The potential of the BRICS + contribution to global governance

Editor's note: Mikatekiso Kubayi is a senior researcher at the Institute for Global Dialogue associated with the University of South Africa and a research fellow at the Institute for Pan African Thought and Conversation. The article reflects the author's opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN. 

The potential of BRICS + contribution to global governance

Global governance and its legitimate and democratic management have been at the center of the aspirations of the BRICS bloc since 2009, when it was founded in Yekaterinburg, Russia. The bloc is on the eve of staging its 16th summit of heads of state and government in Kazan, Russia. With much already being said and debated on the effectiveness and relevance of the bloc, it is an opportune moment to reflect on a truly global event expected to be a significant conversation topic globally in the days and weeks to come.

Any examination of the BRICS bloc must first accept that the bloc is informal, non-aligned, and has no secretariat despite establishing a major contribution to the global financial architecture. This comes in the form of the New Development Bank (NDB), the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, and a major geopolitical and economic advancement in the form of an expansion into a BRICS + as invited by the 15th summit of heads of state and government. The bloc also has two major and highly anticipated possible announcements in Kazan in 2024: a payment system and further expansion of the bloc.

BRICS contributions to global governance

While a lot of focus may be on the expected announcement of a payment system to foster greater intra-BRICS trade and trade with other nations, also of significant value is the BRICS expansion itself. This is important because it would represent a growth in the share of the global population represented, land mass, geographic or geostrategic spread, and, of course, Gross Domestic Product. This reality has an immediate impact on the BRICS reform and development agenda because, with more economies potentially willing to trade with each other’s currencies under a new payment system, there will be an impact, both economic and political.

Development partnerships, as envisaged by the UN Charter, have been a point for conversation for a long time and continue to be so, especially in the African continent's relations with others. Financing the gap in infrastructure has been compounded by the depletion of resources in many economies as they tried to battle the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. On 2 August 2021, the IMF Board of Governors approved a $650 billion SDR allocation. The largest allocation in its history, over 70 percent, did not go to developing economies. While the G7 announced a $600 billion infrastructure finance fund comprising a mix of public and private sector funding, the current global financial condition makes this a difficult proposition to achieve, at least in the short and medium term. This is important because the tendency picked up by the IMF for finance to follow geopolitical alliances is a concern.

It is certainly a major concern when development as a twin focal area to reform will remain a focus area in the Kazan discussions. Certainly, such discussions in Kazan must seek solutions to the challenges identified in the High-Level Advisory Board set up by the UN secretary-general. These discussions will have the benefit of representation of a major share of the global population and growth output. This gives it significant merit and legitimacy to continue to pursue its agenda. An expanded BRICS bloc also suggests a growing popularity of its reform and development agenda; It implies that a growing number of economies are beginning to see a better reality on the horizon through this path.

What is this path of reform and development?

a) BRICS has been focused on reforming multilateralism and global financial architecture broadly. This is because, as many have contended, such as the Secretary General of the United Nations Antonio Guterres, “the international financial architecture is outdated and ineffective and we are simply not equipped to take on a wide range of emerging issues". This was true when the global financial crisis hit developing economies disproportionately, even though it was caused by mistakes in the largest economy in the world. So, there is a growing number of states interested in effecting change to the manner in which the global financial architecture is designed and governed.

b) The challenges of multilateralism begin with the failure to attain the objectives of the UN Charter, particularly where it prescribes the imperative to foster peaceful relations between states and promote global development. To this end, many efforts have been made to raise not only voices but also to generate action toward reform and development. The UN adopted the Pact for The Future, although imperfect because it carries the collective desire to see change and reforms effected and development prioritized.

c) The challenges of global public debt, particularly of developing economies, the scourge of illicit financial flows that continue to drain Africa’s ability to generate and direct resources to its development efforts, and the need to generate financing for infrastructure and development are not only a BRICS priority but for the Global South in the main. Some, such as in Europe, are also considering this pathway forward.

d) For Africa, beyond the calls for two permanent seats in the UN Security Council without any meaningfulness, BRICS has, since its founding, sought to build partnerships to pursue better global financial governance and innovate financial/funding solutions for infrastructure, particularly in the Global South, among other objectives. It has established the NDB with regional offices, including one in Africa. The NDB has been steadily building its footprint on projects in the regions of its members. Infrastructure built has featured heavily in its financing portfolio. Each BRICS country has development finance institutions, a highly developed private sector, established research and development, and technological capabilities.

Other regions, too, will be looking to the BRICS bloc for what it will offer as solutions to their challenges. There are many questions ordinary people would ask about the possible impact on their lived realities, such as where BRICS features in the grand scheme of things, where and how the NDB features in this vision for the realisation development, how do BRICS member states mobilise internal/local capacities for this collective political economy project in developing economies such as Public- Private Partnership.

Africa has an abundance of minerals that fuel and make possible the technologies of tomorrow, such as neodymium, praseodymium, and dysprosium. Africa also has an abundance of platinum group metals, uranium, and other materials coveted for defence and other industries for semiconductor production and related products. An expanded BRICS represents a potential game changer in how the world organizes its supply chain and development model. This, along with many other shared areas of potential convergence and shared development interests, makes for a compelling case for a collective BRICS effort in the Global South's political economy of development finance.

It is a combination of the failure of multilateralism to address people’s daily challenges and improve lives for the better as envisaged by the UN Charter and the opportunities that the BRICS bloc represents that makes a compelling case for the popularity of its agenda. The 2008 financial crisis, the COVID-19 Pandemic, and the globe’s response to them, notwithstanding the disproportionate impact on developing economies, add to the growing frustration with multilateralism and a call for its reform. Reform and development are meant to shift the world from the disproportionality of both good and bad in human advancement. They are meant to reduce the gargantuan gap in inequalities and advance the right to development, access to food, and all the tenets of the UN’s 2030 agenda.

This year, the bloc starts another round of rotational chairships for the bloc and summit hosts. Many will certainly be reflecting on the advancements of the bloc to date and what potential exists for it. The bloc has proven the economic and non-economic value of its agenda. Many movements, as evidenced by the UN Summit of the Future outcomes, agree with this. At its most basic, it seeks to improve global realities. While its foes will be paying attention, even perhaps rooting for cracks and possible demise of the bloc, Africa, for one, and the Global South in general, will be keeping an eye on developments for potential partnerships, ultimately aiming to sculpt better, more holistic global governance.