BRICS Member States Research Articles

Key Aspects of Combined Thinking of the brics Countries on the Responsibility to Protect

This article analyses the key aspects of the brics countries’ joint position on the ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) concept, as well as the degree of their influence on transforming R2P into a global norm. The author’s aim was to answer the following questions: What interconnection is there between the brics and R2P discourses? How can brics stimulate an alternative interpretation of the R2P idea? In terms of cross-border partnerships, is R2P-based cooperation possible within the brics framework, and are states ready to expand it in the future? brics member states have demonstrated several common approaches to R2P, including their reliance on mechanisms strengthening the role of the state, their support for the UN position on peaceful conflict settlement, and preventive diplomacy.

Forging state-building through BRICS: Remodelling South Africa’s foreign policy approach on Zimbabwe

ABSTRACT South Africa is increasingly burdened by the continuing crisis in neighbouring Zimbabwe. This article asks the following question: what can South Africa do to resolve the situation, in the face of her weakened regional hegemonic status and the intransigence of a securocratic state in Harare? Tracing foreign policy approaches of the Mandela, Mbeki and Zuma administrations, the article argues that each failed in Zimbabwe because of the focus on symptomatic problems rather than on systemic state-building challenges. In particular, South Africa has been hindered by policymakers’ respect for state sovereignty, and state securitisation. There is an urgent need for an innovative intervention to forge state-building in Zimbabwe. The article outlines how a coordinated approach with the development agencies of the BRICS member states (Brazil, Russian, India, China and South Africa), through their expansive resources and varied expertise, could effectively support state-building in Zimbabwe based on cooperative hegemony.

ВЗАИМОДЕЙСТВИЕ СТРАН БРИКС С РЕГИОНАЛЬНЫМИ ИНТЕГРАЦИОННЫМИ ОБЪЕДИНЕНИЯМИ АЗИИ И ЛАТИНСКОЙ АМЕРИКИ

BRICS that is a group of five influential countries located on different continents of the planet attracts attention of many political scientists and economists who are trying to assess its potential. The purpose of this article is to study and analyze relations between the BRICS member states and various regional integration associations of Asia and Latin America. This topic is of great scientific interest due to the significant divisions that are taking place in the world when trade wars are being waged, relations between the West and the East are aggravating, which pushes the countries, involved in these processes, to strengthen relations with third parties to ensure their own security.

Monetary inequality in Russia in the sociological dimension

This article examines the specifics of the income inequality structure in modern Russian society, as well as the tendencies for its change during the country’s post-Soviet period of development. It is shown that, compared to other countries, the traditional economic indexes which measure income inequality (decile ratio, Gini coefficient) position the Russian Federation as a country with a high degree of inequality within the mass layers of the population, especially when compared to Europe, albeit the level of inequality is slightly lower compared to BRICS member states. When using equivalence scales, which adjust the people’s income after factoring in economies of scale in consumption, Russia’s inequality figures improve even more. Based on quintile income distribution and the concentration of income within the highest quintile, Russia also occupies an intermediate position, surpassing most European countries, though not BRICS member states. However, the highest quintile is characterized by a high degree of differentiation. When transitioning from the wealthiest 20% of the population to the 1–5%, Russia’s place among other countries of the world changes significantly: when it comes to the gap between the “upper crust” and the masses, Russia can be considered one of the leading countries in the world. It has also been revealed that on the other end of the income distribution spectrum, at the population’s lower strata, there has been a noticeable “rise” of low-income groups in the last few years, with them somewhat approaching the middle. It was manifested in a more rapid increase in prosperity among the lower 40% of the population when compared to the population in general, as well as in a noticeable decrease in poverty levels during the 2000’s. Those citizens who were left in the lower strata of income distribution created a clearer image of poverty, which differs from the “average Russian” and emphasizes the importance of gauging not only low income level, but also an array of non-monetary inequality dimensions. Such a process of “homogenization” has lead to an increase in the size of groups with median and average income, with them being the most numerous groups in the current structure of Russian society. However, the increase in the number of people in said groups was not only caused by their shifts from low-income groups of the population, but also because of some members from the more prosperous strata experiencing an “averaging” of their level of income as well.

Bridging Gaps Between ICC and RoL Discourse With BRICS

The rule of law has increasingly become a germane concept in current legal and political debates on international and national platforms alike. Critics opine that the BRICS Member States are afflicted by rampant corruption; in the main; catalysed by the lack of transparent and democratically accountable elected governments. The resultant weak rule of law undermines the efforts of the BRICS member states to achieve sustainable global economic growth or attract foreign investment. The International Criminal Court contributes to the fight against impunity and the establishment of the rule of law by ensuring that the most severe crimes do not go unpunished and by promoting respect for international law. Thus, this article interrogates the correlation between the rule of law and criminal justice mechanisms; the adherence to the principles of the rule of law by BRICS member States; the role of the International Criminal Court vis-a-vis the rule of law as well as the relationship between the BRICS member States and the ICC. Of course, most desirable is a balanced outcome of political reciprocity without compromising the cardinal rule of law doctrine.

Peculiarities of Legal Regulation of Use of Renewable Energy in the BRICS Member States

Peculiarities of Legal Regulation of Use of Renewable Energy in the BRICS Member States

Tax Cooperation of BRICS States in Present Day Conditions

The paper presents a perspective with regard to the development of tax relations between the BRICS member states, given the new balance of forces on the global scene and the policy of sanctions. The author analyzes the process of developing common approaches in the field of international taxation, transfer pricing, prevention of tax evasion and exchange of information within the framework of BRICS. The paper considers the principles of taxation enunciated in the BRICS documents, in particular, the principle that taxes should be levied in the jurisdiction where the economic activity is being carried out. Based on the results of the study, the author concludes that currently there are a lot of drawback in the field of modernization of existing rules of the Model Convention and determination of approaches to be applied for more close cooperation, including information cooperation, within the framework of tax administration.

Sino-Russian Relations in Central Asia: Challenges, Concerns and Cooperation

The goal of the paper is to analyze the Sino-Russian relations in Central Asia since the collapse of the Soviet Union. The analysis will briefly touch upon the relations between Beijing and Moscow in general but the focus will remain on their relations in the post-Soviet era in Central Asia. Today, China and Russia are BRICS member states. They are united in opposing US unipolarity and they are among the largest and most populous countries in the world. Their border is over 4.000 km long and they are both veto powers on the United Nations Security Council. However, relations between China and Russia have always been complex. At times they waged wars and had border disputes, only to become close allies shortly after. Period of severe conflicts between 1917 and 1950 was followed by a progressive era of oil exploration, student exchanges and various other partnerships. Their rapprochement ended in 1960 and started again in 2008. But the question is: How long wills the rapprochement last? They currently have many things in common but Central Asia remains a potential area of dispute for both countries. Analyzing some accounts on Chinese investments in Central Asia (e.g. Tiezzi, 2014), it becomes obvious that Beijing is highly unlikely to withdraw from the region in case of Russian pressure. On the other hand, Russia is highly unlikely to continue tolerating the rising Chinese influence in Central Asia, as its role has already been significantly reduced in this region. The pipeline that was supposed to connect Siberia with the Chinese province of Xinjiang has been postponed because Putin believes that it could give China leverage over Russia’s internal, as well as external political processes. Putin’s decision will certainly not stop China’s expansion in Central Asia and the Russian Federation will try to avoid a subordinate position in its former republics. This situation complicates their relationship in Central Asia, especially if growing US investments in the region are taken into account. This is why selecting a single IR theory to analyze the Sino-Russian relations in Central Asia is not a simple task. Considering the current circumstances and initiatives by both countries in their internal affairs, as well as in Central Asia, neoclassical realist approach to Sino-Russian relations might give the best results and it will therefore be applied in this paper.

BRICS and the situation of labour

6 | International Union Rights | 24/4 FOCUS | THE BRICS COUNTRIES AND TRADE UNION RIGHTS BRICS and the situation of labour BRICS is an acronym for a grouping of five major emerging economies of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The group started in 2009 with four countries – Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC). South Africa joined the group in 2010, making it a full-blown transcontinental interstate co-operation. Together, these countries account for 41 percent of the world’s population, 14 percent of global trade, 46 percent of the global workforce and 14 percent of the global GDP (Bond, 2016). BRICS was formed in the wake of rebalancing within the global economy that saw the global South emerge as the centre of economic growth. Recognising their emerging economic power, emerging economies felt the need to forge a model of interstate co-operation that will be compatible with the needs of developing economies. With China having emerged as the second biggest economy in the world and two member countries that are permanent members of the UN Security Council, BRICS is a grouping outside of the West that commands enormous political and economic power. But there are imbalances, contradictions and competing interests obtaining among the BRICS member states that threaten the interstate cooperation . Importantly, the weak state of compliance with trade union rights offer some states unfair competitive advantage over others, giving rise to huge imbalances in the distribution of costs and benefits accruing from the membership of BRICS. Co-operation, tensions and competition within BRICS BRICS was formed to promote co-operation among the key emerging economies which felt that the needs of developing countries were marginalised by the West-dominated multilateral finance institutions. At the heart of the formation of BRICS was the idea of promoting ‘contexts-specific developmental goals’; the need to ‘redress the unfairness of the global political and economic architecture and to act as a self-help group in an uncertain world’ (BRICS Think Tanks Council, 2017: 34). The group felt that the West was unable to bring about stability in the global economy following the recent economic crisis. With much positive economic activity registering in the emerging economies, the countries saw the potential to intervene as a group to influence the direction of the global economy. In the area of co-operation BRICS has established the New Development Bank (NDB) to provide resources for development. A credit support line – the Contingent Reserve Arrangement – to aid countries in times of contingencies has been set and steps are underway to establish a credit ratings agency intended to operate differently from the main rating agencies of the West, which have been regarded as hostile to the needs of developing countries. In setting up its institutions to drive its mission, BRICS has often partnered with the main developmental institutions of the West, thus moderating the view that the group is anti-West. But tensions have emerged between some of the BRICS members, including tensions triggered by border disputes between India and China. Efforts by China to step up relations with Pakistan have also riled India. Furthermore competition between the BRICS member states has emerged strongly. BRICS member states enjoy unrestricted entry into each other’s markets. Within this context, China and Brazil have been flooding South Africa with cheap manufacturing and agricultural products, resulting in massive job losses as factories close or scale down operations. Clothing and textile imports from China stopped short of wiping out the South African clothing and textile industry in the early 2000s (Vlok, 2006). In 2015 and 2016 the dumping of steel by China in the South African market resulted in the loss of about 20,200 jobs in the steel sector (Steyn, 2016). The Chinese steel products weakened South Africa’s leading steel producer – Arcelor-Mittal, which accounts for 70 percent of domestic steel production. The poultry sector in South Africa is another case of an industry that suffered from the country’s membership of BRICS. Joining BRICS induced South Africa to open up its poultry market to imports from Brazil. Cheap chicken imports from Brazil induced South Africa’s biggest chicken producers – Rainbow Chicken and Country Bird, to sell or close...

The Foundation for the Establishment of the BRICS New Development Bank: Immediate Impetus and Theoretical Rationale

The BRICS basic infrastructure suffers from a huge financing gap, but their massive foreign exchange reserves lack profitable outlets and member states’ self-contained management costs are extremely high. The coincidence of the need for basic infrastructure investment and the need for profitable foreign exchange reserves are the immediate reasons for setting up the BRICS Development Bank. Comparative advantage and the co-movement of fluctuations in the BRICS member states optimize their cooperative interests. A co- movement game model analysis enables us to deduce the logical necessity for cooperation among the BRICS. Compared with other patterns of cooperation, virtual networks enable this financial cooperation to yield benefits in a short timeframe. The mutually supportive relationship between development and stability in the BRICS economies provides a solid rationale for the establishment of the New Development Bank.

Contemporary International Relations and the BRICS Geopolitics of State Capitalism

This article posits that the BRICS set serves to create a “regional” business space for exclusive operations of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) of member states. Far from being forecast as leading emerging economies of future significant standing on the global stage, the BRICS of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa is trapped in the binary-paralysis of private-public partnership governance. The article examines the BRICS set conditionalities and principles for conduct of international relations in order to demonstrate that member countries’ continued reverence of state capitalism governance, manifested through SOEs “champions”, will precipitate intra-set economic and political conflict in ways that perpetuate domestic political-economy of poverty and inequality. It argues that state capitalism, and a nuance hybrid of SOEs that are supported through public funds in order to operate on the global business platform in the same way as private multinational corporations that pursue commercial financial interests, does not serve societal goals of justice and equity. Given that the establishment of the BRICS is framed on the set being the centre of future global growth, consolidation of state capitalism and the nuance hybrid of SOEs imply that domestic poverty and inequality will continue unabated, as public investment share of education and health remains negligible. The article demonstrates that state capitalism and SOEs “champions” governance, is inherently biased towards greater public investment in industrial production rather than social objectives. It concludes that multidimensional and income poverty will continue to be intensive whilst inequality remains stark among the BRICS member states, whilst their cultural, historical and ideological diversities stimulate economic and political conflict in international relations. DOI: 10.5901/mjss.2014.v5n25p238