Conference Program

This article aims to deconstruct the idea of ‘grievance’ as the factor which anchors the behaviour of the emerging powers from the global south who have a shared history of colonialism. Post-colonialism as a broader theoretical concept, this article brings in their influence on the history of colonialism in terms of framing or shaping their behaviour towards international order, which is fundamentally Western-led. The recent war in Ukraine and the approach of the global south towards the war serve as a testament to their ambivalent stance regarding the understanding of war crimes and violations of international laws. Research has chosen Brazil, India, Indonesia, Mexico, and South Africa as the case studies. The rationale behind choosing this case study is that all five countries are democracies, the regional powers of their respective regions, and have a shared history of colonialism. The qualitative discourse analysis of the article analyses the role of historical grievances, economic interests, and geopolitical considerations. The data set follows primary and secondary sources, especially briefs, commentaries, reports, and working papers from notable think tanks, press briefs, releases, and speeches of leaders, spokespersons, and diplomats. The latest results of the study show that historical grievances still work as a factor for the global south to characterise the sceptical view of Western motives.

The position of Global South countries such as Brazil towards the multiple crises that have currently challenged the supremacy of the liberal international order (LIO) can be problematized in light of their colonial past and the memories they share about colonization, imperialism and contemporary practices of interventionism. For instance, Brazil's position of “active non-alignment” regarding the war in Ukraine is directly related to a defense of a multipolar system that gives greater bargaining power and agency to Global South countries to define their interests and the very normative contours of the international order at hand. In his two previous terms president Lula directed Brazil's foreign policy towards strengthening global multipolarity through the BRICS and cooperation with the Global South. In his third term, Lula is trying to reposition Brazil in the international system based on the understanding that multipolarity may also work in favor of the South. The article discusses how Brazil´s position towards the contemporary challenges, and changes, to/in the LIO goes hand-in-hand with questions about for whom the international order works; who gets to set its machineries; and who gets excluded from its arrangements, only to face the consequences of existing norms, institutions and unequal powers positions.

Since the launch of a full-scale attack on Ukraine and the imposition of Western sanctions, Russia has sought to minimize their impact by opening new markets and deepening relations with the Global South. Her charm offensive among the members of the Non-Aligned Movement is intent on winning hearts and minds and gradually aligning them with the interests of Moscow. Russia is offering development aid, economic partnership and security cooperation. However, Russia’s diplomatic push toward developing countries is based on something utterly different – a carefully constructed, albeit deeply false, narrative representing Russia as an inherently anticolonial power and true friend of the Global South. The narrative’s purpose is to persuade former European colonies that – unlike Western powers – Russia has never pursued a colonial agenda and has always supported the independence and equality of nations. Its goal is to draw developing countries into the Russian camp and neutralize Western efforts of isolating Russia due to her aggression against Ukraine. The aim of this paper is to debunk Moscow’s anticolonial narrative and expose it as a segment of Russian psychological operations. The first step will be to reveal the thoroughly colonial nature of Tsarist Russia. Secondly, Soviet engagement in Africa will be demystified as an expedition for creating a foothold for the USSR on the “Dark Continent”. Finally, Russia’s most recent activities from Libya to South Africa will be laid bare as an attempt to squeeze out Western influence, secure vital raw materials and garner diplomatic support for Moscow.

In recent times, post-Marxism has gained traction as an important theoretical paradigm in the social sciences. Eventually, the theory has also made its impact on the discipline of international relations.The work of post-Marxists, especially Chantal Mouffe and her theory of agonism is of great relevance in IR, especially in areas such as contesting unipolarity and challenging the hegemony of the LIO is concerned. Mouffe has castigated the social democrats and other conformist left-wing organisations of accepting what she calls neoliberal hegemony in the nineties. She has elaborated upon the need for the creation of a formidable left-wing counter hegemonic alternative to the neoliberal project.Today, with the rise of China and the worldwide spread of illiberal politics there seems to be an alternative hegemonic project to counter the LIO, A number of states and political forces of the global south, who have for centuries been marginalised and systematically exploited by the LIO (founded on the Euro-colonial legacy), are a part of this nexus. What should the position of the post-Marxist left be at this juncture? Should post-Marxists rejoice at the weakening of the nemesis- the LIO? This paper argues in the negative. This paper would argue that post-Marxism is founded on egalitarian and inclusive principles which are antithetical to the values of illiberalism and chauvinism. Thus, the growing illiberal axis is even more antithetical to post-Marxists than the LIO. The paper argues with examples that post-Marxists must work sincerely to build a left-wing alternative which is post-liberal not illiberal.