The rebirth of the global south:: geopolitics, imageries, and developmental realities Bull and BAnik

claim

The term “Global South” has resurged in global politics

and academic debates.

• Countries invoking the label now play more assertive

roles in global governance.

• Yet. “there is still no consensus on what the term truly

signifies” (Bull & Banik, p. 196).

changing semantics

Now a geo‑historical concept, not a geographic one.

• Includes low‑ and middle‑income countries and emerging powers: India, China.

• Reflects shared aspirations, challenges, and political claims.

Interpretations

• Economic category: low income, limited industrialization

• Geographical category; inconsistent: China & India are north of the equator.

• Political/diplomatic project (NAM, G77, BRICS).

• Decolonial/emancipatory space (sites of resistance & new imaginaries).

• Narrative/identity project; shared sense of marginalization

problems with simple definitions

Risk of essentializing diverse countries.

• Geographic definitions exclude key actors.

• Political alliances (e.g., BRICS) include non‑South actors like Russia.

• Rising powers (China, India, Brazil) complicate the idea of a unified “South.”

• The label obscures internal inequalities and power asymmetries.

The global south as a political project

Linked to decolonization, NAM, and calls for a New International Economic Order.

• G77 + China frames itself as the voice of the Global South.

• BRICS uses the term to amplify Global South priorities in global forums such as the G20

• But: membership inconsistencies raise questions about coherence

The global south as emancipatory space

A conceptual space where “new horizons of life are emerging”

(Levander & Mignolo).

• Emphasizes shared histories of colonialism, dependency, structural inequality.

• Diversity is seen as a resource, not a weakness.

• But: rising powers may not pursue emancipatory agendas.

Internal tensions

Some scholars argue the category is too broad to be analytically useful.

• Others highlight that rising powers (China, India, Brazil) may reproduce inequalities.

• The label can reinforce simplistic binaries (South vs. West).

• The Global South is better understood as dynamic, not fixed.

The global south in a changing world

• The global order is in flux: “interregnum”

• Liberal order is weakening:

• Internal contradictions

• Inequalities

• U.S. versus China rivalry

• The Global South is increasingly central to debates about future governance.

Beyond a US VS China View

China’s rise is deeply tied to the liberal economic order, not outside it.

• The U.S. increasingly uses tariffs and sanctions, undermining liberal norms.

• Global South states are not passive: they strategically navigate between powers.

• Emerging world order = hybrid, multipolar, and contested.

South-south cooperation (SSC)

• SSC is a key vehicle for Global South agency.

• Driven by:

Strategic interests

Developmental needs

Alternative institutional models

• SSC is not uniform—varies widely across regions and actors.

Conclusion

• “Global South” is contested, flexible, and politically powerful.

• It reflects shared histories but also deep internal diversity.

• The Global South both challenges and reaffirms aspects of the liberal order.

• SSC and new alliances reshape global governance in non‑linear ways.

• Understanding the Global South requires attention to geopolitics, narratives, and development realities