BRICS versus the West. Trying to build a fresh planet order

Professor Gracian Cimek and I are discussing what the BRICS group is, what its objectives are and why it is becoming an crucial player in the global political arena.

(Interview is simply a edited and completed version of the podcast Are you aware? p. Will BRICS change the world's power system?).

Could you explain briefly what BRICS is?

Gratian Cimek: BRICS is simply a socio-political institution that evolves and creates always deeper and more multidimensional ties between its members. It was created in 2006 in order to bring the semi-peripheral states closer together in a situation of hegemonia and the full advantage of the centre of modern capitalism, symbolized by the G7 group headed by the United States. BRICS is not yet a formalized global organisation.

The group's founders were Russia and Brazil, besides joined China and India, and then South Africa – much weaker than the another members, but its reception was in line with the thought of gathering various civilizations that were dominated by Western civilization anyway.

Some, especially those who like to weaken the meaning of this project, remind that BRIC appeared in 2001 as an acronym in Jim O'Neil's analysis, an analyst of Goldman Sachs, and claim that he was the founder of the group. Meanwhile, O’Neil created a statistical concept encouraging global investors, i.e. corporations, to accumulate capital in these developing markets, then dependent and subordinate neoliberal logic. Nothing more.

BRICS is an institution, although informal. It mobilises considerable effort in crucial countries and organises yearly summits.

For a long time, the group had the task of building trust and ties between its members in order to strengthen the possible of semi-peripheral states against the decisive advantages of Western civilization. This was demonstrated by the establishment of the fresh BRICS improvement Bank and the BRICS Monetary Reserve Fund in 2014 at the India Summit. In general, institutionalisation consisted of expanding the volume and quality of joint ventures, making fresh ideas and implementing the "BRICS economical Partnership Strategy", the first signed at the 2015 Ufa Summit, and the next 5 years in 2020.

I call the BRICS group an intercivilising association of states for a fresh era.

Why is that name? First, intercivilization, due to the fact that the group represented representatives of 4 different civilizations. In 2023, after a twelve-year break in the admission of fresh members, six more countries were invited at the Johannesburg Summit, 4 of which had already agreed to participate, Argentina rejected the invitation and Saudi Arabia is close to being full accepted. And these fresh states represent muslim civilization, which opens up a circumstantial cultural context that is crucial in competing with the West.

But why do I call it a union of states for a fresh era? The “New Era” is simply a concept that I drew from the Chinese narrative. That's what China has become alter center globalisation and based on its first doctrine of Confucianism, as well as the acquis of Chinese Marxism, have developed the possible to build a fresh era first within China, later besides in global relations.

What, though, is the old age? The president of Brazil, Lula da Silva, said it best. Criticising the 2030 UN Agenda for Sustainable Development, he simply stressed that the West-promoted fight to reduce climate change is unfair due to the fact that many developing countries are inactive suffering from hunger and poverty, and those who have benefited from the processes of global capitalism want to pass on this as if nothing had happened.

That is why Lula da Silva clearly said that those who led the industrial revolution and practiced colonial looting of natural materials in order to sale them on the planet marketplace bear the primary work for the crisis. The old era is an era of dominance of various Western powers, which were guided by a paradigm of profit and exploitation of weaker civilizations.

The fresh era is going to make a fresh way of organising global relations, which this profit relation will cancel erstwhile and for all.

This is to be done on the basis of a imagination of humanity's common destiny. This has a major impact on the global doctrine of the BRICS Group, which means the request to democratise global relations, that is, the empowerment of all countries, which cannot be confused with the export of liberal democracy.

Most global summits talk about building a just world. What is the function of BRICS in global policy and economy? How much will this fair planet not prove to be another marketing act?

The past of the last fewer 100 years shows clearly that hegemony belonged to Western civilization and resulted from various nonsubjective and subjective elements. Of course, we can talk about technological innovation in the West, but colonialism, exploitation or racism is the another side of a medal that we cannot forget.

If a country cannot make full usage of its capabilities, it cannot make industry, have an independent policy, due to the fact that the strong point is that it is against their interests and has various tools to halt these aspirations, this is evidently unfair, as confirmed by many examples of military intervention or structural adjustments imposed by the global Monetary Fund.

In turn, strong nations can juggle concepts as they please. This has been the case with the thought of free trade, which has been on the flag of globalisation since the 1990s, as long as it turns out that the semi-peripheral countries, especially China, began to prevail in this game, and then the deregulation of the planet Trade Organisation strategy began.

It besides includes common consideration of interests and, above all, respect for the sovereignty of nations and their right to specify their own improvement trajectory according to the African proverb: "If you want to go quickly, go alone, and if you want to go far, go with others", which means that the individual and the community are a complementary whole. Thus, BRICS' doctrine rejects individualism, which is the basis for ideological expansion, globalisation and alleged universalization in the West-centric version. This doctrine allows you to form fresh projects and visions. This distinguishes the BRICS group from others that are narrowed down to economical interactions (G-20) or economic-political ones based on exclusivity (G-7).

The BRICS states do not impose their ideology, economical model and cultural pattern on others and this allows each country to search for ways of development. As we have said, 4 countries have late joined, namely the United arabian Emirates, Egypt, Iran and Ethiopia. Saudi Arabia hesitates. Argentina, in which the pro-American candidate won, cancelled her aspirations for BRICS.

It is simply a immense group, covering 45% of global humanity.

Nobody forced anyone to do anything, imposed nothing, and this state of informalization, which is different from the needs of formalization characteristic of reasoning in Western civilization, is an asset, gives more spontaneity, but besides full equality and voluntaryness. This is the BRICS method.

We already know that there are 34 countries at the upcoming summit in Kazan, which will take place in October 2024, willing to join BRICS, which is already called BRICS+.

There will be no fresh full members this year due to the projects to be launched at the Kazan Summit. However, the expression is envisaged outreach and the expression of the partner countries. The first is to strengthen cooperation between BRICS and non-BRICS entities, both countries and regional organisations specified as ASEAN. This is intended to increase both the legitimacy of the group and the ability to implement its objectives. Partnership is, in turn, the first step in achieving the rights of a full member.

The group's agenda already covers 3 dimensions of cooperation, not only economical and financial, but besides political and security, and promoting the improvement of interpersonal contacts and the sphere of culture. Thus, BRICS develops the first agenda of its own ventures which make it impossible to include it in the same league as G7 and G20.

It is worth mentioning respective events that took place in 2024. In June, the first BRICS Games were held in Kazan, gathering athletes from 82 countries, including Israel and Palestine – an example of how we do not exclude any states, and we know what happens to Western-dominated organizations that discriminate against Russian athletes, according to a twisted logic that, on the 1 hand, claims to live enslaved in an authoritarian government and, on the another hand, makes them endure for political decisions of this regime.

The BRICS+ fashion summit was besides held in 2024. – Under the motto of decentralization and democratisation, representatives of fashion from 60 countries gathered. A movie festival was organized. The network of BRICS universities with its own university rankings, the proposal for a grain exchange initiative or the establishment of a BRICS information network is besides invaluable. This shows that BRICS is not only an institution but besides a applicable building of a fresh paradigm.

And do you think that the BRICS currency can change the global arrangement of forces?

At each summit, declarations were signed that addressed economical or political issues. In 2009, it was stressed that the BRICS group wanted to decision towards de-dollarisation. Yet the dollar was an expression of the United States' hegemony, especially after leaving the gold parity in 1971, abolishing the Bretton Woods system. De Dollarisation is progressing, and there are many indications that at the next summit in Kazan decisions will be taken that are crucial from the point of view of the geo-economic and so geopolitical system. The first anticipation is simply a common unit of account, which will be a common currency. There is besides talk of a multilateral settlement and payment platform in the BRICS digital currencies connecting financial markets, the alleged BRICS Bridge, to be analogous to the M-Bridge implemented with the Bank of global Settlements.

A blockchain-based payment strategy will most likely be agreed, which completely bypasses the US dollar and, above all, SWIFT.

The BRICS Pay strategy is curious in as many as 159 countries. Why? They all share the fear of militarization of the dollar. The dollar, which was a currency of global trust, together with the weakening hegemony of the United States, has become a geo-economic weapon, an example of which is the separation of Iran's countries from SWIFT. The next step undermining assurance was the confiscation of Russian bank funds located in western accounts, which completely undermines the credibility of the Western strategy based on private ownership and contract compliance. Of course, it is known that this is justified by geopolitical competition and Russian intervention in Ukraine. Nevertheless, for the countries of the world, this is simply a signal that specified a "punishment" can affect anyone. Therefore, bypassing SWIFT and de-dollarisation is so attractive.

The Kazan may address the issue of the insurance system, or even the BRICS rating agency, which will be independent of Western giants. I believe that the draft single currency, the alleged The Unit, which is being considered at the BRICS Business Council, will not necessarily be agreed at the October BRICS+ meeting. The fact that summit decisions can be groundbreaking is evidenced by the fact that those who may lose the most on this. president Trump late stated that countries that would bypass the dollar trade would be charged a 100 percent duty.

The situation is strategical for qualitative strategy changes, as the strength of the BRICS mechanics is essential for the collapse of the dominance of the dollar and the strengthening of the multipolar world, which all these countries have been talking about for respective years.

And is BRICS a threat to the United Nations?

The United Nations was a large undertaking within the framework of the Yalta-Potdam Agreement after planet War II. It has led to institutionalisation of cooperation between its members to an unprecedented level in history. But with the collapse of the USSR and the advent of the single-polar world, its function decreased.

Although the UN was very formalized, it had adequate resources for many projects, de facto did not halt the continuing global chaos resulting from the defence of hegemony from global political awakening, against which Zbigniew Brzeziński warned the American Empire in 2009. It happened and the UN is not dealing with these problems.

There are opinions that BRICS can win the United Nations.

For example, the UN General Assembly may call on Israel to halt the business of Palestine or the war expansion towards Lebanon, and this will have no applicable consequences. Moreover, this besides has a negative intellectual dimension, since we know that there is simply a universal organization, but cannot solve these serious problems. Recently, the abroad Minister of India, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, even referred to the UN as an "obsolete enterprise".

The possible of BRICS+ shows, firstly, that it cooperates in various fields, from medicine, through law, culture, to the BRICS safety Committee, which is presently proposed by the Iranian side as a tool for building a fresh global safety vision. The proposed parliament will be deprived of the inequalities that are present in the UN, where 5 powers sit on the safety Council as permanent members with the right of veto. The BRICS regulation is simply a consensus of all members. possibly this direction of improvement of BRICS+ caused the announced presence of UN Secretary General, António Guterres, at the summit in Kazan.

The fact that BRICS is simply a planet that is to make unchangeable and peaceful in the future is besides evidenced by South Africa's activity, which, as the first in the global Court of Justice, launched a case against Israel's conduct in Palestine with a unique mandate to do so as a state that fought racist apartheid.

Who will benefit and who will lose from the strengthening of BRICS?

If BRICS continues to make multidimensionally, they will lose the state of the erstwhile centre, or G7.

To date, global trade in these countries has benefited from outlets and connections with the corporate elites of the BRICS countries. If more and more ventures are taking place outside the G7 and the Global South states are developing economical ties within the group, it is clear that the West centre states will lose.

It besides seems to me that the rule of allocating capital to social improvement is the primary regulation that BRICS+, expanding quantitatively and qualitatively, wants to introduce into the global system.

From the beginning, BRICS shared any elements of liberal governance, concerning trade cooperation or the improvement of institutions specified as the global Monetary Fund. But at the same time, he demanded that this capital, trade, investment, finance should not benefit at the expense of the common good, as the profits of private transnational corporations flow abroad, frequently to taxation havens, and that the wealth of oligarchy in the planet should be at the expense of societies.

The G7 is, on the another hand, an example of the fact that this outgoing model consists in subjecting states and institutions to the interests of global capital. Let us look at the presence of the president of Black Rock, the world's largest corporation, Larry Fink, at the G7 summit in Italy, which offered political leaders support for the privatisation process of further public goods. Imagine – let us take a real example – that presently NFZ does not pay money to any hospitals in Poland, after all, we bear the costs of serving Ukrainian citizens in our system. As a result, the infirmary has nothing to function for and is taken over by Black stone or another investment fund, and will then be rented to the state and society. Meanwhile, the BRICS+ paradigm underlines the essential function of the state and if the group develops positively, this global private capital will besides lose its influence.

How should Poland position itself in this arrangement? What are the chances and the risks to average citizens?

If utilizing geopolitical categories, Poland is simply a loyal associate of the West, specifically the axis of Anglo-Saxon Heartland (Kees van der Pijl). Recently, the Hungarian Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, pointed out that Poland was liable for disintegration of the European global agenda, due to the fact that the axis based on European powers: Berlin – Paris replaced London – Warsaw – Kiev. And, of course, we see commitments in the activity of the Polish state.

I don't anticipate a fast change, but there's a light on. The strategical Partnership of India with Poland was signed during the first 45 years of Prime Minister Modi's visit to Warsaw. Interestingly, at the ninth point of this partnership, it was indicated that we live in a multipolar world. In the tenth – that we recognise a rule-based order – this is an American communicative – but it was added that this order is based on the UN card, not the Hegemon's will. On the another hand, the agreement includes a commitment to build a free, open and based Indo-Pacific region. And in this case Poland and India are part of the communicative of stopping China.

However, answering your question, Poland, which closes its eyes to the nonsubjective reality of qualitative changes in the global system, becomes Polish ahistorical.

If we do not spread a fresh cognitive matrix, as we have been operating in the “old era” patterns based on the decision centre of the West, unfortunately our chances of improvement will decrease. Especially as BRICS becomes a multidimensional and open formula. It is not by accident intended to find a strong NATO state, or Turkey. So it is not excluded that qualitative change of perception will besides happen in Poland, especially erstwhile the BRICS+ train accelerates.

If you had been nominated as a social advisor to the president of Poland tomorrow, what 3 recommendations would you make at the President's Chancellery?

First, the establishment of the BRICSological investigation Institute. I believe in the large possibilities and capabilities of many Polish scientists and that the gathering of these specialists and the beginning of real, multidimensional, unsubordinated ideologies of investigation will give us reliable analyses, and thus increase the possibilities of rational action.

Secondly, the launch of a multi-vector policy, which means active interest in all BRICS+ countries, means activating Polish abroad policy by seeking contacts and presentations of Polish offer. The possible of Polish culture and Polish way of being, the right semi-peripheral state, can become a large asset. After all, if we look at the past of the past 35 years, we see that we have ourselves been subjected to processes which BRICS+ are critically talking about. Just read the book by Ryszard Ślązak "The Self-destruction of the Polish Economy 1989-2016". Guided from the countries of the Centre, reducing industrial and technological potential, unemployment and lowering wages or rejecting locality in the name of global capitalism patterns are visible in Poland.

Thirdly, encouraging investment in Poland. Polish capital has been importantly weakened over these 3 decades and Poland is being drained economically by transnational capital, but mainly related to centres in Western countries. alternate sources of capital must so be sought in the BRICS+ countries.

In short: BRICSological Institute, peculiar representatives in BRICS countries, intensification of diplomatic-political cooperation, creation of clusters, institutions open to investment within BRICS. This must all be accompanied by the building of a fresh cognitive matrix and, on the another hand, by checking the authenticity of the BRICS' declared demands, to what degree they translate into a circumstantial economic, cultural or political reality.

I would like to mention the actions of "economicists from dirty work". Just as they are not missing in the United States, so they are not missing in China that enter South America and Africa.

For now, this cannot be said of China, there is no evidence that is confirmed in the case of the USA. This cannot be ruled out in the future either. That is why it is good that there is simply a BRICS group that can inhibit specified processes erstwhile the state becomes so strong that it seems that it can do anything and then it becomes dangerous. The balance we gain through specified an association is very essential if, of course, it is based on equality and does not let a management committee to appear giving orders to others, or generals from 1 power conducting the rest.

Within BRICS, it can be observed that Russia with India and Iran is building a North-South trade corridor, precisely to guarantee a balance of power within the fresh Eurasian order, so that China does not at any point think that they are free.

What crucial question has no 1 asked you, and what answer is there to that question?

No 1 asked me about my dream of the thought of regulating the future civilization of the multipolar world.

Kazimierz Kelles-Krauz, a Polish researcher, created a category of perverse retrospection. It says that premature ideas preached under inappropriate conditions are simply not implemented or are transformed into their opposites. But at the same time, under fresh conditions, they can be resumed.

I believe that the future of civilization, in which we can participate as Poles, is the Slavic idea, whose meaning – many points to it – will express the negation of the alleged prehistory, which is characterized by the conflict for survival, erstwhile "everyone must bear his cross." Its primary vocation will be to start the past of "human life" by taking the man's shoulders off the cross. After fulfilling this condition already as free people, in voluntarily accepted communities, together, creatively, we will be able to run, jump, play, enjoy life and decision towards the Sun – a symbol of life and vital energy.

This metaphor is, of course, a dream today, a utopia, but many wise people have talked about the fact that you gotta start with dreams and that is the answer to your question.

Thank you for talking to me.