Reconfiguring Power: Strategic Realities of the Global South in a Western‑Dominated World

A Strategic Analysis by Small Drops (Balananthini Balasubramaniam)

© 2025 – All Rights Reserved

Abstract

This article examines the structural, historical, and geopolitical challenges confronting the Global South as it seeks substantive autonomy in a world shaped by enduring Western influence. Institutions such as the Global South Economic Forum (GSEF) and Global South Chambers of Commerce, Industry, Mines and Agriculture (GOSCCIMA) represent ambitious attempts at South-South solidarity. However, colonial legacies, deeply entrenched social divisions, and diaspora dependence continue to constrain systemic transformation.

Employing a Darwinian adaptation framework, this article argues that the Global South must pursue sovereignty not by rejecting Western structures outright, but by selectively appropriating, reforming, and hybridising them. Case studies — including Nigeria (with focus on the Babara region), the historical rivalry and cooperation of India and China, the Zheng He (Chanki) maritime expeditions to Africa (1405–1433), and the role of diaspora communities in the USA and Europe — illustrate the practical challenges and strategic opportunities for the Global South.

Introduction

Recent decades have witnessed an intensifying effort among Global South nations to redefine their position in global economic and political systems. Organisations such as GSEF, GOSCCIMA, and the Global South Engineers Association (GSEA) exemplify this ambition, offering forums for collaboration, trade, and strategic dialogue. Yet these aspirations exist within a historical context in which many postcolonial states remain embedded in institutional, legal, and educational systems originating from colonial rule (Mbembe, 2001; Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, 1986).

India and China, two pivotal Global South actors, exemplify this dynamic. Despite centuries of rivalry — from territorial disputes to competition for regional influence — they now cooperate strategically. Their modern collaboration demonstrates the necessity of adaptation and pragmatic alliance rather than ideological purity (Oishi et al., 2022). Similarly, the Zheng He expeditions (1405–1433) illustrate the precolonial agency of the Global South. These voyages, reaching East Africa and the Indian Ocean, predated European colonial intrusion and reflect early patterns of South-South diplomacy and maritime trade (Chen, 2019; Lin & Zhang, 2015).

Moreover, Global South societies are inherently pluralistic. Nigeria, for instance, exhibits deep divides along religious, ethnic, and linguistic lines. These divisions are structural and cannot be easily reformed, highlighting the limits of rapid sociopolitical engineering. Simultaneously, millions of Global South citizens live in the USA, Europe, and other Western countries, benefiting from systems they often critique, which underscores the paradoxical nature of Global South autonomy.

Colonial Legacies, Institutional Dependency, and Social Divisions

Colonial powers imposed governance structures, legal frameworks, and education systems that continue to shape postcolonial societies (Mbembe, 2001; Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, 1986). In Nigeria — notably the Babara region — British-style administration, missionary education, and legal systems produced local elites integrated into Western paradigms.

Deep societal fragmentation further complicates postcolonial reform. Nigeria is divided along religious lines (Christian, Muslim, indigenous faiths), ethnic divisions, and linguistic groups. Such divisions are structurally embedded and central to political life. Consequently, any attempt at rapid social homogenisation risks instability (Cohen, 2008).

*Diaspora, Western Comfort, and Structural Paradox*

Diaspora communities play a paradoxical role in the Global South’s pursuit of autonomy. Millions live in Western countries, benefitting from political, educational, and economic stability (Nye, 2004). According to the Nigerians in Diaspora Commission (NiDCOM), approximately 17 million Nigerians live abroad, remitting over US$ 90 billion over the past five years, with significant personal spending in Nigeria itself (NiDCOM, 2025; Nairametrics, 2025a; 2025b).

Thus, many Global South citizens rely on Western infrastructures for survival and prosperity, even while their homelands strive for independence. This structural paradox demonstrates that sovereignty must often be pursued through existing systems rather than by rejecting them outright.

Darwinian Adaptation: A Framework for Strategic Agency

Darwin’s principle — that adaptation, not raw strength, dictates survival — provides an instructive metaphor for the Global South. Communities that adopt and selectively reform inherited Western administrative, legal, and educational systems frequently demonstrate greater resilience (Mbembe, 2001). Similarly, historical observation shows that Western powers have strategically supported diverse religious actors, including Muslims and Christians, based on geopolitical interests rather than ideological consistency, highlighting the primacy of pragmatic adaptation over dogma (Chen, 2019).

The Global South’s strategic goal should thus be hybridisation: internalising and repurposing Western structures while concurrently building independent, self-reliant institutions.

Geopolitical Realities: China, India, and Limits of Replacement

China now presents itself as a global alternative through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, replacement of Western dominance is constrained by:

1. Embedded Western legacies: Legal, educational, and financial systems remain influenced by Western models.

2. Diaspora dependencies: Communities abroad rely on Western countries for security and opportunity.

3. Social complexity: Pluralistic societies resist ideological or structural replacement without risk of conflict.

4. Historical memory: The India–China rivalry demonstrates that cooperation requires strategic realism (Sun, 1992; Lin & Zhang, 2015).

Therefore, while China offers a partial alternative, the Global South’s optimal path lies in hybrid resilience: engaging selectively with Western structures while building South-South mechanisms.

Policy Recommendations

1. Strategic Engagement: Maintain active participation in global institutions (e.g., UN, WTO, IMF) while reinforcing South-South frameworks like GSEF and GOSCCIMA.

2. Education Reform: Blend Western critical models with indigenous languages, histories, and governance traditions to develop hybrid intellectual capacities.

3. Diaspora Policy: Engage diaspora communities not only for remittances but as partners in knowledge transfer, institutional strengthening, and development initiatives.

4. Capacity Building: Invest in domestic legal, technological, engineering, and financial infrastructure via regional institutions (e.g., GSEA) to reduce dependency on foreign expertise.

5. Historical and Social Realism: Integrate historical memory — Zheng He’s maritime legacy, India–China interactions, colonial institutional frameworks — into policy design, respecting social complexity.

Conclusion

The Global South’s pursuit of autonomy must embrace strategic realism. Western structures remain embedded in economic, political, and social systems, and diaspora communities depend on these systems. Yet through adaptation, hybridisation, and institution-building, the Global South can harness these inherited structures to achieve genuine agency and sovereignty.

“True sovereignty lies not in rejecting inherited systems, but in mastering and transforming them to build new, hybrid structures from within.”

References

Chen, Z., 2019. Toward a Global Network Revolution: Zheng He’s Maritime Voyages and Tribute‑Trade Relations between China and the Indian Ocean World. China and Asia, 1(1), pp.3–39.

Cohen, R., 2008. Global Diasporas: An Introduction. London: Routledge.

Lin, M. & Zhang, R., 2015. Zheng He’s Voyages to Hormuz: The Archaeological Evidence. Antiquity, 89(344), pp.417–432.

Mbembe, A., 2001. On the Postcolony. Durham: Duke University Press.

Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o, 1986. Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. London: James Currey.

Nairametrics, 2025a. Diaspora remittances hit over $90 billion in five years. Available at: https://nairametrics.com/2025/03/01/diaspora-remittances-hit-over-90-billion-in-five-years-nidcom/ [Accessed 16 Nov 2025].

Nairametrics, 2025b. Nigerians in diaspora spent N60 billion in December 2024 – NiDCOM. Available at: https://nairametrics.com/2025/01/17/nigerians-in-diaspora-spent-n60-billion-in-december-2024-nidcom/ [Accessed 16 Nov 2025].

NiDCOM, 2025. Remittance – Nigerians in Diaspora Commission. Available at: https://nidcom.gov.ng/remittance/ [Accessed 16 Nov 2025].

Nye, J., 2004. Soft Power: The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.

Sun, G., 1992. Zheng He’s Expeditions to the Western Ocean and His Navigation Technology. Journal of Navigation, 45(3), pp.329–343.

© NILA BALA | SMALL DROPS