As many as two-thirds of the world’s population live in countries that have not condemned Russia’s actions, the research institute estimates. Russia has attracted several developing countries.
The Ukrainians deserve all our support and all our respect, Prime Minister Sanna Marin (sd) said a week ago on Saturday at Ykkösaam.
Such comments have been made by EU policymakers since Russia invaded Ukraine in late February. There is no doubt in the European Union and in Finland who should be on whose side.
When you look at reactions around the world, the picture becomes more variegated. The countries of the world are divided into more than three camps in Kuta: countries that condemn the Russian invasion, countries that support or support Russia, and countries that seek to be neutral about the attack.
For this story, we compiled the results of two UN votes on the offensive war, as well as an assessment by the research institute of the reactions of different countries. At the beginning of March, the UN ruled on whether Russia’s attack should be condemned, and in early April on whether the country should be suspended from the UN Human Rights Council.
What does the situation look like on a continent? What explains Russia’s popularity in some African and Asian countries, for example?
The majority of the population lives in countries where no attack has been condemned
According to the EIU, almost a third (32%) of the world’s population lives in countries that have so far remained neutral in their reactions, ie they have not taken a stand in one direction or another. One third also live in countries where the state leadership has directly supported Russia or shared the arguments put forward by Russia in its statements.
In other words, as many as two-thirds of the world’s people live in countries that have not condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
Visiting Leading Expert of the Foreign Policy Institute Olli Ruohomäki the figure is not surprising. He recalls that in the African continent, Asia and Latin America, Ukraine is far away. The war in Ukraine will not come to the skin in the same way as here in Finland and Europe.
– Russia’s disinformation campaign has been reasonably successful in Asia and Africa. Russia has also made it clear to African and Asian countries that if you vote against us, it will have consequences for you, for example in terms of trade relations.
Reactions to the Russian war also tell us about the state of democracy. Roughly speaking, the maps show where the boundaries of the democratic world are going. According to Ruohomäki, the number of supporters of Russia or countries with a neutral attitude shows that Vladimir Putin – as well as the President of China Xi Jinping – have spoken to leaders in many African and Asian countries.
– The concept of liberal democracy in the West has not taken root. On the other hand, it must be remembered that, especially among the young population, the majority wants democracy.
In general, the results of the UN vote and the analysis carried out by the EIU do not tell us what the citizens of different countries think about Russia’s actions, but about the policies taken by the leadership of the states.
China and India, in particular, have come under great pressure from the Asian giants. Both China and India have warm distances to the Kremlin. Both have danced on the rope between the West and Russia throughout the war: they have not clearly condemned the attack.
According to EIU estimates, China and India are leaning towards Russia – China more clearly than India. These two countries make up a large slice of the world’s population. In total, more than a third of the world’s population lives in them.
Pakistan, with a population of about 220 million, has refrained from condemning the Russian invasion and has not voted to remove Russia from the Human Rights Council.
Syria, on the other hand, is one of five states that opposed condemning the Russian attack in early March.
– Syria is an absolute dictatorship that is standing up very much thanks to Russia’s military support. It is indebted and it is obvious that Syria will not go to the polls against Russia.
The map below shows which countries supported a resolution in early March condemning Russia’s actions in Ukraine and demanding that Russia withdraw its troops.
Japan and South Korea belong to the common front of the West. North Korea, on the other hand, is going its own way, as expected. It was also one of five countries that did not want to condemn Russia’s attack in early March in a vote in the UN General Assembly.
African countries are fragmented in their response to the Russian attack. Some countries are leaning to the west in their positions, some to Russia and some to be neutral.
Fragmentation says a senior researcher at the Nordic Africa Institute Liisa Laakson that the African Union has failed in its goal of creating a united voice for Africa in the arena of international relations. The disintegration of African unity has also been a goal for Russia, Laakso estimates.
– Russia wants to prevent Africa’s unified support for the EU and the West. There are 54 states, which means 54 votes in the UN. The Kremlin is perceived as a threat that these voices would go west.
According to Laakso, Africa is “one battlefield for Russia against the EU and EU unity”.
The clearest donor to Russia is Eritrea in the Horn of Africa. It was one of five countries that did not want to condemn the attack at the UN General Assembly in early March. The valley sees nothing surprising in Eritrean’s reactions.
– Eritrea is a very closed, militaristic and authoritarian country.
According to Laakso, the positions of African countries are not so much anti-Ukrainian, but reflect criticism of US dominance and a certain kind of double standards. Recent memories include a military intervention by the United States, Britain and France in Libya that was not condemned at the UN, Laakso says.
China’s influence in Africa is also likely to be reflected in the UN votes in African countries, Laakso estimates.
– Even in previous UN votes, there are signs that African countries have voted as China has hoped. The Ethiopian government, for example, is very close to China. China has made significant investments in the country and supported the government in the civil war in the Tigray region. This may have influenced Ethiopia’s opposition to Russia’s temporary removal from the UN Human Rights Council.
The map below shows which countries are temporarily excluded from the UN Human Rights Council by Russia. This was put to the vote on 7 April.
Europe, North America and Australia
EU countries, the United States, Canada, Britain and Australia have jointly condemned the Russian invasion and imposed a number of sanctions on the country.
Geographically, in the middle of Europe is also Russia’s close partner: Belarus. According to the research institute EIU, the countries in Europe that seek neutrality with regard to Russia’s attack are Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina.
South Africa, like Africa, is well divided.
The Economist Intelligence Unit estimates that there are three clear supporters of Russia on the continent: Cuba, Nicaragua and Venezuela. The countries were either absent or abstained in early March on whether Russia’s actions should be condemned.
Bolivia and Brazil are tilted to Russia, Argentina and Chile, for example, to the west.
said in a story published in mid-March that the Latin American media see the war primarily as a conflict between the United States and Russia.
The right typically condemns the Russian attack, but many in the left camp believe in Russian propaganda. This is partly explained by anger against the United States. Country Supports Bloody Military Dictatorships in Latin America in the 1960s and 1980s, ‘s Next Journalist in Latin America Maija Salmi wrote.
The subject will be open until 11 pm on Wednesday, 20 April.