BRICS - problems and forecasts

[Dogedegen]

Imagine the collaboration between those countries
- Russia and China, collaboration on paper, in reality, each one fears the other, they try to bury the hatchet for propaganda reasons but still have territorial disputes scars that will never heal

I don't think this is a big argument on its own in the topic that we are talking about, many countries in the European Union have historical or current territorial disputes and yet they have managed to find a way to get past that and still work together in a strong way. It is not like all the countries in the European Union are big friends, yet they can still cooperate.

Yeah, except that in China they still have continuous propaganda about the century of humiliation and about their territorial disputes.
When was the last time you read in a German manual that Alsace is part of Germany?

This is called moving the goalpost of the argument. I never said that the border disputes are being treated equally or how the country sees those, I have just said that they do exist among the European countries and they are looking past those as much as possible. Anyway since these disputes are not in the interest, the centralized government in Brussels does all kinds of forceful tactics to suppress both the news but also the dispute themselves. You know the style they used Hungary, threatening to withhold money that you rightfully deserve if you don't obey our wishes. That is how they do it, just not all of the cases are widely reported as the situation with Hungary since they wanted to get rid of Orban. Anyway the point is that they are still somehow able to get past all of these issues and not that they don't exist, but BRICS is not able to do that at this time.

When was the last time you read in a German manual that Alsace is part of Germany?

History is used as a tool for manipulation.
Throughout a lot of societies.

That is true, a lot of the mainstream information that is being taught to most people is not fully accurate and sometimes even false. The best proof that one can get about this is when some big place like the EU or US teaches history about a place or events in which you actually were, then you can know quite well how huge the difference is between reality and what is told as history.

[stompix]

~

This is called moving the goalpost of the argument. I never said that the border disputes are being treated equally or how the country sees those, I have just said that they do exist among the European countries and they are looking past those as much as possible. 

Nope, it's not moving anything!
European countries don't have school manuals about whatever century of humiliation they had, since you mentioned Hungary, yes, they are bitter about the Treaty of Trianon, but you won't find caricatures of all the foreign powers splitting their country and indoctrinating their kids to take arms to revert this, you don't have active propaganda on Chinese state-sponsored levels.
Seriously, you're comparing countries that have open borders and have seen for the first time in their history half a century of no war and prosperity with a country that actively tries to regain control they lost since the Qing Empire everywhere, and if you think that a strong China smelling a weak Russia will not take all of Manciuria back the way Russia took Crimea, you're deluding yourself.

[el kaka22]

So from what I understand, people are mad over Russia wanting piece of Ukraine, and they are mad that China wants piece of Taiwan, and they are mad North Korea has always wanted South Korea, and India wants Pakistan. And these are all bad, right? That is what you guys are saying?

And of course, any normal human would say that, war is bad, death is bad, and everyone should be friendly and have fun, and go have barbeque parties together and we should love each other. But you are forgetting, Europe still has companies sucking resources out of Africa? Or USA killing innocent people in Iran? You think the west is any better? You think USA is out there trying to be friendly and the east is just this bad place? I am sorry but go back to real world, everyone has problems, not just BRICS.

[BlackHatCoiner]

De-dollarization sounds great on paper, but nobody actually wants to hold massive reserves of rupees or yuan that they can't easily spend globally. Until they build a proper institutional framework and resolve these deep internal rivalries, BRICS will remain a glorified talking shop.

Unless something ground-breaking happens and Bitcoin suddenly goes back to six digits again. 

[MRY]

De-dollarization sounds great on paper, but nobody actually wants to hold massive reserves of rupees or yuan that they can't easily spend globally. Until they build a proper institutional framework and resolve these deep internal rivalries, BRICS will remain a glorified talking shop.

Unless something ground-breaking happens and Bitcoin suddenly goes back to six digits again.  

The liquidity of other countries banknotes cannot make cross border transactions as liquid as the dollar at the moment. The problems between members are known to slow down the development of these economic alliances. In case Bitcoin reaches six curves or even higher and becomes highly more valuable than it was last time it hit the all time high, it might have a radical impact on the global financial situation. I believe that money will be a very interesting subject to look into in the future.

[davis196]

- Internal conflicts: There are political tensions between members (e.g., historical rivalry between China and India, disagreements over expanding the list of partner countries)
- Difficulties of de-dollarization: It is impossible to completely abandon the dollar, as economies are highly dependent on trade with the West and dominant world reserves. Settlement in national currencies (Rupees, Yuan, Real) is slow due to trade imbalances
- Different economic structure: The bloc includes states with very different levels of development, investment base and technological potential
- Lack of a single center: Unlike the European Union or the G7, BRICS does not have a rigid charter, a permanent secretariat, or its own supranational currency

1.The process of dedollarization is really slow and it takes time.
2.BRICS cannot be compared to the European Union. The level of integration between the countries inside the EU is unmatched. BRICS is more like a competitor of G7, but the BRICS members cannot be integrated into a strong political and economical alliance, because all countries in BRICS have rather independent foreign policies and want to actively trade with the western countries.
3.China doesn't want to play the role of a hegemon in BRICS, which can cause a problem, because such political and economical alliances require a dominant superpower, that acts as the leader of the alliance. The lack of a hegemon may cause the future collapse of BRICS.

[stompix]

So from what I understand, people are mad over Russia wanting piece of Ukraine, and they are mad that China wants piece of Taiwan, and they are mad North Korea has always wanted South Korea, and India wants Pakistan. And these are all bad, right? That is what you guys are saying?

 But you are forgetting, Europe still has companies sucking resources out of Africa?

You have to be a special case of brainwashed imbecile to put the two of these in a balance!
It's like saying you're dodging taxes with your crypto revenues is the same as someone killing your family!

Seek help! Like serious professional help!

[IjawMan]

The third side is envy that they could not be smarter and more cunning than the USA and did not make their currency the world reserve currency

This a misgiving to what led to the creation of the BRICS alliance and by design they are only a group of countries that wish to rescue their economies from unequal relations that are conditionally detrimental to their respective country's real development and economic prosperity.

Envy is like you saying that seeking for a better platform for yourself to be in a more comfortable condition where your not conditioned to constantly remain dependent is a crime.

The countries of the BRICS wants to save themselves from the consistent cunning economic wreck the Western and Europe giant countries are smashing on them, trade conditions that are not mutually beneficial etc.

If the BRICS can create a balance to the unequal world order and give these countries a platform to have economic corporations where trade relations is not dominated by a single country currency then it should be taken seriously instead of criticising it.

The dedollarisation is not literally anti America as many of you are making a pointer to but instead it about countries that are seeking for better value for their currency as would any American for theirs. Or do we not have BRICS countries doing business with EU and Western countries still?  I do not need to be that achieving what goals and objectives the BRICS stand for will take decades to achieve cause the other existing blocks the EU and USA are not taking a backseat doing nothing to frustrate it.

[Dogedegen]

Seriously, you're comparing countries that have open borders and have seen for the first time in their history half a century of no war and prosperity with a country that actively tries to regain control they lost since the Qing Empire everywhere, and if you think that a strong China smelling a weak Russia will not take all of Manciuria back the way Russia took Crimea, you're deluding yourself.

The same would happen in Europe, that is why the EU is being used to control the other European states and to weaken their sovereignty. If you believe otherwise you are ironically reading too much European propaganda and thinking that you are being a wise guy about China and Russia. 

And of course, any normal human would say that, war is bad, death is bad, and everyone should be friendly and have fun, and go have barbeque parties together and we should love each other. But you are forgetting, Europe still has companies sucking resources out of Africa? Or USA killing innocent people in Iran? You think the west is any better? You think USA is out there trying to be friendly and the east is just this bad place? I am sorry but go back to real world, everyone has problems, not just BRICS.

They are not any better in this part of the argument, they are just pretending to be better. And people who say that this is not true are just evil people who are propagandists for the system. Some are paid and doing it consciously, others are not conscious about it but they have been brainwashed by being exposed to false information for so long. Still that is not really what we are discussing here even if some prideful people can't admit that the EU is quite bad itself. The question is more whether BRICS has a chance of becoming something more serious like the EU, but at the current time everything points us in the direction of a no.

The countries of the BRICS wants to save themselves from the consistent cunning economic wreck the Western and Europe giant countries are smashing on them, trade conditions that are not mutually beneficial etc.

If the BRICS can create a balance to the unequal world order and give these countries a platform to have economic corporations where trade relations is not dominated by a single country currency then it should be taken seriously instead of criticising it.

These kinds of moves usually come as a counter response to prolonged abuse of some side, in this case the West. Still that does not mean that BRICS has a good chance of becoming something real and functional, those are separate things and I believe the author was hinting at that here. That just having this response to abuse as the main driver is not enough to make it a very good alliance, it needs more than that.

[Cryptomultiplier]

- Internal conflicts: There are political tensions between members (e.g., historical rivalry between China and India, disagreements over expanding the list of partner countries)
- Difficulties of de-dollarization: It is impossible to completely abandon the dollar, as economies are highly dependent on trade with the West and dominant world reserves. Settlement in national currencies (Rupees, Yuan, Real) is slow due to trade imbalances
- Different economic structure: The bloc includes states with very different levels of development, investment base and technological potential
- Lack of a single center: Unlike the European Union or the G7, BRICS does not have a rigid charter, a permanent secretariat, or its own supranational currency

1.The process of dedollarization is really slow and it takes time.
2.BRICS cannot be compared to the European Union. The level of integration between the countries inside the EU is unmatched. BRICS is more like a competitor of G7, but the BRICS members cannot be integrated into a strong political and economical alliance, because all countries in BRICS have rather independent foreign policies and want to actively trade with the western countries.
3.China doesn't want to play the role of a hegemon in BRICS, which can cause a problem, because such political and economical alliances require a dominant superpower, that acts as the leader of the alliance. The lack of a hegemon may cause the future collapse of BRICS.

Perhaps we may not see the actualization of BRICS in this generation but in a later one when things have structurally taken shape and place, but it's quite difficult to fully enact de-dollarization when the country having the dollar is a superpower in the world.

I see BRICS as an initiative like Bitcoin which is an alternative currency and so far the BRICs nations has seen how difficult it is to implement this despite the loud noise they made at the onset.
The structural realities of global trade makes BRICS countries to focus more on their economies because it would be absolutely difficult for de-dollarization to happen in the soonest time possible.

[MRY]

- Internal conflicts: There are political tensions between members (e.g., historical rivalry between China and India, disagreements over expanding the list of partner countries)
- Difficulties of de-dollarization: It is impossible to completely abandon the dollar, as economies are highly dependent on trade with the West and dominant world reserves. Settlement in national currencies (Rupees, Yuan, Real) is slow due to trade imbalances
- Different economic structure: The bloc includes states with very different levels of development, investment base and technological potential
- Lack of a single center: Unlike the European Union or the G7, BRICS does not have a rigid charter, a permanent secretariat, or its own supranational currency

1.The process of dedollarization is really slow and it takes time.
2.BRICS cannot be compared to the European Union. The level of integration between the countries inside the EU is unmatched. BRICS is more like a competitor of G7, but the BRICS members cannot be integrated into a strong political and economical alliance, because all countries in BRICS have rather independent foreign policies and want to actively trade with the western countries.
3.China doesn't want to play the role of a hegemon in BRICS, which can cause a problem, because such political and economical alliances require a dominant superpower, that acts as the leader of the alliance. The lack of a hegemon may cause the future collapse of BRICS.

Perhaps we may not see the actualization of BRICS in this generation but in a later one when things have structurally taken shape and place, but it's quite difficult to fully enact de-dollarization when the country having the dollar is a superpower in the world.

I see BRICS as an initiative like Bitcoin which is an alternative currency and so far the BRICs nations has seen how difficult it is to implement this despite the loud noise they made at the onset.
The structural realities of global trade makes BRICS countries to focus more on their economies because it would be absolutely difficult for de-dollarization to happen in the soonest time possible.

The dollar is still the king of the world market due to the solidness of its arrangement in the market. I believe BRICS won’t be able to copy Bitcoin that was created as a free alternative. National leader must know that it is no easy task to alter the direction in which worldwide trade moves and it will not be able to do it only by the use of words without some real evidence.

[juttsab@]

I think BRICKS was never designed to be a second EU it is people who have misconception for its standard that BRICKS has never set for itself. The members of BRICKS are different countries and they have different priorities on their National level, if we talk about China then China is considered as the world second largest economy the other countries like Russia India South Africa Brazil they have different economic strength and they have different political interest and every country try to protect their own strategic interest first before working for someone else.
They have expanded their membership you cannot say that they have completely failed I personally think that the dollarisation was a very unrealistic goal, the US dollar was dominant and still remain dominant because of it's own financial market and the global confidence that it has on the international level and its importance in the international trading. I think that BRICKS will continue to be more stronger and it will grow and it will also give the developing countries more power but I don't think that it will replace the dollar in the future.

[dezoel]

To be fair, at this point all people are saying in this topic is "yes this exists but also this exists, so this is bad but also this is bad" and nobody is realizing that, it's all bad. I think the reality you need to realize is that, west and east are all just caring about themselves, nobody cares about what you think.

Of course west is brainwashed about east, and of course east is brainwashed about west, and nobody will do something nice, because they will defend themselves by showing how bad things were done by others.

[DrBeer]

In addition, I will say another challenge is that each BRICS country has its own economic and political priorities, so for them getting one common position isn't always easy. Even though they all agree that they want to reduce dependency on n the US dollar, the approach and speed which each country prefers can vary or different. For that reason, progress can seems or looks slow but building a stronger economic alliance requires alot of long term commitments, trust and coordination, so you see it's not just something that happens all of a sudden.

There is a good example - the EU. Countries with very different economic levels, different cultures, traditions, and even interests. The only nuance is a rather close geographical location. But by the way, they also had the idea of "dedollarization". And they succeeded! Not 100% perfect, but quite effective, if we compare it with BRICS attempts.
 
The question is why did the EU succeed? There must be some other differences ?
I for example think that one of the key reasons is the attempts of some participants to politicize the union, and make it not according to the principle "let's be friends for our benefit within the union", but according to the principle "et's be friends against others, and try to create problems for them".

I think you are asking a very complex question and are trying to answer it in a very simple way so that can't be correct because very often complex questions have very complex answers. What would we define even as success for this? Working Union and success of dedollarization, working compared to BRICS? You are aware that there are hundreds and thousands of different issues with the EU on various levels? You have it on different levels such as the fight between who retains which competencies and the attempts to turn the EU into a federation so the weakening of the sovereignty of individuals, or too extreme bureaucracy that enables corruption only to those that are the most connected and everything in between. If you compare BRICS to EU, then the EU is great but that is not because it is a paradise and a case example of pure success it is more because BRICS is still mostly a complete failure. 

There’s a very good principle-Occam’s Razor! It’s a methodological principle that states: "One should not multiply entities unnecessarily". In simple terms: when faced with several possible explanations or solutions, it’s always best to choose the simplest one, provided it fully accomplishes its purpose.
Of course, we can look for the most complex explanations for the BRICS problem from a logical and situational standpoint, but the real ones are right on the surface. Or should I take a different approach—refute my assumptions with well-reasoned arguments? Care to try refuting them?

[Dogedegen]

In addition, I will say another challenge is that each BRICS country has its own economic and political priorities, so for them getting one common position isn't always easy. Even though they all agree that they want to reduce dependency on n the US dollar, the approach and speed which each country prefers can vary or different. For that reason, progress can seems or looks slow but building a stronger economic alliance requires alot of long term commitments, trust and coordination, so you see it's not just something that happens all of a sudden.

There is a good example - the EU. Countries with very different economic levels, different cultures, traditions, and even interests. The only nuance is a rather close geographical location. But by the way, they also had the idea of "dedollarization". And they succeeded! Not 100% perfect, but quite effective, if we compare it with BRICS attempts.
  
The question is why did the EU succeed? There must be some other differences ?
I for example think that one of the key reasons is the attempts of some participants to politicize the union, and make it not according to the principle "let's be friends for our benefit within the union", but according to the principle "et's be friends against others, and try to create problems for them".

I think you are asking a very complex question and are trying to answer it in a very simple way so that can't be correct because very often complex questions have very complex answers. What would we define even as success for this? Working Union and success of dedollarization, working compared to BRICS? You are aware that there are hundreds and thousands of different issues with the EU on various levels? You have it on different levels such as the fight between who retains which competencies and the attempts to turn the EU into a federation so the weakening of the sovereignty of individuals, or too extreme bureaucracy that enables corruption only to those that are the most connected and everything in between. If you compare BRICS to EU, then the EU is great but that is not because it is a paradise and a case example of pure success it is more because BRICS is still mostly a complete failure.  

There’s a very good principle-Occam’s Razor! It’s a methodological principle that states: "One should not multiply entities unnecessarily". In simple terms: when faced with several possible explanations or solutions, it’s always best to choose the simplest one, provided it fully accomplishes its purpose.
Of course, we can look for the most complex explanations for the BRICS problem from a logical and situational standpoint, but the real ones are right on the surface. Or should I take a different approach—refute my assumptions with well-reasoned arguments? Care to try refuting them?

I am aware of Occam's Razor, and it does not apply here or at least that is not how you should use it. Occam's Razor does not actually say that the simplest explanation is always the correct one. It means something else and that is, if several explanations account for the evidence in an equally well way then we should prefer the explanation that makes the fewest unnecessary assumptions. That is an important difference to remember.  In your case you have not demonstrated that your explanation explains the reasons here equally well as the alternatives, you just assumed that it does because it is a simpler one and that is not how the principle works.

Much of the current reality of these two blocks don't require any speculation, they are clear and observable differences. For example EU has binding institutions, common legislation and market, a court that can enforce EU law and many other things. BRICS on the other hand is just primarily a political and economic forum for now, it has nothing comparable like in terms of institutions and there are no binding obligations on most issues. And yes some of its members are even geopolitical rivals with different competing interests. So to go from observable differences and fact, to ignore them and reduce it to some members politicized the union is not an application of Occam's Razor it is just simplifying a complex problem in a wrong way.

You also asked why the EU succeeded while BRICS has struggled or is struggling, but even that question alone suggests that there are many variables and reasons involved. If one factor could explain everything, then we could expect countries with similar political motivations to achieve similar outcomes but we do not see that happening. For example, it took decades of negotiations, treaties, compromises and gradual changes for the EU to become what it is today. Even now they have many disagreements and issues in the EU. So if an organization with such institutions and decades of integration still struggles with internal disagreements, how could members of BRICS that have greater political, economic and strategic differences have a simple explanation for its slower progress?

Actually now that you bring Occam's into this, it supports my position more than it does yours. A simpler explanation that is supported by the evidence is that the EU has created institutions that are capable of enforcing cooperation, while BRICS intentionally is still a much looser organization. This single simple structucal difference alone explains a great deal and does not require any assumptions about motives from many countries!

[DrBeer]

You raised a very serious issue here, but I tend to disagree with you. This is because sometimes things are not always the same way that it seems to look and from the allegations about the non functional Way of the BRICS block ever since it emergence. Sometimes some things look deeper than we think as far as I know, BRICS as an organization is active working, with all these war going on right left and centre don't be too surprised if we see more members by there next meeting. The BRICS organization is working behind the scenes that is why America and all their allies are very weary of countries that are having affiliations with the likes of Russia, China and North Korea.

You also forgot to mention Iran among the countries with "specific regimes". Perhaps BRICS should cut ties with such toxic members? By the way, it is precisely these countries that are trying to use the BRICS nations AGAINST the Western world to achieve THEIR OWN political goals, rather than the economic objectives of the BRICS alliance. And here lies one of BRICS’s main problems today-a deep internal rift and the loss of a unified geopolitical identity, which have been exacerbated by the toxic influence and radicalization of the so-called "rogue states" (primarily Russia and Iran).
By attempting to turn BRICS into a hardline anti-Western front, these states are disrupting the balance within the organization and alienating its more moderate members. I can provide concrete examples of this toxic influence-shall we discuss them?
 

[DrBeer]

This all happened in just the last week:

Suspension of the bloc’s expansion: Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov officially confirmed that BRICS has temporarily suspended the admission of new full members. The reasons include serious political disagreements, divergent geopolitical agendas among the members, and the need to adapt following the recent accession of new countries (including Egypt, Iran, the UAE, Ethiopia, and Indonesia).
Problems with Creating an Alternative Currency: India’s attempts to accelerate the creation of a common digital currency and its calls for de-dollarization are facing stiff resistance within the bloc.
India’s leadership openly states that the country has no policy of completely replacing the dollar, which exposes a deep divide between the anti-Western rhetoric of some BRICS members and the actual economic interests of others.  Yet just a year or half a year ago, they were triumphantly announcing its de facto creation
Stalling Financial Mechanisms: Economists and analysts within member countries (particularly in Egypt) note that the transition to national currencies in mutual settlements cannot yet serve as a full-fledged alternative to SWIFT and the dollar due to the high volatility of emerging-market currencies and the lack of a unified technological infrastructure

[DrBeer]

So from what I understand, people are mad over Russia wanting piece of Ukraine, and they are mad that China wants piece of Taiwan, and they are mad North Korea has always wanted South Korea, and India wants Pakistan. And these are all bad, right? That is what you guys are saying?

And of course, any normal human would say that, war is bad, death is bad, and everyone should be friendly and have fun, and go have barbeque parties together and we should love each other. But you are forgetting, Europe still has companies sucking resources out of Africa? Or USA killing innocent people in Iran? You think the west is any better? You think USA is out there trying to be friendly and the east is just this bad place? I am sorry but go back to real world, everyone has problems, not just BRICS.

No one is angry! Ukraine is successfully destroying the terrorist’s country’s army, along with its economy and infrastructure... Taiwan will defend its independence. Now the question is-how exactly do the examples you cited relate to the issues within BRICS?
BRICS is an ECONOMIC alliance, am I right? Their goals are economic development, right? Or do you think they’re somehow connected to Russia’s terrorist activities in Ukraine? I’m probably missing something or don’t know the full story-I’d appreciate it if you could clarify and explain!

[Oluwa-btc]

No one is angry! Ukraine is successfully destroying the terrorist’s country’s army, along with its economy and infrastructure... Taiwan will defend its independence. Now the question is-how exactly do the examples you cited relate to the issues within BRICS?
BRICS is an ECONOMIC alliance, am I right? Their goals are economic development, right? Or do you think they’re somehow connected to Russia’s terrorist activities in Ukraine? I’m probably missing something or don’t know the full story-I’d appreciate it if you could clarify and explain!

Taiwan is China and will forever remain that way. The US government only all around because of their selfish reasons.

The US actions in Iran is not terrorism but Russians pushing back NATO from their backyard terrorism? Lol! All it will take is for Russians to flip the scripts, they  have been silent for too long. You ukrainians are simply proxies, fighting the US war of destabilising Russia. Most stupid of them supporting them are Europeans. Pathetic!

[WillyAp]

Taiwan is China and will forever remain that way. The US government only all around because of their selfish reasons.

The US actions in Iran is not terrorism but Russians pushing back NATO from their backyard terrorism? Lol! All it will take is for Russians to flip the scripts, they  have been silent for too long. You ukrainians are simply proxies, fighting the US war of destabilising Russia. Most stupid of them supporting them are Europeans. Pathetic!

Under DT the US is not as involved any more. Which makes the proxy accusation a little off.
Sure, Ukraine buys weapons from the US, As they also get help from starlink but the that is more the market. A lot of toys are purely available from the us.
As simple as you paint it is not, by far. How do you interpret the action in the Chinese -Philippines conflicts?
https://www.crisisgroup.org/rpt/asia-pacific/south-east-asia/philippines-china-united-states/349-riding-unruly-waves-philippines-military-modernisation-effort