Historians may record that Brics mania reached its height during the 2014 football World Cup in Brazil. President Dilma Rousseff used the occasion to host a summit of the leaders of the five Brics: Brazil itself, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The formation of a new Brics development bank was announced, with its headquarters in Shanghai.
The only thing that spoiled Ms Rousseff’s Brics party was that it took place against the backdrop of the spectacular defeat of the Brazilian national team in the tournament – 7-1 to Germany. A few months later, it is beginning to feel as if the Brics may ultimately prove as much of a disappointment as the host side.
There are three big emerging problems with the Brics story. The first is economic. Three of the five nations involved – Brazil, Russia and South Africa – are floundering economically. This year’s Indian election was also fought against a backdrop of several years of disappointing economic growth. Of the Brics, China alone is still growing at more than 7 per cent a year – but it is in the midst of difficult reforms. Shared dynamism was meant to be the basis of the Brics story – but it has been lost, at least for the moment.
The second difficulty is political. When the Brics were booming, it was natural to argue that their political systems were also functioning well. Now that several are in trouble, political weaknesses such as corruption are more apparent.
The third problem is to do with the incoherence of the group. Although the Brics clearly do aspire to be a voice for the non-western world, they are a very disparate group. Developments in Brazil or South Africa shed no light on the future of China – a country that is so large and powerful that it is really in a category of its own. Meanwhile Russia is mired in a deep and unique crisis in its relations with the west.
Even where real similarities do exist between the countries, they are no longer particularly positive. I spent last week in South Africa, and was struck by how its problems parallel those of Brazil. In 2010, the year Ms Rousseff was first elected, the country was growing at 7.5 per cent a year. But this year growth is likely to be less than 1 per cent. In South Africa, economic growth this year will probably be 1.4 per cent; far less than the more than 5 per cent forecast in the national development plan.
In both countries, stunning natural beauty and the potential for a beguiling lifestyle are undermined by a pervasive fear of crime. The first four items on a nightly news bulletin I watched in Johannesburg were all to do with
different murder cases – including the murder of the goalkeeper of the national football team. In both nations, a sizeable underclass lack basic services and decent housing, while middle-class complaints about unreliable infrastructure mount. Even posh areas of Johannesburg have been hit by power and water outages in recent weeks.
different murder cases – including the murder of the goalkeeper of the national football team. In both nations, a sizeable underclass lack basic services and decent housing, while middle-class complaints about unreliable infrastructure mount. Even posh areas of Johannesburg have been hit by power and water outages in recent weeks.
Complaints about corruption are a central theme of politics in both Brazil and South Africa – and that is true of the other three Brics, as well. In China, President Xi Jinping has made a campaign against graft a central theme of his administration. In India, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s ascetic image and promise to clean up government were central to his electoral victory this year. In Russia, meanwhile, President Vladimir Putin’s opponents have dubbed his United Russia the “party of crooks and thieves”.
The fact that President Jacob Zuma of South Africa has struck up a close friendship with Mr Putin has only contributed to the atmosphere of sleaze that hangs over his administration. But the Putin-Zuma relationship is also a sign of the diplomatic bonds between the Brics. In Moscow a few weeks ago, a Russian emissary to the Brics pointed out to me that none of the other members had voted at the UN to condemn his nation’s annexation of Crimea. He argued that the Brics were united by a shared hostility to a US-dominated world.
Yet, while the Brics may indeed share a general feeling that the west has run the world for too long, there are also deep divergences in their underlying world views. There is a huge difference between the semi-pacifist multilateralism of a Brazil and the angry nationalism of modern Russia. China, meanwhile, is clearly going to chart its own path internationally, regardless of what the other Brics think.
Perhaps the real geopolitical puzzle for the Brics is whether China is able or willing to form the core of the group, much as the US serves as the core of the western alliance.
The siting of the Brics bank in Shanghai – and the suggestion that it was
a potential rival to the Washington-based World Bank – sent a deliberate symbolic message.
a potential rival to the Washington-based World Bank – sent a deliberate symbolic message.
But there is a big transition to be made from symbolism to substance. The Russian and Indian governments may both have problems with a “unipolar” world, centred on Washington. But neither is in a hurry to defer to Beijing.
The fact that all five Brics struggle with domestic corruption points to their common difficulty in building solid domestic institutions. That, in turn, must cast doubt on whether they are collectively capable of the even harder task of creating new international organisations. Five fragile Brics are unlikely to be enough to build a new world order.
Gideon Rachman
Fonte: FT
