In the dictionary an acronym is defined as «a noun formed by joining the initial letters or syllables of several words.» In modern language the use of such formulas (often for reasons of speed, but oftentimes - one almost gets the impression - to impress the interlocutor) is becoming more and more frequent and the sector of international relations is certainly no exception to this observation.
The UN, NATO, OECD and OSCE represent, just to name a few, the acronyms of important multilateral organizations, of which - in all honesty - it might sometimes be difficult to reconstruct the name in full.
In recent times, one of the most cited acronyms in this field is BRICS, unlike others easy to interpret as it is made up of the initials of five (large) countries, namely Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. It is an informal forum (i.e., not based on specific agreements) of States, where Presidents and Heads of Government have met annually since 2010 for a joint analysis of the main political, economic and social issues of current affairs.
An aggregation of significant importance, if we consider the fact that today it represents 41 percent of the earth’s population and 26 percent of the global Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
The BRICS group, defined by Brazilian President Lula as «the club of a possible new world», recently held the 15th Summit in its history in Johannesburg, with the notable absence of Russian President Putin, held back at home by judicial concerns (As is known, the International Criminal Court in The Hague has issued a warrant for his arrest). The meeting confirmed the clear leadership exercised by China (to give an idea of its superiority, it is enough to know that Beijing holds 69 percent of the overall trade between the 5 members) and its firm intention to characterize the group more and more as anti-American and anti-Western. Since the beginning of 2022, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict has contributed to providing further acceleration to this goal, if we reflect on the fact that of the other four member countries none intended to comply with the economic-financial (not to mention military) sanctions ordered by Washington and Brussels towards Moscow.
Beyond the recurring statements in the BRICS context, which not by chance also re-emerged in Johannesburg, of wanting to promote a profound transformation of the international financial institutions (World Bank and Monetary Fund) with the “displacement” of the dollar from the role of primary reference currency, the data with the greatest political weight that emerged in South Africa was the news of the imminent opening of the “bloc” to new members. Here also, Xi Jinping’s plan to use the legitimate interest of the so-called Global South for his own purposes in benefiting from multipolarity, considered by emerging nations to be the system of international relations most suited to their interests and aspirations, is easily recognisable.
Within a broader list (there would in fact be 18 potential member states), Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Argentina, Ethiopia, Iran and Egypt have been designated as candidates for the first round of expansion, to be completed by 2024. As a result of this evolution, the size of the group seems destined to increase and, in the future, to engage critically with the main “Western” reference entity, the G7. The latter would continue, at least in the short term, to remain superior in terms of wealth produced, but would be inferior in terms of the percentage of population represented.
Given this data, it seems correct to highlight how the aforementioned grand project faces considerable opposition even within BRICS itself. Countries such as Brazil and South Africa, currently exclusive exponents of the demands of entire continents, would certainly not look favourably upon the entry, also for reasons of prestige, “into the family” of fearsome regional competitors such as, respectively, Argentina and Egypt. Furthermore, an opening to new members after insufficient deliberation would further dilute a level of homogeneity which already within the current “5” format cannot be considered satisfactory.
If China and Russia can in fact be classified as autocracies hostile to the United States and Europe, Brazil, India and South Africa (rightly) boast of rather advanced internal democratic systems, as well as relations of normal collaboration with the West. In the economic sphere, the contradictory situation is exacerbated by the fact that the GDP per capita of an Indian citizen represents only a fifth of that of an inhabitant of China and Russia, even though the growth rate recorded by the New Delhi economy is decidedly higher compared to that of all other members.
Based on these considerations, the forecast of the experts goes in the direction of considering the process of expansion of BRICS probable, but not so promptly and with less inclusive methods as those hypothesized by Beijing. The question linked to the future function of the G20 also contributes to this prudential evaluation, the forum in which both the richest industrialized nations and the main emerging realities coexist, albeit not without difficulties. In the very recent G20 Summit in New Delhi, deserted by both Putin (due to the already mentioned judicial issues) and Xi Jinping (due to a childish “double resentment” towards Modi and Biden), the limits of the group were undeniably revealed, primarily regarding the evaluation of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. At the same time, it is legitimate to doubt whether its possible substitution with a “BRICS Plus” of increased numerical consistency, integrated by member countries without aligned positions or a common agenda, will translate into an effective enrichment and recognized consolidation of today’s multilateral system.
And, returning to the initial point, with what acronym could today’s BRICS be renamed in the event of a doubling and, potentially, a tripling of its members? A linguistic challenge that reveals the impossible and which, alone, may lead us to reflect on whether the plan is appropriate.
Reggente Marco Marsilli, Foundation President
Map of BRICS member states (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and other BRICS candidates)
