To compete globally, BRICS nations need reputation, not imitation
by Ahmed E. Souaiaia*
The economic,
political, and social rise of the Western block of nations was founded on the
single most enduring currency: reputation. Reputation, the source of credibility
and trust, is the real asset that allows the U.S. to project its stature around
the world. BRICS nations cannot rise to prominence by mimicking developed
countries. They must build their reputation first. Wealth is only a byproduct
of this more precious commodity, and countries who have it can squander it just
as emerging economies can acquire it. For either of those results to happen in
any country, circumstantial conditions and principled actions must converge.
Despite
scientific advances, including ease of communication and physical mobility,
many countries around the world remained untouched.. Many nations around the
world mimicked the Western block of nations’ institutional structures in order to
improve social and economic conditions. Consequently, regional cooperatives
that grouped some countries together to increase capital and expand markets
sprung up all over the world. One such cooperative is the consortium of nations
dubbed BRICS. It is a curious association that warrants close examination in
order to understand the forces that bind them together and the forces that push
them apart.
Observers of
international affairs have been intrigued by the outcome of the BRICS summit in
Durban.
Notably, the leaders of the five countries that constitute this group have agreed
to build institutions that will foster cooperation and coordination.
Specifically, they agreed to found a New Development Bank (NDB) that would
invest in member states’ infrastructure as well as in that of Emerging Markets
and Developing Countries (EMDCs).
The leaders
agreed that each country would contribute an investment of $10 billion,
bringing the initial capital of the NDB to $50 billion. The leaders also agreed
to supplement this capital with an additional $100 billion in emergency reserves,
establishing a Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), to help member states during
unforeseen crises. China will provide $41 billion of the supplemental fund and
each of the other four countries will contribute $18 billion, except South
Africa, which will allocate only $5 billion. The bank will start by investing
in one major project: a high speed Intranet that will connect all five
countries. The project is estimated to cost about $1 billion.
The potential
and challenges facing this emerging economic group are enormous, given the
human, geographic, economic, and political realities that unite and separate
them. What is evident, however, is that challenging the West in the name of multilateralism
is not enough to create a solid block that will survive the various challenges.
First, let’s
look at the potential for success. More than 45% of the world’s population lives
in the countries making up the block: 1.347 billion people in China, more than
1 billion in India, nearly 194 million in Brazil, about 140 million in Russia,
and almost 50 million in South Africa. Together, the five countries control 30%
of the land on earth. Each of the five countries is an economic powerhouse in
its own right: China’s economic input (according to data from two years ago)
equaled $5.5 trillion, Brazil’s was $1 trillion, India’s and Russia’s were both
$1.6 trillion, and South Africa’s equaled $285 billion. Together, the five
nations are the source of about 15% of global trade. More recent data show that
the economy of BRICS grew by an average of 4%, compared to 0.7% for the top
seven industrial nations. Economic projections suggest that BRICS countries
will contribute nearly 50% of global economic growth by the year 2020.
But unlike other
economic blocks around the world, BRICS consists of five countries from four
different continents with five different cultural and ethnic backgrounds. The
geographic, cultural, and ethnic differences among BRICS nations are
significant, but the political differences are even more pronounced. For
instance, Brazil’s political culture is rooted in leadership that is derived
from the authority of the Church and the power of the institution of the
military. In contrast, China’s political system combines Confucius’ values with
communism and the veneration of elders. India’s democracy, shaped by religious
and class casts, is nothing like Russia’s authoritarianism or South Africa’s
emerging representative governance. These differences are significant because
political stability is also crucial in building reputation domestically and
globally. Nations become stable and reputable when citizens (and businesses)
know that life, property, and dignity are safeguarded under all circumstances. If
these nations cannot provide political stability and smooth transfers of power
at home, they certainly cannot be called upon to adjudicate political disputes
abroad. For that to happen, all five nations need to do more to build robust
civil society institutions.
In addition to
the challenges that are dictated by difference, BRICS nations face serious
conflicts of interests. China is perceived to be interested in flooding the
markets of the other countries with its own goods. India is worried about China’s
plans to build more dams on rivers on which India depends. Brazil, South
Africa, and India have campaigned hard to have their status upgraded in the
UNSC, but Russia and China did not support their efforts—which exacerbated the lack
of trust amongst the veto-wielding countries and the non-permanent members.
One could argue
that differences—especially cultural, political, and linguistic ones—ought to
be seen as an asset, not a liability, since leaders of all five nations have
emphasized the virtues of diversity and multiculturalism. That would be a sound
argument if the composition of BRICS was actually built on diversity instead of
economic potential. In the end, this cooperative is an intergovernmental
organization. Governments are not in the business of promoting philosophical
and ethical norms; they are in the business of increasing value to the power
holders.
Ultimately, the
fact that BRICS are focusing on creating an investment bank instead of dealing
with all the outstanding and potential issues suggests that they are relying on
their shared interest in challenging Western dominance. Their first political
statement on Syria and Afghanistan shows that BRICS nations need more than
potential and resources to be effective on the global stage. Importantly, given
the number of crises within the Islamic world, and given the potential and
status of the Islamic world, BRICS could benefit from adding at least one
emerging Muslim country to their exclusive club of nations.
The lingering financial
crisis with which the U.S. and the EU are struggling provided other strong economies
with an opportunity to break free from a unipolar world dominated by the United
States and its allies. China and Russia are seen as the most likely candidates
for re-establishing parity on the global stage. While Russia might be
interested in reinventing itself as one of two superpowers in the post-Soviet
Union era, China seems more interested in improving and preserving its economic
rise. The association of BRICS was built on an idea—not on a principle—an idea that
is rooted in the hope that countries with many resources and much potential can
compete against the West. Competing against the Western block is unifying,
purpose-wise. But competing against the Western block requires a principled
approach and disciplined drive to build a reputation that these countries
singularly or collectively can project around the world with confidence.
Reputation is
not built in a day, by promises, or by wealth. Reputation is the outcome of a
historical trend that builds trust. It cannot be bought, coerced, or
manufactured. Reputation takes time to build and arrogance to destroy. BRICS
nations’ leaders will be fatally mistaken if they think that the crisis of
credibility of the West resulting from their recent illegal wars and violations
of human rights will create an opening for them to as an alternative. BRICS
countries must be consistently better in all those areas for which they fault
the West for a long time for them to have a chance to compete for reputation,
the most valued prize in human civilizations.
______________________
* Prof. SOUAIAIA teaches at the University of Iowa.
Opinions are the author’s, speaking on matters of public interest; not speaking
for the university or any other organization with which he is affiliated.
Posts
