Global governance without global unification
Every new day brings humanity increasing uncertainty about its future. The breakdown of the global governance system that occurred with the collapse of the Soviet Union and the end of the era of bipolarity, which led to a situation of aggressive redistribution of spheres of influence in favor of the remaining hegemon, led to a situation of an uncontested need for reform of the international system, taking into account the real voice of the countries of the World majority.
What is the strength, American?
Despite the fact that the forms of cooperation of the World's majority countries were initially largely borrowed from a group of countries that arbitrarily appropriated the right to determine the parameters of global interaction, the content and spirit of the work of new formats such as BRICS, as they developed, showed significant differences: the principle of sovereign equality and mutual respect as between the members of the group (regardless of the presence or absence of problems of a bilateral nature), and from the members of the group to other countries and peoples, instead of claiming moral leadership and linking political conditions to achieve more advantageous own positions in exchange for limited assistance, which preserves the dependence and lag of recipients of such assistance in the long term; emphasis on dialogue and mutually acceptable solutions to complex issues instead the right to development in accordance with national aspirations, culture and traditions instead of restrictions on the use of opportunities in accordance with the rigid framework and logic of interests of a limited number of countries; intercivilizational, intercultural and interreligious dialogue instead of unification and averaging with the loss of one's own identity.
It is this, as it seems, and not quantitative indicators of superiority such as aggregate GDP by PPP or industrial production, that determine today the significant attractiveness of the BRICS for many countries compared to similar formats of Western states, as well as broader opportunities for unification within the framework of solving the tasks of reforming the international system towards its greater representativeness and fairness principles of regulation. It is the BRICS that today is able to provide states that have traditionally been on the "periphery" of the international system with the right to vote and the opportunity to choose the main parameters of their future, and this opportunity is available not only to those who are officially one of the members of the group.
It would seem that an even more representative forum that could provide such opportunities is the Group of Twenty, which includes the majority of BRICS members, but also does not leave aside the "elderly" states of the "seven". Nevertheless, practice shows that the "Group of Twenty", unfortunately, is rather almost the same phenomenon of the outgoing world as the "Group of Seven". Despite its apparent representativeness, which has increased significantly since last year due to the accession of the African Union, it is drawn into the past by the confrontational attitude of Western representatives, the politicization of globally significant problems and the imposition of the only correct opinion in the understanding of the "seven" countries to the rest.
The loss of the culture of dialogue among the representatives of the "golden billion" actually paralyzes the effective work of any institution or mechanism they belong to, if its activities do not fully meet the interests of this group of States. And we are talking here not only about such club mechanisms as the Group of Twenty, but also about such global institutions as, for example, the WTO. Areas such as culture, science or sports are being politicized and used by Western states, which, on the contrary, should unite and be above politics. What are the shameful speeches of the head of the International Olympic Committee, who has long lost even the right to be called such.
And that is why, despite the fact that the Western powers still remain the key holders of financial, technological and other resources that provide them with levers of pressure against the countries of the World majority, due to which the countries of the "golden billion" have received all the existing advantages and opportunities for dominance, there is an objective need to identify and support an alternative center of power, capable of protecting their interests. At the same time, we are by no means talking about the confrontation between the BRICS countries and the West, at least none of the member countries of the association thinks so. It is about a constructive agenda, the development of new mutually beneficial ideas, the launch of additional projects and mechanisms in an environment where global institutions are not coping. None of the BRICS countries are talking about the abolition of the IMF, although the last decision on a fair revision of quotas was reached in 2009 and has continued to stall since then, or the World Bank. The shortcomings of the global system are offset by new alternative mechanisms such as the New BRICS Development Bank, aimed at bridging the existing gap in infrastructure investment needs around the world.
The situation is similar with many other institutions of global governance. The issue of UN reform has been moving forward for a very long time and is difficult, although it would be more correct to say that, on the contrary, there is no movement. What role can BRICS play in this regard? On the one hand, there is quite significant progress for the diplomatic language in the general declarations on the place and role of the BRICS member countries that are not permanent members of the UN Security Council in the Organization. On the other hand, there remains an understanding that, regardless of the proposed terminology, these changes themselves are unlikely to be brought closer to practical implementation only thanks to the relevant documents of the leaders of the countries of the association.
However, what BRICS can give in this regard is the additional weight and authority of its members in the international arena as a whole, regardless of whether we are talking about the UN, any of the organizations of the UN family or any international institution. Moreover, in this case, not only qualitative reinforcement is important, but also quantitative. Take at least the same IMF, because despite the impasse in the process of reviewing quotas towards a more equitable approach and reflecting the new realities in the capabilities of the World's majority countries, even the current composition of the BRICS makes it possible not to miss the unfavorable decisions of the fund due to the fact that their total share reaches 18%.
The opportunity to act as authors of updated approaches to the organization of the system of international relations with subsequent lobbying of the entire UN structure and its member countries, primarily the countries of the world majority, is also important.
Equally important is the conceptual position of the BRICS as a kind of peaceful alternative or antithesis to the scenario of a clash of civilizations prescribed by S. Huntington, where unification through practical interaction and the sphere of humanitarian cooperation demonstrates an alternative scenario of peaceful and mutually beneficial coexistence of different cultures and civilizations. However, taking into account the increasingly harsh position of Westerners and despite the BRICS position that they are not friends against anyone, the chances of a practical formulation of the concept of "West against the rest" are increasing, and here the role of the BRICS will be not only in creating and developing a space of trust and cooperation between the countries of the World majority, but also leveling possible negative consequences for global development, as well as for the population of all countries of the world (including Western ones) from the aggressive policy of global Western elites.
Another tool may be the already tested method of creating parallel alternative mechanisms in those areas where progress is extremely necessary to ensure the progressive development of the BRICS countries and the countries of the World majority, but which the institutions created by the Western community cannot cope with or deliberately do not want to cope with. However, care must be taken here not to breed a huge number of new bureaucratic entities that formally indicate ambitions for a new vision, but, in fact, do not provide unique new content, but rather represent some kind of slightly adapted tracing paper from existing mechanisms previously created by the West in its interests. It is in this logic that it is necessary to look again at the BRICS cooperation mentioned earlier and one of the most striking examples of BRICS cooperation - its New Development Bank, whose integration into the framework set by the Bretton Woods Institutions rather limits the possibilities for its contribution to development.
Similarly, it is necessary to work out any of the areas of interaction between the BRICS countries, it is not only about the monetary and financial system or the economic aspect - whether it is energy or ecology, food security or technological development. When it comes to platform solutions, in the case of BRICS, we must talk about real openness and equal participation of all countries of the association in their implementation. It is also extremely important that the relevant specialists of the BRICS countries work on standardization and the development of criteria for various areas of international cooperation, taking into account the development requests of the countries of the World majority - new to emerging areas and revising existing ones if necessary.
Hence this request to join the BRICS, the opportunity to join equal and mutually respectful discussions, as well as to become an active participant in shaping the image of the future. It is worth noting that last year we saw a one-time increase in the number of participants in the association by almost two times, and an even more impressive list of states is made up of those who have not yet become part of the club, but are more or less ready to work together.
In this regard, I recall the pioneer of the "club movement" - the "Group of Seven". At one time, new Russia diligently joined the group, doing all the homework, trying to please the older comrades. But as national pride was restored and the priority of national sovereignty was understood, there was an increasing awareness that the group's work was absolutely not in line with either its own national interests or the interests of the development of the world as a whole. By the way, it may be recalled that attempts to invite China to the group were unsuccessful. In addition to the fact that the members of the "seven" themselves realize themselves as an exclusive, elite club, it is noteworthy that there have been no requests from major developing powers to join it. The destiny of the lords is to remain in proud solitude in their "blooming garden" and stay away from the "wild jungle" and its inhabitants.
When a thousand flowers bloom
What provides the BRICS with such broad opportunities that the richer states of the "golden billion" do not have? Next, we will talk not so much about the principles that we discussed earlier, but about the tools themselves, which made it possible to reach bolder and more tempting projects and solutions.
To begin with, from the very beginning, the BRICS acted as a comprehensive initiative, and not just a meeting of leaders to discuss economic issues, and this is an association of not only like-minded people, but also enthusiasts. Last but not least, the innovativeness of this format was determined by the direction of its construction - from the bottom up. Although formally the first BRIC summit was held in 2009, the meeting of BRICS intellectuals took place a year earlier on the initiative of V.A.Nikonov and in a sense became the forerunner of the official track, although we in no way seek to downplay either the processes launched by E.M. Primakov with his concept of the "triangle", or the beginning of communication in as part of the Heiligendam process, nor subsequent official meetings on the sidelines of the UN.
Further developments have shown that such intellectual visionary activity has retained its relevance, since many significant BRICS initiatives were originally born in the disputes and discussions of the expert community. Further, the decisions enshrined in the Durban Declaration on formalizing the process of interaction with expert and business communities were also the result of the effectiveness of the latter's contribution to the development of the association's work. And here it is difficult to overestimate the expert potential of the BRICS, and we can talk about both government agencies and research institutes, especially since there is an urgent need for scientific and analytical justification of the positions taken by the association.
Basically, despite the high level of expertise possessed by the documents developed in the OECD, it is necessary to take into account that the proposed criteria and standards in the field of taxation, economic policy and other issues that the Organization is working on will inevitably have national characteristics and indirectly promote the interests of member countries, without taking into account the interests or specifics of the external the circle of States.
As noted above, such an idea, albeit in a limited form, has already been organized in a certain sense. The network structure of horizontal interaction of the national coordinators of the BRICS countries, which has been formalized in the form of the Council of Expert Centers (SEC), is designed to solve many of the above-mentioned tasks. However, today we see to a greater extent the thematic interaction of national coordinators with an agenda adapted to each new presidency and more ritual than real continuity. We are not talking about the need to abandon the sovereign elements of such a council, nevertheless, it seems necessary to provide some kind of unified technological platform for the interaction of these, perhaps using a distributed registry, and significantly increase the resource capabilities of the SEC with the participation of all BRICS states.
For example, it would be easier for young people to assess the possibilities of learning and other development trajectories in the field of science and education if there is an understanding that any player in this field should be represented on this platform, as it should be with universities that are authorized participants of the BRICS Network University, and the presence of the abbreviation "BRICS" in their name" and a colorful website without verification in a single association space will indicate the real place of this player and will not allow potential students and listeners to be misled.
In general, it is interesting to observe how, over the years of its existence, the BRICS family of peoples has developed, filled with new meanings and activities, as well as horizontal ties. On the Russian initiative, not only the expert track, but also the civil track appeared and became established as one of the main events of the second diplomatic track. There is a very diverse work with the youth of the BRICS countries and the countries of the World majority, and their interaction with each other is strengthening. Among the most successful and significant projects with young people are the traditional BRICS International School, a semester exchange program with a combination of the five most relevant thematic, cultural and educational events for all BRICS countries, as well as the BRICS Youth Summit.
In general, it should be noted that the existing BRICS outreach formats have already been able to prove themselves and have become a serious factor in ensuring the effectiveness of the association. BRICS is a complex, multifaceted organism capable of solving super-tasks, and such opportunities, which at the same time complicate work within the association at times, are obtained precisely when there are many participants interested in the work of BRICS and seriously depend on the coherence of the mechanism of dialogue within the community. In the current difficult geopolitical situation, perhaps only the BRICS can master the solution of the scale of the tasks facing humanity, and promoting solutions in the interests of all mankind. The future belongs to the BRICS, and the BRICS are all of us.