As much of the world focuses on Greece’s travails, the BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — have been working to advance their own economic agenda, most recently at their seventh annual summit in the Siberian city of Ufa. However, even though Russia hosted the meeting, China was viewed as dominating the grouping.
Indeed, the BRICS have already proved to be a force multiplier for Chinese diplomacy and can remain so if China is careful not to push its national interests too hard.
So far, China has played a pivotal role in driving progress toward real cooperation among the BRICS countries. In recent weeks, its members have each pledged $US10 billion to their New Development Bank, which should start lending next year; released a common strategy for economic and trade cooperation; and agreed to a US$100 billion contingency fund to provide temporary assistance to members facing balance-of-payments pressures.
Nonetheless, the BRICS’ future remains uncertain, owing to strong economic headwinds. In fact, many Western observers have come to believe that the BRICS are broken. Morgan Stanley’s Ruchir Sharma has emphasized that the winners of the past decade might not continue to win in this one. Even Jim O’Neill, who coined the term “BRIC,” has turned his attention to the “MINT” economies — Mexico, Indonesia, Nigeria, and Turkey — the BRICS’ key emerging-country competitors.
However, not everyone is bearish about the BRICS’ prospects and global influence, whether taken individually or as a grouping.
Journalist Gideon Rachman has suggested: “The rise of non-Western economies is a deeply rooted historic shift that can survive any number of economic and political shocks.”
China seems to be counting on that being true.
In fact, the BRICS countries remain an economic force to be reckoned with, accounting for 25.7 percent of world GDP, 42 percent of the global population and 17 percent of total trade. They attract more than 18 percent of the global total of foreign investment, hold 40 percent of all foreign-exchange reserves and account for 30 percent of total foreign holdings of US Treasury bonds.
Moreover, the BRICS consumption markets are worth more than US$4 trillion, equivalent to those of the eurozone. According to Goldman Sachs, about 85 percent of the world’s middle class will be living in the BRICS and other developing countries by 2030. Moreover, with many of the factors that have fueled the BRICS’ rapid growth — including relatively low labor costs, rising productivity, trade liberalization, and the free flow of information and capital — still in play, writing off the BRICS would be premature.
Still, the BRICS have work to do. By delaying structural reforms, they have allowed their economies to accumulate risks and imbalances that have eroded their long-term health.
Working together, the BRICS have a better chance of implementing the reforms needed to boost their economies’ resilience — an opportunity that they have already identified. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s administration has sought massive support from China in implementing its national manufacturing policy and overcoming obstacles to developing infrastructure.
The Chinese government is now going further, urging the rest of the BRICS to institutionalize their cooperation, not just pursue domestic reform. China contends that a stronger BRICS grouping would help to safeguard the interests of all developing countries. To that end, the country is also spearheading the effort to reform the global economic architecture, including a push for reforms to the IMF’s weighted voting system.
However, despite the potential benefits of such efforts for emerging and developing economies, they have provoked considerable anxiety among China’s BRICS partners, which fear that its leadership could quickly morph into domination. Beyond fundamental differences in the BRICS’ countries political systems, social values, and cultural traditions — factors that undermine trust and cohesion — there is the obvious fact that China’s economy (not to mention its military) dwarfs the others.
Indeed, bilateral trade between China and the other four BRICS accounts for 85 percent of total intra-BRICS trade. Furthermore, China’s BRICS partners face keen competition from cheap Chinese-manufactured goods (intensified by what many view as China’s undervalued currency). Most trade-related complaints against China in the WTO in recent years were lodged by developing countries, including India and Brazil. China’s relationship with India is particularly fraught, owing to their seemingly intractable territorial dispute, as well as disagreements over the reform of the UN Security Council.
If China wants the BRICS to continue to deepen their ties, it should seek to act as a guiding hand within the grouping, adopting an approach that is more prudent than pushy. That means, above all, curbing its geopolitical competition with India and Russia. At the same time, in dealing with its advanced-country counterparts, it should be open and pragmatic, championing an inclusive global policy agenda that connects the developed and developing worlds.
A united anti-West bloc would not serve China’s interests any more than a grouping characterized by antagonism and divisions. What China — and the rest of the emerging and developing economies — needs is a nimble and cohesive BRICS grouping with a strong reputation as a leading provider of global public goods.
Minghao Zhao is a research fellow at the Charhar Institute in Beijing, an adjunct fellow at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China, and a member of the China National Committee of the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific (CSCAP).
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations