5 ms·
BRICS announces 'historic' admission of six new members
- verdverm 3y agoconfusing, did they just invite or actually accept new members? My understanding is the later and that the headline is misleading.
- drtgh 3y agoIt is misleading, they have been invited to join, https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/brics-2023-summit-new-members-saudi-uae-iran-b2398553.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/brics-2023-s...
- hggh 3y agoThe invitation is just a formality. Those countries (and many more) already expressed their interest to join BRICS: https://www.reuters.com/world/what-is-brics-who-are-its-members-2023-08-21/ https://www.reuters.com/world/what-is-brics-who-are-its-memb...
- Someone 3y agohttps://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/brics-2023-summit-new-members-saudi-uae-iran-b2398553.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/africa/brics-2023-s... : “South Africa said that more than 40 countries have expressed interest in joining Brics and 22 have formally requested to be admitted.” and “The membership of the new members will come into effect from 1 January 2024, Mr Ramaphosa said.” I assume the 6 being invited are a subset of those 22. So it seems “invited” is a diplomatic way of saying that the other 16 got held back at the door, at least for now.
- hggh 3y agoThe news is that the current BRICS agree to admit new members
- verdverm 3y agothe OP says that some members (Brazil/India) have reservations, I recall hearing that else where as well
- pphysch 3y agoThey accepted them and they will formally join at the start of next calendar user. It's not misleading.
- legitster 3y agoSo basically countries that are necessary for China to secure energy, and for Russia and China to trade with each other? Given that most of these countries are falling stars economically, it definitely seems to be a relationship of necessity more than anything.
- pphysch 3y agoThe geopolitics of this announcement are extremely significant. Egypt-Ethiopia and KSA-Iran-UAE are consequential rivalries that dictate MENA geopolitics; Israel/Turkey are left in the cold. Brazil+Argentina means South America is decisively a BRICS+ continent. What Monroe Doctrine? 3/4 of global energy production is now BRICS+. But yeah, we in the West can cope about how BRICS isn't real, and made of economic "falling stars" from our glass houses.
- legitster 3y agoUh.... Israel and Turkey haven't applied and want nothing to do with BRICs because they are not desperate enough to consider it. At it's best it's still a toothless fantasy, at its worst it's G7 but for supervillains. And for all the criticisms you might have for G7 and "the west", BRICs is shaping up to be much, much more exploitative. But my opinions don't really matter. If they can actually figure out a new international commerce and trading system that doesn't rely on dollars and the US Navy, despite all hating each other and each others' currencies, hats off to them. In the meantime I won't wait up.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- alephnerd 3y agoNot really. All these new members are countries that have extremely strong trade and defense relationship with Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa already Brazil - Argentina Russia - Iran, UAE India - Egypt, UAE, KSA, Ethiopia, Iran China - Iran, KSA, UAE, Ethiopia, Egypt South Africa - Ethiopia The issue is, BRICS+ will never be as cohesive as the G7 because the I and C have an active rivalry that is impacting bilateral relationships in the B, R, and S. Within the G7, all the members are already aligned with each other. > Israel/Turkey are left in the cold Israel has India, France, and the US due to defense and economic dependencies. Turkey has the full support of Eastern and Southern European NATO members like Romania, Poland, Spain, etc because they are a regional power competing against Russia within the Balkans, Mediterranean, Middle East, Africa, and Eastern Europe
- local_issues 3y agoBRICS org doesn’t actually mean or do anything, and as should always be mentioned: - India and China fucking hate each other and engage in frequent deadly border skirmishes - Same with Iran and Saudi but without the border - Egypt and Ethiopia are dick inches from a war, and not backing down Maybe BRICS org can help fix some of that but unlikely. More likely this will go the way of the African Union, CARICOM, and ECOWAS - aka a lot of noise but no material change
- wcfields 3y ago> - India and China fucking hate each other and engage in frequent deadly border skirmishes One insane fact I recently learned is that they do not use modern weapons, like guns, for fear of things getting out of hand. Only medieval clubs, bats with barbed wire, and martial arts/fists are allowed. [1] [1] https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a44725757/china-india-border-skirmishes-medieval-weapons/ https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a44725757/...
- tibbydudeza 3y agoIt is a mutual understanding. Improvised clubs with embedded nails, rebar and wooden bats ala Mad Max style. Both are nuclear armed nations, so it is sort of de-escalation mechanism for saving face whenever they clash without somebody taking it up a notch.
- seatac76 3y agoThey have a working agreement that allows no weapons within two kilometers of the demarcation line. Hence the medieval weapons.
- nirav72 3y agoThat's to add one additional rung to the escalation ladder. It's a good thing.
- legitster 3y agoChina is more dependent on Middle Eastern oil more than any other single country in the world. And in a potential breakdown of relations with the US (... and Japan.. and the Philippines...and everyone else in SE Asia) they going to have to get that oil all the way home around the Indian Ocean. So they kind of need it to work.
- tibbydudeza 3y agoI would expect this to change if next year in South Africa if the ruling party are replaced by a new opposition coalition which has pro-US and anti-China sentiments. BRICS is a rather motley collection of mostly "losers" desperately in need of foreign investment and other help - let's see if China/Saudi's has the stomach to give the rest of us some charity.
- SpecialistK 3y agoDo we see the DA actually taking over from the ANC next year though?
- tibbydudeza 3y agoANC voters will stay if they are unhappy with the ruling party - they will not be voting for the DA. I reckon the moonshot coalition pact will be able to squeak by if it holds together but that assumes the turncoat opportunists and backstabbers in the "Patriotic Alliance" is kept out of it. We at a breaking point right now - outside of the Western Cape things are falling apart literally into shambles.
- greatgib 3y agoBasically it will be the club of the shitty dictatorial fake democracies countries.
- nirav72 3y agoBrazil and India are fake democracies ?
- cloudcloud3243 3y ago[flagged]
- ejanus 3y agoDon't worry so much with that, very soon we will see a sea change in the global economy. We have seen the limit of Western sanctions(Russia). Change is coming, and it is coming very fast.
- greatgib 3y agoI don't think that you saw the trends of dictatorship and censor in these countries: https://thewire.in/rights/india-autocratiser-v-dem-report-2023 https://thewire.in/rights/india-autocratiser-v-dem-report-20... India is now ranked 108th in the democracy index.
- nirav72 3y agoyes I know the trends. But the current leadership in both Brazil and India were democratically elected. You might not agree with the outcomes, but that was what their electorate wanted. In fact, Modi's party got more votes in his second term than his first. Also in India's case -the ruling party while having authoritarian leanings, still doesn't control all the states. In fact, it recently lost a state and could lose more. I don't personally like where India is headed. But they still continue to have multi-party elections and have a very vocal opposition. Not to mention a clear separation between their military and their political branches. Neither Brazil or India are anywhere near having a single party control of the entire country. (unlike China and Russia). In Brazil's case , they actually voted out a authoritarian leaning president in the last election. Flaw democracies they might be. Nonetheless, they're still democracies (For now at least). That index isn't a static ranking. Even countries like the U.S have moved couple of rankings up and down in recent years based on policies set by whatever party is in power.
- seatac76 3y agoBRICS is essentially being co-opted by China-Russia now to build a bloc. Since China-Russia on their own are too toxic and enjoy no goodwill. So this is a naked attempt to dilute their negative perceptions via a collective. On its own BRICS makes no sense, the core interests simply don’t align and some members have real conflicts amongst them. The only real beneficiary will be China since this would be a forum to to do what it could not do via Belt and Road Initiative, build a large market in which China is in the center from which it can try to introduce standards and currencies it controls, a long stated goal of the CCP. Russia is going to be a resource train that is it, its march to irrelevancy is all but set. So really it’s a China play. Adding these choice 6 countries makes it even tougher, I can see Brazil and India diluting away and eventually leaving BRICS at some point provided their economies get big enough. Although if BRICS keeps increasing in size and more key members join e.g OPEC it could put them in a tough spot.
- jychang 3y agoStrong disagree. This perspective is very western-centric. Nobody sees themselves as the villain in their own story, after all. I strongly doubt the non-Chinese non-Russians countries are thinking like that. How about another perspective: when you run a science experiment, say if you are checking if a drug works or not, you don’t compare against “nothing”. You compare against a placebo sugar pill; otherwise you will get a significant placebo effect. What if we replace the leaders of these countries with “placebos”? Let’s say they are generic, generally pro-democracy, boring leaders with the interests of their people at heart. Let’s not assume they’re trying to be villains for the sake of being villains, and try to explain this move. What would happen? First off, it seems clear that world trust in the USA and western european countries is falling. The USA is chaotic domestically, and that is spilling over into its foreign policy. A neutral country cannot expect the USA to act in the public interest. The USA will always act in its own interest. For example, West Germany or Japan in the late 1990s could count on a total guarantee of USA protection against the USSR; nowadays, Taiwan is functionally a client state for the USA but seen as more “disposable” in the long run. The USA clearly intends to replace TSMC with domestic companies. Countries like Ukraine can count on USA support only for as long as public opinion holds; as soon as that dries up, the supplies will follow. Russia knows this and is fighting a war of attrition right now. The western democracies are also bound by their election cycles. The USA’s global policy changes every 4 year election cycle, and can be hard to predict. In that sense, China or Russia are more stable allies- you’re not bound to a 4 year election cycle. So if you’re a leader of a somewhat neutral country like Brazil or India or Egypt or Argentina, you’re not inclined to kowtow to the USA long term. It’s in your interest to recognize geopolitics is rapidly moving to a multipolar world, and being seen as one of the poles of the world as opposed to a single standard bearer is seen as being a good neighbor.
- type0 3y agoBRICSAEIEAU is a good name and reflects the value of this organization
- mdwalters 3y agoThe only problem with this is that it's too long, and not easily memorable.
- botanical 3y agoI find it funny how antagonistic the West is against BRICS; the West has ignored the Global South for far too long, and worse, depletes those countries of resources and getting rich off of them. Countries have now seen that they can't rely on the US not to meddle. Look at what America did to their ally South Africa, the ambassador accused us without proof and our currency dropped like a rock. The US also had its army in Syria protect private military contractors who protect US companies extracting oil from Syria. They're hypocrites as China is their biggest trading partner. France produces 70% of its electricity from nuclear and gets the majority of its fuel from Africa. And West Africa is just as poor as it left them. India and China having border skirmishes don't make them sworn enemies of each other. In fact, China is one of India's largest trading partners. The US and Canada even has border disputes; see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixon_Entrance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixon_Entrance. Also, it's not a military bloc. And you can understand why the Global South countries would want this alliance to grow their economies and be less reliant on Western imposition. On average, African countries loans cost 4% more than America and 8% more than Europe, they're being taken advantage of and their natural resources depleted. The BRICS countries constitute more than 50% of the population and 26% of the world's nominal GDP but have only 14% of the IMF's voting rights. They aren't looking to unsettle the dollar, but be less reliant on it. And now those countries want to come together to build up their economies through the New Development Bank which aims to increase local currency borrowing to 30%.