The war in Ukraine proves how different the world is from the one presented in the dominant narrative in the countries of the “West”. Where we expected almost all countries to condemn the Russian invasion, the reactions showed that many are indifferent to the fate of Ukraine, either because they believe in Vladimir Putin (that NATO caused the war) or because they are looking for liquidity gains. While China’s growth is at risk from any disruption in global trade, it is not allied with the US against Russia as it is itself in intense competition with America. Washington is doing little to get Beijing on its side, while both maintain tension on other fronts. For many other countries, a war in Europe does not concern them. So if they can get cheaper energy and other goods from (blocked out by the West) Russia, so much the better for them.
However, the “multipolar” world, which is announced every now and then, has not taken a concrete form, nor has it acquired a direction. The summit of the countries known as BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) in Johannesburg last week demonstrates the mobility and impasses of the strongest “anti-Western” alliance. Although these countries express indignation at the behavior (the “hegemony”) of the US and the “West” in general, Putin did not attend the meeting, because an international arrest warrant is pending against him. A flagship decision of the 15th summit (the first was in 2009) was the full membership of six more countries – Egypt, Ethiopia, Argentina, United Arab Emirates, Iran, Saudi Arabia – from 1.1.24. Together, the 11 account for 37% of global GDP and 46% of the population, Brazilian President Lula said. The idea is to form a strong pole, as the BRICS wish. Enlargement is also supposed to contribute to the achievement of the goals of economic development of these countries; solidarity between them against the undermining of their sovereignty; reform of the international system of governance to be more representative of their own countries. In Johannesburg, the grand vision of emancipation from the dollar did not advance, being referred for further study to ministers and technocrats.
Enlargement, however, may undermine BRICS initiatives/desires. Not even the original five could agree on top issues, nor will it become easier with the addition of the other six. In principle, the permanent members of the Security Council, China and Russia, do not wholeheartedly support Brazil, India and South Africa in their desire to join this elite group. China and India have serious differences over their borders, and both with strong economies are in no mood to prop up the struggling currencies of Russia and South Africa. Now, in addition, Egypt and Ethiopia are fighting over the waters of the Nile, Saudi Arabia and Iran have recently begun to communicate (mediated by China) after years of high tension. Argentina is on the brink of bankruptcy.
The system set up and supported by the USA, the E.U. etc. it remains the only reliable framework of international political and economic governance. Despite his problems, he has endured. If its “guardians” were more zealous in the prudent management of the planet than in “national” interest and geopolitical rivalries, major tensions would ease and minor ones would not flare up.
