2023-11-03 17:30:05
University professor of political science, vice-president of the National Institute of Oriental Languages and Civilizations (Inalco), she is the author of several works, including the one she co-edited with Sonia Le Gouriellec and Mélissa Levaillant, Peace and security. An off-centered anthology (CNRS Editions, 2023), and The Part of the Gods. Religion and international relations (CNRS Editions, 2021).
In the war between Hamas and Israel, how do you explain the nuanced reactions of the BRICS, who do not name those responsible for the attacks of October 7, 2023, call for de-escalation or provide support to the Palestinians, or even to Hamas?
These contrasting reactions illustrate the lack of political convergence between the BRICS, once we move beyond the register of the general demand in favor of better representation of the interests of their members on the world stage. The leaders of India and Argentina quickly condemned the Hamas attacks, as did the United Arab Emirates, a signatory to the Abraham Accords with Israel. Those of Brazil, China, Russia and Egypt have limited themselves to a posture that they consider balanced, refraining from formulating a condemnation and calling for appeasement by returning the stakeholders back to back. Unsurprisingly, at the other end of the spectrum, South Africa and Iran point to Israeli responsibility.
This article is taken from “Special Edition Le Monde – 40 maps to understand a fractured world”2023. This special issue is on sale at newsstands or online by going to our store website.
These postures must be analyzed in the context of continuity with the foreign policy traditions of these States, which the shared reference to the Global South is clearly not enough to change. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict, although it has faded into the background in recent years, in the context of the war in Ukraine and the competition between powers in the Indo-Pacific region, also remains the international issue “interior” par excellence: on a global scale, the positions adopted by the different governments on this subject are largely constrained by public opinions whose differentiated expectations also contribute to the heterogeneity of the BRICS.
Precisely, the expression « Sud global » does it have any meaning?
The now widespread use of the notion of the Global South calls for caution. It essentializes belonging to a category built around opposition to a North itself far from being perfectly united, despite the heterogeneity of the conditions and characteristics of the Southern States, their aspirations and differentiated political positions or still of the variety of their degrees of insertion into globalization. All the States assimilated to the global South are, however, far from favoring a protest posture with regard to the international order… Depriving the analysis of these nuances amounts to obscuring the existing convergences between actors assimilated to the South and the North, to highlight the emphasis on divisions.
You have 75% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.
1699151571
#States #Global #South #favoring #protest #posture #international #order