안티 러시아가 되기를 거부하는 나라들 ( Aljazeera)

식민지 시대에 대한 역사 교육이 어떻게 이루어 지는 지를 보면 안다. 비정상회담에서 일전에 식민지 시대의 교육에 대한 비교를 하면서 유럽열강들과 그 식민지 국가의 역사교육의 차이가 얼마나 큰 지를 잘 보여준 적이 있다. 식민지였던 국가들은 기본적으로 피해심리가 있고, 유럽 및 서구 중심의 역사에 대한 말못할 열등감과 상처를 아직도 간직하고 있다. 이미 오래전 일이기도 하지만, 무의식적으로 나마 부정적인 이미지를 가지고 있는 것이다. 2차대전이 끝나고도 오랜 기간동안 세계의 경제 중심은  여전히 유럽과 서구권이었다. 일본을 포함한 서구권의 GDP의 총합은 세계 전체의 80프로를 상회했다. 그런데 그런 상황이 아시아의 네마리 용을 필두로, 중국과 인도라는 거인들이 깨어나자 상황이 완전히 역전되었다. 기존의 강한 경제력의 절대적인 점유율은 30프로대로 내려 앉았고, 자연적으로 국제사회에서의 주도권도 서서히 바뀌어가기 시작했다. 이를 잘 보여주는 단적인 예를 아래 기사가 소개한다. 유럽의 대재앙, 러시아 침공에 따른 유럽의 다급한 상황에 아시아와 아프리카의 국가들이 아래에는 말하지 않지만 브라질을 포함한 남미의 국가들도 절대적으로 동조하는 시선을 보이지 않는다. 그냥 전쟁 자체는 좋게 말할 수없으니, 중립을 지키겠다고 말하는 것이다. 2022년 6월의 오늘도 국제질서의 그 헤게모니의 전환점에 서 있음을 분명히 목도한다.  

 

원문 https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/6/23/why-global-south-nations-stay-neutral

Brussels, Belgium – European Union officials are meeting in Brussels on Thursday, where they are soon expected to grant EU candidacy status to Ukraine in a gesture of solidarity amid the conflict with Russia.

At the same time, the bloc has been carrying out a global lobbying campaign to boost support for Kyiv, with EU chief Ursula von der Leyen, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Finnish President Sanna Marin and other European leaders travelling to South Asia – namely India, Africa, the Asia Pacific and Middle East.

 

New trade deals have been signed and more humanitarian and financial support has been pledged, in an attempt to support some of these nations to ease off their dependency on Russia.

But speaking at the GLOBSEC forum in Bratislava earlier this month, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, the Indian foreign minister, said that Europe should grow out of the mindset that its problems are the world’s problems.

“The world cannot be that Eurocentric that it used to be in the past,” he said.

“If I were to take Europe collectively, which has been singularly silent on many things which were happening, for example in Asia, you could ask why would anybody in Asia trust Europe on anything at all,” he added.

 

According to Vivek Mishra, fellow at the Observer Research Foundation (ORF) in New Delhi, “Eurocentrism has been challenged in academia on multiple occasions but perhaps for the first time by a leading Indian policy maker on Europe’s turf.”

He told Al Jazeera that Jaishankar’s comments were “consistent with the EU’s shift to the Indo-Pacific from the transatlantic and underscore the idea that Asian problems are as important as anywhere in the world”.

He added: “There cannot be a comparative advantage to Europe or the West over Asia or Asian affairs. There is a colonial tinge there, which needed to be called out.”

 

India’s balancing act of appeasing both Russia and the West has caught the EU off guard but in New Delhi April in April, von der Leyen reiterated the dangers of the war in Ukraine at a press conference.

“The outcome of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s war will not only determine the future of Europe but also deeply affect the Indo-Pacific region and the rest of the world. For the Indo-Pacific, it is as important as for Europe that borders are respected. And that spheres of influence are rejected. We want a positive vision for a peaceful and prosperous Indo-Pacific,” she told reporters.

 

At the time, the EU had established a joint trade and technology council with India with an aim to bolster economic and strategic ties with the country.

But India has continued to maintain its neutral stance towards Russia.

The African Union has also not bought into the EU’s lobbying efforts to isolate Russia.

Concerned about the global food crisis, at a recent meeting with EU leaders, Macky Sall, the president of Senegal and chairperson of the African Union (AU), said that the bloc’s sanctions on Russia threatened the import of grains and fertilisers to Africa.

In an interview with the French weekly newspaper Le Journal du Dimanche, Sall said that the AU wants to pay (for imports of grains and fertilisers) but it was now “becoming impossible”.

“So we ask the Europeans for the same mechanism as for gas and oil,” he said.

 

The AU leader also met Putin in early June and they agreed that sanctions would not solve the food crisis.

 

“I understand the sentiment of these regions, because when countries in Africa and Asia have had wars, Europe has sometimes played a one-sided game,” Jacob F Kirkegaard, senior fellow at the German Marshall Fund, told Al Jazeera.

“The EU has certainly underestimated the fact that the sheer outrage felt within the continent about this war and enmity towards Russia isn’t shared by the rest of the world,” he added.

But Harry Nedelcu, head of policy at Rasmussen Global and in charge of its Free Ukraine Task Force, told Al Jazeera that the onus is also on Russia.

“The response of the Indian foreign minister and also the statements from the African Union illustrate Russia’s narrative and its ability to turn reality on its head and make the victim look like it is the problem,” he said.

“Russia’s basically saying that the food crisis is Ukraine’s fault. But in reality, the food is not going out because Russia is invading Ukraine. Russia attacked Ukraine and has blocked Ukrainian grain from reaching the rest of the world,” he added.

 

Speaking to reporters in Brussels on Monday, EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell acknowledged the African leader’s concerns. But he stressed that the problem should not be blamed on EU sanctions.

 

“I have sent a letter to all African foreign affairs ministers, explaining how our sanctions are being tailored – how they work, whom they affect, what can be allowed under the sanctions or not,” he said.

He also added that the EU has pledged $1.06bn to address food insecurity in the Sahel, $633m for urgent support to strengthen food systems’ resilience in the Horn of Africa and $237m to mitigate the effects of potential emerging food crises in North Africa and the Middle East.

“This is part of the action plan on geopolitical consequences of the Russian aggression,” Borrell said.

 

But according to ORF’s Mishra, ultimately the West, including the EU, has perhaps been more successful in solidifying an intra-West network rather than an inter-regional network with other areas of the world.

“With the war still raging on, most countries outside the transatlantic have harked back to the classic notion of realism which is ‘self-help’. They have been selective on which issues they can afford going with the West, and the ones on which they can’t,” he said.

 

“Whether it is Russian energy trade, bilateral currency channels with Moscow or travel and connectivity with Russia, countries have acted to suit their individual interests more than upholding morality, human rights or even expectations,” he added.

But Nedelcu stressed that for now, the EU’s priority while lobbying globally, should be to tackle the Russian narrative.

“The EU has to be more proactive in explaining who the victim is and who the aggressor is. That’s the only way to tackle Russia’s ability to twist the reality of situations and divide the world,” he said.