Middle Powers in Aid: Political Manoeuvres in Conflict Zones

The advent of the 21st century has brought about shifting geopolitical landscapes, highlighting the overextension of the US presence, which the US struggles to heal from. Further emergence of multilateral institutions challenging the US-led economic and political order establishes the niche scenario of a transitional period, where rule-based order remains while new order is yet to emerge.

Illustration by The Geostrata

This has led to the emergence of certain regions experiencing geopolitical contestations, or Conflict zones. The idea of geo-political contestation in this scenario, highlights proactive undertakings by major powers (the United States and China, for instance), while the region’s political stability becomes increasingly contested by its socio-political disparities.

In such a scenario, the emerging powers have been urged to take responsibility in such areas conforming with their national interests. Such concerned emerging powers are particularly identified by their behavioural stances as ‘catalysts’ for promoting international liberal order, ‘facilitators’ for pro-status-quo coalitions, and ‘managers’ disseminating orthodox norms and practices. 

Yet, for such emerging powers: including India, Brazil, or Türkiye, becoming a factor for spearheading initiatives in key geopolitical areas while maintaining geopolitical interests requires comprehensive narrativisation of foreign policy stances while being inclusive and directive at the same time.

As such, the concerned article attempts to highlight newer manners of engagement by such emerging powers into regions experiencing key geopolitical competition. Manners of engagement by such powers however, have been observed to inculcate a ‘region-first’ ideation, narrating undertakings that facilitate relations through non-traditional means to promote stability.

As such, the article highlights such non-traditional manners of engagements that emerging powers pursue. The article further evaluates how such engagement enhances the positional value of emerging powers in such regions, whilst enabling them to acquisite their national interests.

DEVELOPMENTAL AID FOR SOCIO-POLITICAL STABILITY

The aid recipients are categorised from the prism of developmental challenges. Military takeovers, climate change, and widespread economic shocks from social and political instability mark the challenges.

The case of the same can be traced to the countries in the Sahel region (Burkina Faso, Chad, Mali, Mauritania, Niger and the Central African Republic). The countries recorded humanitarian displacement of over 3 million people from Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger.

The security concerns overwhelmingly impact the budget and administration expenses, leading to fiscal deficits. The emergence of various actors across the international system has created opportunities for developmental aid in countries fraught with the dangers of financial constraints after decades of violence over socio-political instability.

Such conditions have created opportunities for the middle powers to diversify their aid to the most preferred partner, seeking opportunities for partnership and collaboration with countries beyond the traditional actors. The redirection of developmental assistance will lead to an enhanced voice in conflict-ridden countries along with the middle powers in the international governance institutions, making possible changes to the current concerns over public spending,  donor support, and norms enforcement.

The case of India can be traced here, where it has assisted conflict-ridden countries with intelligence sharing, agriculture, and diplomatic engagements to nurture modest financing regimes in such societies.

By providing a voice on the international stage, the additional developmental aid from the middle powers will enable the regional administrations in the countries to mitigate conflict, encouraging stability and reforms for political instability and social inclusivity. 

SDGs AND MIDDLE POWERS

With the concerns of the Global South shifting from immediate threats perceived by the West, the emergence of newer dialogue from the Middle Powers is observed, inculcating global and local food security, human resource development, and climate change. This emergence, coupled with the recent upgrowth of certain states within their geopolitical periphery, has allowed for a perception to develop.

The perception is a benevolent younger giant promoting collaborative growth through inclusive agenda-building and advocating for concerns of the Global South.

For instance, a statement from Nazira Nurbayeva, Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan, quotes the elevating cooperation between Central Asian countries and Japan, with him noting areas of newer partnerships: environmental sustainability, connectivity enhancement, and human resource development. This is further established with the development of JICA projects across Central Asia to promote sustainable and self-reliant development whilst promoting democratic governance, healthcare, and social security.

Acting as a benevolent donor within the narratives of the critical geopolitical region, thereby collateral to providing trustable alternatives to recipient states: something Japan has acted upon considerably through revising its ODA Charter and promoting offer-based development aid. 

However, the perception of such benevolent behaviour extends beyond cooperative, economic-centric development assistance. Türkiye’s distinctive foreign policy stance towards Africa follows the suit of a moniker of Southern donors, inculcating ideals of the ‘actual way of doing development’. Building upon its successful humanitarian campaign in Somalia in 2011, Türkiye has built up a benevolent perception through autonomous undertaking, giving recipient states in Africa a third choice.

Image Credits: Rightful Owner

This, coupled with its unconventional multitrack diplomacy, has allowed Türkiye to promote sustainable undertakings. For instance, it is relatively common for Türkiye’s official development agency, the Turkish Cooperation and Coordination Agency (TIKA) offices in Africa, to provide agricultural tools, fertilisers, and seeds to local farmers to improve agricultural capacity. 

With further considerations within the realm of emerging powers upholding sustainability narratives, India’s vaccine diplomacy highlights the states’ attempt towards promoting accessibility of healthcare within a global range: it constantly supported measures to temporarily suspend COVID-19 vaccine intellectual property.

At the same time, utilising its benevolence through soft diplomacy have garnered trust, particularly underlined by its ‘Vaccine Friendship’ terminology. For instance, in the limelight of India’s Vaccine Mantri program induced to promote COVID-19 vaccines availability in African states, Seychelles Minister of Foreign Affairs and Tourism Sylvestre Radegonde quotes the continuum cementing of cooperative relations with India. Furthermore, recent acceptance of the Indian-produced R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine by Ghana showcases India’s growing presence within the global public health. 

PEACE BUILDING THROUGH INTERNATIONAL INITIATIVES AND ORGANISATIONS

The diplomatic behaviour of the middle powers is a direct byproduct of the prevailing international scenario and its troubled history. Such elements make the middle powers necessary in conflict management and demonstrate institutional resilience from their domestic socio-economic limitations. Therefore, the conditions make the middle powers naturally align with issues related to humanitarian interventions and demand reforms in the existing global peace-making bodies to address the problems.

The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is a case in which the middle powers, led by India, Brazil, and South Africa, tried to address the global challenges of emerging commodity prices, debt, and depopulation. The individual middle powers have also unilaterally collaborated to prevent issues of gender-based violence and foster peace and security.

The involvement of South Africa can be understood in this case, where it mobilised support from like-minded states from the United National Security Council (UNSC) to collaborate on the issues related to peace and conflict. Therefore, the countries distinguished as middle powers can collaborate based on their commonality and combined strength at international organisations to nurture and encourage world opinion on potential risk factors that international organisations avoid. 

Middle Powers thereby have structuralised their behaviour in the key geopolitical areas of competition in a manner that allows the formation of identity distinct from the Great Powers by focusing on niche areas of relative gains and vitalising voices of the Global South.

Insights from the practices of Middle Powers in such regions further enhance their positional value, thereby acquiring social recognition benefiting their national interests.

Further focus on unconventional methods of engagement is what Middle Powers now require as the international system enters a transitional period with shifting axes of power dynamics amidst geopolitical competition between major powers. Focusing on institutionalisation and South-South cooperation, sustainability, and aid provisions could become critical sectors for the Middle Powers to enhance regional and transregional status.

This could allow such states to enforce interest-based undertakings within regions experiencing geopolitical competition, substantially supporting collaborative developments with recipient states, mitigating conflicts, and acting as leading voices in the international community.

---

BY ABHIGYAN DUARAH & ANIRBAN DUTTA

TEAM GEOSTRATA

info@geostrata.com