STEVEN KUO: The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must

Greek historian Thucydides recorded in his History of the Peloponnesian War 2,000 years ago that when the citizens of Melos, an island in the Aegean Sea, wanted to argue the morality of the situation as their city was about to be sacked by Athenians, the Athenians replied that they did not want to waste time talking about morality and that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must”.

When it comes to international politics and war, it is a waste of time to discuss morality, justice, law or truth. Powerful countries dictate what is true. As I observe the war in Ukraine — both the West’s drive to expand Nato eastward to Russia’s border, and Vladimir Putin’s determined pushback in the form of the invasion of Ukraine — I have had to reconsider my liberal position, held since my student days, that there are sound rational foundations to liberal internationalism; that the notion of justice is true; and that institutions such as the UN have the answers.

As we admire the bravery shown by Ukrainians defending their homeland, disgusted by the news of alleged war crimes in Bucha, north of Kyiv, and laugh at Putin spinning his military’s failure to take Kyiv by claiming the objective of the war had always been eastern Ukraine, I have grudgingly come to the position that when it comes to international politics, might is indeed right.

While the West is united in its determination to destroy the Russian economy and Putin’s regime, it is not the case that there is consensus among democracies or countries of the Global South against Russia.

While most countries have called for dialogue and negotiations, democracies, including India and SA, abstained from the UN General Assembly vote on March 2 that demanded Russia withdraw from Ukraine. Despite Western countries’ diplomatic efforts, countries such as Brazil and Mexico have refused to participate in sanctions. Japan, Singapore and South Korea are the only Asian countries that have joined Western sanctions on Russia.

For China, India, Brazil and SA the war in Ukraine has brought a stark choice between the West and the South. Pretoria needs to weigh up carefully where its interests lie, the West — the EU and the US are trading partners — or the South, where SA is a leading player as the pre-eminent power on the African continent and a member of the Brics bloc.

The biggest issue facing SA businesses is sanctions risk, where executives can run afoul of Western sanctions regulations against doing business with Russia. In the same way that Chinese telecommunications companies Huawei and ZTE were punished by the US for doing business in Iran, SA businesses need to assess whether the US will target them if they continue to do business with Russia.

As was the case with US pressure on SA to not to purchase Iranian oil years ago, when SA in fact had good relations with Iran, we can expect US pressure on countries of the South not to buy Russian energy and natural resources. India has taken the lead to resist Western pressure to condemn Russia, and has openly begun to directly negotiate with Russia to purchase Russian oil for its domestic consumption without using the dollar.

The US-led West will ratchet up pressure on developing countries in Asia and Africa to toe the line on Russia. This pressure will rankle, as postcolonial countries in Asia and Africa do not like it when former colonial powers dictate to them how they should vote in the UN, with whom they are allowed to be friends, and with whom they are allowed to do business. Besides, as the EU increased economic sanctions on Russia, Germany and numerous EU countries continue to import the Russian gas that is critical to their domestic economies.

As Ukraine has shown, in the international system nations fight for their own survival and their own interests.

• Dr Kuo, a former lecturer at the Shanghai International Studies University in China, is adjunct senior lecturer in the University of Cape Town’s Graduate School of Business.