Primer: BRICS

BRICS is an unofficial group of nations consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. The main mission of BRICS is to work communally to solve international disputes, grow their economies, limit illegal drug trades, and more. Members of BRICS account for 2.88 billion people and, according to their own sources, 27% of the global GDP. Additionally, many other nations were invited this summer to a BRICS conference and to join the union, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Argentina, and Ethiopia. With the massive size and power of the nations of BRICS, many say they create a serious challenge to the established powers of the US, UK, France, and so on. Others have serious doubts about how truly powerful BRICS is or will soon be. This leads us to our resolution:

BRICS and its new additions provide a legitimate challenge to Western global hegemony. 

Please enjoy the following primer!

The arguments for the pro have many merits. Firstly, the pure size of BRICS is intimidating to the West. A 2010 estimate claims that the OECD accounts for just 19% of the world’s population. As the populations of many BRICS countries have grown much more rapidly since, it reasons that the population gap between BRICS and the OECD is already large and continuing to grow. Secondly, the geographic reach of BRICS surpasses that of what we typically consider the West. Ranging from Europe, Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and South America, BRICS has direct control in more places when compared to the West’s boundaries of Western Europe and North America. Next, BRICS provides a legitimate challenge to Western global hegemony since it is offering the option to not ally with the West. Since the fall of the USSR, the option for nations was, generally, to be part of the First World or the Third World. Now that BRICS is offering a non-Western option, the monopoly the West was holding seems to be less secure. As previously mentioned, 6 new countries are joining BRICS. The old choice of working with the West or not has the new option of working with BRICS, contributing to the pro side’s argument that BRICS is going to provide a legitimate challenge to Western global hegemony. 

The con side also has some serious doubts about our resolution to consider. One point is the internal conflicts within BRICS. As the New York Times article which is linked above mentioned, the leaders of BRICS clashed over what new nations to invite to the group. Prime Minister Modi of India disputed the picks made by China’s Xi Jinping, showing some dividing lines within BRICS. In the same vein, these internal disputes within BRICS can bubble over into conflict. The border between India and China is under serious contention, an issue that won’t likely be solved anytime soon. With these internal fault lines, BRICS is less powerful and capable of challenging the West in a serious manner. Next, the economic power of the members of BRICS is significantly less than that of the West. The OECD accounted for 42% of global GDP in the past 10 years, quite a bit larger than BRICS’s 27%. With the head start on economic development, the opportunity that BRICS could seriously challenge the economic hegemony of the West seems slim. Finally, the goals and institutions of BRICS often fall short. The New Development Bank, which was supposed to offer a replacement with improvements of the IMF and World Bank, has fallen victim to the same pitfalls as the institutions it was supposed to challenge. By failing to follow through on what they are promising in meaningful ways, BRICS is failing to pose a serious challenge to the Western global hegemony. 

Please join us for our debate on Monday, November 6th at 7pm in Scott Hall 201!

"10th BRICS Leaders' Summit | Johannesburg, 27 July 2018" by Paul Kagame is licensed under CC BY-NC-ND 2.0.

Previous
Previous

Opinion: Europe’s Last Summer

Next
Next

Primer: US Representatives