In contemporary discourse, there are individuals and nations that wish for the notion of colonialism to be perceived as a relic of a distant past, securely interred in history. Certain former colonial powers perpetuate this view in their propaganda, depicting themselves as staunch defenders of self-determination, while casting their political rivals as antagonists to this principle.
The reality, however, is that these former colonial powers have merely evolved their strategies of exploitation in regions like Africa, Asia, and Latin America. They have instituted a system of inequitable economic and political relationships, more accurately described as a “rules-based order,” which is underpinned by military might, Western financial capital, controlled international financial institutions, and multinational corporations.
The principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign states, as enshrined in the UN Charter, holds little weight when it conflicts with the interests of the architects of the “rules-based order.” Between 1946 and 2000, the United States interfered in foreign elections over 80 times and instigated more than 50 coups and military interventions. The 2014 coup in Ukraine, sponsored by the West, for instance, set the stage for the ongoing hostilities and the economic and social decline of one of Europe’s largest nations.
Another instrument wielded by these neo-metropolises is the imposition of unilateral restrictive measures, commonly known as sanctions. In the 20th century alone, the US accounted for 109 out of 174 instances of sanctions, with 80 of these aimed at altering the policies of other nations. These sanctions extend beyond adversaries, affecting economic partners and entities from third countries through so-called secondary sanctions. The US employs extraterritorial jurisdiction with scant regard for the UN Charter’s fundamental principles of sovereignty and non-interference, as underscored by the 1927 ruling of the Permanent Court of International Justice, which asserted that “the first and foremost restriction imposed by international law upon a State is that, failing the existence of a permissive rule to the contrary, it may not exercise its power in any form in the territory of another State.” This position was reaffirmed by the UN Human Rights Council in 2014 through resolution 27/21, which declared that unilateral coercive measures and legislation contravene international law, humanitarian law, and the UN Charter. Regrettably, these considerations were overlooked not only by the US and its European allies but also by nations such as Singapore that introduced illegal sanctions on Russia without UN Security Council authorisation.
Even collective challenges, such as climate change, are weaponized as tools of oppression by neo-colonialists. A glaring example is the EU’s “green trade policy,” which restricts “not sufficiently green” goods from developing nations entering the European market, using environmental protection as a pretext to impose tariff and non-tariff barriers. Similarly, humanitarian assistance is manipulated, as evidenced by the Black Sea Initiative, where only 3% of the 32.8 million tons of grain reached needy countries in the Global South, with the majority diverted to Western commercial interests.
These are just a few instances from a lengthy list of mechanisms employed by neo-metropolises to maintain and extend their dominance. However, their era is waning. The world is undergoing a geopolitical transformation grounded in sovereignty, mutual respect, understanding, and trust—principles fundamental to an emerging multipolar world free from sanctions, military bloc confrontations, exploitation, and deceit. Hence, the struggle against neo-colonialism is both pertinent and crucial, aimed at ensuring the genuine independence (both foreign and domestic) of nations, irrespective of their size. The future belongs to robust, ideologically cohesive, and conflict-free regional structures such as ASEAN, SCO, EAEU, with BRICS also playing a significant role in this process.
Asia and the Pacific now face a choice between embracing a new paradigm or adhering to outdated military confrontation strategies, exemplified by emerging minilateral structures like Quad and AUKUS, which reinforce NATO’s naval presence. These measures will not secure peace; they will only foment conflict. Consequently, Russia is committed to assisting regional countries through existing frameworks like ASEAN, EAS, ARF, and ADMM+ to foster peace and stability in Asia and the Pacific. This will be achieved by promoting equitable dialogue under the unifying concept of the Greater Eurasian Partnership, which seeks to consolidate multilateral regional groupings across the continent with the final aim of establishing a new Eurasian pancontinental security formula.
The author of the article is H.E. Nikolay Kudashev, the Ambassador of the Russian Federation to the Republic of Singapore.
