BRICS and US Hegemony

The BRICS is considered to be an association between Brazil, Russia, India, China that came into effect back into 2009, and later on South Africa joined in 2010, the world’s largest emerging economies (Adnan, 2014, p. 2).?Many reasons explain the desire for cooperation between BRICS nations, most important is that of influence (Breslin, 2010, p. 55). Most international organizations today are initiated through the Western economies and allow themselves to exert their influence through backing up each other in economic and diplomatic confrontations. Thus, if you are a large market that isn’t quite happy with the U.S. or European decisions then you team up with others, designing your own format of cooperation that doesn’t involve much Western influence (Andreoni, 2022). In other words, this association came about for the purpose of creating a sort of independence from the western domination of the World, appearing as a potential challenge to the global economic order of U.S. hegemony. Ever since its first summit in April 2011 as a group of 5 nations, the BRICS has proved the willingness to cooperate on a variety of issues ranging from the need for a new global reserve currency, not dominated by the U.S, . to the establishment of a new global financial institution like the New Development Bank, and investing more in the fields of trade, business, economy, health, education, agriculture, technology, science and arts (BRICS Challenge, 2022) The BRICS may not be an economic union but as a result of their size both demographically and economically, they have the ability to play a significant role in the global economy in the upcoming decades (Laidi, 2012, p.616). This paper will compare the dynamics of the BRICS to that of the U.S. and explain the hypothesis of potential “BRICS Challenge”, the influence the BRICS wields on world stage and how the latter comes to challenge the U.S economic hegemonic power.

BRICS nations represent a sizeable portion of the world, being at approximately 43% (Cooper and Farooq, 2015, p.34). The BRICS encompasses a population of 3.2 billion people which is estimated to be 9 times that of the US, at a number of 325 million (Beeson and Zeng, 2018, p. 1965). The US is not expected to make any leaning step towards the economic growth of the BRICS anytime soon. Coming to the economic standing of the U.S., the latter alone produces a total number of 18 trillion dollars in terms of GDP, with an expected number of 2% to the estimated global economic growth in the following years while BRICS shows 37 trillion dollars in terms of GDP, contributing to an estimation of 5% of global economic growth in the upcoming years as well (BRICS Challenge, 2022). According to the International Monetary Fund, BRICS contributes to 22% of the world’s GDP. Referring to Goldman Sachs, China’s GDP alone would be equal to America’s by 2027 and then overpass it (Andreoni, 2022). ?However, things tend to differ when it comes to the military standing of both entities. Currently, the U.S. spends quite more on its military defense than all nations combined, with an estimated defense budget of 639 billion dollars in the year 2018 (Beeson and Zeng, 2018, p.1966). It’s quite a large number that the BRICS nations combined together don’t come near that number. Referring to the Global Firepower index, Brazil’s military budget is 24.5 million dollars, India’s is 51 billion dollars, China’s is 161.7 billion dollars, India’s 51 billion dollars and South Africa’s is 4.6 billion dollars, combined with a defense budget of 284.6 billion dollars (Beeson and Zeng, 2018, p. 1968). This is even more surprising when you see India and China as the top BRICS countries for military expenditures. In terms of ground military, we already know that the U.S. is outmanned and outnumbered. China alone has 4.6 million personnel, India 3.4 million, Russia 3.2 million, Brazil 2.1 million and South Africa 106,000 (BRICS Challenge, 2022). In total, that’s approximately 18.5 million people ready to fight while the U.S. encompasses 1.3 million active military personnel and 806,000 reserve personnel (Andreoni, 2022). Yet, considering the large amount the latter spends on its military defense, it continues to develop constantly more advanced war machines. It certainly can compete in the air rather than on the ground. This can also be credited to the budget the U.S. spends on its air force which can exceed the military defense budget of many nations put together (Ban and Blyth, 2013, p.242). As for the navy power, the U.S. again spends as much as 170 billion dollars, as other countries could only hope to spend on all military branches (Armijo and Roberts, 2014, p. 504). Much of this money goes to maintenance and infrastructure, operations and maintenance, research and development and of course acquiring new ships. According to National Interest, the US and UK will be followed by 3 countries as the most powerful navies in the near future. While Russia is to be expected, both India and China are pouring more money into their navies (Robinson, 2015, p. 3). Pundits believes that by 2030, India will have the 2nd largest navy in the world. China is on the follow to have the largest flee by 2030 (Stephen, 2014, p.913). Russia’s threat lies in its largest flees that carry devastating ballistic missiles. South Africa and Brazil don’t contribute much to the world’s dominant navies but together, the BRICS would form a strong coalition if held on the same side. We must also mention the nuclear capabilities of both entities. The US and Russia (6,800 to 7,000) own around half of all the nuclear weapons in the world, with China (260) and India (120), and is believed to be working on increasing its arsenal. Brazil and South Africa have no nuclear weapons (Andreoni, 2022). Yet, talking about the military capabilities of both entities is just an assessment of individual countries’ capabilities and not the BRICS all together acting as a military force because if that were to be the case, then the US as well would not be standing alone and would have for example the NATO acting with it. Thus, militarily speaking, the BRICS are out of context and not seeking to confront the US through such means.

The challenge that BRICS imposes can be divided into 2 lines of hypothesis: The first one would be the BRICS challenging the state hierarchy of the system, and the second is the latter seeking to defy the international system (Robinson, 2015, p.7). In a state-centric study of foreign relations, challenging the hierarchy between states is pertinent, especially when it comes to the US and all of its allies (Laidi, 2012, p. 619). However, from an institutionalist viewpoint, the state order is out of context. As long as international institutions allow for deliberation among many rather than just one state and as long as rules and norms dominate international relations, then state order becomes out of question (Ban and Blyth, 2013, p. 244; Stephen, 2014, p. 915). Again, from an institutionalist perspective, it is crucial to examine the BRICS in relation to current institutions, such as norms, laws, and international organizations. A multipolar international order that reflects the plurality of interests is the common objective of all members of the BRICS members who reject Western universalism. Moreover, the BRICS summit declarations from Xiamen and Johannesburg are unmistakably in favor of the institutions of global governance (Cooper and Farooq, 2015, p.35). A stronger role for the UN, Security Council, World Trade Organization and G20 in global governance is definitely in the best interests of BRICS, but of course with a more definitive position for its partners (Brazil, India and South Africa) under the UN’s context (Armijo and Roberts, 2014, p. 506). Also, BRICS is firmly opposed to protectionism and supports more globalization as well as the implementation of the Paris Agreement on climate change (BRICS Challenge 2022). BRICS members frequently disagree, yet despite this, the group managed to not only survive the first ten years but also establish new functional financial institutions. In 2014, in reaction to the US's refusal to relinquish its hegemony over the world's financial institutions, the BRICS nations established the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (Beeson and Zeng, 2018, p. 1970). The NDB, sometimes known as the "BRICS bank," is an organization run by developing nations. In actuality, it supports the developing world's independence from the Bretton Woods system, which is still dominated by the West. In addition to the World Bank and the IMF, BRICS has created its own model for the rest of the developing world with the New Development Bank, albeit the goal is not to displace these Western-led organizations. How much of a new kind of global financial governance the NDB represents is still up for debate. By boosting the weight of the developing world within the WTO, however, three of its members, Brazil, India, and China, played a critical part in upending the preexisting balance of power (Andreoni, 2022).

With all that being said, what role does the BRICS play on the international scene today? The BRICS are coming to win popularity over the anti-western and anti- US hegemony part of the world as the Latin part of America, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia and many more regional powers that choose to be part of the “Global South” rising power (Beeson and Zeng, 2018, p.1972). The main guiding principles or force behind such risings aren’t new and have been evident on the international scene for quite a while now. Such states are calling for more autonomy, independence (from the dominant US influence) and of course taking part in the journeys of emerging economies. Lavrov stated during a meeting with his Indian counterpart Subrahmanyam Jaishankar that membership in the BRICS organization is highly desired (Andreoni, 2022). Considering that Turkey, Afghanistan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Egypt, and Algeria have already submitted formal applications, he continued, "We, of course, believe that harmonization of the conditions and guiding principles for the growth of BRICS won't take too long (BRICS Challenge, 2022). Additional possible members include Nigeria, Senegal, Kazakhstan, Nicaragua, the United Arab Emirates, and Nicaragua. All of the nations' finance ministers attended the May 2022 BRICS Expansion discussion meeting (Andreoni, 2022). The BRICS group has grown from a transient framework to an important international platform. It has steadily evolved into more than just a symbol of globalization; it is now an essential instrument for maintaining control over these processes (Kurukulasuriya, 2012). Through its existence and development, BRICS has experienced constant transformation. But it's crucial to remember that, given how drastically the balance of economic power has changed over the past two decades, the main driving force behind the creation of this format was to combine the countries that leading economists predicted would comprise the strongest economies in the 21st century.

Also, the emergence of China, and to a lesser extent, the BRICS nations have been the main factors contributing to this (Beeson and Zeng, 2018, p.1973). The more standardized and formalized this group has grown, the more it has become part of the larger system. Just recently, they also announced that more countries are willing to “ditch” the U.S. dollar (BRICS Challenge, 2022). As the argument goes, Anglo-American economic, political and social institutions prefer the eastern models of growth led by the state, being consistent with, and depending upon an open and free international economy (Cooper and Farooq, 2015, p.37). Now what’s certain is that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has ignited the worries of many Western liberals. Again, they have reason to be concerned following the reports of Egypt, Argentina, Turkey, Iran, Saudi Arabia, all of which are not democracies, want to join the BRICS. Around the middle of this year in June, President Putin announced at one of the BRICS Summits that a new global reserve currency, composed of a basket of BRICS currencies will be soon introduced (Andreoni, 2022). If this new reserve currency were to gain widespread acceptance, the U.S. then would have a problem. It’s hard to look at these 2 stories and not see them as connected. For example, the reason that Argentina and Iran see an opportunity to join the BRICS is the belief of the opening to form a new coalition in opposition to Western-led globalization (BRICS Challenge, 2022). Also, Saudi Arabia has a tight security alliance with the United States and is already a wealthy country. Moreover, it can mobilize large amounts of foreign wealth for investment to spur economic growth (Andreoni, 2022). However, progress towards political modernization at home has been sluggish and an energy-dependent economy puts the country at risk during global decarbonization, and following the killing Jamal Khashokji, there has been some diplomatic isolation (BRICS Challenge, 2022). Like other authoritarian nations, Saudi Arabia must look for internal and international legitimacy from outside sources. Expanding commercial ties with China is crucial to this effort since it will help diversify the economy and the sources of foreign support simultaneously (Stephen, 2014, p. 920). Now, Egypt, Iran and Turkey all have tales that are pretty similar. Each of these nations current governments have presided over a period of economic instability, political strife and international isolation (Ban and Blyth, 2013 p. 248). Eleven years after it began, the Arab Spring’s impact is still being felt strongly in the Middle East today. As a result, the authorities were left feeling vulnerable and the repression continued. Consequently, the rest of the BRICS took the chance and encouraged them to join the organization after spotting blood. It is important to note again the states that are willing to join experience great resentment towards the Western Hegemony.

With a potential formation percentage of 33% of world GDP, including Iran and Argentina, the BRICS might become a formidable trading bloc worthy of its own reserve currency (Armijo and Roberts, 2014, p.515). Even beyond this, there is always massive room for mutual benefit between the countries. The combined output of oil and iron are required to create steel from the enlarged BRICS countries is around 26%, and 50% respectively, and about 40% of the world’s corn and 46% of the world’s wheat are produced there (Andreoni, 2022). So, a new reserve currency would quickly rise to prominence if these were transacted in it. Meanwhile, the value of the dollar is beginning to fall. At the start of June, the International Monetary Fund issued a study revealing that the US dollar now accounts for 59% of world reserves, falling drastically from its 1999 high of 70% (BRICS Challenge, 2022). According to the study, reserve managers at central banks have been diversifying their holdings away from the dollar and into alternative currencies (Andreoni, 2022). So picture this, the BRICS nations have decided to develop their own reserve currency. Suppose the BRICS was used as reserve proportionally to the bloc’s weight in terms of world GDP, eating way at the value of all other reserves by the same amount (Adnan, 2014, p.7). The implications could also be devastating. If pitted against the US currency, the BRIC might hold its own. In terms of their impact on the global economy, the current shifts have been unprecedented since 1945. However, the topic is rarely broached among political leaders and in the media (Ban and Blyth, 2013, p. 249). Some experts hope that the western leaders have prepared for this and have a plan for the future. The reason is that these changes have the potential to have a profound effect on Western lifestyles and the global order.

To conclude, the BRICS have been expanding economically more than ever due to the cooperation among its member states, despite their ideological and social differences. Their influence not only managed to question the US hegemony on the international economy but also succeeded at encouraging the anti-western point of view of world domination over the system. It might not pose a real threat to the U.S. militarily, but it definitely will do so economically with China leading the BRICS. It is a powerful force that should not be disregarded or undervalued. Because of the informal nature of the organization, its members are powerful nations that can collaborate to take swift action and finish massive projects. Even though it may seem straightforward to write off countries that are seen as "third-world" or "developing," doing so could have detrimental implications on the western global economy (Adnan, 2014, p.2). ?Since two of the group's most important members, Russia and China, seem to pose a threat to the Western liberal democratic order, the US administration sees the BRICS as a threat to its hegemonic position (Armijo and Roberts, 2014, p. 505). According to the US National Security Strategy (2017: 25) and National Defense Strategy (2018: 2), great power competition has resumed, and the challenger states want to "shape a world consistent with their authoritarian model" by gaining veto power over other countries' economic, diplomatic, and security decisions." (Adnan, 2014, p.4). BRICS doesn't share a unified plan for change. Increasing one's influence within the international organization might be a goal in and of itself. It may or may not suggest a desire to alter the current system. According to Andreoni (2022), the so-called "BRICS Consensus" that was supposed to challenge the Washington Consensus does not exist. According to some academics, the political economy of the BRICS countries is a break from Western-centric economic imperialism while also demonstrating growing South-South collaboration. For instance, according to Niall Duggan (2015), the BRICS are redefining globalization's norms and regulations by promoting a new kind of international economic governance. His opinion was based in part on how the BRICS countries felt about the Washington Consensus and in part on the way the BRICS summit declarations discussed development. Duggan does not, however, demonstrate the existence of a real agenda. Instead, he only shows that there is a discourse that differs from the Washington Consensus, which, according to Ban and Blyth (2013 p. 245), could have long-lasting impacts on how global governance is constructed socially.?

References

Adnan, M, (2014), BRICS: A Challenge to the US Hegemony, Minhaj University Lahore, vol. 1, no. 1, pp.1-16

Armijo, L. E., & Roberts, C. (2014), The Emerging Powers and Global Governance: Why the BRICS Matter. In R. E. Looney (Ed.), Routledge International Handbooks. Handbook of emerging economies (pp. 503–524).

Andreoni, M, (2022), What happened to the BRICS bank, The Third Pole, Retrieved from https://www.thethirdpole.net/en/regional-cooperation/new-development-bank/

Ban. C. and Blyth, M. (2013), ‘The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: an introduction’, Review of International Political Economy, 20(2), pp. 241-255.

Beeson, M. & Zeng, J. (2018), “The BRICS and global governance: China’s contradictory role”, Third World Quarterly, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 1962-1978.

Breslin, S. (2010), ‘China’s Emerging Global Role: Dissatisfied Responsible Great Power’, Politics, 30(S.1), pp. 52-62.

BRICS Challenges Unipolar World and US Dollar Hegemony, (2022), Bellaciao, Retrieved from https://www.bellaciao.org/en/BRICS-Challenges-Unipolar-World-and-US-Dollar-Hegemony

Cooper, A., & Farooq, A. (2015), Testing the club dynamics of the BRICS: The new development bank from conception to establishment, International Organizations Research Journal, 10(2), 32-44.

Kurukulasuriya, L. (2012), BRICS CHALLENGE DOLLAR HEGEMONY, New Internationalist, Retrieved from https://newint.org/blog/2012/04/13/brics-challenge-dollar-hegemony/

La?di, Z. (2012), BRICS: Sovereignty power and weakness. International Politics, 49(5), 614–632. ?

Robinson, W.I. (2015), “The transnational state and the BRICS: a global capitalism perspective”, Third World Quarterly, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 1-21.

Stephen, M.D. (2014), “Rising powers, global capitalism and liberal global governance: A historical materialist account of the BRICs challenge”, European Journal of International Relations, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 912-938.?