USA
Author: William Grimes
Source: www.bu.edu

William Grimes, Associate Dean for Academic Affairs at the Frederick S. Pardee School of Global Studies at Boston University, was recently interviewed on the the impact of the BRICS countries on the new international economic order as well as the challenges the BRICS countries currently face.

Grimes was quoted in a September 12, 2017 article by Sina entitled "China Will Become The Leader of the BRICS Mechanism."

From the text of the article:

"I do not think that the BRICS countries as a unit have had much effect on global governance. However, there has clearly been a major expansion of the role of China, India, and (to a lesser extent) Brazil in global governance. This can be seen in their role in international trade agreements, international organizations such as the IMF and World Bank, and greater prominence in the UN system. In the case of China, its efforts in institution-building (including the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and Chiang Mai Initiative Multilateralization) as well as its economic and connectivity impact through its trade and investment networks as well as the Belt and Road Initiative are also substantial, and are significantly reshaping the broad regional order."

"China and Brazil are facing the "middle income challenge," in which increases in factors (labor, capital) alone are insufficient to maintain rapid economic growth. However, both have positive growth prospects given their levels of income. For India, Brazil, and South Africa, infrastructure is a major challenge, as is mass education. Both will hamper equitable growth. Russia's challenges are different – they include lack of industrial base, excessive dependence on resource extraction by oligopolistic companies, crony capitalism, and depopulation."

Grimes, who has taught at Boston University since 1996, is a leading scholar of East Asian financial regionalism. His 2008 book Currency and Contest in East Asia: The Great Power Politics of Financial Regionalism won the 2010 Masayoshi Ohira Memorial Prize and received Honorable Mention for the 2009 Asia Society Bernard Schwartz Book Award. More recently, in conjunction with the Pardee School's Global Economic Governance Initiative, he led a research project for the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) to develop a guide to best practices for regional liquidity arrangements.

USA
Author: Harsh V Pant
Source: yaleglobal.yale.edu

The abrupt hostilities that flared this summer at the tri-border region of Bhutan, China and India were settled peacefully. Harsh V Pant, professor of international relations, credits the BRICS summit meeting – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – for hastening agreement. "It would have been difficult for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to justify his presence at the summit with Indian and Chinese forces facing off each other at the border," he writes. "And for Chinese President Xi Jinping, keen on presenting himself as a global statesman, India's absence would have meant the beginning of the end of BRICS, tarnishing Xi's reputation in the run-up to the critical Communist Party Congress in October." For the long term, China and India have agreed to strengthen border-defense agreements and pursue closer communications between military personnel. Despite peaceful resolution, challenges remain with nationalistic tendencies displayed by leadership of both nations, unresolved border disputes, ongoing disagreement over policies regarding terrorism and Pakistan, and response to unsettling US disengagement from the region. In terms of GDP, China dominates the BRICS grouping. Still, Pant concludes that India relies on BRICS to counter the consequences of China's rise. – YaleGlobal

NEW DELHI: One week can be a long time in inter-state relations. In a week's time, India and China had kissed and made up after their armies stood eyeball to eyeball at the Doklam Plateau for more than two months. The trouble at the India-Bhutan-China tri-junction started June 16, when Indian soldiers detected construction activity on what is considered disputed territory on the Doklam Plateau. Chinese workers seemed to be building a road that would have allowed China to project power further into the territory claimed by Bhutan, thereby giving Beijing an ability to cut India's northeast from the mainland.

India's response was immediate. The government sent troops into Bhutan to halt the roadbuilding, demanding restoration of status quo ante. As the Indian external affairs minister explained in the Indian Parliament: "Our [Indian] concerns emanate from Chinese action on the ground which have implications for the determination of the tri-junction boundary point between India, China and Bhutan and the alignment of India-China boundary in the Sikkim sector." Sushma Swaraj added that "dialogue is the only way out of the Doklam standoff…and this should be seen in the context of the entire bilateral relationship."

China, for its part, demanded that India withdraw unconditionally from Doklam before any meaningful bilateral talks could be held, and state-owned media launched a shrill campaign, at times threatening war and issuing reminders of the 1962 conflict between the two countries and India's humiliating defeat. New Delhi was responsible in handling the crisis – refusing to be drawn into escalation by bellicose rhetoric and not losing its nerve. Tensions continued to rise through August 26 when disengagement was announced and an understanding reached with the withdrawal of Indian troops and cessation of Chinese road construction in the area.

Notwithstanding the spin used by both sides to justify disengagement, the BRICS summit played a key role in the final outcome as representatives of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa headed for Xiamen in early September. It would have been difficult for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to justify his presence at the summit with Indian and Chinese forces facing off each other at the border. And for Chinese President Xi Jinping, keen on presenting himself as a global statesman, India's absence would have meant the beginning of the end of BRICS, tarnishing Xi's reputation in the run-up to the critical Communist Party Congress in October.

As the scene shifted to Xiamen for the BRICS summit, India underscored its dissatisfaction with how BRICS member states dealt with the issue of terrorism during the previous summit in Goa. Despite India making terrorism a priority, China not only blocked India's attempts to include the names of Pakistan-based terror groups like Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Muhammad, LeT and JeM, in the 2016 BRICS declaration, but openly defended Pakistan after the summit, saying it opposed linking any country or religion with terror and asked the world community to acknowledge Pakistan's "great sacrifices."

A surprise was in store when this year's BRICS declaration named LeT and JeM along with the East Turkestan Islamic Movement and the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, reiterating agreements arrived at during the 2016 Heart of Asia summit. The agreement was not merely an acknowledgment that BRICS member states face common threats in the form of terrorism, but also a tribute to India's consistently strong stand on this issue. China warned Modi not to raise bilateral terrorism-related issues at the BRICS summit, but India made sure to put these on the agenda. By listing Pakistan-based terror organizations for the first time, the Xiamen declaration underlined changing regional realities for Pakistan, accustomed to using China as a shield against global pressure on terror.

Modi and Xi signaled efforts to move away from the bitterness engendered by the short-lived Doklam standoff by managing to present a united front at the BRICS summit. They agreed that Doklam-like situations should not be allowed to recur by charting new mechanisms to strengthen border-defense agreements that have held in the past and identified the need for closer communications between defense and security personnel. Both nations also sought convergence at the global level by underscoring their positions resisting economic protectionism of the kind that the Trump administration has been espousing, and the BRICS countries committed to an "open and inclusive" multilateral trading system.

After the resolution of the Doklam standoff and show of unity at the BRICS summit, a sense of normalcy has returned to Sino-Indian relations. But the underlying forces shaping this relationship – structural, domestic politics and individual – continue to make for a grim prognosis. India and China are two rising powers in the larger Asian strategic landscape which is being reshaped by American disengagement. Both are governed by nationalistic leaders who want to shape global politics to serve their national aspirations. And China, by diplomatically mishandling India, remains bereft of friends in India and continues to reinforce a perception that it is intent on scuttling India's rise. New Delhi will be carefully watching if the BRICS declaration on terrorist groups like LeT and JeM translates into action as early as during October when the issue of designating JeM chief Masood Azhar as a global terrorist is likely to come before the United Nations Security Council. China, for its part, has already started back-pedaling by reassuring Pakistan that there is no change in Chinese policy vis-à-vis its close ally.

India's presence may have salvaged the BRICS grouping this year, but the broader agenda inspires little confidence, considering the serious differences among member states on a range of economic issues. At a time when the global economy is passing through a difficult phase, there has hardly been any real reform of the global governance architecture. Apart from China and India, the remaining three member states of BRICS are facing economic decline. No wonder the Chinese president is calling for expansion of BRICS, and as he argued in his keynote speech at the summit's opening ceremony: "We should promote the 'BRICS Plus' cooperation approach and build an open and diversified network of development partnerships to get more emerging market and developing countries involved in our concerted endeavors for cooperation and mutual benefits."

The BRICS declaration also called for greater economic cooperation beyond the five-member bloc, including Egypt, Mexico and Thailand, but there is resistance. Even with five members, the platform struggles in balancing China. China's gross domestic product for 2016 was double that of the other four members combined. By bringing in other countries which it could manage, China's dominance might just be complete.

India could deftly leverage the BRICS summit in resolving the Doklam crisis as well as ensuring that its concerns are not marginalized. BRICS provides India with a platform to keep China engaged multilaterally as well as working with other members on matters of shared concern. In a reversal of sorts, BRICS for India today has become an instrument to manage the externalities – positive and negative – of China's exponential rise. The success and failure of the grouping, therefore, depends on how India and China manage bilateral relations. There is no guarantee that other points on the contested Sino-Indian border would not flare up again if political relations remain strained. And despite the peaceful resolution of the Doklam standoff and success of the BRICS summit, there are few reasons to be optimistic about the future trajectory of relations between Asia's two preeminent powers.

Harsh V Pant is a Distinguished Fellow at Observer Research Foundation, New Delhi, and professor of international relations, King's College London.

Germany
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

The recent BRICS Summit, hosted by China and held in the coastal town of Xiamen, showcased a much stronger partnership with greater responsibilities than ever before. There had been much talk prior to the gathering of the demise of the BRICS organization due to the downturn in international trade. And the recent tensions between China and India led some critics to predict that India would not be attending. But they have been proven wrong.

Indeed, it was undoubtedly the solidarity exhibited in the BRICS partnership which allowed the two countries' leaders to put the border dispute aside and to focus on their common interests as the largest developing nations. Both leaders stated after their bilateral meeting that the talks were productive and constructive.

China took the initiative to invite the leaders of five nonBRICS countries to attend the summit and to engage in a Dialogue of Emerging Markets and Developing Countries. The invitees, Egypt, Mexico, Thailand, Tajikistan and Guinea, come from all the major continents. As President Xi pointed out during the event, all emerging market and developing countries have great expectations for the BRICS, as a platform for cooperation.

During the Summit, it was announced that China was contributing $4 million to the project preparation fund of the BRICS New Development Bank for the bank's operation and long-term development. In addition it was setting aside $75 million for economic and technological cooperation and exchanges among BRICS countries. China will also commit $500 million to the Assistance Fund for South-South Cooperation.

The concluding Xiamen Declaration also underlines the long-term goal of the BRICS partnership to introduce a new form of global governance. "We resolve to foster a global economic governance architecture that is more effective and reflective of current global economic landscape, increasing the voice and representation of emerging markets and developing economies."

While the issue of economic development will remain a primary task of the BRICS cooperation platform, the Xiamen Declaration also clearly indicates that BRICS coordination and cooperation will play an even greater role on major security and political issues. In this way BRICS -- and the developing sector generally -- will have the opportunity to exert an even greater influence on how the world is governed.

In his opening statement, Xi Jinping quoted a Chinese proverb to express the importance of solidarity in the group: saying "a partnership forged with the right approach defies geographical distance; it is thicker than glue and stronger than metal and stone."

China
Source: www.bjreview.com

Editor's Note: From an economic idea to a cooperation platform for major emerging economies, BRICS has drawn worldwide attention over the past decade. During the Ninth BRICS Summit in Xiamen, Beijing Review and China Today interviewed ambassadors and scholars from both China and abroad. The following are edited excerpts of what they had to say about BRICS:

Some say BRICS is just a round table for talks because it has no binding rules for members or mechanism to take unified action as a whole. Some Western media even predict the decline of BRICS. What do you think of BRICS?

Liu Zhiqin, Senior Fellow, Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China: The increasing mutual trust between BRICS members has promoted their cooperation and exchanges. The BRICS group has become a new model of multilateral cooperation on common development.

In Chinese, BRICS is not merely a set of bricks; we Chinese add the adjective "golden" to describe the bricks, which reflects China's positive expectations for cooperation ties. Gold can endure over time. China hopes BRICS cooperation can withstand various difficulties and challenges. Therefore, BRICS countries must maintain unity and be candid to each other. In this way, they can push their common development to a new height and better promote the reform of world economic governance.

As a Chinese saying goes, unity is power. BRICS must maintain a stronger partnership to tackle challenges in a changing world.

He Wenping, Professor and Director of African Studies at Institute of West-Asian and African Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences: BRICS serves as a good platform for major emerging countries to have their say on global economic governance. There have been various views since the cooperation mechanism was established. Media outlets, especially those from the West, take a pessimistic view of the future of BRICS. They overlook BRICS members' efforts to undertake reforms in their domestic economies.

In the face of challenges, BRICS countries have put forward new development strategies. For example, China launched the Belt and Road Initiative to promote broad international cooperation on common development. Russia is building the Eurasian Economic Union. South Africa announced its ocean development strategy. China's Belt and Road Initiative is well received by countries across the Eurasian continent, Southeast Asia and Africa.

Georgy Toloraya, Professor of Economics, Moscow University of International Relations, Executive Director of Russian National Committee on BRICS Research: All five BRICS countries hope to reform and improve the current global governance. Over the past 10 years, BRICS has signed many documents and action plans. The five countries are implementing cooperation at the level of over 35 governmental departments or sectors.

It needs to be pointed out that BRICS is not a framework for economic integration. BRICS countries are different in national conditions, political systems and geographic environments. They are also in different phases of development. Diversification is one of the most unique features of BRICS. So it is natural that they have different ideas on some issues. But, the key to BRICS' success is that all parties pursue common interests on the basis of dialogue and consultation. Even complicated disputes and contradictions shall not hinder the five members from discussing action plans that are good for all.

What efforts should BRICS states make to enhance their cooperation in the future?

Liu Zhiqin: A sound bilateral relationship will better serve BRICS' growth.

In particular, I believe the China-Russia relationship is an important pillar of BRICS. The two nations should expand their economic and trade cooperation, providing driving force for BRICS' development. In 2016, trade between China and Russia reached nearly $50 billion. Both Chinese and Russian leaders vowed to make the bilateral trade reach $100 billion by 2020. Such an ambitious target shows their strong confidence in bilateral cooperation. This is also a positive signal for BRICS. Closer China-Russia ties have been important for the healthy development of BRICS in past years.

Furthermore, BRICS should strengthen its voice to maintain world economic order, including on the World Trade Organization (WTO) rules for solving trade disputes. Today, some developed countries are inclined to resort to protectionist measures in trade disputes. All BRICS countries have suffered discriminatory policies by the West, which have intensified unfairness in the world trade system. So, BRICS should unite to say no to such unilateral actions.

He Wenping: BRICS countries have respective advantages in deepening industrial and technological cooperation. As we know, China is making rapid progress in nuclear energy, aerospace, computing and manufacturing. Russia is a world power in heavy industry. Brazil is developing its own aircraft manufacturing industry. India is called "the office of the world," famous for abundant IT and management human resources. South Africa is a financial center in Africa. All these five countries consider how they complement each other's advantages. In fact, there are still wide gaps for them to fill even though they have signed many intergovernmental cooperation documents.

Some may be over-optimistic about BRICS cooperation in putting forward the proposal to build an economic union. I think this is too early to consider. Currently, BRICS should work hard to deal with their economic problems first and then explore more ways to improve global governance for the interests of developing countries.

Georgy Toloraya: BRICS now should implement cooperation on the New Development Bank (NDB) and other economic collaboration strategies that they have reached. Currently, the trade between China and the other four countries is much bigger than the trade between the four countries themselves. For the healthy development of BRICS, its members must truly and effectively participate in multilateral cooperation in the future.

The NDB is the first major organization arranged under the BRICS framework. In the aspect of finance, politics or strategy, the NDB is a good attempt to supplement current global financial institutions, as it aims to meet the needs of developing countries.

China has proposed to expand the dialogue between BRICS and other developing countries. What implication does the BRICS Plus proposal have for BRICS? What opportunities does it bring to other developing countries?

Yaroslav Lissovolik, Chief Economist of Eurasian Development Bank: The state leaders of Egypt, Guinea, Mexico, Tajikistan and Thailand were invited to attend the Dialogue of Emerging Market and Developing Countries. In the past, the host nation of the BRICS Summit would invite neighboring countries to a meeting as a means to implement the idea of BRICS expansion. China this time enlarged the circle of friends from the local neighborhood to the whole world.

It is necessary to point out that BRICS Plus doesn't mean the simple expansion of the group's members. BRICS hopes to expand cooperation with more developing countries. The idea of BRICS Plus will help developing countries find new ways to reach international cooperation. The mechanism of BRICS Plus can become a new platform to promote South-South cooperation and dialogues.

Each BRICS member is also a member of other cooperation organizations like the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Eurasian Economic Union, South American Common Market, Southern African Development Community and South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation. All members of these regional organizations could develop widespread partnerships with BRICS. So, BRICS Plus could establish links with other mechanisms and organizations consisting of developing countries and eventually promote South-South cooperation globally.

Furthermore, BRICS Plus is helpful to reconcile regional organizations and multilateral arrangements in world economic affairs. Through expanding its partners, BRICS will boost a new round of globalization and create a new model for the world's multi-polarization and cooperation between civilizations.

Ali Asghar Khaji, Iranian Ambassador to China: Since its founding, the BRICS cooperation mechanism has represented a new cooperation concept and played an important role in raising a voice in the international community on behalf of the developing world. The Iranian Government showed its support for the BRICS Plus proposal when it was first put forward. As an important developing country in the region of North Africa and West Asia, Iran is poised to strengthen its cooperation with China under the frameworks of the Belt and Road Initiative and BRICS Plus. In addition, we also hope China as a leading developing country can play a bigger role in advancing cooperation among developing countries on such aspects as economy, security and social development.

Leela Mani Paudyal, Nepal's Ambassador to China: BRICS, as an economic platform, engages with more and more developing countries that have opportunities to benefit from the economic development of BRICS countries. We're quite optimistic about that. That would provide a good opportunity and prospects for countries like Nepal. We'll find more markets for our products, and we'll benefit from the capabilities that BRICS countries have. We'll see opportunities to share the technological advancements they've made. So, we'll also be able to give our economy the new technology they developed. It would be a new opportunity for countries in the region, particularly developing countries.

Gonzalo Sabate, Vice Ambassador of Argentina to China: For Argentina, it would be a good thing to be involved with BRICS. We're in the G20. We'll organize the G20 Summit next year; China did the G20 last year. We're at the appropriate level of development to be in the BRICS group.

China
Author: Fu Jing
Source: africa.chinadaily.com.cn

The European Union should be invited to expand the BRICS partnership and take part in the BRICS+ concept, a senior Belgian official said on Friday in Brussels following last week's BRICS summit in Xiamen, China.

"The Summit in Xiamen added a new dimension to the BRICS+ concept…In my opinion inviting the European Union (in the future gatherings) would certainly make sense," said Anick Van Calster, director general for Bilateral Affairs of Belgium's Federal Public Service of Foreign Affairs at a conference on BRICS countries' global role arranged by the five embassies in Belgium.

Van Calster said she has noticed that this time not only neighboring countries were invited, but the Chinese host also took the initiative to invite Mexico, Egypt, the President of the African Union, Equatorial Guinea, the President of the G77 Thailand and Tajikistan.

They have joined Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa in Xiamen, Fujian province during 4-5 September when China hosted the BRICS annual summit.

"I noted with interest the proposal of Chinese Ambassador to Belgium Qu Xing to devote part of this conference to the relations between the BRICS and the European Union," said Van Calster.

"May I consider this as a hint that the BRICS countries are seriously considering to enrich the BRICS+ concept even further by inviting the European Union to one of their future meetings?"

She said it "makes sense" to invite European Union at the future gatherings.

She added it is inspiring to discuss how to enhance the interaction of the BRICS with the rest of the world in international fora to the benefit of a safer, cleaner and happier world.

Van Calster said that in many statements the BRICS countries underlined their commitment to principles that are also held in high esteem by the European Union and its member states. Van Calster listed strong support to multilateralism and commitments to refrain from protectionism as examples.

"Belgium upholds the same principles and wants to remain a reliable partner for those countries that wish to advance these principles in a multilateral context," said Van Calster.

In their address on Friday, ambassadors of BRICS countries in Belgium have expected that their countries aim to obtain fairer share of saying in evolution of global governance architect and cooperate with European Union to cope with the pressing challenges the world has faced.

Alexander Tokovinin, Russian Ambassador to Belgium said the BRICS countries have contributed greatly to the global economic growth, global peace, stability and multilateral system.

"They could help realize fairer global governance and international democracy by gaining more say," said Tokovinin.

Citing example of the New Development Bank, which is based in Shanghai, Tokovinin said the BRICS countries have already achieved progress in reforming global economic governance architect.

Joining other embassies in organizing the conference themed as the BRICS role in the world, Tokovinin called it as an excellent initiative, which could help Europeans and Belgians better understand the mechanism of BRICS.

Echoing Tokovinin,Chinese Ambassador to Belgium Qu Xing also said the five countries' contribution to global economy is impressive.

Citing numbers, he said since their first summit nine years ago, the BRICS countries' combined GDP has grown by 179 percent and their share in world economy from 12 percent to 23 percent. And the contribution of the BRICS to the global growth rate is up to 50 percent in the past ten years.

"All this has contributed significantly to stabilizing the global economy and returning it to growth and it has delivered tangible benefits to the world," said Qu, who has initiated to make the BRICS to have better presence in Belgium and EU.

"The first decade of the BRICS cooperation is a very fruitful one but the potential is big."

Citing the BRICS leaders' commitments in boosting cooperation and coordination in improving global economic governance to foster a more just and equitable international economic order and safeguard international and regional peace and stability, Qu said the BRICS countries have strong reasons to believe in brighter future in the coming decade.

The five countries have also organized one-week film festival in Brussels on September 4-9.

Russia
Author: Feng Shaolei
Source: valdaiclub.com

Counting from the inaugural BRIC Summit in Yekaterinburg in 2009, the BRICS cooperation has gone through eight full years. This year the Xiamen Summit has called people's attention towards both current development and future prospectsof the BRICS. Meanwhile, they are also concerned about the further cooperation among the BRICS and the improvement in global governance promoted by the BRICS cooperation as well.

I. Economic Cooperation and Development: Still the Primary Goal of the BRICS

Since the BRIC concept was first proposed by the Western scholar O'Neill in 2001, the economy of the BRICS once performed prominently early in the new century. Later, due to the impacts of the international financial crisis and problems occurring during the development of the BRICS, the BRICS were frustrated in the past three or four years. However, with the gradual stabilization of European and American economy, in addition to perseverant efforts the BRICS on their own, since the first half of 2017, the economy of the BRICS has generally improved significantly.

In the past ten years, the proportion of the economic aggregate of the BRICS in the world economy increases from 12% to 23%, the proportion of the total trade increases from 11% to 16%, the proportion of foreign investment increases from 7% to 12%, the contribution rate to world economic growth is over 50%. In the first half of 2017, China's imports from the BRICS gained rapid growth, the amount of which is over $70.16 billion, with a growth rate of 33.6%, which is 14.7% higher than that during the same period last year.

As far as China is concerned, since the first half of this year, its economy has grown by 6.9%. In late July, the IMF raised its economic growth forecast for China in 2017 for the third time this year.

Over the past few years, some have said, "The BRICS has faded." Nevertheless, the signing of the Xiamen Declaration and the results of over 40 agreements shows that the BRICS is still an important driving force and source for the recovery, development and cooperation of the world economy. In detail, a series of documents in trade have been formally passed, including the BRICS investment facilitation outline, roadmap of trade cooperation services, economic and technological cooperation framework, e-commerce cooperation initiatives. Meanwhile, in the field of investment, China will formulate the first BRICS economic and technological cooperation exchange plan with a total amount of 500 million RMB, strengthening policy exchanges and pragmatic cooperation in economy and trade.

II. The BRICS Make Efforts to Practice and Optimize the Governance Structure

The BRICS not only endeavors to achieve the due status of emerging countries in the international financial institutions through the reform in shares within the institutes such as the IMF, but also aims to provide a model through establishing creatively the NDB. On the one hand, the BRICS maintains cooperation with such traditional international financial institutions as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and on the other hand, it tries to establish a financial institutional structure where equalities and differences co-exist, laying foundations for future larger-scale cooperation.

In addition, this summit decides to establish the CRA macroeconomic information exchange mechanism in the field of international finance, as well as to further improve the research capacities of the CRA and to enhance the consensus of a closer cooperation with the IMF. China will contribute $4 million to the preparation funds of the NDB project, supporting the banking operations and long-term development. This summit also supports to establish the first regional office of the NDB, namely the African Regional Center, in South Africa. Besides, it is also supportive to set up a project preparation fund of the NDB and approve the second batch of projects.

III. BRICS-Plus Deepens Regional Cooperation Among Developing Countries

Over years, many emerging economies and developing countries have always been expecting to participate in the BRICS, including Argentina in South America, Indonesia in Southeast Asia, Egypt in the Middle East in and Turkey across Asia and Europe. These countries have basic attributes, i.e., all of them are developing countries with certain regional influences, with rich endowment in resources and great potentials for economic development, and they play indispensable and important roles in international affairs.

Regarding the issue whether the BRICS should enlarge or not, some members hold that, there is no hurry to expand but should instead advance it in depth, focusing on implementing the existing agreements. While others argue that, the BRICS should gain victories through scale effects and enroll new members in time. Although BRICS has not expanded during this summit, some of these key countries are invited as participants, which paves the way for the further development of the future BRICS cooperation.

In addition, the BRICS members are all regional major countries. Therefore, since the Durban Summit in 2013, whenever the annual BRICS summit was held, there was also a dialogue with the leaders of the regional cooperation organization where the host country is located, to highlight the leading and coordinating role of the five BRICS members as major countries within that region.

For instance, the BRICS dialogue with leaders of South American countries was held during the Fortaleza Summit in Brazil. Russia's Ufa Summit witnessed the dialogue between leaders of the BRICS and the Eurasian Economic Union Member States. During the Durban Summit in South Africa, there was a dialogue between the leaders of the BRICS and African leaders. A dialogue was held between the BRICS leaders and leaders of the Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation during the Goa Summit in India. Obviously, this mechanism will continue during the following summits.

IV. Strengthening Humanities and Security Cooperation, Laying Solid Foundations for the BRICS Cooperation

One of the most valuable experiences of international multilateral cooperation is that we should strengthen the links between humanities and cultural exchanges, advancing the mutual understanding of the BRICS members. This summit not only established the BRICS University League, signed sports exchange memos, agreed to promote the medical cooperation projects, but also began to plan the establishment of the BRICS cultural exchange funds.

It is noteworthy that the Xiamen Declaration attaches great importance to international security issues. According to this summit, not only the annual meeting of foreign ministers will become a formal mechanism, but also the meetings among senior representatives of the BRICS security issues will be held at the same time. This summit also criticized seriously terrorism, the spread of drugs, all kinds of destruction activities against public order and the nuclear test of North Korea as well.

The recent good development momentum of the BRICS does not necessarily mean that the BRICS have already overcome in-depth problems in economic structures, market foundation, innovation abilities and many other aspects. Furthermore, it also does not mean that there does not exist cognitive differences or collision of interest, including border turmoil and many other pressing issues.

However, the progress clearly demonstrates that the future of the BRICS cooperation is bright. First, the great economic complementarities between the BRICS promotes the deepening of their internal trade and investment. It will lay foundations for the connectivity between the BRICS cooperation with the One Belt, One Road Initiative. Second, through economic cooperation, it adopts non-alignment and non-confrontational ways to provide basis and paths to solve global and regional security issues. Third, it strengthens the existing basis for the BRICS cooperation, further exploring the mechanism construction of the BRICS cooperation and providing effective pragmatic paths and concrete experience for the future regional and international order.

India
Author: W.P.S. Sidhu
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Given the internal contradictions, the past of the BRICS might be more noteworthy than its future.

The 9th Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) summit in Xiamen began dramatically with a big bang, but it was not the kind of noise that host China would have wanted: the unannounced sixth and biggest nuclear test by China's enfant terrible ally, North Korea. This test literally and politically stole the thunder from China's grandiosely titled "Brics: Stronger Partnership for a Brighter Future" summit.

Having barely worked out a face-saving disengagement with India at Doklam, which paved the way for Prime Minister Narendra Modi to attend the summit, Beijing was clearly expecting to use the occasion to advance its national, regional and global interests. Instead it had to contend with US President Donald Trump's "twiplomocy" following the North Korean test, where he chided that Beijing's closest ally "has become a great threat and embarrassment to China, which is trying to help but with little success". At best this tweet makes China looks ineffectual and at worst conniving.

This not only marred the carefully choreographed summit but also highlighted a fundamental question about the raison d'etre of the group: Can the Brics advance their collective development and political agenda without resolving some of their internal and intra-group ideological differences, political tensions, and economic contradictions? The answer, despite China's best efforts to push for a stronger partnership, has to be "no".

In a background document titled Theme And Cooperation Priorities Of 2017 BRICS Summit, published in January, a "partnership dedicated to improved global economic governance" was stressed without any similar emphasis on improving global political governance. Instead, there was merely a plea for a "partnership that upholds world peace". Even here, the document candidly acknowledged— months before the Doklam confrontation between China and India—the "need to further enhance strategic mutual trust" especially in "preserving international and regional peace and stability".

Herein lies a key contradiction: can countries like India, Brazil, and South Africa (Ibsa), uphold world peace without being part of the global peace and security decision-making process centered in the UN Security Council (UNSC)? The answer is obvious. Similarly, the absence of regular consultations between the two Brics members on the UNSC and the three aspirants to it reveals that China and Russia merely want the support of the Ibsa countries for the positions the duo take in the council without providing the Ibsa members a voice, let alone push for their permanent membership.

This duality is evident in the Xiamen summit declaration on reform of the UNSC, which remains a cut-and-paste section from previous versions. The section, like that of previous summit declarations, merely states: "China and Russia reiterate the importance they attach to the status and role of Brazil, India and South Africa in international affairs and support their aspiration to play a greater role in the UN."

Similar political contradictions abound in the Xiamen declaration. For instance, the call for "upholding a fair and equitable international order based on the central role of the United Nations... and respect for international law, promoting democracy and the rule of law in international relations" sounds patently hollow, especially given host China's blatant disregard for the Law of the Sea Convention and its cursory dismissal of the ruling of the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague on the South China Sea dispute.

Additionally, while the declaration makes a pitch for promoting nuclear energy and "predictability in accessing technology and finance for expansion of civil nuclear energy capacity", any such efforts are likely to be ineffective until China supports India's entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group (NSG), which is a crucial forum to ensure this "predictability". Today India is the only Brics country which is still not a member of the NSG on account of host China's intransigence. Thus, the declaration is making a collective promise that host China is committed to scuttle.

Moreover, for the first time the declaration also lists several terrorist organizations, including the Taliban, Islamic State, Al-Qaida, the Haqqani network, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. Normally, this should expectedly lead to a collective effort to ban and target leaders and individuals of these organizations. Yet China is unlikely to retract its technical hold on designating Masood Azhar, the Jaish-e-Mohammad chief, as a terrorist at the UN.

Finally, although the declaration deplores the test conducted by North Korea, it emphasizes a peaceful settlement through a "direct dialogue of all parties concerned". Yet, curiously, for a group with two UNSC members, the declaration offers no initiatives that China and Russia or the Brics might collectively undertake to break the dangerous escalation on the Korean peninsula.

To be fair, the summit did have a series of promising initiatives related to sustainable development in Africa, promoting green development and low-carbon economy, a no first placement of weapons in outer space, and even a Brics Remote Sensing Satellite Constellation. However, all of these will come to naught until the members, especially China and India, can resolve their political differences.

As a host, China might have wanted to set the group on a path towards a brighter future. However, given the internal contradictions, the past of the Brics might be more noteworthy than its future.

W.P.S. Sidhu is visiting professor at New York University's Center for Global Affairs and associate fellow at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy.

Russia
Author: Evgeniya Drozhashchikh
Source: www.nkibrics.ru

Not so long ago BRICS countries proclaimed the idea of creating an informal block that would serve as an alternative to already existing institutions of the global governance system. And it did not take long before "the bricks" started to work out — multidimensional cooperation took place. To expand the progress, BRICS may apply to outer space as one of the platforms of mutual interest. Like in the case of struggling against the bipolar order of the Cold War in political and economic contexts, now the BRICS nations are able to confront the imperfect system of regulating space. It is believed that since 2003-2004 the world has stepped into the era of the "second space race" which marks high time for the members of BRICS to achieve their top ambitions. [1]

BRICS Leaders Xiamen Declaration 2017 supports the statement raising the issue of peaceful and secured outer space in points 26, 58, 59. For us to assess feasibility of these provisions it is necessary to check whether the BRICS member-states have a firm ground regarding the level of space exploration or not, whether they have sufficient space assets to jointly stand for a multipolar world or lack them. Description of national space programs of the BRICS countries given below is to enhance better understanding.

Brazil

Brazil may be said to have started positioning itself as a spacefaring nation in 1961 when its government, being supported by the USA, first initiated the program of space exploration and organized the special National commission, successfully transformed into National Institute for Space Research (INPE) in 1971.

The 1960s marked a "golden age" for Brazil: rocketry and space exploration firmly occupied a certain niche in the development and strategic planning of the state due to the country's geography. The size of the country, its prolonged coastline, tropical regions, extensive natural resources as well as the fact of being crossed by the equator-line (letting it take additional advantage of the Earth's spin such as fuel savings and cheaper launches) [2] enhance chances of realizing national ambitions with the help of space technologies. NASA benefited from this peculiarity till 1977 when the state launched its own rocket program undermining dependence on cooperation with the American state. [3]

Since creation of the Brazilian Space Agency (AEB, 1994) the country stimulated independent outer space research through fostered cooperation between institutions comprising the so called National System for the Development of Space Activities (SINDAE) [4]. Brazil also set up partnership with the International Space Agency while focusing on maintenance of test facilities, control centers, research laboratories. Ground stations laid the foundation for further improvement and supplementation of the national space program.

Today AEB has several active imagery intelligence satellites in orbit, including reconnaissance and earth observation satellites and develops those to provide low cost communications around the equator. In 2004 Brazil successfully launched its first rocket into space.

Strategic goals set by the country are described in the National Program of Space Activities 2012–2021 (PNAE 2012–2021). Brazil strives for developing space technology in order to raise the quality of society's life, implement efficient public policies and confront national problems in the spheres of meteorology, communications and a number of "Earth observation" questions. Space activities stimulate innovation that will consequently influence industry and citizens, while mutual cooperation is seen as the instrument of promoting advancement.

Russia

Russia's current period of dealing with issues of outer space can be described as "resurrection" — an association that deservedly comes up to the minds of experts when they analyze the "freefall" Russia right after the collapse of the USSR. The very split of an earlier powerful "machine" had a tremendous impact on the branch. On the one hand, it was caused by the necessity to adjust to new rules of "managing business" (during the Soviet years there were no central executive agencies — therefore, a task of organizing an own institution from scratch was posed) [5] ; on the other hand, the conditions for retaining a clear lead in space were intertwined with financial problems — the most reliable way to keep afloat was to launch commercial satellites and engage in space tourism (profitable but lacking opportunities for self-development).

This unfortunate position could hardly be heartily welcomed after a giant leap forward during the first space race with the USA. The former Soviet Union sweepingly burst through difficulties on its way using intellectual and material potential possessed. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries a pioneer of space exploration Konstantin Tsiolkovsky shared his concept of the future of multistaged rocketry. His followers made his theoretical developments come true to life. From then on the country served as the locomotive of technological advancements, the most notable of them being first launched satellite (1957), first probe to impact the Moon (1959), first man in space (1961) and a number of other "firsts".

Crisis years, in particular, early 1990-s, prevented Russia from following the rising trend. Although already up to 2005-2006 it felt more determined to recur putting an additional accent (plus spending) on the new Angara rocket family (along with the Soviet-designed Soyuz) and the GLONASS global navigation satellite system. Meanwhile it continued to be one of the main partners in the International Space Station program to deliver expedition crews and to resupply the space station with its transporters. It owns a series of diverse satellites for commercial use but still faces a lack of capacity to ensure development of national scientific cosmonautics.

Hitches with launching an unmanned Soyuz-2.1 a rocket from the recently-constructed Vostochny cosmodrome as well as the failure to launch the Phobos-Grunt probe in 2011 undermine the trend of Russia following "the lucky path". Sanctions pressing the country somehow aggravate the situation, making the matters worse by causing cuts in funding of the 10-year space program. [6]

Whatever the case, the political will and persistence are likely to overcome