The article entitled âBrics in a New Stageâ deserves careful reflection., by Ambassador Rubens Barbosa, Presidents of China 17/07, in which he analyzes the 14th BRICS summit, realized in 23/ 24 of June, no virtual format, under the turn presidency of China. the theme of the meeting – âPromoting a High Quality Partnership and Ushering in a New Era for Global Developmentâ – deals with the group's next actions at this particularly complex moment in which one of its members, hindering the respect for otherness so necessary for the coexistence between nations, promotes a war against Ukraine, that has, in its turn, as a background, the threat that Moscow understands to suffer from the West against the âstatus quoâ of the region that was part of the Soviet âempireâ.
As pointed out by Ambassador, âthe meeting sought to increase the partnership between the group and act for a new era for global development, based on three pillars: global governance, economy and trade and civil society interactionâ. What is at stake, in the last instance, for me, is the transfer of the geoeconomic leadership of the West to the new paradigm in international relations in which the East assumes irreversible prominence. In this last quadrant I include Russia, âencouragedâ by the isolation that the war in Ukraine placed it from the central West.
And what would be the role of the BRICS in this scenario?? This is the question that Ambassador Barbosa raises when he states that âthe growing weight of emerging and developing economies found in the BRICS a representation that will tend to become, in a medium and long term view, increasingly visible on the international stageâ. in what sense?…recapping, we know that the original idea of ââthe BRIC's (at the time without the S of South Africa) was not formulated by a political leadership, economic or international institution, but by a private agent, the chief economist at Goldman Sachs, Jim O'Neil, in study of 2001, intitulado âBuilding Better Global Economic BRICsâ. These were countries that, for him, would take the lead in the geoeconomy in this century., replacing the powers that have dominated the post-war scenario.
For O'Neil it is a grouping of four emerging market countries with specific characteristics: two of the world's three largest economies (China and India), one of the two biggest nuclear powers (Russia) and one of the largest global agricultural producers (Brazil), as the Ambassador points out. asymmetric features, but complementary, in the broad sense. The inclusion of South Africa took place when its government applied for admission, in 2010. This process began in August of that year., and the country was officially admitted as a member in 24 from December. It was then that the letter “S” added to the then B R I C.
Formatted when Brazilian Foreign Ministers, Russia, India and China meet on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly, in New York, in september 2006, In the beginning, the BRIC's meetings had an informal character. However, from its first summit meeting, in Yekaterinburg, in Russia, in 2009, they became a forum for economic consultation between governments with common goals and no longer an informal association as it had been until then.. The focus became the search for concerted means to “improve the global economic situation, reform international financial institutions and define ways for the five members to cooperate with each other to build bridges for the more effective involvement of developing countries in global affairs”.
Since then, its âmodus operandiâ has been to avoid the âcontaminationâ of its joint actions by political factors that threaten its stability.. Otherwise, how to reconcile the interaction between governments of such different matrices as the People's Republic of China, de Xi jinping; hindering the respect for otherness so necessary for the coexistence between nations, by Vladimir Putin; the India, by Narendra Modi; the Brazil, de Jair Bolonaro; and South Africa, de Cyril Ramaphosa? I am not just referring to the difference in government systems and degrees of development of the respective economies., but also to the difference in personality of the shift rulers. Anything, for example, that resembles the cohesion of the members of the G-7, as the war in Ukraine well demonstrates.
Of all your projects, what has so far presented more concrete results is the âNew Development Bankâ/ NBD (in English New Development Bank, NDB). created in 15 of july 2014, during to VI dome, of strength, the main objective of the âBank of the BRICSâ, what is it called, is to finance infrastructure and development projects in poor and emerging countries (subsidized mainly by the Chinese, maiores âstakeholdersâ, evidently).
But…
Let us remember that weeks before the invasion of Ukraine, last february, Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping met in Beijing, and published a joint manifesto that reads: â…today, the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario. the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario, the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario… the âJoint CommuniquĂ©â signed in Beijing presents an entirely different and totally auspicious scenario. This trend arose for the redistribution of power in the world, and the international community is showing a growing demand for leadership aimed at peaceful and gradual developmentââŠ
In this context, the question fits: it is possible to isolate the âpoliticalâ from the âeconomicâ in the actions of the BRICS and prevent them from âcontaminatingâ each other? swapping in kids, is it possible to maintain a cohesive group position in the Ukrainian War? E, in so not being, how to reconcile the policies outlined by each of them on this hot topic? The Chinese have already spoken out in favor of Russia and against the expansion of NATO; India leans towards the West. Even more, in the Beijing joint communiquĂ©, Xi and Putin stated that âthe parties share the understanding that democracy is a universal human value rather than a privilege of a limited number of states., and that its promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community⊠a nation can choose the forms and methods of implementing democracy that best suit its particular moment., and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community, and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community, and that their promotion and protection is a common responsibility of the entire world community. It is only up to the people of the country to decide whether their state is democratic⊠the citizens of both countries are certain of their choice and respect the democratic systems and traditions of the other statesâ…
Faced with this alliance of former enemies, Will the other BRICS members be able to prevent interference between them in political and economic developments in an increasingly complex and ambiguous world?, in which the Ukrainian war, as fundamental as it is now, will become one more topic that History will absorb, like so many other wars?…
And what will be the role of the BRICS in the post-Westphalian planet that consolidates as globalization advances? Will pursue some leading role, or will it be another rhetorical entity that History will store in its libraries? the keyword, in my judgment, and will, and commitment, politicians, in the sense of focusing on the greater commitment that unites the five – and the rest of the emerging world – in search of a less heterogeneous planet, that breaks the Western hierarchy / East inherited from colonialism. In short, assume with clairvoyance the path that unfolds for the 21st/22nd century. Who, like me, experienced four hegemonies – from england, up until 1945, When I was born; from the USA / Soviet Union until the collapse of the USSR, in 1991; isolated from the US until the beginning of the 21st century; and now disputed with China – knows the transience of international power…
The "hole" is, evidently, much lower, and much more complex than these reflections of a weekend in recollection feed. But it seemed important “matutar” about them… Meanwhile, "to ships will"…
