BRICS: friendship against the dollar
BRICS is not a European Union with common borders and the same money. BRICS is a model of how you can begin to make friends across the oceans, across continents, having different currencies (not necessarily even convertible ones) and interests; Finally, this is an example of such friendship, when several relatively weak (“developing”) suddenly unite, causing the strong (“developed”) to look around, looking at them from top to bottom and suddenly finding themselves looking at their shoes.
The West, accustomed to glancing down upon Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, in the person of the BRICS, met what he had always feared. Perhaps, the western part of the world, headed by the States, fears that Khrushchev's long-standing strategy will be implemented by the five countries named (“Overtake and Overtake America”). Or maybe politicians in the West see in the alliance of the five countries the specter of the CMEA, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance that existed from 1949 to 1991, rose from the historical darkness, and in 1960-70's. acting as a socialist alternative to the EEC.
Overtake, and catch up, BRICS, however, is not going to anyone. At a recent summit in New Delhi, a similar goal was not declared, and from an economic point of view, such a strategy would look like a murderous one. But from the point of view that the devastated Americans are massively moving to tent camps, the EU, having just plugged a huge budget hole in Greece, is experiencing not the best of times, but various international financial institutions like the IMF and various world banks have long lost confidence in those whom ravaged, time for the vigorous activity of an alternative association now is the most suitable.
Let's remember the CMEA. In 1964, a settlement system was launched between the member countries of this organization, the operations of which were carried out by the International Bank for Economic Cooperation. The IBEC was established in 1963 and had the main purpose of promoting the development of foreign trade of the CMEA member countries, and the settlement was carried out in transferable rubles. (The bank is still valid, its members: Bulgaria, Vietnam, Cuba, Mongolia, Poland, Russia, Romania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic). Later, in 1970, a credit institution, the International Investment Bank, also appeared within the framework of the CMEA (it is also still in operation, its participants are: Bulgaria, Cuba, Mongolia, Vietnam, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, the Czech Republic). In 1980's due to the scientific, technical and technological backwardness of the socialist countries from the western states, the CMEA manifested crisis phenomena. 1985-1988 programs did not save the situation, and then in the member countries the regimes of power changed, and the former socialist economies took the path of market and capitalism.
Doesn't BRICS inherit to the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance - in the best years of its activities? Not in the sense of socialist construction and the creation of a counterbalance to the West in the protracted “cold war”, but in the declared purpose - in mutual economic assistance? And is it not because of the Western countries with such skepticism and such contempt speak about the BRICS, that they feel, as a world equal to the developed democratic West, which before seemed so strong and stable, and even the only possible (according to the books of the idealist Fukuyama), suddenly changes, acquiring New forms and getting ready to send former hegemons to an unenviable place in the tail of the world column?
I. Ruble to replace the dollar
BRICS today is more than forty percent of the world's population, a quarter of its territory, almost a third of arable land, a fifth of the world economy, fifteen percent of international trade and more than half of all capital attracted to the world economy. Do not reckon with him will not work.
The abbreviation "BRIC" was invented in 2001 by Mr. Jim O'Neill, the chief economist of the investment bank "Goldman Sachs". The abbreviation "BRIC" meant Brazil, Russia, India and China, whose economies were recognized as "rapidly developing." In 2011, South Africa joined four countries, and the union was called BRICS (S - South Africa).
BRIC began its active work not in 2001, but only in 2006. In September of this year, at the initiative of Vladimir Putin, a meeting of the foreign ministers of four countries was organized at the UN General Assembly in New York. In July, 2008 hosted a meeting of the BRIC heads of state in Japan, following the G-8 meeting. Then the heads of the financial departments of the BRIC countries met in November 2008 in Brazil and in March 2009 in London. Russian President D. Medvedev also met in 2009 in Moscow with representatives of the participating countries responsible for national security issues. Since 2009, the BRIC and BRICS summits have been held regularly.
The first summit was held in Yekaterinburg in June 2009, the second summit - in Brasilia in April 2010, III - in Sanya (PRC) in April 2011, IV - 28-29 in March 2012 in New Delhi. The last meeting seriously worried Western politicians and economists. The fact is that the BRICS countries are no longer going to be content with one economic cooperation with each other. Now they have clearly expressed a desire to influence world order. It was about creating our own system of settlements and lending in national currencies and abandoning the dollar and euro in this system. “On the part of Vnesheconombank, the documents were signed by the head of the bank, Vladimir Dmitriev. In addition to VEB, the China Development Bank, the Export-Import Bank of India, the Brazilian National Economic and Social Development Bank (Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Economico e Social) and the South African Development Bank ( Development Bank of Southern Africa). Banks signed a general agreement on the provision of loans in national currencies and an agreement on the confirmation of letters of credit within the framework of the interbank cooperation mechanism of the BRICS countries ”(source: RIA News").
Quote:
“Another agreement signed at the end of the summit in New Delhi is a general agreement on mutual lending in national currencies.
According to Russian presidential aide Sergei Prikhodko, this agreement should enhance the role of national currencies in settlements between countries.
In fact, this means that the states of the bloc have taken the first step towards reducing dependence on the two most common world reserve currencies - the US dollar and the euro.
The need for this step in the BRICS countries has long been spoken about. So, in August last year, the PRC, the largest creditor of the United States, expressed confidence that the world needs another reserve currency that can replace the dollar.
The Russian authorities have repeatedly spoken about this, offering the Russian ruble as an option ”("Russian service" BBC ").
In addition, the BRICS countries decided to strengthen the role of the friendly "five" in the International Monetary Fund.
Quote:
“But the representation of the BRICS countries in international organizations does not correspond to their role in the global economy. “This is primarily about reforming the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
This reform needs to be completed and done so, as we agreed in the framework of the G-20, not postponing it because the problems did not end in the international financial system, ”said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.
Developing countries are seeking to increase their quotas in the IMF. Governance reform at the IMF began in 2010 and should be completed in 2012 before the annual meeting of the Fund and the World Bank, revision of the quota calculation formula to 1 in January 2013, and revision of the quotas themselves to 1 in January 2014.
Only if the voice of the developing countries in the fund becomes more substantial, the IMF can count on additional financial investments from their side, the BRICS leaders warned.
Only at the end of the quota reform will efforts to increase the resources of the IMF be successful, the Delhi Declaration emphasizes.
The IMF is counting on funds from developing countries. Last November, the head of the fund, Christine Lagarde, met with some of the leaders of the BRICS countries, including Dmitry Medvedev, to make sure they were ready to increase lending to the IMF.
But the reform of the quota system is proceeding very slowly, noted the leaders of the BRICS countries. So, for now, countries will focus on their own projects ”(Gazeta.ru, Olga Tanas).
Own projects? Oh yeah. The BRICS countries are planning to implement an ambitious economic project: to launch their own financial institution - a bank. This unborn financial babe has already been dubbed by analysts the Bank of BRICS. In the Delhi Declaration, it is called the “BRICS Development Bank”.
“The creation of a new BRICS Development Bank was proposed by India in February 2012 of the year, on the eve of the meeting of finance ministers and heads of central banks of the G-20. “Initially, the idea of creating a bank was only to help African countries. But then, in order to make the BRICS countries more interested in creating a bank, India clarified its position and suggested that in addition to the poorest countries, the bank could lend to the BRICS countries themselves, ”Finance Minister Anton Siluanov explained to Gazeta.Ru” (Gazeta.ru, Olga Tanas).
“In a joint statement following the meeting, the so-called Delhi Declaration, the leaders of the BRICS countries stated the need to create a new bank that would accumulate resources for“ infrastructure and sustainable development projects. ”
We are talking about projects not only in the five countries of the block, but also in other developing countries.
The BRICS finance ministers are instructed to “study the feasibility and viability” of this initiative and present their findings at the next block summit to be held in the Republic of South Africa in 2013 ”("Russian service" BBC ").
Such initiatives, agreements and statements can not but worry the Western countries: after all, the unification of BRICS is nothing more than an economic threat to the existence of geopolitical hegemony with America at the head. The old world order may become a thing of the past with its key currencies - the dollar and the euro.
“People's Daily” (China) reports: “During the 4, four specific features were shown by the BRICS:
The first specificity is epochal. BRICS cooperation aims to overcome the financial crisis, to strive for economic development and to break the unfair order.
The second specificity is the complementary countries of BRICS, respectively, famous in the world as a “global factory” (China), a “country of outsourcing” (India), an “energy empire” (Russia), a “resource warehouse” (Brazil), a “golden country” ( South Africa), have specific advantages and great complementarity in the economic sphere.
The third specificity is pliability. The motto of the cooperation of the five states is “arbitrariness, vastness, decentralization, multidimensionality”. Despite this, the parties can always express a “common voice”, in which the great consensus of BRICS is expressed.
The fourth specificity is openness. Last year, South Africa officially became the fifth member of BRICS, which demonstrates the reliability of BRICS in the area of joining a new partner and embodies the open spirit of this platform ”(source: Radio "Voice of Russia").
BRICS is becoming an influential organization. At a meeting of the BRICS leaders in expanded 29 in March, the President of Russia said: “I believe that the commonality of our fundamental interests can be the key to the success of the BRICS project. We are all interested in reforming the outdated financial and economic system of the world. Now this reform is underway, but today we have expressed dissatisfaction with the pace at which it is being implemented ... ”(RIA News"). In a press statement following the summit in the capital of India, Dmitry Medvedev said: “The promising agenda of BRICS is the gradual transformation of this forum into a strong and influential organization ...” (RIA News").
Quote:
“The Declaration, based on the Delhi Summit, leaves no doubt that the process of gathering forces inside the BRICS has moved into the phase of formulating common interests and preparing concrete joint actions on the world stage.
“Our discussions, the general theme of which was“ the BRICS partnership in the interests of global stability, security and prosperity ”, were held in a cordial and warm atmosphere and were imbued with our shared desire to further strengthen partnership in the interests of common development, as well as to promote cooperation based on openness , solidarity, mutual understanding and trust, ”the Declaration says.
Behind these simple formulations reads the fatigue of "double standards" in Western international politics. International relations have long needed to be cleared of lies and pharisaism that permeated the political culture imposed by the Anglo-Saxons on the world ”(Dmitry Sedov, Foundation for Strategic Culture).
In 2012-2013 BRICS countries are planning to hold meetings of ministers of foreign affairs, finance, trade, agriculture and health, to organize scientific and technical forums, to hold a meeting on urbanization, on cooperation of twin cities, etc.
“An agreement was signed on the settlement system in national currencies, which aims to push aside and ultimately replace the dollar in settlements between these countries. The group's finance ministers were tasked to prepare proposals for the Development Bank for the next summit. Now the internal trade turnover of BRICS is 230 billion dollars, and there is every prospect that it will quickly reach 500 billion.
BRICS leaders ... noted the disproportionate representation of nations and continents on the UN Security Council. “Russia supports India, Brazil and South Africa as strong candidates for membership in the UN Security Council,” the Russian president said. A serious warning to NATO strategists who are carrying out plans for enforcing political surgery in a number of countries sounded the summit’s statement on the inadmissibility of using the UN "to cover up the policy of displacing undesirable regimes and imposing unilateral conflict resolution formats."
Iran and Syria have been the subject of debate. “We also discussed foreign policy issues, special attention was drawn to situations in hot spots, including the situation in Syria,” Medvedev informed. - We believe it is important not to allow external interference in the affairs of Syria, to enable the government on the one hand and the opposition on the other hand to finally enter into a dialogue without destroying it, not to mention that initially this dialogue is doomed to failure and only military actions able to restore order - this is the most shortsighted, the most dangerous approach. " A consolidated position has emerged to prevent aggression against Iran. China, India and South Africa receive from Iran from 12 to 20% of total oil imports. They just talk about it. “We must avoid political upheavals causing fluctuations in the global raw materials market that affect the flow of goods,” said Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. He was supported by Brazilian President Dilma Roussef, who condemned the policy of embargo against Iran and the escalation of rhetoric of violence.
If we keep in mind that before this, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu expressed his intention to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, it becomes obvious that two radically different approaches to shaping the international agenda are forming in the world. And BRICS is already emerging as an alternative force to the Western approach ”(Dmitry Sedov, Foundation for Strategic Culture).
But he writes John Brown from Euro Pacific:
“For sixty-eight years, Anglo-Americans have significantly increased the power and size of central governments and central banks. Governments scored unimaginably irresponsible levels of public debt and devalued their currencies almost beyond recognition. It discouraged savings and investment. But if the emergency expenses of the government run out and the money taps are curled up, these economies will face a brutal recession, leaving only a few options to politicians who want to vote. On the other hand, countries with healthy manufacturing industries, high savings and investment, low government debt, and smarter economic policies have accumulated huge reserves (reflecting America’s heyday in the 19 century).
While the BRICS countries have amassed impressive reserves of about $ 4 trillion, the US Treasury alone is in debt about $ 15.4 trillions. Moreover, American politicians plan to increase this debt by borrowing another trillion dollars in the foreseeable future. It is already clear to many that the continued dominance of the Anglo-Americans is no longer deserved.
This fundamental struggle without a real prospect of compromise is at the epicenter of the future global clash for money and power. Led by China, the BRICS bloc stands for an alternative to the US dollar, because it is annoyed by the fact that it is under the yoke of a monetary system based on less and less stable economic fundamentals. In my opinion, they are clearly focused on a new international reserve standard tied to gold, which should replace the existing exchange rate regime.
Now the BRICS countries are insisting on accelerating the restructuring of the management of international financing. Surviving countries may want to seek help from these new support resources. In the end, other resource-rich countries like Chile and Indonesia may want to choose their creditors themselves. In addition, if the United States continues to base its entire faith on the printing press, some savings-rich Western countries like Germany, Norway and Switzerland may be tempted to join the BRICS block in their quest for a new world order based on secured money.
It seems that the sun of the era of impetuous typing is drooping. When the dawn of new days comes, the newly laid path to freedom and entrepreneurship will be paved not with paper, but with gold and silver ”(translation source: Mixednews).
But the opinion Shemsa Eddina Shitura ("L'Expression", Algeria):
“The West, incorrigible and mired in dreams of its own greatness, deliberately ignores developing countries and does not want to reckon with them, recalling their existence only when it calls on them to save Europe and support the huge US deficit. China has the world's largest foreign exchange reserves: 3,2 trillion dollars. Russia has 514 billions of dollars, Brazil has more than 350 billions, India has more than 320 billions.
After joining the South African group in April 2011, the economic weight of the BRICS countries reached 11,7 trillions of dollars. In 2010, the nominal GDP of the members of the BRICS was 18,5% of world value. When converted to purchasing power parity, this figure reaches 26,7%.
In addition, the economic gap between the BRICS countries and the G8 continues to narrow. Without Russia, the rest of the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Great Britain and the USA) account for 38,3% of world GDP, taking into account purchasing power parity. This distance will decrease even more in the coming years, since some G-8 countries only with great difficulty manage to cope with their chronic difficulties. At the same time, the economic growth of the BRICS countries will remain at a consistently high level.
While the United States and the European Union cannot straighten out the economy that is sliding toward recession, the BRICS group lays out its own trump cards that will enable it to become a new driving force of the world by 2050. In addition, the group is not going to follow the economic embargo imposed by Europe and the United States on Iran: the summit participants decided to strengthen the partnership with Tehran, which supplies oil to India and China. In order to clearly mark their independence from international financial institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF, the five BRICS leaders emphasized in the final statement the group’s desire to create its own development bank to finance major infrastructure projects and provide loans to poor countries.
In addition, the participating countries agreed to increase the volume of trade within the organization, which should increase from the current 280 billion dollars to 500 billion dollars by the year 2015. In the next three years, India and Russia intend to switch to using their own national currencies in bilateral trade operations, thereby removing dependence on the US dollar rate.
Moreover, it should be noted that the West is gradually losing ground and for the first time in stories forced to back down in international affairs. Lynching over Gaddafi, the collapse of Sudan, Libya, Iraq and Yemen - all this was the last straw. For the first time in history, two states were able to stop the infernal machine targeting Syria, in spite of the fanfare of US vassals. Inevitably, there will be changes in politics, and Bashar Asad will comply with the decisions made at the elections, but the American project of the “Great Middle East” will remain just an unrealizable mind-building ”(translation source: "InoSMI").
Thus, a structure emerged on the geopolitical and international economic arena that decided to trade without using the US dollar. Moreover, the organization, towards which you can snort, but with which you can no longer be ignored, develops joint political approaches: for example, to the situation in Syria and to the situation with Western aggressive intentions regarding Iran.
All this explains why the former Western skepticism regarding BRICS, flavored with a share of contempt and habitual demagogy, changes to anxiety and anxiety. In addition, in the West, they are well aware that nothing brings as close as a common ... well, let's say, not an enemy, but an offender.
Quote:
“There is still an opinion that it belongs to the publicist James Traub from the USA that it would be better if there was no BRICS at all, and instead of it there would be“ expanded IBSA ”. These are the same India with Brazil and South Africa (which are actually also found in three), and if Turkey and Indonesia are joined to them, they will be IBSATI.
Why? Because the IBA countries are “dear democracies”, Turkey and Indonesia are also, but these are Russia and China ...
The point here is not how democratic the Turks or Brazilians are, and not that if you take the division of countries into “democracy” and “autocracy” seriously, you can forever say goodbye to the hopes of understanding anything in our world.
The main thing here is the complete and sometimes sincere misunderstanding by many people of what BRICS is all about.
For example, there is a mass of people willing to remind about the long-standing mutual distrust of India and China after the 1962 war of the year. (However, how to deal with the growth of Indian-Chinese trade, which already exceeded 60 billion dollars? With the fact that China has become the main trading partner of India?)
Or you can raise your eyebrows in surprise: what is South Africa doing here? Or think about the fact that the five countries are physically far from each other, and form a regional trade bloc of them is impossible. And then a classic and very erroneous conclusion is made: if I don’t see what brings BRICS together, then BRICS will not live long.
But the fact of the matter is that different economic realities, or growth rates, or disputes and contradictions not only do not interfere with the existence of the BRICS - they cement it. They are the reason why BRICS was created and grew, first on the basis of just the “arguing” Indo-Chinese-Russian “triangle” called RIC. And only then Brazilians reached out to him in 2006, then South Africans, and, by the way, new ones appeared, which was quite lively talk about in Delhi on the eve of the summit ”(RIA "Novosti", Dmitry Kosyrev).
So, it's time to reckon with the BRICS, to fear the BRICS and even ... get rid of the BRICS. That is what they think, for example, in Britain.
Ii. “It's time to dump the bricks.”
At the end of the Delhi forum, British newspapers, along with doubts about the fact that BRICS could do something at all, speculated on the fact that Moscow had a place in Europe, and there was no need for the Kremlin to be friends with the Chinese. "Russian service" BBC " I recently pleased my readers with a review of the British press, so I can only bring a few excerpts from there.
“Financial Times” in an editorial comment, playing with the words “BRICS” and “bricks” (“bricks”), notes that “the creation of a bloc that united countries, which account for almost half of the world's population and a quarter of the world economy, was a spectacular PR technique and powerful market move. " “It is difficult to build trust between such different political systems as communism, authoritarianism and democracy,” continues the Financial Times. “It’s equally difficult to find common interests for exporting countries and importers of natural resources.” “The newspaper refrains from direct forecasting the likelihood of such a development of events, but immediately reminds that the participants in the Delhi summit could not agree on the support of a single candidate for the post of head of the World Bank, and concludes that“ bricks do not have enough solution ”.
“The theme of the" BRICS bricks "is addressed to the Times.
According to the diplomatic editor of the newspaper, Roger Boyes, the West should try to destroy this "brick wall", because the "Russian-Chinese axis is dangerous for the rest of the world."
“Let's try to get Moscow back to Europe,” says the subtitle of Boyes’s article.
The diplomatic editor of Times sees the danger in that “the BRICS philosophy, formed under the influence of Russia, lies in rivalry with the United States and the G7 countries.”
“As for the West, then, in the opinion of the Times editor, his mission should be to“ lure Russia out of the embraces of BRICS and offer it an alternative place in the world system - as an EU partner that recognizes its European roots and European values ”.
“Let us take root in Russia in Europe and will not support Moscow’s muddy ideas about BRICS as a new International,” Boyes calls.
“It's time to dump the bricks,” the Times sums up.
By the way, regarding the first article in the review - from the Financial Times - in the Russian Internet you can find next review (published without editing):
“Well, the leaders of the third world countries of 5 met and what? India and China have the poorest population in the world, Russia has a bloody regime that fights hard with its own people. Brazil is a raw material appendage of the USA. South Africa will not comment at all. And these countries with a medieval economy, which can produce nothing but raw materials and primitive labor-intensive products, want to oppose themselves to such industrial giants as England and the USA? Yes, in the US, every citizen has a much larger amount of knowledge than an academician in Russia ... They have democracy there and people are not afraid to tell the truth, not like in Russia and in China, where people are zombie and can only think in the way that power allows them. Americans are much more talented, and therefore much richer ... And do the BRICS countries want to compete with them? Yes, if it were not for the constant humanitarian assistance from the United States, the population of the BRICS countries would be less in 2 than it is now. People would have died out of starvation.
I believe that as a sign of gratitude for the fact that we still exist, we and all the other BRICS countries should abandon their currencies and switch to the US dollar. You do not need to wrung out “great powers”, you need to help those who create everything, thanks to which we still exist and we need to start with the transition to the dollar as the main currency. ”
British newspaper The Guardian in the person of journalist Simon Tisdalla joins the choir of the BRICS opponents:
“The one-day annual summit of the so-called BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — has received little attention in the West. Perhaps because the group has achieved little since its inception in 2009. Critics make fun of her as an empty discussion club.
But this neglect, or even contempt, may also reflect the fact that the block, representing almost half of the world's population and about one fifth of global economic production, is an undesirable challenge to the existing world order defined by the IMF and the World Bank, as well as the UN Security Council, dominated by the USA.
The desire of BRICS countries to change the world raises questions about fundamental values, as well as geopolitical influence. The key members of the bloc, China and Russia, have little or no adherence to democratic principles, which, in particular, includes free elections, free speech and free media. India is also subject to growing criticism regarding attempts to silence open debate. Attitudes toward basic human rights that China and Russia are showing, in particular with regard to the Syrian uprising, may not be a paradigm that developing countries will gladly accept ”(source of translation: Mixednews).
Thus, there is a British tradition: to inspire oneself with an old kind song about ever-living democracy. There is no "democracy" - there will be no new union, no economic development, no common bank. Here the States and Britain have everything, because strong democracy - along with the complete freedom of speech. Well, and you, friends, no matter how you sit down, all the Democrats are not fit ...
The French sing along with the British "Le Monde".
Alain Fouja wrote an article titled “Fake BRICS unity”. The journalist believes that the success of the BRICS will be hampered by the lack of banking experience in the planned financial education, as well as the fact that the participants of the organization cannot come to a common opinion even on “symbolic issues” like a single candidate for the WB head. Fuzha goes so far as declaring BRICS a fiction:
“Ultimately, BRICS cannot agree on any serious problems, with the exception of joint protests against the dominance of rich countries in the system of world leadership. In addition, it is impossible to say that China is striving so hard for this: if it gets a leading role in the economy of the planet, then it will have to demonstrate a far greater degree of monetary, trade and public responsibility. Thus, BRICS is a fiction that is at the same time too popular in the media ”(the source of the translation is "InoSMI").
This is how the French journalist simply resolved the geopolitical issue with BRICS. Fiction, and the point.
However, this balancing voice is from somewhere in the third row. It is not France or Britain that acts as a chorus in the choir of detractors of the strengthening “five”. The solo batch is derived by the United States of America.
Iii. Soloist in the masons choir
Reporting of Rama Lakshmi from New Delhi to Washington Post on March 29, entitled “BRICS Summit: Emerging Economies Condemn Military Threats against Iran and Syria”, is full of skepticism.
The author obviously does not believe or does not want to believe in the future of BRICS:
“The coalition, which represents countries that have more than 41 percent of the world's population and 20 percent of the world economy, suffers from mutual suspicions and disagreements. And its members have not always taken a unified position in international efforts for the uprisings in Libya and Syria.
The term “BRICS” was introduced by Goldman Sachs in 2001 to categorize developing economies as drivers of international growth. Formally, the group merged in 2006 year on the initiative of Russia. In 2011, it was joined by South Africa. In recent years, the BRICS countries have worked on the formation of general provisions aimed at determining the outcome of the climate change negotiations in Copenhagen. But many analysts say that this is unlikely to be a significant block in international negotiations.
“The BRICS grouping has economic weight, but their political influence still needs to be tested,” said Lalit Mansing, a former Indian ambassador to the United States. - They do not have a common opinion on many international issues. They have no common cementing principle. All members of the group have problems with China. They all had the right talk today at the summit, but each country would have to make its own calculations about how far they could go in challenging the United States. ”
In the article by Heather Timmons and Glenn Kates, “Bouquets and fragments of bricks for BRICS” (the name can also be translated as “Compliments and harsh remarks to BRICS”. Wordplay. - O. C), published on March 30 in "New York Times", in a blog about India, says: “Whether the BRICS meeting was in New Delhi on Thursday was a major triumph or disappointment, it seems that it depends a little on who you ask.”
The article provides an overview of the different points of view about BRICS. The authors lead the reader to the fact that, for example, the press of the BRICS member countries declares a bold challenge to an outdated world economic order, while the Western media, on the contrary, predict all sorts of failures for BRICS. In conclusion of the brief review, the authors note: “Regardless of your opinion regarding the BRICS summit, it seems to everyone, including the top five world leaders themselves, that this was a great photo operation.”
The theme of a successful newspaper photo shoot "New York Times" Started another 28 March. Jim Yardley in a report from New Delhi “A group of five countries: the acronym is easy, but hard points of contact” ironically remarks that the greatest achievement of a group of countries was “the addition of the letter S” (meaning admission to the participants of the South African association).
Yardley informs readers of the newspaper that the group members could not agree on the new head of the IMF and the candidate for the post of head of the World Bank. In addition, the BRICS participants do not have a unanimous opinion about terrorism and national security (for example, they do not have a single line regarding Iran’s “nuclear ambitions”).
“This is not a political bloc at all,” said Yasheng Huang, a professor of global economics and management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. - This is really a photo operation. This is really an idea that the West is no longer the only center of attraction or should no longer be treated as such. ”
We read further:
“Deep internal political and economic differences complicate unity prospects. India, Brazil and South Africa are democracies, and have already used their own separate tripartite group, IBSA, as the primary platform for coordinating positions on several major diplomatic issues.
Russia, however, drifted away from democracy to the power of a strong personality under Vladimir V. Putin. China is the largest authoritarian state in the world and has by far the largest and strongest economy in BRICS, which generates an isolated mobile part. China is a heavyweight, and thus the natural leader of the group, except that he is a politically isolated part.
There is also considerable mistrust in relations between India and China, the border disputes of which continue for decades, fueled by the quiet build-up of military power on both sides. The two countries differ sharply in their views on Pakistan and the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet. Trade is growing rapidly, but India complains that China has done too little to open up its market to Indian firms. China, in turn, suspects that India is pursuing a policy of containment in alliance with the United States through its diplomatic ties with East Asian countries, such as South Korea, Japan, Australia and Indonesia. ”
In general, not a union, but a tangle of contradictions ...
The author cites the opinion that China is the leader of the group, and he will implement policies aimed only at his own interests at BRICS: “Moreover, some analysts see BRICS mainly as the annual meeting of China and its major suppliers. Brazil, Russia and South Africa are selling an ever-increasing amount of goods to China. China persistently lobbied for the inclusion of South Africa in the group - at a time when Chinese state-owned firms were buying raw materials in Africa. ”
In another report from New Delhi, entitled “The BRICS leaders are not able to create a competitor to the World Bank”, published on March 29 in "New York Times"Yardley reports numerous violations of democracy in Delhi during the summit:
“Thousands of police and paramilitary officers were sent to New Delhi to meet - not only to guard the arriving leaders, but also to thwart protests of Tibetans against the presence of the Chinese leader, Hu Jintao, and against Beijing's power in Tibet.
At least 316 people were detained under “preventive arrest” in the prison of the city of Tihara, according to the administrator, who added that they were not charged. On Wednesday, a Tibetan monk from Kirti Monastery in western China died of self-immolation, as did one of the Tibetans in New Delhi, who protested against Mr. Hu’s visit.
Tibetan activists and human rights advocates criticized the crackdown in New Delhi as a violation of freedom of speech. On Thursday, police tried to thwart demonstrations near the summit venue by blocking adjacent streets. But around noon, two Tibetans managed to run up to the pedestrian bridge a few hundred yards from the Taj Palace Hotel, the meeting venue. They chanted slogans and unfolded a banner with the inscription: "Hu Jintao is a failed leader, Tibet is now free." The police quickly intervened. ”
Old annoying song. Its motive is the same, only the characters change: some fighter for freedom of speech and video files in Syria, relocated to Egypt with an iPhone, and a banker who has run from Venezuela in the United States from harassment by Chávez, the nameless administrator, who counted those who innocently languish in the Indian dungeons, and tell the whole truth to the American correspondent.
The West, accustomed to glancing down upon Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, in the person of the BRICS, met what he had always feared. Perhaps, the western part of the world, headed by the States, fears that Khrushchev's long-standing strategy will be implemented by the five countries named (“Overtake and Overtake America”). Or maybe politicians in the West see in the alliance of the five countries the specter of the CMEA, the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance that existed from 1949 to 1991, rose from the historical darkness, and in 1960-70's. acting as a socialist alternative to the EEC.
Overtake, and catch up, BRICS, however, is not going to anyone. At a recent summit in New Delhi, a similar goal was not declared, and from an economic point of view, such a strategy would look like a murderous one. But from the point of view that the devastated Americans are massively moving to tent camps, the EU, having just plugged a huge budget hole in Greece, is experiencing not the best of times, but various international financial institutions like the IMF and various world banks have long lost confidence in those whom ravaged, time for the vigorous activity of an alternative association now is the most suitable.
Let's remember the CMEA. In 1964, a settlement system was launched between the member countries of this organization, the operations of which were carried out by the International Bank for Economic Cooperation. The IBEC was established in 1963 and had the main purpose of promoting the development of foreign trade of the CMEA member countries, and the settlement was carried out in transferable rubles. (The bank is still valid, its members: Bulgaria, Vietnam, Cuba, Mongolia, Poland, Russia, Romania, Slovakia, the Czech Republic). Later, in 1970, a credit institution, the International Investment Bank, also appeared within the framework of the CMEA (it is also still in operation, its participants are: Bulgaria, Cuba, Mongolia, Vietnam, Romania, Russia, Slovakia, the Czech Republic). In 1980's due to the scientific, technical and technological backwardness of the socialist countries from the western states, the CMEA manifested crisis phenomena. 1985-1988 programs did not save the situation, and then in the member countries the regimes of power changed, and the former socialist economies took the path of market and capitalism.
Doesn't BRICS inherit to the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance - in the best years of its activities? Not in the sense of socialist construction and the creation of a counterbalance to the West in the protracted “cold war”, but in the declared purpose - in mutual economic assistance? And is it not because of the Western countries with such skepticism and such contempt speak about the BRICS, that they feel, as a world equal to the developed democratic West, which before seemed so strong and stable, and even the only possible (according to the books of the idealist Fukuyama), suddenly changes, acquiring New forms and getting ready to send former hegemons to an unenviable place in the tail of the world column?
I. Ruble to replace the dollar
BRICS today is more than forty percent of the world's population, a quarter of its territory, almost a third of arable land, a fifth of the world economy, fifteen percent of international trade and more than half of all capital attracted to the world economy. Do not reckon with him will not work.
The abbreviation "BRIC" was invented in 2001 by Mr. Jim O'Neill, the chief economist of the investment bank "Goldman Sachs". The abbreviation "BRIC" meant Brazil, Russia, India and China, whose economies were recognized as "rapidly developing." In 2011, South Africa joined four countries, and the union was called BRICS (S - South Africa).
BRIC began its active work not in 2001, but only in 2006. In September of this year, at the initiative of Vladimir Putin, a meeting of the foreign ministers of four countries was organized at the UN General Assembly in New York. In July, 2008 hosted a meeting of the BRIC heads of state in Japan, following the G-8 meeting. Then the heads of the financial departments of the BRIC countries met in November 2008 in Brazil and in March 2009 in London. Russian President D. Medvedev also met in 2009 in Moscow with representatives of the participating countries responsible for national security issues. Since 2009, the BRIC and BRICS summits have been held regularly.
The first summit was held in Yekaterinburg in June 2009, the second summit - in Brasilia in April 2010, III - in Sanya (PRC) in April 2011, IV - 28-29 in March 2012 in New Delhi. The last meeting seriously worried Western politicians and economists. The fact is that the BRICS countries are no longer going to be content with one economic cooperation with each other. Now they have clearly expressed a desire to influence world order. It was about creating our own system of settlements and lending in national currencies and abandoning the dollar and euro in this system. “On the part of Vnesheconombank, the documents were signed by the head of the bank, Vladimir Dmitriev. In addition to VEB, the China Development Bank, the Export-Import Bank of India, the Brazilian National Economic and Social Development Bank (Banco Nacional de Desenvolvimento Economico e Social) and the South African Development Bank ( Development Bank of Southern Africa). Banks signed a general agreement on the provision of loans in national currencies and an agreement on the confirmation of letters of credit within the framework of the interbank cooperation mechanism of the BRICS countries ”(source: RIA News").
Quote:
“Another agreement signed at the end of the summit in New Delhi is a general agreement on mutual lending in national currencies.
According to Russian presidential aide Sergei Prikhodko, this agreement should enhance the role of national currencies in settlements between countries.
In fact, this means that the states of the bloc have taken the first step towards reducing dependence on the two most common world reserve currencies - the US dollar and the euro.
The need for this step in the BRICS countries has long been spoken about. So, in August last year, the PRC, the largest creditor of the United States, expressed confidence that the world needs another reserve currency that can replace the dollar.
The Russian authorities have repeatedly spoken about this, offering the Russian ruble as an option ”("Russian service" BBC ").
In addition, the BRICS countries decided to strengthen the role of the friendly "five" in the International Monetary Fund.
Quote:
“But the representation of the BRICS countries in international organizations does not correspond to their role in the global economy. “This is primarily about reforming the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
This reform needs to be completed and done so, as we agreed in the framework of the G-20, not postponing it because the problems did not end in the international financial system, ”said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.
Developing countries are seeking to increase their quotas in the IMF. Governance reform at the IMF began in 2010 and should be completed in 2012 before the annual meeting of the Fund and the World Bank, revision of the quota calculation formula to 1 in January 2013, and revision of the quotas themselves to 1 in January 2014.
Only if the voice of the developing countries in the fund becomes more substantial, the IMF can count on additional financial investments from their side, the BRICS leaders warned.
Only at the end of the quota reform will efforts to increase the resources of the IMF be successful, the Delhi Declaration emphasizes.
The IMF is counting on funds from developing countries. Last November, the head of the fund, Christine Lagarde, met with some of the leaders of the BRICS countries, including Dmitry Medvedev, to make sure they were ready to increase lending to the IMF.
But the reform of the quota system is proceeding very slowly, noted the leaders of the BRICS countries. So, for now, countries will focus on their own projects ”(Gazeta.ru, Olga Tanas).
Own projects? Oh yeah. The BRICS countries are planning to implement an ambitious economic project: to launch their own financial institution - a bank. This unborn financial babe has already been dubbed by analysts the Bank of BRICS. In the Delhi Declaration, it is called the “BRICS Development Bank”.
“The creation of a new BRICS Development Bank was proposed by India in February 2012 of the year, on the eve of the meeting of finance ministers and heads of central banks of the G-20. “Initially, the idea of creating a bank was only to help African countries. But then, in order to make the BRICS countries more interested in creating a bank, India clarified its position and suggested that in addition to the poorest countries, the bank could lend to the BRICS countries themselves, ”Finance Minister Anton Siluanov explained to Gazeta.Ru” (Gazeta.ru, Olga Tanas).
“In a joint statement following the meeting, the so-called Delhi Declaration, the leaders of the BRICS countries stated the need to create a new bank that would accumulate resources for“ infrastructure and sustainable development projects. ”
We are talking about projects not only in the five countries of the block, but also in other developing countries.
The BRICS finance ministers are instructed to “study the feasibility and viability” of this initiative and present their findings at the next block summit to be held in the Republic of South Africa in 2013 ”("Russian service" BBC ").
Such initiatives, agreements and statements can not but worry the Western countries: after all, the unification of BRICS is nothing more than an economic threat to the existence of geopolitical hegemony with America at the head. The old world order may become a thing of the past with its key currencies - the dollar and the euro.
“People's Daily” (China) reports: “During the 4, four specific features were shown by the BRICS:
The first specificity is epochal. BRICS cooperation aims to overcome the financial crisis, to strive for economic development and to break the unfair order.
The second specificity is the complementary countries of BRICS, respectively, famous in the world as a “global factory” (China), a “country of outsourcing” (India), an “energy empire” (Russia), a “resource warehouse” (Brazil), a “golden country” ( South Africa), have specific advantages and great complementarity in the economic sphere.
The third specificity is pliability. The motto of the cooperation of the five states is “arbitrariness, vastness, decentralization, multidimensionality”. Despite this, the parties can always express a “common voice”, in which the great consensus of BRICS is expressed.
The fourth specificity is openness. Last year, South Africa officially became the fifth member of BRICS, which demonstrates the reliability of BRICS in the area of joining a new partner and embodies the open spirit of this platform ”(source: Radio "Voice of Russia").
BRICS is becoming an influential organization. At a meeting of the BRICS leaders in expanded 29 in March, the President of Russia said: “I believe that the commonality of our fundamental interests can be the key to the success of the BRICS project. We are all interested in reforming the outdated financial and economic system of the world. Now this reform is underway, but today we have expressed dissatisfaction with the pace at which it is being implemented ... ”(RIA News"). In a press statement following the summit in the capital of India, Dmitry Medvedev said: “The promising agenda of BRICS is the gradual transformation of this forum into a strong and influential organization ...” (RIA News").
Quote:
“The Declaration, based on the Delhi Summit, leaves no doubt that the process of gathering forces inside the BRICS has moved into the phase of formulating common interests and preparing concrete joint actions on the world stage.
“Our discussions, the general theme of which was“ the BRICS partnership in the interests of global stability, security and prosperity ”, were held in a cordial and warm atmosphere and were imbued with our shared desire to further strengthen partnership in the interests of common development, as well as to promote cooperation based on openness , solidarity, mutual understanding and trust, ”the Declaration says.
Behind these simple formulations reads the fatigue of "double standards" in Western international politics. International relations have long needed to be cleared of lies and pharisaism that permeated the political culture imposed by the Anglo-Saxons on the world ”(Dmitry Sedov, Foundation for Strategic Culture).
In 2012-2013 BRICS countries are planning to hold meetings of ministers of foreign affairs, finance, trade, agriculture and health, to organize scientific and technical forums, to hold a meeting on urbanization, on cooperation of twin cities, etc.
“An agreement was signed on the settlement system in national currencies, which aims to push aside and ultimately replace the dollar in settlements between these countries. The group's finance ministers were tasked to prepare proposals for the Development Bank for the next summit. Now the internal trade turnover of BRICS is 230 billion dollars, and there is every prospect that it will quickly reach 500 billion.
BRICS leaders ... noted the disproportionate representation of nations and continents on the UN Security Council. “Russia supports India, Brazil and South Africa as strong candidates for membership in the UN Security Council,” the Russian president said. A serious warning to NATO strategists who are carrying out plans for enforcing political surgery in a number of countries sounded the summit’s statement on the inadmissibility of using the UN "to cover up the policy of displacing undesirable regimes and imposing unilateral conflict resolution formats."
Iran and Syria have been the subject of debate. “We also discussed foreign policy issues, special attention was drawn to situations in hot spots, including the situation in Syria,” Medvedev informed. - We believe it is important not to allow external interference in the affairs of Syria, to enable the government on the one hand and the opposition on the other hand to finally enter into a dialogue without destroying it, not to mention that initially this dialogue is doomed to failure and only military actions able to restore order - this is the most shortsighted, the most dangerous approach. " A consolidated position has emerged to prevent aggression against Iran. China, India and South Africa receive from Iran from 12 to 20% of total oil imports. They just talk about it. “We must avoid political upheavals causing fluctuations in the global raw materials market that affect the flow of goods,” said Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. He was supported by Brazilian President Dilma Roussef, who condemned the policy of embargo against Iran and the escalation of rhetoric of violence.
If we keep in mind that before this, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu expressed his intention to strike at Iran’s nuclear facilities, it becomes obvious that two radically different approaches to shaping the international agenda are forming in the world. And BRICS is already emerging as an alternative force to the Western approach ”(Dmitry Sedov, Foundation for Strategic Culture).
But he writes John Brown from Euro Pacific:
“For sixty-eight years, Anglo-Americans have significantly increased the power and size of central governments and central banks. Governments scored unimaginably irresponsible levels of public debt and devalued their currencies almost beyond recognition. It discouraged savings and investment. But if the emergency expenses of the government run out and the money taps are curled up, these economies will face a brutal recession, leaving only a few options to politicians who want to vote. On the other hand, countries with healthy manufacturing industries, high savings and investment, low government debt, and smarter economic policies have accumulated huge reserves (reflecting America’s heyday in the 19 century).
While the BRICS countries have amassed impressive reserves of about $ 4 trillion, the US Treasury alone is in debt about $ 15.4 trillions. Moreover, American politicians plan to increase this debt by borrowing another trillion dollars in the foreseeable future. It is already clear to many that the continued dominance of the Anglo-Americans is no longer deserved.
This fundamental struggle without a real prospect of compromise is at the epicenter of the future global clash for money and power. Led by China, the BRICS bloc stands for an alternative to the US dollar, because it is annoyed by the fact that it is under the yoke of a monetary system based on less and less stable economic fundamentals. In my opinion, they are clearly focused on a new international reserve standard tied to gold, which should replace the existing exchange rate regime.
Now the BRICS countries are insisting on accelerating the restructuring of the management of international financing. Surviving countries may want to seek help from these new support resources. In the end, other resource-rich countries like Chile and Indonesia may want to choose their creditors themselves. In addition, if the United States continues to base its entire faith on the printing press, some savings-rich Western countries like Germany, Norway and Switzerland may be tempted to join the BRICS block in their quest for a new world order based on secured money.
It seems that the sun of the era of impetuous typing is drooping. When the dawn of new days comes, the newly laid path to freedom and entrepreneurship will be paved not with paper, but with gold and silver ”(translation source: Mixednews).
But the opinion Shemsa Eddina Shitura ("L'Expression", Algeria):
“The West, incorrigible and mired in dreams of its own greatness, deliberately ignores developing countries and does not want to reckon with them, recalling their existence only when it calls on them to save Europe and support the huge US deficit. China has the world's largest foreign exchange reserves: 3,2 trillion dollars. Russia has 514 billions of dollars, Brazil has more than 350 billions, India has more than 320 billions.
After joining the South African group in April 2011, the economic weight of the BRICS countries reached 11,7 trillions of dollars. In 2010, the nominal GDP of the members of the BRICS was 18,5% of world value. When converted to purchasing power parity, this figure reaches 26,7%.
In addition, the economic gap between the BRICS countries and the G8 continues to narrow. Without Russia, the rest of the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Italy, Great Britain and the USA) account for 38,3% of world GDP, taking into account purchasing power parity. This distance will decrease even more in the coming years, since some G-8 countries only with great difficulty manage to cope with their chronic difficulties. At the same time, the economic growth of the BRICS countries will remain at a consistently high level.
While the United States and the European Union cannot straighten out the economy that is sliding toward recession, the BRICS group lays out its own trump cards that will enable it to become a new driving force of the world by 2050. In addition, the group is not going to follow the economic embargo imposed by Europe and the United States on Iran: the summit participants decided to strengthen the partnership with Tehran, which supplies oil to India and China. In order to clearly mark their independence from international financial institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF, the five BRICS leaders emphasized in the final statement the group’s desire to create its own development bank to finance major infrastructure projects and provide loans to poor countries.
In addition, the participating countries agreed to increase the volume of trade within the organization, which should increase from the current 280 billion dollars to 500 billion dollars by the year 2015. In the next three years, India and Russia intend to switch to using their own national currencies in bilateral trade operations, thereby removing dependence on the US dollar rate.
Moreover, it should be noted that the West is gradually losing ground and for the first time in stories forced to back down in international affairs. Lynching over Gaddafi, the collapse of Sudan, Libya, Iraq and Yemen - all this was the last straw. For the first time in history, two states were able to stop the infernal machine targeting Syria, in spite of the fanfare of US vassals. Inevitably, there will be changes in politics, and Bashar Asad will comply with the decisions made at the elections, but the American project of the “Great Middle East” will remain just an unrealizable mind-building ”(translation source: "InoSMI").
Thus, a structure emerged on the geopolitical and international economic arena that decided to trade without using the US dollar. Moreover, the organization, towards which you can snort, but with which you can no longer be ignored, develops joint political approaches: for example, to the situation in Syria and to the situation with Western aggressive intentions regarding Iran.
All this explains why the former Western skepticism regarding BRICS, flavored with a share of contempt and habitual demagogy, changes to anxiety and anxiety. In addition, in the West, they are well aware that nothing brings as close as a common ... well, let's say, not an enemy, but an offender.
Quote:
“There is still an opinion that it belongs to the publicist James Traub from the USA that it would be better if there was no BRICS at all, and instead of it there would be“ expanded IBSA ”. These are the same India with Brazil and South Africa (which are actually also found in three), and if Turkey and Indonesia are joined to them, they will be IBSATI.
Why? Because the IBA countries are “dear democracies”, Turkey and Indonesia are also, but these are Russia and China ...
The point here is not how democratic the Turks or Brazilians are, and not that if you take the division of countries into “democracy” and “autocracy” seriously, you can forever say goodbye to the hopes of understanding anything in our world.
The main thing here is the complete and sometimes sincere misunderstanding by many people of what BRICS is all about.
For example, there is a mass of people willing to remind about the long-standing mutual distrust of India and China after the 1962 war of the year. (However, how to deal with the growth of Indian-Chinese trade, which already exceeded 60 billion dollars? With the fact that China has become the main trading partner of India?)
Or you can raise your eyebrows in surprise: what is South Africa doing here? Or think about the fact that the five countries are physically far from each other, and form a regional trade bloc of them is impossible. And then a classic and very erroneous conclusion is made: if I don’t see what brings BRICS together, then BRICS will not live long.
But the fact of the matter is that different economic realities, or growth rates, or disputes and contradictions not only do not interfere with the existence of the BRICS - they cement it. They are the reason why BRICS was created and grew, first on the basis of just the “arguing” Indo-Chinese-Russian “triangle” called RIC. And only then Brazilians reached out to him in 2006, then South Africans, and, by the way, new ones appeared, which was quite lively talk about in Delhi on the eve of the summit ”(RIA "Novosti", Dmitry Kosyrev).
So, it's time to reckon with the BRICS, to fear the BRICS and even ... get rid of the BRICS. That is what they think, for example, in Britain.
Ii. “It's time to dump the bricks.”
At the end of the Delhi forum, British newspapers, along with doubts about the fact that BRICS could do something at all, speculated on the fact that Moscow had a place in Europe, and there was no need for the Kremlin to be friends with the Chinese. "Russian service" BBC " I recently pleased my readers with a review of the British press, so I can only bring a few excerpts from there.
“Financial Times” in an editorial comment, playing with the words “BRICS” and “bricks” (“bricks”), notes that “the creation of a bloc that united countries, which account for almost half of the world's population and a quarter of the world economy, was a spectacular PR technique and powerful market move. " “It is difficult to build trust between such different political systems as communism, authoritarianism and democracy,” continues the Financial Times. “It’s equally difficult to find common interests for exporting countries and importers of natural resources.” “The newspaper refrains from direct forecasting the likelihood of such a development of events, but immediately reminds that the participants in the Delhi summit could not agree on the support of a single candidate for the post of head of the World Bank, and concludes that“ bricks do not have enough solution ”.
“The theme of the" BRICS bricks "is addressed to the Times.
According to the diplomatic editor of the newspaper, Roger Boyes, the West should try to destroy this "brick wall", because the "Russian-Chinese axis is dangerous for the rest of the world."
“Let's try to get Moscow back to Europe,” says the subtitle of Boyes’s article.
The diplomatic editor of Times sees the danger in that “the BRICS philosophy, formed under the influence of Russia, lies in rivalry with the United States and the G7 countries.”
“As for the West, then, in the opinion of the Times editor, his mission should be to“ lure Russia out of the embraces of BRICS and offer it an alternative place in the world system - as an EU partner that recognizes its European roots and European values ”.
“Let us take root in Russia in Europe and will not support Moscow’s muddy ideas about BRICS as a new International,” Boyes calls.
“It's time to dump the bricks,” the Times sums up.
By the way, regarding the first article in the review - from the Financial Times - in the Russian Internet you can find next review (published without editing):
“Well, the leaders of the third world countries of 5 met and what? India and China have the poorest population in the world, Russia has a bloody regime that fights hard with its own people. Brazil is a raw material appendage of the USA. South Africa will not comment at all. And these countries with a medieval economy, which can produce nothing but raw materials and primitive labor-intensive products, want to oppose themselves to such industrial giants as England and the USA? Yes, in the US, every citizen has a much larger amount of knowledge than an academician in Russia ... They have democracy there and people are not afraid to tell the truth, not like in Russia and in China, where people are zombie and can only think in the way that power allows them. Americans are much more talented, and therefore much richer ... And do the BRICS countries want to compete with them? Yes, if it were not for the constant humanitarian assistance from the United States, the population of the BRICS countries would be less in 2 than it is now. People would have died out of starvation.
I believe that as a sign of gratitude for the fact that we still exist, we and all the other BRICS countries should abandon their currencies and switch to the US dollar. You do not need to wrung out “great powers”, you need to help those who create everything, thanks to which we still exist and we need to start with the transition to the dollar as the main currency. ”
British newspaper The Guardian in the person of journalist Simon Tisdalla joins the choir of the BRICS opponents:
“The one-day annual summit of the so-called BRICS countries — Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — has received little attention in the West. Perhaps because the group has achieved little since its inception in 2009. Critics make fun of her as an empty discussion club.
But this neglect, or even contempt, may also reflect the fact that the block, representing almost half of the world's population and about one fifth of global economic production, is an undesirable challenge to the existing world order defined by the IMF and the World Bank, as well as the UN Security Council, dominated by the USA.
The desire of BRICS countries to change the world raises questions about fundamental values, as well as geopolitical influence. The key members of the bloc, China and Russia, have little or no adherence to democratic principles, which, in particular, includes free elections, free speech and free media. India is also subject to growing criticism regarding attempts to silence open debate. Attitudes toward basic human rights that China and Russia are showing, in particular with regard to the Syrian uprising, may not be a paradigm that developing countries will gladly accept ”(source of translation: Mixednews).
Thus, there is a British tradition: to inspire oneself with an old kind song about ever-living democracy. There is no "democracy" - there will be no new union, no economic development, no common bank. Here the States and Britain have everything, because strong democracy - along with the complete freedom of speech. Well, and you, friends, no matter how you sit down, all the Democrats are not fit ...
The French sing along with the British "Le Monde".
Alain Fouja wrote an article titled “Fake BRICS unity”. The journalist believes that the success of the BRICS will be hampered by the lack of banking experience in the planned financial education, as well as the fact that the participants of the organization cannot come to a common opinion even on “symbolic issues” like a single candidate for the WB head. Fuzha goes so far as declaring BRICS a fiction:
“Ultimately, BRICS cannot agree on any serious problems, with the exception of joint protests against the dominance of rich countries in the system of world leadership. In addition, it is impossible to say that China is striving so hard for this: if it gets a leading role in the economy of the planet, then it will have to demonstrate a far greater degree of monetary, trade and public responsibility. Thus, BRICS is a fiction that is at the same time too popular in the media ”(the source of the translation is "InoSMI").
This is how the French journalist simply resolved the geopolitical issue with BRICS. Fiction, and the point.
However, this balancing voice is from somewhere in the third row. It is not France or Britain that acts as a chorus in the choir of detractors of the strengthening “five”. The solo batch is derived by the United States of America.
Iii. Soloist in the masons choir
Reporting of Rama Lakshmi from New Delhi to Washington Post on March 29, entitled “BRICS Summit: Emerging Economies Condemn Military Threats against Iran and Syria”, is full of skepticism.
The author obviously does not believe or does not want to believe in the future of BRICS:
“The coalition, which represents countries that have more than 41 percent of the world's population and 20 percent of the world economy, suffers from mutual suspicions and disagreements. And its members have not always taken a unified position in international efforts for the uprisings in Libya and Syria.
The term “BRICS” was introduced by Goldman Sachs in 2001 to categorize developing economies as drivers of international growth. Formally, the group merged in 2006 year on the initiative of Russia. In 2011, it was joined by South Africa. In recent years, the BRICS countries have worked on the formation of general provisions aimed at determining the outcome of the climate change negotiations in Copenhagen. But many analysts say that this is unlikely to be a significant block in international negotiations.
“The BRICS grouping has economic weight, but their political influence still needs to be tested,” said Lalit Mansing, a former Indian ambassador to the United States. - They do not have a common opinion on many international issues. They have no common cementing principle. All members of the group have problems with China. They all had the right talk today at the summit, but each country would have to make its own calculations about how far they could go in challenging the United States. ”
In the article by Heather Timmons and Glenn Kates, “Bouquets and fragments of bricks for BRICS” (the name can also be translated as “Compliments and harsh remarks to BRICS”. Wordplay. - O. C), published on March 30 in "New York Times", in a blog about India, says: “Whether the BRICS meeting was in New Delhi on Thursday was a major triumph or disappointment, it seems that it depends a little on who you ask.”
The article provides an overview of the different points of view about BRICS. The authors lead the reader to the fact that, for example, the press of the BRICS member countries declares a bold challenge to an outdated world economic order, while the Western media, on the contrary, predict all sorts of failures for BRICS. In conclusion of the brief review, the authors note: “Regardless of your opinion regarding the BRICS summit, it seems to everyone, including the top five world leaders themselves, that this was a great photo operation.”
The theme of a successful newspaper photo shoot "New York Times" Started another 28 March. Jim Yardley in a report from New Delhi “A group of five countries: the acronym is easy, but hard points of contact” ironically remarks that the greatest achievement of a group of countries was “the addition of the letter S” (meaning admission to the participants of the South African association).
Yardley informs readers of the newspaper that the group members could not agree on the new head of the IMF and the candidate for the post of head of the World Bank. In addition, the BRICS participants do not have a unanimous opinion about terrorism and national security (for example, they do not have a single line regarding Iran’s “nuclear ambitions”).
“This is not a political bloc at all,” said Yasheng Huang, a professor of global economics and management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. - This is really a photo operation. This is really an idea that the West is no longer the only center of attraction or should no longer be treated as such. ”
We read further:
“Deep internal political and economic differences complicate unity prospects. India, Brazil and South Africa are democracies, and have already used their own separate tripartite group, IBSA, as the primary platform for coordinating positions on several major diplomatic issues.
Russia, however, drifted away from democracy to the power of a strong personality under Vladimir V. Putin. China is the largest authoritarian state in the world and has by far the largest and strongest economy in BRICS, which generates an isolated mobile part. China is a heavyweight, and thus the natural leader of the group, except that he is a politically isolated part.
There is also considerable mistrust in relations between India and China, the border disputes of which continue for decades, fueled by the quiet build-up of military power on both sides. The two countries differ sharply in their views on Pakistan and the Dalai Lama, the exiled spiritual leader of Tibet. Trade is growing rapidly, but India complains that China has done too little to open up its market to Indian firms. China, in turn, suspects that India is pursuing a policy of containment in alliance with the United States through its diplomatic ties with East Asian countries, such as South Korea, Japan, Australia and Indonesia. ”
In general, not a union, but a tangle of contradictions ...
The author cites the opinion that China is the leader of the group, and he will implement policies aimed only at his own interests at BRICS: “Moreover, some analysts see BRICS mainly as the annual meeting of China and its major suppliers. Brazil, Russia and South Africa are selling an ever-increasing amount of goods to China. China persistently lobbied for the inclusion of South Africa in the group - at a time when Chinese state-owned firms were buying raw materials in Africa. ”
In another report from New Delhi, entitled “The BRICS leaders are not able to create a competitor to the World Bank”, published on March 29 in "New York Times"Yardley reports numerous violations of democracy in Delhi during the summit:
“Thousands of police and paramilitary officers were sent to New Delhi to meet - not only to guard the arriving leaders, but also to thwart protests of Tibetans against the presence of the Chinese leader, Hu Jintao, and against Beijing's power in Tibet.
At least 316 people were detained under “preventive arrest” in the prison of the city of Tihara, according to the administrator, who added that they were not charged. On Wednesday, a Tibetan monk from Kirti Monastery in western China died of self-immolation, as did one of the Tibetans in New Delhi, who protested against Mr. Hu’s visit.
Tibetan activists and human rights advocates criticized the crackdown in New Delhi as a violation of freedom of speech. On Thursday, police tried to thwart demonstrations near the summit venue by blocking adjacent streets. But around noon, two Tibetans managed to run up to the pedestrian bridge a few hundred yards from the Taj Palace Hotel, the meeting venue. They chanted slogans and unfolded a banner with the inscription: "Hu Jintao is a failed leader, Tibet is now free." The police quickly intervened. ”
Old annoying song. Its motive is the same, only the characters change: some fighter for freedom of speech and video files in Syria, relocated to Egypt with an iPhone, and a banker who has run from Venezuela in the United States from harassment by Chávez, the nameless administrator, who counted those who innocently languish in the Indian dungeons, and tell the whole truth to the American correspondent.
Observed and translated by Oleg Chuvakin
- especially for topwar.ru
- especially for topwar.ru
Information