PERSPECTIVE Between Principles and Pragmatism Perspectives on the Ukraine Crisis from Brazil, India, China and South Africa FELIX HETT AND MOSHE WIEN (EDS.) May 2015 n In the EU, the Ukraine crisis is often portrayed as an epochal conflict with global consequences. To test this assumption, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (FES) asked four authors from Brazil, India, China and South Africa to explain how foreign-policy elites in their countries regard the crisis. Does it pose a challenge to the international order – or is it a singularly »European« problem? n Responses vary, but some similarities are found in all four papers: Whilst the con- flict is indeed seen as serious, it is not perceived as critical – the way it is in Europe. Ukraine makes fewer headlines in Brazil or South Africa than in the EU, yet it is de- bated in expert circles, and its global implications are recognised. n The governments of the BRICS countries advocate a peaceful approach to conflict resolution. All of them have voiced their respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty and terri- torial integrity. For both India and China, which are threatened by latent separatist conflicts, the inviolability of borders and the rejection of outside interference are cherished principles. n In the competition between principles and pragmatism, however, the latter seems to prevail: Criticism of Russia’s actions vis-à-vis Ukraine is hardly voiced in public by government officials. Apparently, counterbalancing the West’s perceived dominance in international relations is thought to be more important than upholding principles. Realpolitik appears to be the order of the day in the BRICS capitals. FELIX HETT & MOSHE WIEN (EDS.) | BETWEEN PRINCIPLES AND PRAGMATISM Contents Introduction ���������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������2 Brazil: Balanced Neutrality ..................................................3 India: The Quest for Balance in Asia . .5 China: Ukraine Crisis as a »Lose-Lose« Game ���������������������������������������������������������������������7 South Africa: Treading a Fine Line �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������10 1 FELIX HETT & MOSHE WIEN (EDS.) | BETWEEN PRINCIPLES AND PRAGMATISM Introduction Felix Hett and Moshe Wien The Ukraine crisis is now in its second year. On 18 March and the rejection of outside interference are cherished 2014, the Russian Federation annexed the Crimean pen- principles. The right to national self-determination is insula. A few weeks later, the Ukrainian government less emphasised. launched an »anti-terror operation« in the Southeast, which gradually evolved into an open war with Rus- Another commonality is that in the competition be- sian-backed separatists. A deep rift grew between Rus- tween principles and pragmatism, in the BRICS coun- sia on one side, and the European Union and the United tries the latter seems to prevail. Despite their principled States – commonly referred to as »the West« – on the opposition, criticism of Russia’s actions vis-à-vis Ukraine other. is hardly expressed in public by government officials. Apparently, current Russian behaviour is not perceived To policymakers and experts in Berlin, Brussels, Mos- to be much of a threat in Beijing, Brasilia, New Delhi cow and Washington, the Ukraine crisis naturally tops and Pretoria. On the contrary, the conflict tends to be the agenda. The conflict is often portrayed as epochal, described as Moscow’s reaction to »Western« actions with global consequences, even as a re-enactment of in Ukraine. The Ukrainian »Euromaidan« is not seen as the Cold War that was supposed to have ended 25 years an indigenous, civil-society protest movement; indeed, ago. Are these descriptions accurate? the change of government in Kiev in February 2014 is portrayed as a Western sponsored coup d’état. In expert To evaluate the Western assumption, the Friedrich- discourses, the Ukraine crisis is easily integrated into a Ebert-Stiftung (FES) asked four authors from Brazil, In- worldview according to which the conflict is part of the dia, China and South Africa – which, with Russia, make slow transition of the global order: Western dominance up the BRICS alliance – to explain how foreign-policy is replaced by a multipolar system – a process that is es- elites in their countries view the Ukraine crisis. Does it sentially positive and will lead to more »justice« interna- really pose a challenge to the international order? Or is tionally. This take on global politics is very similar to the it a singularly »European« problem? What are the pos- Russian discourse, as exemplified by the Foreign Policy sible consequences for cooperation within the BRICS Concept of the Russian Federation adopted in 2013. group? All four papers emphasise the need to maintain good The responses vary, of course, but some similarities are relations with Russia. Although Western sanctions found in all four papers: Whilst the conflict is indeed against Russia appear to offer export opportunities for seen as serious, it is not perceived as critical as it is BRICS businesses, they are generally opposed. Coopera- in Europe. Ukraine makes fewer headlines in Brazil or tion in the BRICS format is expected to continue. In light South Africa than in the EU, yet it is debated in expert of this, it is important to recall why the BRICS commu- circles. All the governments advocate a peaceful res- nity was founded: to counterbalance the West’s inter- olution to the conflict. All of them have voiced their national dominance. Cautious positioning with Russia respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integri- is a logical way to ensure the BRICS’ long-term goals. ty. For both India and China, which are threatened by Realpolitik appears to be the order of the day in the latent separatist conflicts, the inviolability of borders BRICS capitals. 2 FELIX HETT & MOSHE WIEN (EDS.) | BETWEEN PRINCIPLES AND PRAGMATISM Brazil: Balanced Neutrality Wladimir Pomar and Valter Pomar The Brazilian government first reacted to the Crimea cri- Agriculture announced that 100 Brazilian cattle farmers sis in a speech by the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Luiz had been authorised to export to Russia. Sectorial ad- Alberto Figueiredo, on 19 March 2014 during an offi- visers say that this creates opportunities, particularly for cial meeting with his French counterpart, Laurent Fa- producers of chicken and cattle meat. Both Russia and bius, in Paris. Figueiredo said that Brazil was monitoring Ukraine support Brazil’s aspirations for a permanent seat the situation and supported United Nations efforts to on the UN Security Council. Ukraine and Brazil operate help Russia and Ukraine to find a negotiated solution. the Alcantara Base in Maranhão state together. In the He let it be understood that Brazil would not condemn last decade, they invested over USD 1 billion in a joint Russia’s actions, emphasised Brazil’s friendly relations space and satellite project. Brazil also seeks to maintain with Ukraine, and appealed to both Moscow and Kiev good relations with Ukraine because of the 500,000 »to act with moderation«. Brazil supports the Minsk II Ukrainians who live in the country. Agreement of 11 February 2015 and the ceasefire, be- lieving that this path is necessary to engage all parties in seeking a peaceful and permanent solution to the Sanctions and Geopolitical Implications conflict. Brazilian business representatives say that sanctions were imposed on Russia without any consultations with Brazilian Neutrality Brazil, and that Brazil’s commercial relations cannot be decided by other nations’ foreign policies. Brazil views Brazil’s traditional position is non-interference in other the sanctions as counterproductive: they complicate ef- countries’ internal affairs. In the last century, Brazil had forts for frank, direct dialogue between the two sides no territorial disputes with its neighbours. It defends and their allies. Brazil is very concerned about proposals the right to self-determination, but stresses the need to arm any side in Ukraine, as this could deepen the con- for negotiated solutions to disagreements and con- flict and create incalculable political and humanitarian flicts. impacts. Brazil’s even-handed position regarding the Ukraine cri- Brazil, like the other BRICS countries, thinks that the evo- sis is to advocate a political solution. On the question lution towards a new world order should be gradual, of Crimea, Brazil is officially neutral, an approach that and based on compromise. They all believe that the EU is particularly supported by agricultural business circles and US should not have supported a coup in Ukraine who view the Russian – Western crisis as an opportunity and that the West is attempting to undermine Russia to increase exports to Russia. However, there is hardly as a strategic competitor. Underlying this conflict is ge- any public debate on the subject, mainly because of the opolitical rivalry: Russia is fighting the old US plan to large physical distance between Brazil and Ukraine. weaken Russia internationally by removing Ukraine from its sphere of influence. The West’s over-reaction with re- gard to Crimea’s reunification with Russia puts the oth- Good Relations with Russia and Ukraine er BRICS members in an awkward position. Territorial integrity, non-interference and respect for international Brazil maintains significant political, economic and sci- law helped BRICS evolve into an economic union,