The Rise of the Global South and China's Role: An Interview with Indian-American Scholar Vijay Prashad
Vijay Prashad (1967– ), an Indian-American scholar and PhD from the University of Chicago, is the Executive Director of the Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research and the Chief Correspondent for Globetrotter. Prashad has published over 30 books, with representative works including On Cuba: Reflections on 70 Years of Revolution and Struggle, The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South, and The Darker Nations: A People's History of the Third World.
I. India’s Social Contradictions and the Communist Movement
Q (Zhao Dingqi, same below): How did you grow up to be a Marxist? What do you think is the practical significance of Marxism in the 21st century?
A (Vijay Prashad, same below): I grew up in Kolkata and Northern India. As a youth, the poverty in cities and villages affected me deeply. I felt a profound disgust toward the grotesque inequalities of life and the ubiquitous feudal-style social relations—especially the social hierarchy under the caste system [1]. My parents taught me to be a person of integrity and to behave with propriety, but in such an unjust society, these values seemed impossible to maintain. I felt angry at the world. When I began participating in small-scale struggles and reading the works of Marx, I realized that while anger is necessary, it is far from enough. I needed to join an organization; I needed a theory of social transformation. This prompted me to conduct deep academic research to explore the roots of Indian social inequality (my doctoral dissertation focused on the social history of oppressed caste groups), while also driving me to throw myself into the struggle for social change, leading me to join the left-wing movement.
Marxism is an evolving science and the most accurate critique of capitalism. As long as capitalism exists, Marxism must necessarily exist—unless a theory for the critique of capitalism emerges that is even more profound and clearer than Marxism. When Marx published Capital in 1867, he pointed out that the exploitation of the working class produces surplus value, and it is this surplus value that allows capital to accumulate in the hands of capitalists, while workers sink further into poverty amidst this accumulation. Competition between capitalists leads to overproduction and a crisis of social totality. To date, no better critique of capitalism than Marxism has emerged.
Q: In recent decades, Indian society has experienced rapid economic development. However, under the capitalist system, various contradictions in Indian society remain acute. What are the primary social conflicts India currently faces? What forms of social oppression are the Indian people facing?
A: Part of the reason the Indian economy achieved rapid growth is that after national independence, long-suppressed social needs began to be released. At the same time, the lag in infrastructure became an urgent problem to solve—and though it remains thoroughly unresolved to this day, it did contribute to economic growth. However, it must be noted that this growth is uneven. The primary economic problem India faces is the state’s failure to implement effective land reform, which makes it difficult to achieve social equality in rural areas. The deep-rooted nature of social inequality—especially the stubborn persistence of the caste system—means that traditional relations of subordination remain [2], and this inequality intensifies as the wealth of the affluent classes increases. Therefore, although the Indian economy has achieved growth, this growth is extremely lopsided and unequal. This has led to massive social unrest, which the Indian bourgeois government attempts to suppress through violent means, including legal measures that label dissenters as "anti-national" and the harsh suppression of social protests.
Q: Currently, what is the developmental status of the Indian communist movement? Which are the primary Marxist political parties and organizations?
A: Because of the stagnation of trade union movements in manufacturing and services, along with the slump in the movement of rural agricultural workers, the Indian communist movement is currently in a period of low ebb. In the neoliberal era, the fragmentation of society and workplaces has led to a low level of organization among the working class in both urban and rural areas. The weakening of working-class power has led to the weakening of left-wing forces. The Indian communist movement is primarily composed of three parties: the Communist Party of India (Marxist), the Communist Party of India, and the Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist). These parties are legal and play a certain role in national and state parliaments. Additionally, there is the banned Communist Party of India (Maoist), which is mainly active in rural areas. The total number of people covered by these parties reaches hundreds of millions, but they are currently insufficient to push forward certain key agendas.
II. The Rise of the Global South and the "Belt and Road" Initiative
Q: When was the concept of the "Global South" first proposed? How do you understand this concept? What does it mean in the present moment?
A: The term "Global South" first drew widespread international attention in the 1980 report of the Brandt Commission. In that report, the word "South" referred to those countries mired in poverty, while "North" referred to the former colonialist countries. Subsequently, the South Commission provided a more in-depth interpretation of this concept in 1989. This commission was chaired by the former President of Tanzania, Julius Kambarage Nyerere, and its members included Qian Jiadong, who had been the foreign affairs secretary to former Premier of the State Council [3] Zhou Enlai. The purpose of the South Commission’s discussion of this concept was to encourage developing countries to formulate development agendas suited to their own national conditions. The commission studied the remarkable development results achieved by China's Shenzhen Special Economic Zone and proposed a development agenda. This agenda emphasized that the dependent status of developing countries was not unchangeable; through technology transfer and the rational use of domestic resources, developing countries could likewise achieve breakthroughs. Compared to the old modernization development agenda, this idea undoubtedly possessed a more advanced, forward-looking character.
Q: In your 2014 book The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South, you suggested that the term "Global South" should not merely refer to a geographic space, but to a series of protest activities directed against neoliberalism. Why do you believe this?
A: Around 2010, a series of protests broke out across the Global South against the debt austerity mechanisms pushed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). At that time, there seemed to be no way out of this predicament. These protests themselves seemed to serve as the hallmark of the post-financial crisis era. However, a striking shift subsequently occurred, which I mentioned in my work but had not yet theorized: the rise of a more confident South, which I later called the "new mood of the Global South." The establishment of the BRICS countries [4] marked this shift, but equally important was the continuous refinement of a new development theory and the establishment of new financial and multilateral development institutions (including the New Development Bank established by BRICS in 2014). These initiatives marked the transition of Global South countries from an era of protest to an era of construction. Whether this new architecture can begin to replace the IMF's debt austerity mechanism is the question facing our era. We are standing at a crossroads of this dilemma. Whether the IMF's debt austerity mechanism will continue to hold the upper hand in the future, or whether a new development theory and architecture will be established, is something we still cannot accurately predict.
Q: After the end of World War II, although colonialism exited the stage of history, the exploitation and oppression of the Global South by imperialist countries persisted, forming neocolonialism. What are the manifestations of neocolonialism?
A: "Neocolonialism" is a concept proposed in 1965 by the first Prime Minister and President of Ghana, Kwame Nkrumah, referring to countries that have obtained political sovereignty but cannot control their own economies. This inability to control occurs because these countries depend on overseas borrowing for almost all affairs (even public finance) and are forced to allow foreign companies to extract their resources because the state itself possesses neither the capital nor the technology or professional expertise. This lack of financial and technological strength makes these countries prey for their former colonial masters. In the current era, for many countries, the basic framework of neocolonialism remains, and it is further exacerbated by the endless upward spiral of debt. This makes development impossible. This is the structure of contemporary neocolonialism. It is precisely this structure that gave rise to dependency theory, which Andre Gunder Frank expressed as the "development of underdevelopment."
Q: You once mentioned the "self-replication of colonial structures and institutions" in a speech. How is this "self-replication" carried out?
A: Many workers in former colonies in Asia, Africa, and Latin America can now only earn "sub-human" wages. We are told that people in these countries have very low cultural levels, so they can be paid very little to dig copper ore, iron ore, and various natural resources out of the ground—providing them only with a little water, some onions or flour, or a cheap smartphone—as if these people do not need to enter the modern world and can forever survive at a low stage of human civilization. This is a repulsive idea. To some extent, the entire system of capitalism is structured upon these workers forced to take low wages. This is a colonial structure that recurs generation after generation. Even though these countries have achieved nominal independence, their economies remain trapped in colonial structures. They are forced to borrow money from the IMF, which says, "We can lend you money, but only on the condition that you weaken your healthcare system, and cut subsidies for education and pensions," and so on. This is the reproduction of colonial structures.
However, a country like China did not get trapped by this; it trod its own path. That China has escaped Western oppression today is not merely because of China’s unique cultural traditions; a more important reason is that in 1949, the Communist Party of China led the New Democratic Revolution [5] to a great victory and established the People's Republic of China. When Mao Zedong said "the Chinese people have stood up," a new spirit was born on the foundation of fine traditional Chinese culture; this is a very powerful force. China rejected neocolonialism; China seeks to achieve its own industrial and agricultural modernization independently, improve the living standards of its own people, and provide them with all services including healthcare and education.
Q: In recent years, the Global South, represented by China, has risen rapidly. What impact will this have on the global order?
A: The South Commission specifically explored several "locomotive" countries of the Global South, hoping that these countries, with their advantages in population and land size, could achieve rapid development and lead other countries to join the ranks of development. To some extent, this vision has been realized. China successfully broke free from the shackles of "dependency." The People's Republic of China benefited from the socialist revolution and construction during the Mao Zedong era, nurturing a highly educated and healthy population. Domestic savings combined with foreign investment within a government-managed financial system, while the transfer of capital and technology and the introduction of scientific knowledge together promoted the country’s industrialization process and the elevation of overall productive forces. Other countries such as Vietnam have adopted similar, though relatively moderate, socialist development strategies, achieving high economic growth. China’s rise has not only inspired other countries, such as Indonesia and Bangladesh, but has also helped them escape the predicament of dependency from which it is difficult to extricate oneself. It is precisely due to China’s influence that Indonesia was able to ban the export of unprocessed nickel to promote its own industrialization process; it is also because of China’s rise that the bright prospects of industrialization have reappeared on the African continent.
Q: How do you understand the significance of China’s "Belt and Road" initiative for the Global South?
● The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)—initially proposed in 2013—is closely linked to the Chinese government's efforts to move away from reliance on US and European markets following the 2008 international financial crisis. China gradually realized that Northern markets would not remain open to countries like China forever. To open new markets, China not only needed to continue advancing the Great Western Development [6] strategy and extend it into Central Asia, but also committed to building infrastructure across the Global South to promote more harmonious economic cooperation with these regions. From 2013 to 2024, China’s total engagement in the BRI reached $1.175 trillion, encompassing investments, loans, and grants. This figure marks a major shift in the development agenda. Although a certain degree of research has been conducted on the BRI, in-depth study of its totality remains insufficient. I hope more scholars can go deep into BRI project sites, accumulate more empirical experience, and explore development theories adapted to this new phenomenon.
○ You mentioned that to understand Chinese-path modernization, we should not forget three specific years: 1949, 1978, and 2013. Why do you believe this?
● The first key year is 1949. When exploring a country’s history, we sometimes focus on specific periods or events while ignoring the continuity of historical experience. For contemporary China, the Eleventh Central Committee’s Third Plenary Session of the CPC in 1978, which made the great decision to implement reform and opening up, was undoubtedly a turning point with profound influence. However, this focus sometimes fails to fully recognize the major achievements of the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949 and the subsequent socialist revolution and construction under the leadership of Mao Zedong. Without land reform, the reshaping of social relations, the establishment of financial and production management institutions, and the accumulation from early industrialization, the economic reforms after 1978 would have found it difficult to achieve success. Therefore, 1949 is an indispensable, key year in the journey of China's transformation.
The second important year is 1978. This is because it was recognized at the time that if the social productive forces were not increased, the Chinese economy would stagnate, unable to meet the needs of the people or play an internationalist role on the world stage. Consequently, China allowed the entry of foreign capital and technology—provided they aligned with the strategic planning of China's socialist construction. This influx of technology and foreign funds enabled China to liberate and develop its social productive forces and become one of the world's most powerful economic engines. This is the second important year, related to reform and opening up.
The third key year is 2013. At that time, two important trends became evident: first, that North American and European markets could no longer absorb the goods produced by China; second, that social inequality had to be reduced as much as possible, and capital development had to be regulated and guided healthily. The New Era of socialism with Chinese characteristics will be remembered by history as an era in which China, through the Belt and Road Initiative, shifted from reliance on Northern markets toward constructing Southern markets; China accelerated its social equality agenda and completed the arduous task of eliminating absolute poverty. These reforms, driven by President Xi Jinping, were marked precisely by the proposal of the Belt and Road Initiative in 2013. This is the third important year. We shall wait and see what other landmark years emerge in the future.
○ You once mentioned that one of the characteristics of the Communist Party of China's leadership of socialist construction is its "experimental" nature. Why do you say this?
● All 20th-century socialist practices took place in countries that were relatively backward economically. This lived reality dictated that countries carrying out socialist revolution and construction had to conduct "experimental" explorations: they had to promote the development of social productive forces while maintaining a degree of social equality and simultaneously constructing an advanced socialist culture. To achieve this goal, flexible and diverse measures are required. For example, at certain times, private enterprises are permitted to exist in different forms, but they must be subject to restrictions. Socialist construction cannot follow old tracks; it must have the courage to try new methods. Taking China as an example, viewing China as a wealthy country is merely an unrealistic fantasy; China's development experience is typical of developing countries. Since the 19th century, China suffered under long-term imperialist oppression, and it was not until 2021 that it declared the completion of the arduous task of eliminating absolute poverty. Therefore, socialist construction requires constant exploration and the testing of different development paths; this is the attitude socialism should uphold. The "experimental" nature of socialism is reflected in the use of pragmatic mechanisms to promote the progress of human society, which requires us to maintain flexibility and openness and avoid acting with rigidity. When one method does not work, we should adjust strategies in a timely manner and try other ways. In the process of exploration, one must maintain an open mind, but the premise is to ensure that policies can enhance the people's well-being without destroying the natural environment, always maintaining the harmony between humanity and nature.
III. Trump’s Return to the White House and the Challenges to Global South Countries
○ In January 2025, Trump returns to the White House to begin his second term. What impact will this have on the Global South?
● Trump has abandoned the imperialist "idealism" that the United States pursued for 35 years and reintroduced a Henry Kissinger-style right-wing realism into US foreign policy. We must be aware of this shift. The US government no longer harbors the illusion of being able to shape the world in its own image. In my view, the US will adopt a more practical agenda: prioritizing the use of its power to drive the realization of its own interests and controlling the world by maintaining the status quo, rather than trying to transform it into some idealized form. This is clearly not progress. The structure of US imperialist hegemony has not changed, but the means it adopts will change. The US will continue to use forceful means, but the purpose is to safeguard its own interests rather than the interests of the global bourgeoisie. At present, it is not yet clear how the bourgeoisie of the Global South will respond to these changes. It is quite likely they have not yet realized that the US will no longer defend their interests but will instead fight for the maximum interests of its own bourgeoisie. Will this weaken the Global South bourgeoisie's faith in economic globalization? In other words, will a patriotic bourgeois stratum emerge in the Global South? We cannot give an answer yet. Of course, if the Global South bourgeoisie can recognize its own class interests, then this situation will occur sooner or later.
Trump is no ally of the Global South. He will push an imperialist line as harshly as he can. His advisors, particularly Elbridge Colby from the Department of Defense, have made it clear that obstructing China's economic and technological development is the top priority, and this obstruction will extend to other rapidly developing countries in the Global South. The efforts of Global South countries to strive for their own sovereignty will be struck down by the Trump administration. The only interest they protect is that of the US bourgeoisie, and they will use force to ensure it. Any illusions regarding Trump having a fundamental commitment against imperialism have been completely shattered by the issues in Gaza.
○ How should the Global South respond to the challenges posed by Western right-wing populism such as Trump?
● The Global South must remain vigilant and organized to defend its national sovereignty and the dignity of its people. We need to strengthen organizational capacity, for instance, by establishing more regional organizations and institutions to promote South-South trade and cooperation. It is worth looking back at a passage at the end of the South Commission report, The Challenge to the South (1989): "The South as a whole has enough markets, technology, and financial resources to make South-South cooperation an effective means of widening the development options for its economies. Strengthening South-South cooperation must be an essential part of the South’s strategy for self-reliant development. The South must enhance its own capacity to sustain a rapid pace of growth—even when the economic engines of the North are running at low speed." With the impact of Trump’s tariff policies on the American working class (reducing their annual consumption by at least $2,500), the US market will no longer be a market for Southern countries. South-South cooperation will have to be strengthened. But the quality of this cooperation needs improvement. It must maintain a harmonious state so that every country—no matter how small or poor—can benefit from development rather than be destroyed by it.
(Zhao Dingqi, staff reporter) Source: World Socialism Studies, No. 6, 2025 Web Editor: Huihui