B RICS-EU: Divide ut reges? 8 May 2012 Tanguy S TRUYE DE S WIELANDE Prof. International Relations, Coordinator Chair InBev Baillet-Latour – Relations European Union - China
• In a world in transition, emerging powers as Brazil, India and others play a growing role on the international scene. • Facing this new reality, the EU needs to develop its policy and strategy to be able to participate in this new world.
• Does that necessarily imply recognizing forums as BRICS, IBSA and others – document of the European Parliament entitled “On the EU foreign policy towards the BRICS and other emerging powers: objectives and strategies ”?
• The presentation will argue the opposite: – it is in the interest of the EU to fulfill a leading role by reinforcing its bilateral relations with emerging powers without recognizing formally forums as BRICS and IBSA which make the agenda setting of the Europeans on the world scene more complicated.
"What experience and history teach is this - that people and governments never have learned anything from history, or acted on principles deduced from it." • G. W. F. Hegel
• Realism • National interest • Power • Realpolitik
PRELIMINARY OBSERVATION
• End of Cold War • Unipolarity • Globalisation Today = Age of rising powers • Huntington: Uni-multipolar moment • From unipolar world => multipolar world • Diffusion of Power Global order is being recast/ in transition • New centers of power • Towards the Pacific • EU isolated? • Opportunity? Shifting geopolitical landscape
• Existing power poles (West) are challenged – economically, politically, …culturally/ideologically • Power shift • Collective security? – Realpolitik
BRICS: EMERGING ECONOMIES/POWERS
• BRICS – 2001 : Jim O’Neill, Goldman Sachs – 2003 : Report « The Path to 2050 » • Popularity of the concept – Emerging markets/economies : B rasil, R ussia, I ndia and C hina • + South Africa
• BRICS – 30% of world surface – 42% of world population – 20% of world economy • 40% of world GDP (2050) • OECD – 33 countries » 2004: 77% of world economy » 2015: 65,7% » 2030: 43% –
• World Bank – Decisions: majority of 85% • U-S: 16,77=> 15,85% ( veto!) • Japan: 7,62 => 6,84% • France/ Great Brittan: 2,71 => 2,43% – Emerging countries: 47,19% • China: 2,77 =>4,42% • Brasil: 2,06 => 2,24% • India: 2,77 => 2,91%
PricewaterhouseCooper (2011) • Seven emerging countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, Indonesia, Mexico and Turkey) projected to have larger economies than G-7 (USA, Japan, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, France and Italy) in 2050 – NOT GDP/Capita
• New Balance between North and South • « The West is broke, really broke »
• Emphasize has been on ECONOMICS – Rapid economic grow, but Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is still inferior to developed countries • BRIC (S) • BRIIC • BRICSAM • The Next Eleven
• Can we define an emerging power just on economics ? – An “emerging economy” is not necessarily an “emerging power” – Indispensable precondition • Gives opportunities (militarily, culturally, politically,…)
• Power is more than that: – Ray Cline: Pp = (C + E + M)*(S + W) Pp: Perceived power, C: Critical mass, E: Economic capability, M: Military capability, S: Strategic purpose, Will to pursue national strategy • High and Low politics – Scenario of the « potential power » • Challenge : To transform in real power
• An emerging power is by definition a power in becoming, caracterized by its instability and relativity. • It is a regional power that can lead to a global power. • The emerging power can collapse by reason of internal or external factors before reaching its objective.
• Strategies of the emerging powers
– Strategy of Reform • Economics • Internal balancing/ economic prebalancing – Strategy of Revolution • Political Revolution ( Nationalism) • Revolution in military affairs – Strategy of conquest ( territorial/sphere of influence ) – Strategy of Alliance • External balancing/ hard balancing • Less reliable, because your power depends on someone else
• BRICS: Alliance/Partnership? – June 2009: First Summit • April 2012: 5 th Summit – Influence on economic questions – Multilateralism/ multipolarity • Rhetoric? – “entangling diplomacy” (Paul)/ strategic institutionnalism ( Ikenberry)
– What is behind this policy? - Global Governance? - Liberal approach? or - National interest? - Countering the West?
– Balancing the West (The Rest against the West) • Hard balancing – Traditional alliances? – Divisions, no homogeneous bloc • Soft balancing – Diplomatic coordinations (U.N.) – Binding (restrain dominant power through institutional agreements) – Buffering » Regional alternative orders » Ex. Shanghai Cooperation Organization/ Collective Security Treaty Organization/ BRICS/ IBSA – Baiting » To establish principles or institutions, becoming a referent
Walt • « conscious coordination of diplomatic action in order to obtain outcomes contrary to U.S. preferences, outcomes that could not be gained if the balancers did not give each other some degree of mutual support »
« Discursive flagship to pursue possession goals and national interests » • (Flemes)
– Real objective: power • Shared frustrations – Alliance of circumstances – Manoeuver of the challengers • Strenghtening their position on world scene • Redistribute power – Driving force= China • “tactical followership” • Buck-passing
• Synergy ? – Heterogeneous (Aron) – …fundamental “political” differences and competition • Concept, more than a reality • 5 different states – Political system • 3 democracies • 2 « autoritarian » regimes – Security/ defense • Different visions
– Economies • Intra-BRIC trade : 1- 2 % of world trade – 500 bill (2015) • Different challenges – Corruption (I/R/C/SA), social instability, (C), communautarian instability(I/SA) – WTO negotiations » Divisions on agriculture ( Br-I) – Different energy demands » I/C/SA: importing countries » R/B: exporting countries – India: services and technologies – Chine: heavy industry and finances
GDP/capita (2010) – Brasil 53th – Russia: 56th – China: 93 th – India: 133 th – Geopolitics • Three eurasian powers – China/ Russia/ India – China India
THE EU POLICY TOWARDS BRICS
• DANGER: exclusion and irrelevance – Paralysis of the EU project – Lack of strategy • Not recognizing BRICS as one bloc – # document of the European Parliament entitled “On the EU foreign policy towards the BRICS and other emerging powers: objectives and strategies” – 120
Document: • without an inclusive new global governance system based on close consultation and cooperation with the BRICS and other emerging economies, there will be little incentive for international cooperation and concerted action on major global issues with the potential risk of (i) political and economic fragmentation and the emergence of competing world agendas and separate regional areas, (ii) the disentanglement of global economic structures and investment flows and (iii) the creation of regional blocs of influence with very limited international coordination and no possibility of concerted solutions to transnational challenges
• Reality – No collaboration: • Promoting democracy, • strengthening the rule of law • defining a common approach to the resolution of conflicts – Concerted actions? • Libya, Syria, • Africa • Environment • Naivety – Wishfull thinking
document • Notes that BRICS have shown regional integration capacity and hence the capacity to engage in multipolar governance systems ; believes that this demonstrates further the potential interest of the BRICS in contributing to global governance ; takes the view, therefore, that the BRICS and other emerging countries are in the process of defining their strategic direction in foreign policy terms and thus becoming partners of emerged powers and supporters of a global governance system based on universal values, partnership and inclusiveness ;
• Challenge: New Global Order • BRICS interests = EU interests ? – Different culture, history, values • “Cultural fragmentation” – Different interpretation of multilateralism/ multipolarity (normative power) – Viable alternative to neoliberal model?
Ikenberry: • “The hallmarks of liberal internationalism – openness and rule based relations enshrined in institutions such as the U.N. and norms such as multilateralism – could give way to a more contested and fragmented system of blocs, spheres of influence, mercantilist networks and regional rivalries”.
• Reinforcing strategic partnerships – Implies a strong, effective EU diplomacy (European External Action Service) – Limit the role of the member states – Implementation, no declarations
Recommend
More recommend
