A New World Order?
"Western-style free markets are especially experiencing a systemic collapse and these economic models are not delivering as they once did. The free market system outwardly, at least, seems like it is failing the majority of the people in what is increasingly their growing hour of need. These and a myriad of other such issues have all caused global economic, financial, political, and social tsunamis and the magnitude and impact of these events and crisis has left relatively few national arenas unaffected—be it security in old age, long-term youth joblessness, or energy shortages. This has exposed the combustive fissure of income disparity and has lit a match that has instigated class wars on the wealthy and a sudden proliferation of technocratic unelected governments in the West."
Will BRICS Expand Into BRICSIT?
"One expert on emerging markets believes this will happen, with the BRICS nations – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – extending invitations to Indonesia and Turkey to join the club, as it expands its footprint into new regions.
“I was in Moscow recently and there was talk of the BRICS expanding to the BRICSIT, with the new members being Indonesia and Turkey,” Martyn Davies, the chief executive officer of Johannesburg-based emerging markets consultancy Frontier Advisory, a leading research, strategy and capital advisory firm that specialises in emerging markets, told IPS.
“There are sound geo-political and geo-economic reasons for this.”
He outlined why Turkey and Indonesia would be best placed to be at the front of the queue of potential new members, by explaining that an Indonesian addition to the BRICS alliance would extend the club’s reach to Southeast Asia, while Turkey would also add geographical diversification."
South Africa pledges commitment to BRICS
CAPE TOWN, Nov. 20, 2012 (Xinhua) --
"The South African government on Tuesday pledged its commitment to the BRICS goal of growth, sustainable development and prosperity.
"BRICS is a platform for dialogue and cooperation amongst countries that represent 43 percent of the world's population," said Minister of International Relations and Cooperation, Maite Nkoana-Mshabane.
"The platform strives to promote peace, security and development in a world that is multi-polar, inter-dependent, increasingly complex and globalizing."
China Wants Its Own New World Order To Oppose The US Version:
""Fighting terrorism needs to address both its symptoms and root caused" he said. "... An important prerequisite in this connection is to resolve the question of development and narrow the gap between the (global) North and the South."
He concluded his speech by making clear China did not believe the current world order could produce lasting peace and prosperity, and that it was ready to establish far-reaching ties with other nations to create a "fair and equitable new world order" that would.
"China is ready to strengthen its coordination and cooperation with all other countries in the conduct of international affairs, security included, and work vigorously toward a world that enjoys lasting peace and universal prosperity with a fair and equitable new international order," he said."
"In this situation, where China and Russia are increasingly seizing the high ground economically, while the US continues to dominate the world militarily, how is the US trying to stop its slide into the abyss? (Because obviously, the US cannot sustain global military dominance for a long time without a sound economy.) How is the US responding to the economic, and therefore political, rise of China and the BRICS? It is responding militarily, as you might predict, – by stirring up color revolutions, ‘Arab springs’, Islamist insurgencies in Central Asia, China, and Russia, by expanding NATO to include even Mongolia and Vietnam as ‘partners’ or ‘candidate partners’ of one sort or another. The US is responding by stirring up political turmoil that it hopes to turn into military intervention for itself and its allies. This is not necessarily to control the world, but to destabilize any power not accepting US hegemony and US-led globalism.
"Accordingly, yes, China and Russia do not want to see armed conflicts anywhere, because conflicts ‘feed’ the US Empire. They keep it going, keep it justified, and give it opportunities. Take Syria for example. Calm in Syria would not benefit the US, NATO, the Zionists, or US-led globalism. Calm allows the Syrian state to strengthen itself on the basis of its own resources – with or without reforms, depending on the domestic political situation. Syria could speak to the globalist hegemonists from the position of at least being in control of Syrian space – and, indeed, with the friendship of Russia and China, too. That is bad news for the West. But the West can benefit from Islamist insurgency, guerrilla warfare, and political unrest in the country. All those allow the US to meddle in the country – to ‘protect the victims’ to ‘support democracy’ and what not else."
In this context, no, the Russians and Chinese are NOT going to arm resistance movements against the US imperialists. If they did, they would immediately be drawn into a conflict that would weaken their own strongpoint (their economies) in order to confront the US in precisely the one area where the US still has an overwhelming preponderance (the military). That would, in effect, be falling into the American trap. It’s elementary strategic thinking: you simply do NOT fight the enemy at his strongest point. Opting for a direct military confrontation with the US could bankrupt China and Russia economically, leading to the downfall of their states. But continuing to foster their own economic growth, while increasing their own defensive potential gradually and unobtrusively, starting with their own geographic regions, will drain the US of its resources and eventually force Washington to disband its massive military complex."
Brics aim for no less than a new world order
THE fifth Brics Summit in Durban might well represent the emergence of an interesting new power bloc. Brics’s objective is to reshape the international economic order by challenging the historic dominance of the US, Germany, the UK and France, with a bloc composed largely of countries of the global south, comprising two international and three regional powers.
In previous centuries, Russia’s striving to become a world power was stifled by the backwardness of its political institutions. It required the social and political revolutions of 1917, followed by the industrial revolution Stalin brutally imposed on it, for Russia to survive the Second World War, making possible its emergence as a world power. Russia’s old ruling classes proved incapable of realising Peter the Great’s dream. After the Decembrist Uprising of 1825, modernist intellectuals dashed their heads against the iron-clad defences of the ancien regime in their attempts to overthrow Tsarism. It was the intellectuals who adopted the most revolutionary ideas of their age, the Bolsheviks, who proved equal to the task, raising Russia from a European backwater to the international power it became after 1945.
The Bolsheviks defeated counterrevolution, supported by Britain, France, the US and Japan, because they offered the oppressed nationalities of the Tsarist empire autonomy, self-government and equality. Joseph Vissarionovich Djugashvili, who assumed the pseudonym Stalin, was the son of one such minority, the Georgians.
China is the dominant economic player in Brics — made possible by the radical transformation of a declining Asiatic despotism by revolutionary means. After a century of political and social upheavals from 1850 to 1950, the communists reasserted China’s national sovereignty, reunited the country and created stability by offering leadership to a peasant revolt that brought much-needed economic and social change. The communists were the agents of modernisation in Russia and China. Ruthless programmes of social engineering, driven by the intelligentsia, recast them into modern industrial powers.
India, the world’s second-most populous country and its largest parliamentary democracy, is a rich tapestry of languages and religions that has been moulded into one nation under the leadership of nationalist intellectuals. India has wrestled with modernity in an environment riddled with the uncertainties of democratic government since independence in 1947. Continuing tensions could not deter India from transforming itself into a leading centre for the design, manufacture and servicing of digital software.
Like India, South Africa is composed of a diversity of racial, cultural and religious communities that will become a united nation thanks to an African nationalist intelligentsia. The newest member of the Brics bloc, South Africa, with its relatively small economy and population, is visibly punching above its weight by associating with the four others. For close to a century, backward political institutions frustrated its potential. South Africa’s economic development was distorted by white racism — its industrial economy managed to address the needs of less than 20% of its small population.
Yet South Africa’s economic muscle on the continent comes with a number of obligations. Peace and stability in our region are essential for the realisation of the country’s continental ambitions. On the world stage, order and security in the oceans on which the country’s international trade relies have required South Africa to re-equip and modernise its navy. On a continent where its relative prosperity attracts thousands of legal and illegal migrants, South Africa necessarily is a status quo power.
Brazil, too, has a diverse population, numerically dominated by Afro-Brazilians, but otherwise dominated by whites. It lives in the shadow of the US, which, invoking the Monroe Doctrine, regards that country as part of its sphere of influence. Consequently, unlike tiny Cuba, Brazil has been unable to project its power in the region, let alone challenge the US on the world stage. Brazil’s leftist government has redefined its role and seeks to build new transcontinental alliances with other developing countries.
Until recently, Brazil’s rapacious capitalist class plundered the rainforests and brutally exploited the indigenous peoples to near extinction. Perhaps, as in Russia, Brazil can realise its international goals by unlocking the talents of its African majority and indigenous minorities. That will require programmes to eliminate overt and covert forms of racial discrimination and to rein in the predatory practices of ranchers and logging and mining corporations that are doing such violence to the rainforests and the indigenous communities who live in them.
Brics has already unlocked new sources of direct foreign investment for African economies and could provide new markets for African goods. Africa’s 1-billion inhabitants constitute a huge market. The continent will exercise more leverage acting as a unit rather than as a number of discrete, small markets. South Africa should persuade its Brics partners to regard Africa as a single market with attractive opportunities for greenfields investments. Economic growth will bring the stability so necessary for South Africa’s own economic success.
• Jordan is a former arts and culture minister.
Brics’ bid for new world order
THE fifth summit of Brics (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) countries, the first in Africa, which ended in Durban yesterday gave further momentum to efforts by key representatives of emerging markets and the developing world to create a new global order.
Editors Memo with Dumisani Muleya
Brics, an acronym coined by British economist and retiring chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management Jim O’Neill, wants to ensure a new trajectory in global economic development, while contributing to peace and security.
In the process, it seeks to contribute towards establishing a more equitable and fair world.
Its emergence has now come to symbolise a gradual shift in global economic power away from the developed G7 economies to emerging markets, hence needless hostility by some Western administrations and interested parties.
Attempts at achieving this have been underway for some time, with the Emerging and Growth-Leading Economies (Eagles), which include Brics members and other economies like South Korea, Malaysia, Taiwan, Mexico, Indonesia, Thailand, Turkey, Egypt and Nigeria, among others, being another such initiative.
The eThekwini Declaration, named after the alternate name for Durban, set the future agenda for the bloc by launching a Brics business council; five think tanks; multilateral infrastructure financing agreements; and a development bank as part of its bid to promote global growth, sustain macro-economic stability and investments.
This came at a time when the world is facing multiple challenges on which Brics got a useful and timely opportunity to consult and co-ordinate.
Brics has also been urging faster movement on reform of institutions of global political and economic governance, while encouraging different forms of engagement to encourage global peace and security.
While it is important to analyse and critique the Brics initiative, there is need to support such initiatives to reform and redefine the global political, security and economic order to ensure progress.
Even if Brics controls 21% of the world’s US$70 trillion economy and 43% of its seven billion population, it won’t be easy to ensure change in a unipolar world controlled by a domineering United States, the only superpower.
Besides a deeply entrenched prevailing order and resistance to reform, Brics does not as yet have the critical mass to secure sustainable change.
Therefore Brics countries must not unnecessarily come across as hostile rivals to Western institutions, but progressive counterweights in the balance of power.
Besides, Brics also has its own internal dynamics, including serious flaws, and hence needs to shelve its differences over strategic objectives to establish more common interests.
Its member states have different social systems and follow different ideologies. Its member states are some of the most unequal societies on earth and instead of capitalising from each other’s advantages they might multiply and reproduce their defects.
The good thing though is they largely have shared interests and hold comparable views on how to address the pressing issues obstructing global development. Given their huge potential they can bring measurable changes across the world.
There is an urgent need to establish a peaceful international system and promote democracy and equality in international relations, as opposed to the current Cold War approach. The only trouble though is besides India, Brazil and South Africa, the two biggest Brics member states, China and Russia, are authoritarian.
Many countries around the world want a fairer and more equitable global economic and financial order to replace the one dominated by major developed economies, especially the US due to its control over global institutions, including the International Monetary Fund and World Bank.
So Brics’ strategic objective to help shape a more democratic, fairer, multipolar world, and ensure the United Nations plays the central role in world affairs is useful. China and Russia are permanent UN Security Council members.
And if India, Brazil and South Africa succeed in getting permanent security council seats, it will further bolster Brics’ position and influence while helping in the creation of a new global order.
Putin: Russia, China Help Build New World Order
The New World Order of Russia, China and a weak U.S.
Russia-China ties 'guarantee world peace' and 'new world order'
China-Russia Alliance Would Create New World Order
China and the New World Order
China Wants Its Own 'New World Order' To Oppose US Version
In lavish reception, Putin greets China president
Newcomers drive for new world order
China’s Growing Independence and the New World Order
Chapter 1: China, India, and the New World Order
China & The New World Order by Leslie R. Pastor
China and the New World Order
The new world order - How China sees the world
Law, China and the New World Order