The study analyzes soft power's role in boosting economic partnerships in the global South, highlighting multilateral cooperation.
Development cooperation between the North and the global South undergoes dynamic process of change due to the strategic struggle over control of global resources and markets to determine who gets what, when and how. In the pursuit of these goals, bilateral cooperation between the North and the South is gradually been replaced with multilateral cooperation among countries of the global South. Therefore, the study seeks to analyse the model of soft power as a tool for stimulating economic, diplomatic and development cooperation among countries of the global South. This changing context encourages horizontal partnership among developing countries based on the ethics of equity, mutual benefit and long term economic relations. Such economic partnership provides an alternative to USA and Western European development initiatives and ideology. Considering these two-dimensional premises, the study adopts the dependency theory to describe the dynamic variables of South-South cooperation. The application of this theory shows that South-South collaboration is a group effort to break free from the exploitative economic ties with the North and redress the imbalance in the global capitalist system. Therefore, the study reveals that the new dimension of South-South cooperation is gradually replacing the vertical relation between the North and South with a new form of horizontal partnership founded on the philosophy of multilateralism. Based on the findings, the researchers conclude that South-South cooperation with its mechanism of soft power diplomacy is a valuable system that fosters favourable balance of economic power between the North and the South by getting through the challenges of inequality, food security and de- industrialization in the global South.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Enwere et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: