New World Order - BRIC

[riksavage]

BRIC countries — Brazil, Russia, India and China have recently met to confirm the new alliance. The meeting ended with a declaration calling for a “multipolar world order”, diplomatic code for a rejection of America’s position as the sole global superpower.

Sounds great in theory. I wonder whether the new block could ever evolve into a quasi military alliance to rival NATO. The Russian's would love to be able to build a coalition mirroring the might of the old Warsaw Pact. They could once again try and monopolize R&D, weapons production and supply to signature nations. I'm very surprised Venezuela hasn't jumped on the band wagon and joined the new team.

Geographically BRIC represents a nice global footprint with access to the majority of oceans and landmasses, stretching from Eastern Europe, South America to Asia Pacific.

If they signed a mutual agreement allowing for the sharing and berthing of one another's Naval assets we could witness a true blue water capability.

Such a shift would definitely push NATO east, with Japan, South Korea and Australia joining the Alliance.

Thoughts, opinions?

 

[Ananda]

Just one thing that do not 'click' to me. India and China together on one front..???? Very Questionable

 

[riksavage]

Just one thing that do not 'click' to me. India and China together on one front..???? Very Questionable

Truth is stranger than fiction - Hitler and Stalin managed it for a few years.

 

[Runi_dk]

What are your sources?

 

[Runi_dk]

This wiki article may be of interest.

BRIC - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[shag]

Just one thing that do not 'click' to me. India and China together on one front..???? Very Questionable

I agree, India for one would be unwilling to form a alliance against US or European Union since it has much better relations with them compared to Chinese or Russian Relations with US or Indian Relations with China.
Ofcourse this could change if the US policy towards India turns overtly hostile in future but going by current trends, that too is unlikely to happen.

 

[mysterious]

It strikes me as 'absurd' to say the least how the whole issue of 'BRIC' countries is being read too much in to. BRIC is 'not' an 'alliance' as the original post says. It is simply a common platform to bring four emerging regional powers - if that can be said - together to form consensus on issues commonly effecting them.

It is naive to even ponder of some 'alliance' where India and China will sit together. Having non-hostile relations and having an alliance are two very different things. India today is completely in the Western camp of United States, Israel, etc while drifting away from the Russians.

On the other hand, Chinese and Russian relations have grown immensely over the years while Sino-US relations have continued to balance on a fragile thread.

Brazil, has no concerns outside of South America.

 

[F35Owns]

It strikes me as 'absurd' to say the least how the whole issue of 'BRIC' countries is being read too much in to. BRIC is 'not' an 'alliance' as the original post says. It is simply a common platform to bring four emerging regional powers - if that can be said - together to form consensus on issues commonly effecting them.

It is naive to even ponder of some 'alliance' where India and China will sit together. Having non-hostile relations and having an alliance are two very different things. India today is completely in the Western camp of United States, Israel, etc while drifting away from the Russians.

On the other hand, Chinese and Russian relations have grown immensely over the years while Sino-US relations have continued to balance on a fragile thread.

Brazil, has no concerns outside of South America.

Quick question, since you seem to your stuff......The BRIC is for emerging nations, how does Russia qualify? I've read into Russia for awhile, their population is under 125 million, and dropping.

The only way they seem relivent is because they have natural resources and nukes.

As countries like China and the US are beginning to push green technology (cars, homes, .ect), neither of us will be dependent on Oil and Natural Gas 30 years from now. Granted, some will still need it, but how are countries in the Middle East and Russia going to handle it? Losing all of that capital, especially the Mid East. For example, France is going completely nuclear powered and won't need Russian Gas.

I see why China, India, and Brazil are in their, but it seems like the only reason Russia is doing it, is to try to counter NATO, SK, Japan, and Australia Alliance.

Am I off base? I would love to hear some intake.

 

[Sampanviking]

No BRIC is not an alliance, it is however an alignment of interests and these interests do not coincide with the interests of the Established Powers.

Much of these interests are to do with financial and commercial infrastructure and much of the summit last week was about how to enhance that infrastructure, most of which meant bypassing the use of the dollar in bilateral trade.

Brazil incidentally is very concerned with events outside of South America and is emerging as a major strategic trade partner of China. It supplies considerable amounts of raw materials and China is investing huge sums in building the physical infrastructure to move these resources to the Pacific Coast. I am also informed that the Physical Chinese presence in Brazil is growing rapidly as a large diaspora spreads and puts down roots.

India is of course the odd man out in terms of overall alignment, being a key Western ally in Global matters. This alignment is however being severely tested as it sees the established powers in decline and the its emerging power neighbours clearly on the rise. Many in India are deeply disturbed by the likelihood of alienating its SCO neighbours and excluding itself from access to markets and resources, let alone political or security influence. That debate however, still has a long way to go.

 

[shag]

India is of course the odd man out in terms of overall alignment, being a key Western ally in Global matters. This alignment is however being severely tested as it sees the established powers in decline and the its emerging power neighbours clearly on the rise. Many in India are deeply disturbed by the likelihood of alienating its SCO neighbours and excluding itself from access to markets and resources, let alone political or security influence. That debate however, still has a long way to go.

I understand that what you say is the popular opinion in China, but I can assure you as an Indian that it is not the case, no one in India barring perhaps those maoist rebels, see China as an ally of India now or in long term future. There are simply too many reasons for India not to align itself with China, few being democracy, clash in economical interest, clash in strategical interest, China's nuclear arming of India's neighbour, String of pearls, border conflict etc.
Latest Indian nuclear doctrine allows targeting of countries who supply nuclear arms used against india. Who do you think that is targeted against?

besides strategic alignment has nothing to do with economic status except in times of war. US and China still trade heavily don't they?

 

[Sampanviking]

I understand that what you say is the popular opinion in China, but I can assure you as an Indian that it is not the case, no one in India barring perhaps those maoist rebels, see China as an ally of India now or in long term future. There are simply too many reasons for India not to align itself with China, few being democracy, clash in economical interest, clash in strategical interest, China's nuclear arming of India's neighbour, String of pearls, border conflict etc.
Latest Indian nuclear doctrine allows targeting of countries who supply nuclear arms used against india. Who do you think that is targeted against?

besides strategic alignment has nothing to do with economic status except in times of war. US and China still trade heavily don't they?

Whats interesting here Shag is that I talk about the SCO and you come back and talk China.

The salient points here is that a huge part of Asia is now engaged in a process of Integration via the SCO, but India seems determined to isolate itself from this development. This is far more than China, this is about access to energy resources in Central Asia and Political influence in its near abroad like Iran and Afghanistan. A pertinent example must be India excluding itself from the Iran - Pakistan originally India but now most likely to be China Gas Pipeline.

Serious Indian commentators such as M K Bhadrakumar are both askance and aghast by India's lassize faire attitude to its long term economic and physical security and given that these people are establishment insiders must reflect a powerful body of opinion within it.

If India is feeling isolated and surrounded it must look to itself as to why rather than blame the Chinese bogeyman. China has been able to settle border disputes with a host of neighbours many of which have been as acrimonious if not more so than that which it has with India and do it in a atmosphere of friendship and co-operation. In the same spirit China is now building a web of Global ties on both a National and Regional Organisational Level. So what is stopping India?

Loyalty is undoubtedly a virtue, but with the welfare of over a billion souls to care for, the time must come to recognise where its real interests lie and to unhitch itself from the Sinking ships to which it has tied itself.

 

[shag]

SCO is seen as a military/political alliance with limited unity among members states compared to say NATO or old Warsaw pact.
In either case it has been a policy of Government of India since NAM to stay away from tight military pacts. Reasons for which I will again not discuss here. There is also the obvious fact that membership of SCO will not help it against any aggressive activities from China(No disrespect intended) compared to alignment with US.
Besides there are better economic blocks like ASEAN etc which have much more to offer India economically than SCO can .
Hence it makes better sense for India to stay aligned away from SCO.

Going into your thing about global ties, India has great ties with most countries across the world including old ties with Russia and Brasil the other two of members of BRIC. There is no country in europe and americas that India doesn't have good ties with. That can be witnessed in the number of countries eager to sell defence equipment to India. In addition there are good ties with both Israel and middle eastern nations(That is saying something), the African Union and ASEAN among many others. In fact India enjoys greater respect in middle east than Pakistan itself. With Afghanistan coming under control of Indian supported northern alliance, That potential enemy has also disappeared.As of last few years India engaged with Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan and Austrailia in SE asian region in military and technical co-operation. Since recent years India has a good trade going on with China too with lots of IT related exports etc. inspite of strategic conflict. Isolated?Not by a long shot.

 

[roberto]

SCO is seen as a military/political alliance with limited unity among members states compared to say NATO or old Warsaw pact.

SCO is much tighter alliance than NATO for its intended purpose. Look at direct Chinese/Russia billions of dollars financial help to SCO countries. Direct pipeline routes/natural resource trade. Joint military exercises under CSTO/SCO. Whole point is bringing stability and removing outside influence. and they are successufl in it.
NATO has very limited militar/economic/political unity between Eastern & Western EU & Southern EU to Northern EU.
For example. Italy/France/Germany has large joint projects with Russia at expense of Eastern EU but Russia is not carrying out projects with Taiwan/Japan and has downgraded with India for the benefit of China.
Think over this report.

Mongolia leader wants to change mining deal -report | Markets | Bonds News | Reuters
Mongolia leader wants to change mining deal -report

In either case it has been a policy of Government of India since NAM to stay away from tight military pacts. Reasons for which I will again not discuss here. There is also the obvious fact that membership of SCO will not help it against any aggressive activities from China(No disrespect intended) compared to alignment with US.

India was not that much neutral either. It has Soviet friendship treaty for discounted weopons. and neither will US help against China. US-China commmerical interest are too tight. Who is proposing G-2?

Besides there are better economic blocks like ASEAN etc which have much more to offer India economically than SCO can .
Hence it makes better sense for India to stay aligned away from SCO.

ASEAN economic is wholly dependent on China. There is not much use of joining useless alliance. infact South Koreas arse was saved by China in current economic crises.

Going into your thing about global ties, India has great ties with most countries across the world including old ties with Russia and Brasil the other two of members of BRIC. There is no country in europe and americas that India doesn't have good ties with. That can be witnessed in the number of countries eager to sell defence equipment to India. In addition there are good ties with both Israel and middle eastern nations(That is saying something), the African Union and ASEAN among many others. In fact India enjoys greater respect in middle east than Pakistan itself. With Afghanistan coming under control of Indian supported northern alliance, That potential enemy has also disappeared.As of last few years India engaged with Singapore, Vietnam, Thailand, Japan and Austrailia in SE asian region in military and technical co-operation. Since recent years India has a good trade going on with China too with lots of IT related exports etc. inspite of strategic conflict. Isolated?Not by a long shot.

I agree with this point. India cannot enter SCO/BRIC as senior member. It is laggard. And there is no point in gaining respect from Middleast. as Middleast influential countries deal with US/Russia/China/EU depending how wind is blowing.

 

[mysterious]

Quick question, since you seem to your stuff......The BRIC is for emerging nations, how does Russia qualify? I've read into Russia for awhile, their population is under 125 million, and dropping... The only way they seem relivent is because they have natural resources and nukes.

You answer it yourself. Russian population has little to do with anything here. It is Russia's nuclear arsenal and not just its energy reserves but the fact that Russia now enjoys a virtual monopoly over Natural Gas supplies to much of Europe via Gazprom. One who controls the flow of energy resources in today's world has power.

As countries like China and the US are beginning to push green technology (cars, homes, .ect), neither of us will be dependent on Oil and Natural Gas 30 years from now. Granted, some will still need it, but how are countries in the Middle East and Russia going to handle it? Losing all of that capital, especially the Mid East. For example, France is going completely nuclear powered and won't need Russian Gas.

When that will happen, remains to be seen. No green technology is currently commercially viable when it comes to heating your house or getting most bang for your buck from your car. What you're hypothesizing is around 30years from now. Thats a LONG time.

I see why China, India, and Brazil are in their, but it seems like the only reason Russia is doing it, is to try to counter NATO, SK, Japan, and Australia Alliance... Am I off base? I would love to hear some intake.

Of course Russia is not in it for simple economic reasons as well. Russia has almost lost India - its longest standing 'ally' and military hardware buyer to the U.S and Israelis. Russia needs friends and in today's shifting quicksands of international relations, those can mean the difference between power & weakness. Russia is getting cozier with China, Venezuela, etc to offset West's - especially NATO & EU's expansion.

 

[mysterious]

User 'shag' and 'roberto'; lets be very clear, SCO is NOT a 'military alliance' like NATO. It is a common platform for a group of nations to address common issues from economics to security. That does not automatically imply a 'military alliance'.

 

[roberto]

User 'shag' and 'roberto'; lets be very clear, SCO is NOT a 'military alliance' like NATO. It is a common platform for a group of nations to address common issues from economics to security. That does not automatically imply a 'military alliance'.

No one use Military Alliance in 21st century diplomatic jargon. Make no mistake Military force and Joint exercises are there as last resort against outside influence.
No alliance in modern day can survive unless member countries economic interests are the same. otherwise one have to create coalition of willing on its own expense.

UKraine/Georgia is not EU member but you can see the view point of sharing burden.

FT.com / Brussels - EU strives to avert energy supply crisis
The basic problem is with Ukraine’s ability to pay for its gas supplies from Russia, and that is not our responsibility. We cannot spend the [EU] community budget on that, but we will see if others can make a certain contribution.”

What will happen if current economic crises continue for 5 more years or new economic crises emerge?. As boom and bust cycles are part of capitlist system along with job losses/job shifting.
What do you think member states response will be among East & West.in EU and its impact on Nato?. You cannot make military alliance of members when its economic interests are at cross purpose. Turkey/Italy are practically different than let say Poland/Baltic.
Days of ideology based alliance are over. I can understand Brazil to certain extent in BRIC but not India.

 

[shag]

lets be very clear, SCO is NOT a 'military alliance' like NATO.

No its not in any real sense. Although it does have an essence of strategic alignment esp for China.

Look at direct Chinese/Russia billions of dollars financial help to SCO countries. Direct pipeline routes/natural resource trade. Joint military exercises under CSTO/SCO.

China is competition in gas supplies, partnering with it doesn't make sense.

Italy/France/Germany has large joint projects with Russia at expense of Eastern EU but Russia is not carrying out projects with Taiwan/Japan and has downgraded with India for the benefit of China.
Think over this report.

There was a lull in defense relations with Russia due to delays in defense projects etc. and because initially the Indian cosy-ing up to west was seen as aligning away from Russian. Russia and India are still increasing co-operation when it comes to defense projects. Take a look at why partnership in pak-fa was offered to India or why Russians still don't hesitate to field their best equipment with full TOT when they make defense offers to India in its MMRCA deal. Issues were worked out in recent talks. Compare that with the fact the refusal on TOT on a/c engines to China. For most countries there is a lot of "trust deficit" when it comes to dealing with China compared to India, this is something China really has to work hard on.

India was not that much neutral either. It has Soviet friendship treaty for discounted weapons.

Not being neutral is not the same as joining a pact. The flexibility in simultaneous bilateral relations that India enjoys with both Russia and the West wouldn't be so easy in a military pact. Which is essence of India's argument against military pacts, i.e, to maintain a relatively independent foreign policy.

ASEAN economic is wholly dependent on China. There is not much use of joining useless alliance.

Economically there is interdependence, but that is the case between any two nations trading heavily. By that parameters it is more dependent on US. Militarily ASEAN is not remotely dependent on China.

 

[roberto]

China is competition in gas supplies, partnering with it doesn't make sense.

Cooperation with China is good for long term prosperity of India. China can finance all pipelines and trade routes from Central Asia/Russia towards India. India can purchase all the gas it wants from China at friendship prices. Only China has the financing and Construction capability to make it.
That day is not faraway when you can ship goods and travel people from India all the way to EU through China.

There was a lull in defense relations with Russia due to delays in defense projects etc. and because initially the Indian cosy-ing up to west was seen as aligning away from Russian. Russia and India are still increasing co-operation when it comes to defense projects. Take a look at why partnership in pak-fa was offered to India or why Russians still don't hesitate to field their best equipment with full TOT when they make defense offers to India in its MMRCA deal. Issues were worked out in recent talks. Compare that with the fact the refusal on TOT on a/c engines to China. For most countries there is a lot of "trust deficit" when it comes to dealing with China compared to India, this is something China really has to work hard on.

It is not about Trust but simple Business sense. There is reason Chinese sent Men into Space with Soyouz replica and is building its own GPS constellation pretty fast. You dont license certain technologies to them even with upfront cash. Even if India gets licenses it is pretty slow to produce the original one let alone improve it.

Not being neutral is not the same as joining a pact. The flexibility in simultaneous bilateral relations that India enjoys with both Russia and the West wouldn't be so easy in a military pact. Which is essence of India's argument against military pacts, i.e, to maintain a relatively independent foreign policy.

SCO/BRIC has well defined economic sense. I am sure there will be inducements for India taking sides.

Economically there is interdependence, but that is the case between any two nations trading heavily. By that parameters it is more dependent on US. Militarily ASEAN is not remotely dependent on China.

It is not interdpendence if you think over it. Asean economies neither has the natural resources nor the technology that China cannot obtain from other places on hard cash. There is interdependency between China/EU/Russia but not Asean-China.

JapanFocus
A Helping Chinese Hand: Trade and Aid with Southeast Asia

 

[shag]

You are mixing Economics with strategy too much friend. Just because strategically India is aligned away from China doesn't mean it doesn't cooperate with china in other spheres. There are evidences of that all around, check Doha for example.
Heck, I run a software development company and I often outsource my small projects to a firm in Pakistan. There is only so much strategic interest will dissuade you when its about economics.

 

[Ananda]

It is not interdpendence if you think over it. Asean economies neither has the natural resources nor the technology that China cannot obtain from other places on hard cash. There is interdependency between China/EU/Russia but not Asean-China.

:shudder Uugghhh...Sometimes I feel many people outside Asean citizens tend to see because there's Asean in Southeast Asia..than all the conditions for SEA countries can be group to one front...

Asean consists from pariah like Myanmar (that's really dependent to China)..and Country like Singapore which is more or less more incline on US club , Vietnam which still have large suspiscions with it's northern Giant neighbours, and largest SEA country my own Indonesia which still do not know which way to go..

China need SEA since this is 500 mio market, we need China for her Cheaps but relatively competitive products. Both can have resources from other hand, but both SEA and China also know they need each other, which China try hard to erlarged it's influences in SEA, and SEA's try hard to balances it with other powers.

Not a simple black and white situations.