold War mentality -in a clear allusion to the role of the United States and the NATO – to protect national security interests and stop economic sanctions against Russia. The proposal was announced shortly after a recent tour, probably exploratory, by former Foreign Minister Wang Yi to four European countries – France, Germany, Italy and Hungary – that hold the least hardline positions on Russia, culminating in a visit to Moscow. and an interview with Putin, and, at the same time, about China’s abstention in the United Nations General Assembly that recently demanded the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine.

Beyond assuming a role of global peacemaker in the framework of a reconfiguration of the world order that challenges the hegemony of the United States, the initiative sends a clear message to this power about the formation of a new global order with the participation of new actors protagonists and on a greater alignment of Beijing with Russia in the event that this initiative does not prosper.

The West – spanning from the US administration to the NATO general secretariat – has reacted skeptically to the initiative. In fact, Jens Stoltenberg has not hesitated to say that China “does not have much credibility in this conflict.” However, Ukrainian President Zelensky has indicated his willingness to enter into a dialogue with Xi Jinping on the plan and, simultaneously, has expressed his expectation of holding a summit with Latin America and the Caribbean. This last point is part of Ukraine’s current diplomatic offensive to strengthen its relations and seek support and allies in the region and in the Global South. Particularly after the failure of a summit with African leaders that was attended by only four countries.

Although the term Global South suffers from marked ambiguities and gives rise to a confusing use, it is evident that -once the Atlantic alliance was consolidated in the face of the conflict (despite the existence of tensions and internal fissures both between the United States and some countries of the European Union, as well as within it) – the formation of two confronting blocs between the Western North and the South has given rise to a struggle between the two to win over the wishes of the Global South in Africa, Asia, the Middle East and Latin America . The nations of the Global South – many of them emerging economies with aspirations for international leadership – have generally maintained, despite public condemnations of the Kremlin, a neutral position in a confrontation that has become a conflict between the West and Russia. Reasons abound for this position, from experiences of colonialism or intervention lived in the past to the reluctance to get involved in a distant conflict alien to their interests. However, both the West and Russia have intensified their diplomatic offensives in these regions, with varying degrees of success, giving rise to a “battle for the Global South” that the Ukrainian government is now also trying to deploy.

Behind these movements to win allies and wills on the international stage, the urgent need to promote an initiative that can put an end, at the same time, to the war in Ukraine and to the humanitarian catastrophe that, in different spheres, is often lost sight of and at various scales, it has been developed both in this country and globally.

The peace plan proposed by Beijing, thus initially presented in generic terms and with an abundance of messages and signals addressed to various interlocutors, may be a first step in this direction. Even more so if some important players from the Global South see their interests favored by joining the initiative to promote an armistice and negotiation between the parties in conflict. It is no coincidence, in this sense, that Lula da Silva, the president of Brazil –a country that currently occupies a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council– promotes talks with Zelenski and a forthcoming meeting with Xi Jinping with the intention of to form a Peace Club that gives rise to this negotiation.

Faced with the paralysis or failure of other attempts in this direction, let us trust that the growing international weight of some nations of the Global South can crown these initiatives with success – individually or collectively – in a situation in which both the need to prevent and limit humanitarian catastrophes such as containing the threat of a global nuclear conflict.

* President of Cries and author of War and global transition.