While definitely true, Putin has been exploiting African countries, too.
https://time.com/6165246/putin-africa-evade-sanctions/
Doesn’t make it right, mind you.
Geopolitics
- Thread starter Mciahel Goodman
- Start date
https://time.com/6165246/putin-africa-evade-sanctions/
Doesn’t make it right, mind you.
I haven't said much about exploitation though. My suggestion was that Russian and Chinese governments have historically been perceived as a positive by people in these countries compared to the US and the EU. Recent developments might change that narrative in the future but for now it is what it is. I also get highly skeptical when you share links like these. Companies like Wagner Group, in the link you shared, are a very small part of overall outsourcing of the government activities that have taken place in developing countries, especially Africa. Lack of government capacity, and colonial legacy has meant that most of natural resource extraction process has been in hands of private companies mostly from Europe. But I know very little about Africa so I will refrain from speaking my opinions in this matter. My overall point is that posters here do not really realize the deeply complex and historical relationship people in developing countries have with foreign powers. For many people here, it is not a simple matter of Ukrainian heroes vs. Putin evil. They have seen how Western media operates and distorts reality of their own lives. More importantly for now, rising food prices and fuel prices have been an absolute nightmare. For rich nations, this is an inconvenience. For poor nations, it is a potential human catastrophe. Cooking oil prices have tripled in last 5 months, vegetable prices have doubled. People are starving, having to eat less, having to force their kids to work and not send them to school. Support for Ukrainian people is difficult when the governments' priorities are to feed its own poor due to this war.
When a country has a dictatorship, it is the dictator who appoints his own henchmen at all top positions. Journalism in a dictatorship is basically propaganda, and the main goal of this propaganda is to keep the dictator unchallenged. It helps to claim that rich western countries have been taking advantage of this particular country, and that the dictator is a national hero who defends the riches of this country. Hence most dictatorships dislike western democracies and side with other dictatorships. You can talk about colonialism in africa, about history, etc ... but actually for the dictator all those things are secondary, his main goal is to remain unchallenged, so his people should not want democracy. Unfortunately, many intellectuals in western countries keep flogging themselves about past western horrors (which is right) and finding excuses for current dictators (which is wrong). Democracy is a very hard system of government, that's why most countries have dictatorships today, and they will have dictatorships tomorrow no matter what the West does or does not. Democracy itself is not perfect and there are always problems, but still it is much better than a dictatorship, those of us who live in a western democracy should be grateful about it. I am an immigrant myself and I am really happy that I had the opportunities I had in my life, and the freedoms I always had. I appreciate that it is a very hard path from a dictatorship to democracy, and many countries might never have a chance to it. That's one of the reasons we should support Ukraine, because they were clearly on the path to a better democracy. Putin would prefer that our democracies fail; that the EU dissolves so he has only to deal with small weak countries; that US votes for Trump and destroys itself in a civil war. His life and his position would be much easier without EU and US, he would become Vlad the Great, that's his ultimate dream.
I have never claimed anything about dictatorship though? Not all developing countries have dictatorships and not all dictatorships are underdeveloped. Russia (and Soviet), the EU and the US have been part of national fabric and people's lives before there was Putin and before there was democracy in Ukraine. Bearing this in mind, all I have said is that it might be disingenuous to expect the same level of support for Ukraine from developing countries whose realities are very different from the West.
The deep skepticism of the West holds in African democracies as well, putting this all on dictators and propaganda, and considering the West's exploitation as a thing of the past, is a shallow and wrong analysis fitting for this thread. It simply doesn't hold.
It's also weird that this isn't understood when a lot of people here are open about why they support Ukraine; that even though it's partly to defend Ukrainians from an invasion it's also for selfish reasons because Russia is a threat to Europe in a way other invading countries aren't, and because Ukrainians are Europeans and our neighbors in a way others aren't.
Take you yourself as an example. You've been very clear about the fact that you're completely fine with not lifting a single finger to help Yemen. That's other people's and countries' responsibility. Their neighbors have to do this, you're not going to give enough of a shit to waste any resources.
Just apply this stance to Africans, often people and countries with way less resources to waste than you or your country, and it should be especially obvious to you why they might not care too much about Ukrainian lives or their democracy.
Last edited:
"Realities are very different from the West" is a phrase used to provide excuses for dictators. Which is the actual reality of most developing countries. Under a dictatorship, most people believe what the dictator wants them to believe.
Russia, Belarus and Ukraine, are good examples because they have followed different paths out of a common past. (And you can add the Baltic countries for further examples. )
Russia had democracy for a very short time, but Putin (KGB) turned it into a dictatorship with minimal opposition. Unfortunately, many Russians believe that Russia is ungovernable without a strongman at the helm. Of course, this belief is simply the result of centuries of propaganda. I have seen this belief in both Dostoyevsky and Solzhenitsyn (among others).
Belarus tried to become a democracy, but Lukashenko (Putin's lackey) was successful in crushing any democratic aspirations.
Ukraine had a similar path to Belarus, but Yanukovych (Putin's lackey) failed to crush Euromaidan, Ukraine moved towards more a western democracy, and Putin decided to crush Ukraine.
Honestly, I know next to nothing about Yemen. I know there is a civil war, one side is supported by the Saudis, the other side by Iran. I know nothing else, I have no idea what their differences are. Can you perhaps write a couple of paragraphs about it? Which side supports democracy? Which side supports atheists like me? Which side would support a Pride parade for gays? I like democracy and atheism and freedom of expression, so it would be nice to know which side is closer to the ideals I support. ( For Ukraine vs Russia the choice for me is obvious because I know the answers to these questions. )
I have no idea why you've stuck on to the idea of dictatorship. Most countries in South and South-East Asia are not under dictatorship. Many of these countries have achieved independence (primarily from their Western colonial governments mind you) for now over few decades have been democratic in most senses of the word. The quality of local information here might not be best but as can be seen recently, neither is this true even in the heart of Western democracies. There is easy access to internet, little to no censorship, and people are free to choose their news sources.
With the word "dictatorship" I cover all kinds of authoritarian governments. Unfortunately democracy is not something easy or simple. I am from Greece, the birthplace of democracy, and actually modern Greece had uninterrupted democracy only since 1974. There aren't many countries who had democracy for more than 100 years. In my opinion, democracy is the most important element for any country, and for me the struggle of Ukraine is first and foremost the struggle for democracy, which is something that Putin wants to destroy.
I really feel like which side supports gay pride is irrelevant when it comes to war crimes being committed against civilian populations. The answer is likely "neither" in most parts of the world but that doesn't make it ok to commit horrific human rights abuses. The Saudis are the aggressors, the Houthis in Yemen are probably not goodies, but invading another country and starving and bombing their population cannot be excused by that. The Saudis are in the wrong regardless as they have no right to do what they're doing (and wouldn't even if they were doing it in their own country either in this case).
Your broader point was that people in these countries are somehow misinformed because government (or the dictator) controls the information sources, which I am trying to say is not true in many cases. Besides making multiple generalizations that all developing countries are either authoritarian or dictatorship, or that diverging opinions there are excuses for supposed dictators, perhaps you can give governments and people a bit of credit that their reaction to this war can be different based on their historical experiences.
Yes, definitely people in dictatorships are misinformed, even if the internet is open and free. Dictatorships control the TV, and most people get their news from TV. Sure, internet is there but the average person will not search the internet for information. This is one of the main reasons that the average Russian supports the "special operation".
Yes, most of what I write is generalizations. I am not writing a PhD dissertation. But there are some efforts to quantify a "democracy index" if you are interested in it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
For you? No. I'm not interested in informing you so you can decide if the people are worthy of being spared from slaughter and genocide.
I think most posters here understand the legacy of the imperial era and the Cold War. The reason I bring up exploitation is because that’s a big part of that legacy… that these places were exploited, both politically and economically, and this led to a great deal of animosity towards the exploiters. My point is that Putin’s Russia is imperial as well, and can and will exploit those very people who you say are holding Russia in a better light than the US and/or Europe.
Lets go by the definition you provide and check to see if all developing countries in that index are "dictatorship". The fact that you willfully brush aside all developing governments as dictatorships, call their people there as ignorant, and concurrently expect them to share your moral outrage just speaks volumes.
@Carolina Red, most definitely. The difference is that unlike countries in East Europe or Central Asia, many others in other part of the world have not "first hand" experienced Russia's imperial ambitions, yet. As China's experience shows, this narrative might change swiftly. Meanwhile, the legacy of imperial era still persists and exploitation by the US and the EU is still alive, albeit in a very indirect manner.
Speaks volumes? And says what? That we have to support Democracies when we can. Like Ukraine. That's what I have been saying. It is quite simple actually.
Well, I guess you don't know much about Yemen, either. I asked three simple questions. I don't understand why you keep referring to Yemen, in a thread about Ukraine, when you don't really know much about Yemen, either.
By the way, here is a description of the civil war by BBC for those interested. It is not as simple as some posters pretend it to be. I am 100% for peace there, but I honestly don't know which side is worse.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29319423
For example, for the side Iran supports, Wikipedia says:
In 2003, the Houthis' slogan, "God is great, death to the US, death to Israel, curse the Jews, and victory for Islam", became the group's trademark.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Houthi_movement
Sorry, but I don't support "victory for Islam". I am 100% for peace (without victory for Islam! ). I am 100% for victory of Ukraine, no question about it!
Last edited:
China is doing a lot of the same things now, Sri Lanka is a total mess partially due to Chinese involvement, which has allowed India to regain influence there by stepping in to provide much needed aid.
You know exactly why I keep referring to Yemen, because I told you and you can read.
You also can in no way infer what I know or don't know about Yemen just because I don't want to discuss with a moral void.
Maybe the side invading the other and causing the death of countless people, including thousands of children, while causing a massive famine and humanitarian crisis is worse, no?
You can hate yemenite rebels and government and recognize that SA is clearly in the wrong here. It's not that hard.
Says you are willing to label a large population of the world as misinformed and misguided without a trace of evidence or irony.
So, you will judge people outside Europe for not caring about Ukraine, but you cannot be judged for not caring about Yemen. And in case you're going to blame it on media coverage: their media won't care much for Ukraine the same way as yours doesn't for Yemen. If it's a cop out for you, it's a cop out for them.
More generally, some great posts by @NotThatSoph and @Stanzin Lama the last two pages. Thanks for providing some perspective to the disdain, condescension, and lack of understanding for the views of Africans and Asians that was on display. (Also, Africans and Asians aren't monolithic blocks of people, so the shorthand is not very meaningful anyway.)
Finally, I've seen people mention Russia getting 'increasingly isolated' and 'becoming like North Korea'. Are those people aware that there's a world outside of the EU/NATO? Outside that, there's a only a few countries that care about this to the extent that they'll help 'isolate' Russia; it's business as usual for the rest of the world.
How can you support the government but not SA who are backing said government?
Sorry, you lost me.
Are you sure about that?
Numbers-wise he is accurate...
Reading this thread makes me understand how different world views are in Europe / the west and the developing world.
I'm very sympathetic to Ukraine but your average person worrying about surviving day to day won't give two fecks about it. It's easy to preach about democracy and "the right thing to do" when your living off centuries of exploitation of these countries.
Anyway, back to Ukraine - hope they hold the Donbas and start pushing Russia back but it's looking tough right now.
I am wondering about all these SE democracies as good as any being there as long as any other part of the world.
Can you rephrase this?
I was just wondering about what he wrote here: " Most countries in South and South-East Asia are not under dictatorship. Many of these countries have achieved independence (primarily from their Western colonial governments mind you) for now over few decades have been democratic in most senses of the word. "
I had no idea how this was brought up with the exchange between him and another poster. I might have overlooked it. But, that statement about most countries in SE Asia not being under dictatorships and having been democratic in most senses of the word is laughable at best.
Sorry about bringing this up in this thread. Just found it amusing.
No, I was meaning that I couldn’t understand what you’d written there
Democracies: Malaysia, Thailand, East Timor, Indonesia, Phillippines, Singapore, India, Sri Lanka
Authoritarian: Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, Vietnam, (Brunei), Afghanistan, Maldives.
Hybrid: Bangladesh, Bhutan, Nepal, Pakistan.
Not being under dictatorships is true. Most being democracies depends on how you characterise the hybrids, but it's not a laughable claim. Going by population it's certainly true.
I was talking about SE Asia. You know why I found it laughable because I grew up in Burma. Burma has had some of the most brutal Juntas in its history and their leaders used to say how they were envious of the likes of Indonesia's government system when Suharto ruled it about two decades ago. And the current Burmese Juna leader had the full support of Thailand's military Junta leader.
If people think Singapore has full democracy, well.
Last edited:
What would you classify as a "good" democracy. I never said as long as any other part. The post said decades..
I was obviously confused by his claim. It was not aimed at you.
I don't know how to classify a 'good' democracy. But military leaders having a coup on civilians' government and then trying (and pretending) to rule the country as some legitimate democratic government while oppressing and taking out all the opponents systematically to get there would not be classified as a good democracy for me. That happened a lot in SEA countries, and it was not too long ago, certainly not decades ago.
I don't think this is accurate. As I said before, I don't know much about this conflict, but since some people here always refer to Yemen, in the past couple of days I read a few things on BBC, AP, and Wikipedia. Both sides seem equally terrible from what I have read, the UN says that the rebels use children:
https://apnews.com/article/middle-east-united-nations-yemen-houthis-17c3e19c239be8a2f41ee3e27469fc6e
I understand that US and UK supported the SA coalition against the islamist rebels, which upsets the anti-western sentiments of some people. Personally, I don't see any good reason to support either side, both are terrible. I also do not see any similarities to Ukraine, the SA coalition did not try to annex parts of Yemen.
Singapore might not be a full democracy, but neither is the US according to the Democracy Index.
Reminder of what happened a century ago -https://merip.org/2013/06/the-greek-turkish-population-exchange/
I think it is, generally, accurate. Sure, the rebels aren't saints, but most of the suffering generated is responsibility of SA, so it should be easy to spot the worst side of these two. I genuinely don't understand why this is so hard for you.