Abstract
The West is entangled in a seeming paradox: it abhors the war in Ukraine but continues to fund it by
buying oil and gas from Russia (with Germany as the main Western buyer) and giving billions of
dollars in weapon aid to Ukraine (with the United States as the main donor). Although “severe”
sanctions have been imposed, they are yet to significantly affect Russia’s ability to continue the war.
Presently, Russia’s lower sales volume is compensated by the soaring prices. The Russia-Ukraine war
is “global” due to its adverse “cluster and scattered” effects (like the cluster bombs and “scatterable”
munitions allegedly used by Russia in Ukraine). The sanctions adversely affect less well-off
Westerners through increasing energy and food prices [1, 2] which some governments alleviate
through tax reductions and other support measures. Unfortunately, the vulnerable populations of the
Global South, with very little leverage to end the war, bear the greater brunt of the sanctions’ adverse
effects.
War has been described as a man-made public health problem [3]. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine
is a typical example of a catastrophe in the globalized world. It is also an example of manufactured
risk; sadly, risk-sharing is unavoidable. The sociologists Ulrich Beck and Anthony Giddens
described the world as a risk society [4, 5]. Since the world is socio-spatially compressed,
most high-level events will have global consequences. As Beck observed, unequal distribution
of risk is a reality as risk often settles at the lower rung of society. Russia’s war inUkraine is a global
event with considerable adverse consequences impacting disproportionately on vulnerable
populations, mostly in the Global South.
The primary war victims comprise the deceased, injured and displaced in Ukraine and Russia.
Many of the secondary victims or casualties are in the Global South, groaning about the
concomitant war-related rise in food and energy costs, weakening the already fragile
livelihood system and thus, upsurging the poverty and hunger counts. For instance, the warrelated
inflation shock will push over one million more Nigerians into poverty [6]. Significant
inflation and supply disruption mean that “the world’s poor could be forced to do without (food)”
[7]. Worse still, there are limited or no social security benefits to protect the vulnerable populations
in the Global South. For instance, only 18% of Africa’s population has adequate access to at least
one form of social protection [8]. While there are apparent adverse effects on economic growth and
poverty reduction, it is early to estimate the other multiplier effects on education, employment,
crime, social unrest, social amenities and well-being, including morbidity, mortality and access to
healthcare.
Consequently, as the war lingers and theWest imposes sanctions, we all feel the pain—not only
or even mainly populations of theWest [7]. For the Global South, the war is like a spanner thrown
in the wheel of progress toward the Sustainable Development Goals. It is a massive global health
concern.War is always a path of inhumanity. Although the greater responsibility rests on Russia to
end the invasion, it takes all stakeholders, including NATO and the United States, to stop the war.