In analyzing the dynamics of BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), it becomes evident that this emerging alliance is distinct from the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in several crucial ways. While NAM was established during the Cold War as a forum for countries wishing to remain non-aligned between the Western and Eastern blocs, BRICS is a grouping of major emerging economies with diverse geopolitical interests. NAM’s primary focus was on political neutrality and non-alignment, while BRICS seeks to enhance economic cooperation and pursue common goals in a multipolar world. This key differentiation highlights that BRICS is more than just a relic of the past; it represents a contemporary and evolving force in global geopolitics with a focus on economic growth and cooperation.
Tag: GS Paper-2: Groupings and Agreements involving India and/or affecting India’s interests.
Exam View:
The story of BRICS expansion; BRICS vs NAM.
Context:
The leaders from BRICS are beginning a three-day summit in Johannesburg, where they are discussing expanding the club that harbours ambitions of becoming a geopolitical alternative to Western-led forums such as the Group of 7.
Decoding the editorial: The story of BRICS expansion
- Bigger numbers are more likely to undermine the coherence of any group.
- The widespread interest in joining BRICS reveals its greater relevance to world affairs.
- However, the larger the membership, the smaller the least common political denominator.
- The tensions between India and Pakistan, for example, have long limited the effectiveness of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation.
- The SCO has struggled to manage India-Pak and India-China differences.
- The conflict between India and China has already cast a shadow over BRICS.
- China and Russia’s “alliance without limits” could have boosted BRICS to the forefront.
- In February 2022, China and Russia announced their “alliance without limits”.
- They appeared well-placed to deliver the final blow against the Western dominance of the world.
- Since then, Russia has been locked in a prolonged and unwinnable war against Ukraine, is isolated from its natural partners in Western Europe, and faces heavy international sanctions.
- China has disappointed the world with its sputtering economy.
- The international focus is instead on the several structural challenges, including debt, demographic decline, and decoupling from the West.
- Meanwhile, the US, which was supposed to be in terminal decline, has bounced back on economic and geopolitical fronts.
- The talk of China overtaking the US economy has now been relegated to the distant future.
- Washington has mounted relentless pressure against Beijing with its economic and technological measures.
- It has put together new strategic coalitions on China’s periphery, including the Quad (with Australia, India and Japan), the AUKUS (Australia and the UK), and the trilateral coalition with Japan and South Korea.
- Thanks to Washington’s added support, Manila, which has been long at the receiving end of Beijing’s bullying, is standing up.
BRICS vs NAM
- The political intentions
- Beijing sees BRICS as a political platform to mobilise the non-Western world in its rivalry with the US.
- Balancing the US was also the original motivation for Moscow in promoting the BRICS.
- The interests of the “Global South” are confused with Sino-Russian geopolitical games.
- The presence of many African special invitees does not make Johannesburg comparable to the gathering of the Afro-Asian leaders in Bandung, Indonesia, in 1955.
- One of the principal objectives of the Bandung movement that morphed into NAM eventually was to stay away from rivalrous power blocks, the US-dominated Western one and the Eastern one led by Soviet Russia.
- The BRICS, in contrast, is led by one of the competing power blocs, the Sino-Russian alliance.
- Bipolar confrontation vs avoiding polarisation
- Beijing and Moscow began BRICS to limit the “unipolar world” and promote a “multipolar world”, but have forced it into a bipolar confrontation with the West.
- If NAM was about avoiding East-West rivalry, the Global South addressed the contradictions between developing countries and the developed world, or the Global North.
- But today, China is the world’s second-largest economy, and its capital has made great strides in penetrating the Global South.
- Some in the developing world argue that China’s rough and ready “neocolonialism” is worse than Western “imperialism” tempered over the centuries.
- Membership race
- Countries want membership of BRICS to enhance their bargaining power with the US.
- On top of it, posturing against the West plays well at home for most political elites.
- Unlike in Bandung, the post-colonial elites are not today animated by ideology.
Source: The Indian Express
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)
1: Is BRICS a continuation of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM)?
Answer: No, BRICS is not a continuation of the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM). While both are international groupings, they have distinct purposes and origins. NAM was created during the Cold War to promote political neutrality, whereas BRICS is an alliance of emerging economies aimed at fostering economic cooperation and addressing contemporary global challenges.
2: How does BRICS differ from NAM in terms of its objectives?
Answer: BRICS differs from NAM in its objectives. NAM primarily focused on non-alignment and political neutrality during the Cold War. In contrast, BRICS seeks to enhance economic cooperation, trade, and investment among its member countries and collaborate on issues such as development, infrastructure, and global governance in today’s multipolar world.
3: Are the member countries of BRICS also part of NAM?
*Answer: Yes, some member countries of BRICS, like India and South Africa, were historically part of NAM. However, being a member of NAM does not preclude a country from participating in other international groupings or alliances, and BRICS represents a more recent and specific cooperative effort with a different focus.
4: What are the major differences in the composition of BRICS and NAM?
Answer: The composition of BRICS and NAM varies significantly. BRICS comprises Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, all of which are major emerging economies. NAM, on the other hand, includes a larger and more diverse group of countries, many of which are not major economic powers. The key difference is in the nature and composition of these groupings.
5: Can a country be a member of both BRICS and NAM simultaneously?
Answer: Yes, a country can be a member of both BRICS and NAM. Membership in these groups is not mutually exclusive. Some countries, such as India and South Africa, are members of both BRICS and NAM, reflecting their engagement in a range of international forums and alliances to pursue various foreign policy goals.
In case you still have your doubts, contact us on 9811333901.
For UPSC Prelims Resources, Click here
For Daily Updates and Study Material:
Join our Telegram Channel – Edukemy for IAS
- 1. Learn through Videos – here
- 2. Be Exam Ready by Practicing Daily MCQs – here
- 3. Daily Newsletter – Get all your Current Affairs Covered – here
- 4. Mains Answer Writing Practice – here
