Simran Walia
The term “Global South” gained prominence in the 1970s and 1980s as a more neutral alternative to “Third World,” distinguishing non-aligned developing countries from the democracies of the “First World” and the now-defunct communist bloc of the “Second World.” Proponents of the Global South advocate for a multipolar global system that challenges Western liberal norms and privileges. Recent shifts in global power—from the transatlantic to the Indo-Pacific, the rise of non-Western nations like China and India, and the relative decline of the West—have accentuated these differing viewpoints. However, the intrinsic diversity of the concept is underscored by the fact that China and India, the two self-declared leaders of the Global South, struggle to forge Asian unity due to their own territorial disputes and nationalist ambitions.
The Global South is often associated with certain characteristics. Its positioning in the Group of 77 (G77) versus the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), or G7, highlights the economic disparities between developing and industrialized nations. The Global South contends that the inequalities of the post-World War II international order, which favor Western nations, stem from colonial legacies and are perpetuated by global capitalism.
Historically, the normative solidarity of Global South nations has encompassed opposition to colonialism and neocolonialism, resistance to hegemony, and support for a multipolar world. They have persistently advocated for more equitable access to markets, technologies, and financing, underscored the importance of national sovereignty, and challenged Western-centric approaches to human rights and democracy. They have also called for reforms in global governance. The term “Global South” serves not merely as a metaphor for underdevelopment but as a reference to a lengthy history of colonialism, neo-imperialism, and uneven economic and social development, which has perpetuated stark disparities in resource access, life expectancy, and living standards.
The China Factor
China’s strategic objectives are served by its investments in the Global South despite growing isolation from the West and competition with the United States. China may challenge Western supremacy and increase its influence in forming the global order by aligning with the Global South. This makes a lot of economic sense as well, since developing nations are becoming important markets for Chinese investments, products, and financing. China is intensifying its economic shift towards the developing world in response to growing protectionism from the United States and its allies.
Growing geopolitical rivalry between the US and China has brought back bipolar dynamics akin to those of the Cold War, when a large portion of the world was used as pawns in a fight between superpowers. The pressure on developing countries to choose between the democratic West and authoritarian China and Russia has increased as a result of Moscow’s aggression against Ukraine, but many of them are resisting this option. A series of systemic shocks, however, have brought attention to the glaring disparities at the center of the global economy and the susceptibility of lower- and middle-income countries to political, economic, and ecological crises that are not of their own making. These shocks include the COVID pandemic, the economic fallout from Ukraine, and the growing climate emergency.
Simplistic narratives cannot capture the diversity found throughout the Global South. Southeast Asian countries, for example, defy the stereotype of the “developing world” because of their diverse range of development stages, security issues, and economic links. These nations make foreign policy decisions mostly based on their national interests rather than strictly adhering to the rhetoric of the Global South, despite the fact that they face some shared issues.
Is Singapore in Global South?
There are around 670 million people living in the ten ASEAN member nations combined. Singapore, with a per capita GDP of over $73,000, nearly twice that of Japan, and Myanmar, with a per capita GDP of $1,000, are at extreme opposite ends of the ASEAN spectrum. It is difficult to include Singapore in the Global South. Indeed, Singapore has incorporated itself into the economic restrictions imposed on Russia. Despite being largely included in the Global South, Southeast Asia shows a great deal of variation in terms of its degree of development. With gross domestic product per capita levels above the OECD average and human development indices on par with or even higher than those of OECD nations, Singapore and Brunei stand out as anomalies. The per capita GDP of the remaining Southeast Asian countries, on the other hand, ranges from US$1,000 to US$12,000, well below the OECD average.
The ASEAN and Global South
By their UN voting habits, Southeast Asian nations have shown that they share norms with the Global South, which includes China. In opposition to the “hegemony of liberal democracy,” they have argued for “Asian values” and have consistently backed resolutions that reflect the views of the Global South on democracy and human rights. Furthermore, the South China Sea dispute illustrates how countries in Southeast Asia, and the Global South in general, have prioritized their own interests over defending international law against more powerful nations like China.
Malaysia’s Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim visited New Delhi, following which both Malaysia and India committed to enhancing their ties through a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership. This unprecedented level of collaboration will focus on shared goals such as public goods delivery, green development, sustainable economic growth, connectivity, and technological advancement. Prime Minister Anwar discussed at length the strategic significance of Malaysia-India relations within the framework of the Global South. He emphasized the importance of air connectivity between the two countries and the potential for further integration in the semiconductor industry.
China has demonstrated skill in using terminology from the “Global South” to critique the West and advance its own agenda, arguing that “true multilateralism” and “universally beneficial” globalization are essential. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has urged ASEAN leaders to “elevate the Global South for the common interest of all.” Japan has also made efforts to serve as a bridge between the North and the Global South.
ASEAN as a whole is China’s largest commercial partner, followed by South Korea, Japan, and the EU, with the US and India in fourth place. Southeast Asia’s integration into global supply chains and its production of goods primarily for the Global North’s market have contributed significantly to its wealth. This success is partly due to Southeast Asia’s access to capital and technology from the Global North.
The economic reality of Southeast Asian nations shows that, rather than being mere victims or passive recipients, they have been active participants and beneficiaries of the contemporary economic system. In fact, they have strategically shaped regulations to serve their interests by establishing a network of regional free-trade agreements with key trading partners through ASEAN and other minilateral approaches. Although there are complaints, particularly regarding trade restrictions imposed by wealthy countries for political or environmental reasons, these do not, contrary to the rhetoric from the Global South, reflect a general dissatisfaction with the system.
[Simran Walia is an Associate Fellow at the Centre for Air Power Studies, New Delhi, pursuing a PhD in Japanese Studies from Jawaharlal Nehru University, Delhi. ]
The opinions expressed do not reflect the stance of COGGS.
