No matter how famous Lester C. Thurow was, he did not make the right prediction this time. Why did he neglect those emerging countries? It seems reasonable from a contemporary view. “Until the beginning of the 1990s, Russia was still behind the Iron Curtain, China was recovering from the Cultural Revolution and the Tiananmen Square unrest, India remained a bureaucratic nightmare, and Brazil experienced bouts of hyperinflation combined with a decade of lost growth. These countries had largely muddled along outside the global market economy; their economic policies had often been nothing short of disastrous; and their stock markets were nonexistent, bureaucratic, or super volatile. Each needed to experience deep, life-threatening crises that would catapult them onto a different road of development.”²¹⁰ That is how the West looked at the future BRICS countries at that time. Yet, things changed very quickly.

The prediction itself indicates one thing: Lester C. Thurow was quite confident in the international order established by the West after the WWII. He never expected the dramatic change, let alone with such an astonishing speed.

What does it mean creating all these new acronyms, names and titles? It is meaningless to name some countries just to catch the eyes of the world. There must be some unique characteristics regarding those countries.

Criteria. Generally speaking, the emerging countries must have the following characteristics.

1. These countries must be developing countries, not included in the list of traditional developed countries.

2. The countries must have experienced a steady economic development for a period of time and the ratio of the growth should be above the average of the global level.

3. They must have shown resilience during the period of difficulties and provided more dynamic and vigorous force than other countries.

4. The countries usually have a large population, which prepares a huge consumer market for economic growth.

5. They must have a reasonable economic aggregate, which can bring about a greater impact on world economy.

6. They usually have a large young labor power, which provides a driving force for the sustainable and vigorous development.

7. Their political and social situation is reasonably stable which lays down the foundation for the healthy development of economy.

All these conditions create a better environment for economic development in these countries, which in its turn attracts more foreign investment in comparison with the other countries.

Indicator of change. The appearance of the emerging economies or emerging countries clearly marks a denial of the present economic system. The formation of the BRICS is one of the indicators of the current order decline. G7 (U.S., Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Japan and Canada) has represented the best, the biggest and the most prosperous economies of the world for more than half a century. Yet in recent years, the economic situation has worsened in these traditional economic big powers headed by the U.S.A. After the economic crisis occurred, the economy not only deteriorated in the above mentioned countries, but also spread the instability to the global economy as well. While the old balance is being shaken up, the new one is emerging. As the Conception Paper for the Third International Solidarity Conference says, “Who would have thought that one day Europe or the U.S. would be on its knees, begging for money from China?”²¹¹ Although the statement is an exaggeration, yet tells some truth: people are tired of the unequal relations with the West. However, the West would not easily give up the status of dominance, the order they set up and based on their own interests since the WWII. Different strategies have been used to sabotage the solidarity of the BRICS. The extreme case is the article by Ruchir Sharma entitled “The Demise of the Rest”, published in the newest Foreign Affairs, predicting the break-up of the BRICS.

We have to be very careful.

Longing for the equality and better world. The appearance of the emerging countries also indicates a new hope for a better and equal world order. Although the ideal of equality is embodied in the constitution of almost every country, and it is also the theme in the history of various social movements and human development, yet the international socio-economic situation established after the WWII does not recognize the principle of equality. History has witnessed various incidents, events and situations of unequal cases, and underdevelopment was not only created by colonialism, but also by the current unequal political and economic order. For example, Niger has an enormous deposit of uranium which could provide an excellent foundation for its normal development. However, the deposit has been monopolized by the French company Areva for half a century; and Niger is still one of the Least Developed Countries in the United Nation’s list. When the U.S. economic situation deteriorates, it just turns on the machine to print more money, thus all the world has to pay for its debt. Inequality does not only exist in the economic field. Developed countries can use their power to interfere in other countries business under the pretext of democracy or human rights protection. The extreme case includes the situation in Afghanistan, Iraq and recent Libya. Definitely, people hope for a just world order and a better future. Who is going to bring this bright future? The good hope is laid on the rising powers and emerging economies, such as the BRICS, Emerging 11, Mist or CIVITS. Definitely, the countries included in those groups are expected to play a better role in economic performance.

---

BRICS: Achievements and Weaknesses

Since its establishment, the BRICS forum has gradually evolved into a regular platform for cooperation and coordination in various issues concerning the whole world and emerging economies in particular. The BRICS share many common views in issues of development, many challenges on the international political arena and promising prospects. It is noticed that the BRICS have achieved a great deal in various fields, with a focus on economy.²¹² According to the World Economic Outlook issued by the IMF on January 24, 2012, the BRICS countries still took the lead in the world economic growth in 2011. The economic growth rate of China reached 9.2%, India 7.4%, Russia 4.1%, South Africa 3.1% and Brazil 3.0%, much higher than the average growth rate of the developed countries (1.6%).

In terms of international trade, the BRICS countries have constantly strengthened their economic ties with each other. During 2001-2010, an average rate of trade growth among the five countries grew by 15 times, reaching 28%. In 2011, trade volume continued to increase rapidly. Between China and Russia, the trade volume amounted to $79.3 billion, the trade between China and Brazil reached $84.2 billion, that between China and India rose to $73.9 billion, and, finally, the trade volume between China and South Africa made up $45.4 billion.²¹³ Since the trade growth is complementary, volumes for other pairs have also grown rapidly.²¹⁴

The same is true for trade dynamics between BRICS and other areas of the world. For example, the BRICS played a very important role in their trade with the African continent. There has been an intensified strategic interaction between the BRICS and Africa over the past decade. As H.E. Ambassador Bheki Langa of South Africa put it, “in terms of economic linkages, BRIC-Africa trade has increased nearly eightfold between 2000 and 2008, and the BRICS’ share of African trade rose from 4.6% to almost 20% in 2008. Today, China, India and Brazil rank as Africa’s 2nd, 6th and 10th largest trading partners respectively”.²¹⁵ Traditionally, USA and the European Union continue to be significant partners of Low Income Countries (LIC), yet their share of exports fell from 60% in 1980 to less than 45% in 2009. On the contrary, the LIC-BRICS trade partnership has been growing. In 2005–2008, the average total share of the BRICS in LICs’ exports was about 70% higher than the average total share of the BRICS in the world exports. Moreover, over the last decade, all BRICS member-states have established themselves as increasingly influential players across Africa.²¹⁶

In 2010, the sum of overseas merge– and acquisition deals by the BRICS was $402 billion, or 22% of the global aggregate of $2230 billion. China was the third largest direct investor in the world in 2010, investing more than 60 billion overseas.²¹⁷

The BRICS are cooperating in other fields as well. Now they have formed a forum to hold regular meetings to discuss international issues and exchange various ideas. First, they are trying to fight protectionism and speed up liberalization of international trade. Second, the BRICS are endeavoring to promote reform of the international financial order, aiming at, in particular, improvement of the position of developing countries in the international financial system. Third, the BRICS have also pushed up their cooperation against global climate change and in other fields.

There are, of course, certain problems and weaknesses in the relationship between the BRICS. Owing to different political systems and cultural varieties, members of the group acutely need mutual trust and consensus to make common decisions. Till now, their cooperation has been mainly focused on economic issues. Political influence of the BRICS in the world is not as strong as their economic impact. What concerns many acute issues of international politics, the group is still in the stage of “discussion”, “dialogue” or “exchange of ideas”, etc.

Since all the BRICS are regional or global powers, their individual interests are sometimes different. In some specific issues such as the UN Security Council reform, prices of natural resources etc., there is no consensus yet and it is to be reached as soon as possible. Besides, China and India have an unresolved border dispute.

Even in the economic field, there have been many contradictions related to natural resource prices, investment and trade. Take China as an example. It has contradictions, in particular trade frictions, with any other BRICS member. China and Russia do cooperate but they also have disputes over trade in natural resources. The same is true for the relationship between China and Brazil. Between China and India, there are certain tariff obstacles which disturb bilateral investment and trade. The Chinese-South African trade relations are rather unbalanced. China’s dialogue with other three BRICS members (Brazil and South Africa) under the WTO aegis sometimes causes new frictions. In particular, India, Brazil and South Africa filed more trade-related claims against China than with than against any other WTO member. In 1995–2010, India initiated 637 anti-dumping case investigations with 58 countries – 142, or about 22.3%, of them were related to China, no other country received more claims. During the same period, Brazil initiated 216 anti-dumping investigations against 53 countries – again, China had the largest share of it (about 20.4%, or 44 cases). Trade-related problems between China and South Africa exist as well. Among 212 anti-dumping investigations with 43 nations, initiated by Pretoria in 1995-2010, 33 cases, or 15.6%, were against China. Again, no other country received more claims from South Africa.²¹⁸ This is no surprise, as trade disputes between the BRICS are primarily caused by their competition in commerce, similarities of typical export commodities and protectionist policies implemented by the BRICS in the interests of national producers.

---

The Role of China

The BRICS have similar views and stands on many of the issues which are now widely discussed in various international organizations and forums. These are, in particular, reform of the Bretton Woods Institutions, trade protectionism and the Doha Development Round, struggle against international terrorism, the UN Millennium Development Goals, support for multipolar, equitable and democratic world order, principles of cooperation and mutual respect in the international arena etc. Common positions concerning all those issues have laid a foundation to the solidarity of the BRICS.

At present, the five countries see BRICS as a forum of increasing importance for dialogue and cooperation. They are also prepared to strengthen the mechanism of the BRICS teamwork. We should keep looking forward and remain open for dialogue and cooperation not only among ourselves, but also with other international or regional groups and individual states.

China has been playing a significant role in the making and development of the BRICS. What role could China play to further consolidate the group?

First, she could build up mutual trust, promote mutual understanding and mutual learning in various fields, especially those related to history, culture and development. China could widen the cooperation between the group members. Only by mutual learning are we able to improve our mutual understanding, gradually proceed to confidence-building and, finally, establish our mutual trust.

Since the creation of the BRICS, the focus has always been on economy. Yet, a human being is not only homo economicus, and social evolution depends on cultural achievements as well. The BRICS comprise very different nations from different continents which adhere to very different cultural traditions. It cannot be disputed that the five BRICS countries are unique civilizations, all of them having rich historical and cultural heritage. This creates a potential for socio-economic progress both inside and outside the BRICS. But it is also true that most people living in the five nations don’t have sufficient knowledge of history and culture of each other. Therefore, the BRICS should gradually build up mutual understanding, trust and learning by initiating activities of cultural exchange, such as visits by artists, students and scholars, conferences to discuss cultural and civilization issues, historical and art exhibitions, educational courses, exchange of ideas about international affairs, etc.

The principal reason for the creation of the BRICS is that the four original members (and South Africa as well) have developed very fast and, therefore, caught the eye of economic experts. Yet, different countries have different experience in development. So far, the BRICS countries have gradually developed a mechanism of economic cooperation which functions primarily on the governmental level and places emphasis on trade and investment.

China can also learn a great deal from the other four BRICS countries. Traditionally, Russia is a leading force in science and technology. It has a very comprehensive training system in many technical fields which combines theory and practice and which China can adopt. Brazil’s concept of environmental protection is far more advanced than the Chinese one. The Chinese have long cherished the idea of “first build, then protect the environment”, which has left the country with a lot of problems. In India, the financial institutions have created an effective system to support small businesses, whereas their Chinese counterparts generally ignore this important task. Moreover, India has established a good legal system in the financial sector, which the Chinese should borrow as well. By peacefully resolving ethnic conflicts after the end of apartheid, South Africa has taught us a lesson of effective conflict management, which is important for the whole world and China in particular.

Second, China should take the lead to probe the agenda of cooperation among the BRICS, since their bilateral and multilateral cooperation can be broadened in various ways. Since the BRICS started to operate, their teamwork has been centered on trade and investment, plus few other issues such as climate change in the global scale. Obviously, there are more fields to cooperate on. The BRICS should have a stronger voice in the process of rule-making in international diplomacy, international development cooperation and the world financial system. As for international development cooperation, it is clear that developing countries should have a common language and offer more practical assistance to the least developed countries. I once attended an off-record workshop on the South-South Development Aid organized by the SAIIA in 2007, where other participants were scholars and officials from Brazil, India, China, South Africa and Western states. One of the findings was that aid policies of Southern countries followed similar rules which were quite different from those of the West. While the Westerners first set certain conditions and only then started to provide aid, this was not the case with Southern states.²¹⁹ An Indian scholar Aparajita Biswas noticed that India and China carry out their international aid policies in Africa according to the same principle.²²⁰ Therefore, it is possible that the BRICS set up their own international development cooperation agenda.

---

Since the beginning of the global financial crisis, the damage caused by the U.S. currency to the global economy is prevalent and obvious. It would be most beneficial for the BRICS countries to carry out their trade in the most convenient way to avoid the disastrous effects caused by the U.S.. Therefore, it is an imperative that the Chinese currency RMB become convertible. As a foreign businessman points out, “as China is the largest economy among the BRICS countries, it is imperative for China to ensure that its currency is fully convertible with restrictions on moving money into and out of the country lifted, as this would make it more effective in using the renminbi in intra-BRICS and international trade.”²²¹ Therefore, it is necessary for the BRICS to unite and change the international currency relations in their own interests, rather than remaining the passive victim of the U.S.-controlled monetary system.

Thirdly, China should take the lead to facilitate the consolidation of the BRICS, which includes revision of previous policies, establishment of an information exchange network and a conflict resolution network. The BRICS countries had established their bilateral relations long before the acronym came into existence. Therefore, the countries in question should sign bilateral agreements and coordinate their cooperation policies. Are the existing agreements still effective and able to stimulate bilateral relations? Or did they become out-of-date and, therefore, do they pose an obstacle to cooperation? There might be three cases. The agreements may have become obstacles to bilateral relations, which means there is an acute need to renegotiate them. Some agreements might be beneficial to bilateral relations but not to the new situation of multilateral cooperation. The agreements may have become out-of-date long ago, but they may still exist. Therefore, it is important to reexamine the effectiveness of the signed agreements and discuss the need to sign new ones. Moreover, information exchange becomes more and more important in international political, economic and security-related issues. The BRICS should gradually set up an information exchange network to share various kind of information, especially in such important issues as introduction of sanctions and other measures, interference and war etc. The five countries usually have the same standard for these issues, but they still need more discussion information exchange and exchange of ideas in order to coordinate their actions. Their cohesive actions are very important in issues such as new threats to security, i.e. terrorism, drug traffic, illegal cross-border activities, etc. Information sharing can also include data on immigration and trade-related issues. It is also important to establish a common conflict-resolution system. Since China, Russia and India are neighboring countries, and the five countries ‘overlap’ in production of or trade with certain goods, it is more than necessary to build a mechanism that would prevent conflicts in various fields. As part of the emerging countries, the BRICS countries have gained the momentum in recent years because of their coordination and cooperation. Russia is traditionally strong in science and technology. India is nicknamed the “world office”. Brazil is not only rich in natural resources, but also has reputation of a renewable energy expert. South Africa has an efficient socio-political system and an enormous natural resource base. China is regarded as the “world workshop”. With all these factors, the BRICS have a real competitive advantage. Academia sometimes asks the question of whether the BRICS should choose to be incorporated into the existing system, or challenge it. I think the BRICS should be more open-minded instead of taking a zero-sum attitude towards the present system. We should work in the present system and at the same time gradually reform it. For the first step, we should establish our mutual trust which will pave the way forward. There have been various metaphors about the 21^st century, such as “the century of India”, “the century of China” or “the century of Africa”. I am not sure about any of them in particular. Yet, it is certain that the 21^st century will belong to emerging economies in general.

5. South Africa’s Africa Policy in the Context

of BRICS Interests

Abstract

The purpose of this chapter is to contribute to the theoretical understanding of South Africa’s Africa policy within the context of BRICS interests. Our starting point in our contribution towards the theoretical understanding of South Africa’s Africa policy within the context of BRICS interests is the strategic emphasis of South Africa’s status as Southern African regional power and the African continental power and its efforts to achieve its global strategic objective to be an important international power. There is a fundamental and structural need for South Africa to actively contribute to the creation and sustenance of a continental and global environment more or increasingly conducive not only for the advancement of its regional, continental and global strategic objectives, but also for the creation and sustenance of a better Africa in a better world. By consolidating its regional and continental status and by seeking to be an important international power, a major force within the Group of 20 countries and within a new global organisational actor consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS) and an important actor within the United Nations as a permanent member of its Security Council, South Africa will be able to actively contribute to the creation and sustenance of a continental and global environment more or increasingly conducive for the effective advancement of Africa’s interests in its Africa policy continentally and globally and those of its BRICS partners.

---

Key Issues in South Africa’s Africa Policy within

the context of BRICS interests

The strategic importance of South Africa’s role in African affairs within the context of the advancement of the continental development and progress is the issue recognised and highly appreciated by individuals of different and antagonistic political, economic and ideological positions. Registering his recognition and appreciation of the strategic importance of South Africa’s advancement of the continental interests in its Africa policy, Douglas Gibson, a member of the Democratic Alliance and a former South African ambassador to Thailand, Laos, Cambodia and Burma/Myanmar, maintains that:

The African Union (AU) chairmanship will enhance South Africa’s credibility not damage it. Among the achievements of Thabo Mbeki … was the transformation of this country from the new boy at the table to a major player in Africa, trusted on all sides to perform a significant peacemaking and peacekeeping role. Our foreign policy was aimed at Africa first, and many initiatives … were taken to promote Africa and its interests in the councils of the world. South Africa has followed an unusual path in international politics: sometimes our own obvious or immediate interests have been subordinated to the larger interests of the continent. We have also been prepared to put money, energy and resources behind other African countries in the pursuit of peace and stability. All of this has enabled South Africa to punch well above its weight in the world and to achieve successes²²².

Defending the position that the African Union needs South Africa’s leadership, he maintains that:

One of the frustrations endured by South African diplomats and policy makers over the past number of years was the failure of the AU to live up to its promise of a new beginning as an effective body, able and willing to play a role in the world that would raise the voice of Africa and win the respect and recognition that a continent-wide body should have.

South Africa’s quiet role and its untiring efforts to promote Africa while never breaking ranks or endangering African solidarity failed to nudge the AU in the desired direction and were in some respects counterproductive. Some countries seemed to feel that they could ignore us when it suited them, but come running to Daddy when they needed a bail-out. South Africa’s soft voice was sometimes interpreted as a sign of weakness or unwillingness to be anything other than a charming and helpful source of advice, troops, money and effort.²²³

The position that Africa needs South African leadership continentally and globally is based, among others, on South Africa’s position in a hierarchy of political and economic, human capital or human resources development, technological and military international power relations. Its intermediate position in international power relations helps to explain its strategic role in African affairs and the fact that there is a higher level of demands and expectations from the rest of the continent and the world for it to play an increased role not only in continental affairs, but also between the continent and the rest of the world. It is expected to play a leading role in Africa’s socio-political and economic transformation. Fidel Castro, in his address to the South African Parliament in Cape Town on 4 September 1998, articulated this higher level of demands and expectations as follows:

From the new South Africa, the hope of a new Africa can emerge. Looked at economically, from the industrial, agricultural, technological and scientific points of view, South Africa is the most developed country on the African continent. Its energy and mineral resources are innumerable and in many of them, South Africa is very highly ranked world-wide. Today, South Africa produces 50% of the electricity of the entire continent, 85% of the steel and 97% of the coal. It accounts for the transport of 69% of all the railway freight, has 32% of all motorized vehicles, and 45% of all paved roads on the continent.²²⁴

Africa occupies the central position in South Africa’s foreign policy. According to Kgalema Motlanthe, South Africa accords central importance to our immediate African neighbourhood and the rest of the continent; working with countries of the South to address shared challenges of underdevelopment; promoting global equity and social justice; working with countries of the North to develop a true and effective partnership for a better world; and doing our part to strengthen the multilateral system²²⁵.

Pallo Jordan maintains that the core of the South African foreign policy is the creation and expansion of the space for Africa to define and fight for its future by exploring and offering its viable agenda conducive for the resolution of its problems. From the first day of his administration, Thabo Mbeki embarked upon a programme of action to contribute to the resolution of the conflict in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The thrust of the South African foreign policy was to “minimize the capacity” of the external powers dominant in international relations and cooperation to interfere in the internal affairs of the DRC so as to enable it and its neighbours to “resolve their problems.” This can best be understood if we come to grips with the reality that: “Ruthless foreign interests, most of them based in the West, have taken advantage of the relative weakness of African governments to intervene in the internal affairs of African states to install regimes they deem more favourable to them.”²²⁶ Western powers still take advantage of this factor characterising African governments as an integral part of strategies used to secure their interests in Africa.

---

Смотрите также файлы

• BRIKS_i_Afrika_-_sotrudnichestvo_v_tselyakh_razvitia.pdf

• BRIKS_tseli_i_zadachi.pdf

• Kontseptsia_sozdania_Kulturnogo_Tsentra_stran_BRIKS.docx

• Na_puti_k_dolgosrochnoy_strategii_stran_BRIKS_angl.pdf

• Novye_vozmozhnosti_dlya_razvitia_korporatsiy_v_ramkakh_sotrudnichestva_so_stranami-uchastnikami_BRIKS_Evraziyskogo_Soyuza_so_stran.docx