Photo: Róbert Hegedüs
Joakim Scheffer
20/09/2024 06:00
When discussing the changing world order, the rise of China is often the first development that comes to mind. At the same time, India is increasingly playing a significant role in shaping this evolving order, as demonstrated, for instance, during the 2023 G20 summit.
It is essential to recognize that we are not yet living in a truly multipolar world; it remains an aspiration rather than a reality. However, China's rise is indisputable. As the world’s second-largest economy, it is poised to rival the United States in the near future. Yet, when examining the broader balance of power, the United States retains a substantial advantage due to its extensive alliance system, something China has not yet established. Additionally, China’s relationships with other emerging powers are often marked by disputes, notably with India. To maintain the influence it has built over the past decades, the West must learn to engage these aspiring powers in international decision-making and in shaping the global order. India serves as a prime example of this approach. It has demonstrated a willingness to build a new partnership with the United States, particularly as China increasingly challenges Washington’s position. This dynamic is also evident within BRICS. Unlike other members of the bloc, India does not aim to create an anti-Western platform or advocate for the decline of U. S. influence. On the contrary, it is in India’s national interest for Washington to maintain a strong presence in Asia, thereby ensuring a balance of power in the region. India seeks to advocate for the interests of the Global South while serving as a bridge between the West and the Global South.
Many like to believe that the BRICS, comprising 9+1 (Saudi Arabia is not a full member yet) members, is a cohesive group akin to the G7. However, as you suggest, this was not the case even before its enlargement. How might this dynamic evolve with the inclusion of new members?
For many countries, BRICS serves as a platform to assert an independent foreign policy and balance the influence of the United States and the West. Nonetheless, internal contradictions within the group persist. For instance, India and China remain at odds on various issues, South Africa faces its own domestic challenges, and Brazil pursues an agenda that reflects its distinct priorities. The inclusion of six new members is likely to exacerbate these divergences, making consensus even harder to achieve. If BRICS continues to expand, it risks becoming a miniature version of the Non-Aligned Movement or the UN General Assembly—organizations that struggle to advance concrete actions due to their broad and often conflicting interests. The perception of BRICS as a significant threat to the West stems largely from European and American anxieties. This, in turn, fosters unwarranted optimism in some parts of the developing world, where there remains a nostalgic yearning for confrontation with the West. Both perspectives—exaggerated fears in the West and inflated expectations in the Global South—are misplaced. The more pragmatic path forward would involve the West actively engaging with emerging powers and offering genuine partnerships. Over the past three decades, Western attitudes have often reflected a sense of detachment, characterized by a tendency to lecture the developing world while assuming unchallenged authority as the "empire of norms" in Europe and the "teacher of all knowledge" in the United States. However, the context has shifted. Today, the United States needs emerging powers just as much as these powers need the U.S. and the broader West. This creates opportunities for a new framework of negotiations between the U. S. and the Global South, and India could play a particularly important role in facilitating such dialogue.
So far, little has been said about Europe. How can the continent benefit most from cooperation with the Global South?
For a long time, Europeans have tended to equate Asia with China, overlooking the continent's vast diversity. However, Asia is much more than China—it includes Japan, the world’s fourth-largest economy; India, the fifth-largest economy; the entire ASEAN region; and other key players. Europe should broaden its perspective and engage more actively with these countries. The shifting global dynamics should encourage Europeans to recognize the importance of building a more diversified and balanced approach to Asia. Furthermore, Europe has often been one of the loudest advocates for infrastructure development in the Global South, yet its contributions in terms of resources have been limited. This trend appears to be changing with initiatives like the India-Europe-Middle East Economic Corridor. Increased European political, strategic, and financial support for such projects would significantly enhance their impact and foster deeper partnerships. Lastly, the Indo-Pacific route to Europe holds the potential to serve as an alternative to the energy infrastructure dominated by Russia and the regional infrastructure projects driven by China. This diversification could bolster Europe’s strategic independence while strengthening its connections with the Global South.
The author is an editor of Eurasia