New power blocs or just other hollow alternatives?

To some, BRICS may just be the product of frustrations with a prolonged Western hegemony on free markets. Anti-imperialism is not necessarily a good cause to unite nations but such forces are now losing steam. On the other hand, BRICS does not have much to brag about when it comes to creating new paradigms of development. Each BRICS nation is ruled by an elite that operates on its own exclusivist economic agenda. The often used label “emerging economy” by the West is itself an empty idea when one considers that BRICS has created enormous wealth for very small numbers of its people and left behind a vast majority in abject poverty.

The increase in regional economic blocs such as Asean, Asean+3, Asean+6, Apec, SAARC and others have created new hopes for rapid development in their respective regions. The problem with these blocs is that they are seen as powerful alternatives. The rich and the middle classes are carried away by a sense of euphoria over dominance over the West, overlooking the fact that groupings like BRICS and Asean have their own ideologies and agenda. They tend to portray themselves as an alternative to Western dominance. Just like Nato or the EU, there is a sense in which they are united by self interest, such as a seat in the UN Security Council or “higher” positions of power in other world bodies such as the World Bank and IMF. 

And yet, there seems to be a flip side to this emerging bloc phenomenon. In March, in their declaration in India, BRICS leaders seemed to be saying we are fed up with being considered a second-rung power in the current scenario. We are big not only because we have huge populations and vast geographical areas and natural resources, but also because we are big contenders. BRICS is standing up to West and demanding to be counted. They are the new advocates for a “new world order”.

On the other hand, within Asean there are big disparities among the members. The purchasing power of the group’s four poorest countries is five times less than the other members. Hence Asean can never become similar to the EU because the political and institutional differences between the countries are too large. Can we say the same thing about BRICS?

The problem with BRICS or Asean is that they can only arrive at a very low common denominator to contest the power of the West. They are not going to be strong collective bodies to come up with strong collective responses to their own challenges. This is evident from ongoing political crises in Russia, India, South Africa, Thailand, Myanmar, Malaysia and Indonesia.

BRICS has stated its intentions in well-couched words. They claim they will remain engaged with the world community as they address the challenges to global wellbeing and stability in a responsible and constructive manner. BRICS also envisions a bright future marked by global peace, economic and social progress. It claims to stand ready to work with developed and developing countries on the basis of universally recognised norms of international law and multilateral decision-making. Did BRICS initiate its parallel to the World Bank simply because it was snubbed by the West on its claim for one of its own to head the World Bank? Or, is there something genuine to it? Perhaps. We must abandon cynical thoughts and pessimism. Maybe we should give BRICS a chance!

In the final analysis, we may not need more economic and political blocs. Imperialism in any form – economic, political or military – must die. And the day that the unipolar worldview comes to an end will be a victory for the world’s ordinary citizens. It is time that the US, EU, Australia, Canada, Japan and other rich and powerful nations cease to exercise brute power and pursue selfish agendas. At the end of the day BRICS and Asean have to admit that they have skeletons in their own closets that make their calls for fairness and justice appear very hollow. In an ideal world, things must function in a way that nations can thrive on inter-dependence, cohesion and solidarity. However, it remains to be seen what these new alliances can offer to the people in their respective countries? The current crisis in the EU does not present a pretty picture for such alliances.

The coming months and years will put BRICS and other alliances such as Asean to the test. If the stated intentions and continuing actions match, then the big powers of yesteryear are in for a stiff contest – especially if BRICS and Asean are backed by peoples’ power. BRICS represents 43 per cent and Asean makes up 26 per cent of the world population. If, as is claimed, BRICS and Asean will advance “peace, security and development in a multi-polar, inter-dependent and increasingly complex, globalising world” and these fine words transcend mere rhetoric, maybe there is hope.

Dr Kuldeep Nagi is a Fulbright Fellow from Seattle, WA, USA and is working as a faculty at Assumption University, Bangkok, Thailand. He can be reached at [email protected].