The Great Realignment: How the War in Ukraine Reshaped the Global South

The war in Ukraine has radically changed the geopolitical landscape of the Global South, forcing countries such as Brazil, South Africa, and India to balance between the West and the East in their quest for autonomy. Ukraine, resisting the informational influence of Russia and China, is actively building diplomatic coalitions in Africa and Latin America to strengthen its position on the global stage.

The Global South is a unique political phenomenon. In the context of Russia's war against Ukraine, the positions of Global South countries such as Brazil, South Africa, and India remain ambiguous. This is due to a complex combination of pragmatic national interests, historical alliances, and the search for autonomy amid conflicting pressures from the West and authoritarian centers of power. In this context, Ukraine faces the task of building effective coalitions in Africa and Latin America while avoiding being drawn into ideological confrontations.

At the same time, Russia and China have launched targeted activities in the field of information influence, forming narratives that compete with the pro-Western messages of Ukraine and the West. Why do these countries remain ambiguous, what opportunities for diplomacy are opening up in the Global South, and how are Russia and China strengthening their information influence?

Why do Brazil, South Africa, and India Remain Ambiguous?

Brazil 

Lula da Silva's Brazil formally condemned Russia's full-scale invasion at the UN, but quickly approved its own “six-point” “peace plan” together with China, which, according to Kyiv, is more of a confusing tool than a means to real peace. Brazil seeks to maintain political autonomy from the West by diversifying its relations with the East, particularly through BRICS and a powerful bilateral channel with China focused on economic benefits and investment projects. A pragmatic orientation, a history of distrust of US sanctions (especially in the 1980s), and the dominance of “peacekeeping” positions among the population reinforce the ambiguity of Brazil's position.

South Africa

South Africa, like India, refrains from clear support or condemnation, taking a position of non-interference, which is reflected in its abstention in the UN Security Council. Food security issues and the need for economic relations with both the West and Russia and China prevent South Africa from taking a clear stance. Refraining from sanctions rhetoric allows the BASIC bloc (Brazil, India, China, South Africa) to project an image of a “third force.”

India

India is holding back, emphasizing the principle of non-interference and seeking a balance between its strategic partnership with the US and expanded military-technical cooperation with Russia. It also cares about economic interests, particularly in the energy and arms sectors, which explains its abstention in UN votes and its cautious attitude toward sanctions.

All three countries demonstrate a desire for autonomy, balancing between the West and the East— a strategy that should ideally benefit them, but leaves their position unclear.

How Ukraine Can Build Coalitions in Africa and Latin America

Since 2022, Ukraine has implemented the “Ukrainian-African Renaissance”: the emergence of new diplomatic missions, active political expansion, and the promotion of humanitarian initiatives, in particular “Grain from Ukraine,” which have helped to secure food stability in many African countries. Minister D. Kuleba has made several tours of Africa, which has had a positive impact on Kyiv's perception among government branches, and some countries are beginning to change their position on the war.

Ukraine is engaging regions through trade and investment frameworks, educational programs, and cultural diplomacy. For example, cooperation with creative industries in Latin America and Africa is being intensified through cultural events and agencies that promote Ukraine's image as a partner.

Brazil has created a Parliamentary Group in Support of Ukraine, intensifying debates in Congress and among experts. In Latin America, countries such as Argentina and Colombia have joined humanitarian initiatives and efforts to free kidnapped children.

However, these campaigns require significant financial and organizational resources. The Ukrainian state has declared its intentions, but real support from Western sources is needed to effectively build coalitions, especially in influential regions.

Russia and China are Expanding their Influence on the Information Spaces of the Global South

Moscow continues to use a wide arsenal of information warfare: creating fake websites, bot farms, and manipulating social media. The Doppelganger and SDA campaigns spread disinformation about Ukrainein all regions of the Global South. According to analytics, more than 20% of messages with pro-Russian rhetoric are spread by bots, particularly in India, South Africa, and neighboring countries. In addition, intelligence data from Western investigations describe the growing coordination between Russia, Iran, North Korea, and China to spread anti-Western narratives, including anti-Semitic slogans as a weapon against the liberal West.

China is employing a gradual but highly sophisticated strategy: paid Facebook posts from Xinhua, algorithmic support for Russian propaganda, and a large number of bots promoting synchronized messages. China claims to advocate a peaceful settlement in Ukraine through a “window of opportunity,” but its information machine is preparing the ground for shifting support toward the Russian version of events.

In the countries of the Global South, Ukrainian messages compete with well-concealed campaigns by Russia and China, which involve local media, social networks, and educational communities. The West is creating counter-networks, but without proper coordination and resources, they often yield to the scale of authoritarian propaganda.

Ukraine is Ready for Systematic Work with Non-Western Countries 

Russia's full-scale war against Ukraine has not only redefined Europe's military and security architecture, but also led to a massive geopolitical shift in the Global South — a concept that has long transcended geography and become synonymous with multi-layered post-colonial autonomy balancing between global poles of power.

In this new agenda, Ukraine has become not only a victim of war, but also an active participant in diplomatic competition spanning Latin America, Africa, and Asia. However, this competition is asymmetrical. While Ukraine and its Western allies appeal to international law, historical precedents, and values, Russia and China use a much broader, more flexible arsenal — from economic blackmail to algorithmic interference in national information spaces that are weakly protected ideologically, technically, and politically.

Are Brazil, South Africa, and India accidentally neutral? 

They are the result of long-term pragmatism, deep historical distrust of the West, and an element of geopolitical bargaining. All these countries try to avoid tough decisions not out of indifference, but out of an institutional instinct for self-preservation. They do not want to become vassals of the West, just as they are in no hurry to enter into political marriages with authoritarian players. This creates a window of opportunity for Kyiv — but it is short-lived and selective.

In this political turbulence, Ukraine has begun to build its own “parallel diplomacy”: from humanitarian programs such as “Grain from Ukraine” to the creation of new embassies and parliamentary support groups. These initiatives create the conditions for presence, but they are insufficient for influence.

The Global South is a region where emotions, historical traumas, and economic needs often outweigh abstract notions of international solidarity. That is why Ukrainian diplomacy must go beyond moralizing and move toward systematic trust management, including long-term economic programs, cultural alliances, and, equally important, information interventions.

The information front is a key element. Russia is waging an information war not only against Ukraine, but also against the very concept of Western truth. Campaigns such as “Doppelganger,” the involvement of local bot networks, and the use of anti-Semitic and anti-Western narratives are not random acts, but part of a systematic undermining of Western legitimacy. 

China, although less aggressive, is investing in long-term changes to the information landscape, presenting Russia as part of a “multipolar” resistance to the colonial past. Both states have adapted their messages to the local context, using the linguistic, historical, and cultural codes of the recipient countries. The West is not yet capable of doing this — and Ukraine, unfortunately, is not either.

The conclusion here is obvious, though not very optimistic. Ukraine has a chance for diplomatic and moral victory in the Global South only if it transitions to a systemic game. It must act not as a beggar for help, but as a partner offering security expertise, technological solutions, educational cooperation, and mutual respect. The Global South does not want to be a tool in someone else's war, but it is ready to cooperate with those who speak its language — not only linguistically, but also culturally, historically, and economically.

Otherwise, the field will remain open to Russia and China. And then the war for Ukraine will finally become a war for the civilizational choice of a significant part of humanity — with all the consequences that entails.

Bohdan Popov, Head of Digital at the United Ukraine Think Tank, communications specialist and public figure