Great Groupings, Grand Objectives
Of the plethora of contemporary multilateral groups three are particularly noteworthy. These are the G7, G20 and BRICS. India is a member of G20 and BRICS which held its 17th summit in Brazil on July 6 and 7. This number includes the summits held virtually during the years of the Covid 19 pandemic, BRICS has expanded from the original four---Brazil, Russia, India and China, when it was called BRIC---to now ten members. South Africa became a member in 2011 and the group’s name then became BRICS. It would be instructive to consider the nature of the three groups and how they impact world in different ways, especially those relating to economics and commerce and security.
At this stage, though, a word of caution is needed because it may upend any analysis. This circumspection is required because of the disruptions caused by President Donald Trump since he became the US President for a second time in January this year. He has introduced such a high degree of unpredictability not only in global economy and commerce but also in the security domain, on account of his ever changing statements and action,s or holding back on promised actions, that established certainties have become, or, are becoming, uncertainties. This applies not only to the internal cohesion and working of the G7 which the US dominates and has used, in the past to steer, the world but also to inter-se relations between the G7 and the other groups. This stated, it is nevertheless still useful to briefly consider the basics of the three groups.
The G7 originated in the 1970s and finally came to include the US, Britain, France, West Germany, Italy, Japan and Canada. These were the most advanced countries of the Western world. These countries formed the group to absorb any shock to international monetary and financial system and to preserve their technological edge. This was the time of the Cold War; the West was locked in a struggle with the Soviet Union. Inevitably the group gained a political orientation too. It tried to reach out to developing countries but would brook no interference in global rule making. The end of the Cold War and the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991 added immensely to the strength of the group. Russia became weak and the impact of China was still two decades away. Within the G7, the US reigned supreme but attempted to take its G7 partners along. In 1997, G7 took a momentous decision. It included Russia and became G8. This continued till 2014 when Russia was sent out of the group because of its invasion and amalgamation of Crimea.
BRIC was formed as a group of emerging economies that were seeking to move ahead and desired to play a role in rule making on how the world was run. The first BRIC summit took place in the aftermath of the 2008 world financial crisis. The acute mismanagement of the world economy by the US had led it to the brink of collapse. Now, the BRIC countries could legitimately assert their right to a greater role in global rule making and a greater role in the Bretton Woods institutions. Significantly, by around, 2010 China’s historic rise was clearly discernible though at that stage it was still not visible that it could or would stake a claim for co-leadership of the world with the US. That came after Xi Jinping became President in 2013.
The 2008 financial crisis shook the US and the Western World. It realised that it had to create a more broad-based structure (at least for the sake of appearance) for global management. The G20 was the outcome of this thinking in 2008. It was a group of the leading economies of the world. They also contained the major scientific and technological powers and among themselves they accounted for 85% of the world GDP. In the years after 2013 and, especially over the past five years, it has become increasingly clear that the G20 umbrella group notwithstanding the real struggle is between a US led G7 while China would seek to be the pivot of BRICS. Ironically, today the G7 is in some disarray because of Trump, and India and like-minded countries are unwilling to have China dominate BRICS.
The Brazil BRICS summit statement mentions almost at its outset: “As we build upon 17 years of BRICS Summits, we further commit ourselves to strengthening cooperation in the expanded BRICS under the three pillars of political and security, economic and financial, cultural and people-to-people cooperation, and to enhancing our strategic partnership for the benefit of our people through the promotion of peace, a more representative, fairer international order, a reinvigorated and reformed multilateral system, sustainable development and inclusive growth”. No one can quarrel with these high objectives.
The problem lies, as always, in ensuring that the now expanded BRICs with Egypt, Indonesia, UAE, Ethiopia and Iran as members can actually be on the same page on the issues such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Of course, on some matters, like the imposition of unilateral tariffs and ‘coerced’ trading arrangements which Trump is compelling countries to submit to, the BRICS will share and articulate common sentiments. But, on many others, despite the formulation of positions contained in the Statement, which all countries have agreed to, the true positions of BRICS member states are not on all fours.
It will now fall on India to seek to give a fresh direction to BRICS during its Presidency and the summit which it will host next year. That will be no easy task in view of the fundamental contest between the US and China, Trumps unpredictability and India-China issues.
