Connect with us

World

China-India Conflict a Potential Threat to BRICS Association

Published

on

BRICS leaders

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

The tension between China and India threatens to paralyse BRICS – the association of five major emerging national economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. While struggling to expand and influence on the global stage, China and India have locked horns over issues in their bilateral relations, ranging from border security to trade conflicts and information war.

The latest strains began in early May and culminated in hand-to-hand fighting in the Galwan Valley, a remote stretch of the 3,380-kilometre (2,100-mile) Line of Actual Control – the border established following a war between India and China in 1962 that resulted in an uneasy truce.

Punsara Amarasinghe, a former research fellow at the Faculty of Law, Higher School of Economics in Moscow, and now a PhD candidate in international law at the Sant’Anna School of Advanced Studies in Pisa, Italy, argues that this tension is rather ironic given that in the past the two countries shared many civilisational values and both were victims of Western colonialism.

When India gained independence in 1947 from the British, its first prime minister Jawaharlal Nehru built a rapport with Communist China by accepting the government of Mao Zedong with great anticipation that both China and India would become the stalwarts in the global campaign against Western imperialism. For example, it was Nehru’s idea that China should be granted a place in the non-aligned movement despite some of opposition from some members at the famous Bandung Conference in 1955.

However, the comity between the two nations was short-lived as China claimed the territory near Arunachal Pradesh whereas India adhered to the line of control known as the McMahon Line established by the British under the 1914 Simla Convention with the consent of Tibet. From the 1950s onwards, China showed its interest in the Aksai Chin area albeit its cordial relations with Nehru’s India. This long dispute finally ended in military escalation in 1962 and became known as the Sino-Indian War.

While acknowledging that some other issues have marred their relationship apart from the current border conflict, Amarasinghe told this article author that “both China and India have longed for global governance as emerging powers, and particularly, the influence expanded by China in South Asia has rapidly increased India’s doubt on China’s presence. Secondly, China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative project has encircled India geopolitically, creating a plethora of doubts about India’s state apparatus.”

He added that the notion of nuclear weapon strategies and India’s affinity with the USA are the biggest dilemmas that China has persistently had in dealing with India. Moreover, India has been the sanctuary for Tibetan refugees, including the Dalai Lama.

As to the fundamental question of whether all these issues put together could reappear in future, Amarasinghe emphasized: “Having looked at the trajectories of the history of Indo-China conflict, one can ascertain that the India-China issue has always been imbued with a question of power. Both states are yearning for global governance. Yet India is ahead of the curve as the world’s largest democracy and a state with one of the strongest soft powers, making the Indian narrative stronger, whereas Beijing is known for its autocracy.”

On the other hand, he reminded, “We should not forget that the pact signed between China and India in 1996 clearly says that two states cannot use firearms in a border dispute escalation. However, there have been several events that have shown the acts of aggression in the Indo-China border conflict. The Chinese efforts to build a road in the Doklam area near the border created a tense situation in 2017. Three years after that event, the conflict erupted again.”

China’s Foreign Ministry stipulated measures that would be implemented to normalise the situation and prevent future armed conflicts. “The sides welcomed the developments of relations between defence agencies and the external affairs ministries, agreed to support such consultations in the future and implement agreements that were reached by the two sides during the talks between the border troops commanders, as well complete as soon as possible the process of frontline troop withdrawal,” read a ministry statement.

The Foreign Ministry noted that the sides also reached an agreement to implement measures to “prevent the reoccurrence of incidents which may influence the situation and peace in the border region.”

“The relationship of China and India underwent various trials and their progress towards modern development was not always swift. As had been recently demonstrated correctly, and at the same time incorrectly, by the recent incident in the western sector of the China-India border in the Galwan River valley, China will continue to assert its territorial sovereignty as well as peace and tranquillity in the border region,” according to the statement.

The sides expressed readiness to respect the agreements achieved previously by the heads of state, pay specific attention to the issue of state borders and prevent “disagreements from becoming conflicts.” The sides also confirmed their adherence to the earlier agreements on the state border and expressed readiness to implement measures to normalise the situation in the border region.

Sino-Indian geopolitical rivalry is certainly not new, but today it has multifaceted implications for developments in the South Asian region and most possibly for BRICS. For example, in email discussions, Dr. Zhu Ming of the Institute for Global Governance Studies at the Shanghai Institute for International Studies (SIIS), noted that while there have been several disagreements between China and India, some have been resolved within the framework of international law but others have remained without comprehensive solutions.

Within the context of geopolitical alliances and emerging challenges, Tahama Asadis, a graduate of Strategic Studies from the National Defence University in Islamabad, noted the changing alliances and power equilibrium among the United States, China, India and Pakistan that bear key implications for inter-state rivalry and the consequent crisis dynamics in South Asia.

China has so far been successful in influencing South Asia because of many factors. One of the major reasons is that China has managed to project itself as a neighbour that would not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries, least of all, in the internal affairs of its friends and partners. In the light of its ‘Good Neighbour Policy’, China’s increased diplomatic and economic engagements in South Asia are aimed at enhancing its strategic influence in the region.

Professor Ian Taylor at the University of St Andrews in the United Kingdom explained that he did not see any long-term future for the BRICS as a coherent grouping on the world stage. According to Taylor, the China-India rivalry (as exemplified by border clashes) shows how shallow the alliance is. Furthermore, Brasilia has its own “Brazilian Trump” who sees alliance with the West as the way forward, not with other “developing countries”.

Originally, BRIC was a four-member alliance until South Africa officially became a member in December 2010, after formally being invited by China to join and subsequently being accepted by the founding BRIC countries. The group was renamed BRICS – with the “S” standing for South Africa – to reflect the group’s expanded membership. South Africa is a staunch member of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).

“South Africa is in terminal decline and was only admitted to the BRICS for politically expedient-politically correct reasons. Its membership damaged the group’s credibility. And of course, China will resist to the very end the notion that India be admitted to the UN Security Council as a Permanent Member,” Taylor explained, adding that so much for the vaunted “South-South solidarity” that the BRICS was supposed to represent and what all the noise was about when it was launched.

Zhu Ming holds conservative not so negative views on the future of BRICS amid India-China conflicts, giving two reasons. The first and most important is that Beijing is still keeping a low profile on this conflict. For instance, Chinese local media coverage of this conflict is still quite low, and Beijing has not revealed losses on the Chinese side in order not to form the impression of too huge a gap in losses between the two sides as to humiliate the Indian side. “Just imagine, if two people were fighting, the situation would be extremely hard to turn back to normal very soon. But if one side could keep relatively calm, the situation would be more optimistic.”

Secondly, the disputed land is not worthy of a war between the two countries. “However, the rising nationalist mood of India is a bit troublesome. BRICS is not nothing to New Delhi, it will not be a good option for India to quit BRICS. Since BRICS was formed jointly by five powers, China does not own BRICS,” he told this article author, adding, “It is a bit early to judge the prospects of BRICS. It is quite possible that the global and BRICS health governance system could be another rising cooperation field within the BRICS group after the forthcoming BRICS summit.”

“While there are no official claims from the Kremlin that Putin was brokering any negotiation between the two to reconcile the border dispute if Russia can make a good move in meddling with the Indo-China border conflict, I assume it will work to a greater extent. Given the history of Russia’s dominant role in South Asia since its Soviet past, Moscow has a greater capacity to play the role of mediator. Besides that, BRICS is a platform for emerging powers and its capacity cannot be discarded as a regional political talk shop. Thus, I believe BRICS would create some steps for a more amicable solution,” Amarasinghe concluded on an optimistic note.

Alicia Garcia-Herrero is Senior Research Fellow at the Brussels-based think tank Bruegel and Adjunct Professor at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, noted in her article headlined “China Continues To Dominate An Expanded BRICS” published by the East Asia Forum that China has been the leading proponent of expanding BRICS to BRICS+. The main reason for the expansion was to make BRICS more representative of the developing world and give it a stronger voice on the global stage.

But the six countries invited to join — which has become five after Argentina’s withdrawal — are quite heterogeneous. Some are net creditors (such as Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates), while others are net debtors and in a very weak financial position. Half of them are large exporters of fossil fuels (Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Iran). Ethiopia and Egypt stand out as members from Africa, a continent that has become increasingly important for China’s and India’s foreign policy, according to Garcia-Herrero.

The BRICS countries are considered the foremost geopolitical rival to the G7 bloc of leading advanced economies, implementing competing initiatives such as the New Development Bank, the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement, the BRICS pay, the BRICS Joint Statistical Publication and the BRICS basket reserve currency. But in practical reality, China has large control and uses the platform to widen its economic influence. Most of the trade growth has been China-centric, with contributions from the rest of BRICS remaining quite flat until recently. Russia, with its limited economic impact, only remains an excellent public relations organizer for BRICS.

The BRICS members are known for their significant influence on regional affairs, and all are members of the G20. Since its establishment in 2009, the BRICS nations have met annually at several summits, with South Africa having hosted the most recent 15th BRICS Summit in August 2023. Currently, Russia is heading the rotating in 2024 and plans to push forward significant issues, particularly the association’s expansion and transforming it into an anti-Western coalition. Reports indicate about 40 countries, the majority in Africa and Asia have expressed readiness to join BRICS from the Global South. The association has three areas of strategic partnership: policy and security, economy and finance, and cultural and educational cooperation.

Between now and until October when Kazan will host the 16th summit, Moscow has scheduled various activities including the BRICS Games, BRICS Foreign Ministers, BRICS Academic and BRICS Parliamentary meetings, these aim at showcasing BRICS geopolitical influence and increasing coalition for building a fairer, better and multipolar world. It also operates based on non-interference and equality with the hope of ensuring members get mutual economic benefits in the world. BRICS has received both praise and criticism from academics, researchers, politicians geopolitical analysts and writers around the world.

The origins of BRICS — a bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa and, as of 2024, new members Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates — can be traced back to a 2001 publication by Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill titled ‘Building Better Global Economic BRICs’. O’Neill argued that Brazil, Russia, India and China were poised to play an increasingly significant role in the global economy. BRIC was officially launched in 2009 and was renamed BRICS in 2010 when South Africa joined, and Russia will make history by admitting the largest ever in 2024.

The founding countries of Brazil, Russia, India, and China held the first summit in Yekaterinburg in 2009, with South Africa joining the association a year later. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates joined on 1 January 2024 The five BRICS countries together represent over 3.1 billion people, or about 41 percent of the world population. The five nations had a combined nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of 18.6 trillion dollars and an estimated 4.46 trillion dollars in combined foreign reserves.

World

Saudi, Russia, 6 Others Agree to Raise Crude Oil Output Next Month

Published

on

crude oil output

By Adedapo Adesanya

Eight key producers in the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies (OPEC+) on Thursday agreed to raise combined crude oil output by 411,000 barrels per day.

Saudi Arabia, Russia, Iraq, UAE, Kuwait, Kazakhstan, Algeria, and Oman met virtually to review global market conditions and decided to raise collective output by 411,000 barrels per day, starting in May.

The group was widely expected to implement an increase of just under 140,000 barrels per day next month.

The May hike agreed on Thursday is “equivalent to three monthly increments,” OPEC said in a statement, adding that “the gradual increases may be paused or reversed subject to evolving market conditions.”

The eight OPEC+ producers this month started gradually unwinding 2.2 million barrels per day of voluntary cuts undertaken independently from the production strategy of the broader 22-member OPEC+ alliance, which has roughly 3.66 million barrels per day of separate cuts in place until the end of 2026.

CNBC reported that the Thursday meeting was the first one attended by Mr Erlan Akkenzhenov, the new energy minister of Kazakhstan, which has struggled with producing above its assigned quota.

Without referencing individual countries like Nigeria, OPEC said in its Thursday statement that the May output hike will “provide an opportunity for the participating countries to accelerate their compensation” by way of additional production cuts in line with overproduction.

The Thursday decision was taken against the backdrop of broader market trouble triggered by sweeping tariffs on key trade partners unveiled on Wednesday by the administration of US President Donald Trump.

Mr Trump, who has been simultaneously championing higher US oil output, signed a reciprocal tariff policy on Wednesday.

The American President said his plan will set a 10 per cent baseline tariff across the board.

The plan imposes steep tariff rates on many countries, including 34 per cent on China, 20 per cent on the European Union, and Nigeria got 14 per cent.

Continue Reading

World

Russia’s Expanding Geopolitical Influence in Burkina Faso, Mali, Niger

Published

on

Confederation of Sahel States

By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh

Growing impatience over the fragile security situation in the Sahel region and collective anxiety to lift up and strengthen their Confederation of Sahel States (AES), some prefers the Alliance des États du Sahel (translates in English as the Alliance of Sahel States), the three Foreign Ministers of Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger embarked on a fresh trip to Moscow.

Meetings, held in early April 2025, with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov undoubtedly gave a strong boost to the AES relations, marking the latest new chapter in building sustainable security ties and economic cooperation.

Ahead of the meeting, the Russian Foreign Ministry said the Sahel foreign ministers prioritized perspectives on regulating their political crisis as well as focusing on economic spheres. According  to Russia’s MFA, the three African countries’ foreign ministries indicated in a joint statement that the joint visit as the first session of “AES-Russia consultations” which aims at finding appropriate pathways in fighting jihadist insurgencies that has spread across the region south of the Sahara.

Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger currently run by military governments that have taken power in coups between 2021 an 2022, have formed an alliance known as the Confederation of Sahel States (AES). By creating their own bloc, it exposes Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) weaknesses and its long-term inability and incompetency to deal with regional problems, particularly rising security through mediation.

The French grouping later kicked out French and other Western forces and conveniently turned towards Russia for military support. Their foreign ministers will visit Moscow on April 3 and 4 and hold meetings with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov at his invitation, the statement said.

“The Moscow meeting represents an important step in establishing strategic, pragmatic, dynamic and supportive cooperation and partnership relations in areas of common interest between the AES and Russia,” the ministries said.

Basic research and review show that besides instability, these countries are engulfed with various socio-economic problems primarily due to the system of governance and poor policies toward sustainable development. And Russia’s renewed and full-fledged interest is primarily focused on uprooting French domination, and support the development goals of these French-speaking West African countries in the Sahel region.

For fear and concerns about the new rise of terrorism and for the sake of deeper cooperation and integration, the three Sahelian countries have turned to Russia, and as expected Russia has since offered tremendous assistance. As a follow up, the early April meetings in Moscow, several critical issues are on the agenda: military assistance to fight growing terrorism, and efforts to strengthen political dialogue and promote concrete partnerships relating to trade and the economy in the region.

The AES has multitude of obstacles, the main problems emerged after exiting out of ECOWAS, the regional organization consisting 16 West African states. Finance is another hurdle among others. Nevertheless, Russian Foreign Ministry explained in a statement posted on its website, that Russia’s military-technical cooperation with African countries is primarily directed at settling regional conflicts and preventing the spread of terrorist threats and fighting the growing terrorism in the continent.

Russia’s MFA has earlier assured: “we will continue supporting it with the supply of arms and hardware and personnel training, including peacekeepers, as it is very important to help put an end to this evil and other challenges and threats, including drug trafficking and other forms of organized crime.”

With regards to financing AES, the bloc on March 31st introduced 0.5% levy on imported goods to finance their newly formed three-state union, following their withdrawal from ECOWAS. The agreed levy took immediate effect and applies to all imported goods except humanitarian aid.

It also implied that the move officially ended free trade with West Africa’s ECOWAS bloc, deepening the rift between the three and regional democracies like Nigeria and Ghana. Worth noting that ECOWAS sanctions imposed to force a return to civilian rule have had little impact, as the Sahel alliance continues to strengthen economic and security cooperation.

Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger are among many African countries bartering natural resources. There have been cases, where huge natural-resource projects were given away without cabinet discussions and parliament’s approval.

Apparently, these agreements on resources extraction hardly deliver broad-based development dividends. Nevertheless, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have bilateral agreements with Russia. The three have offered complete access to exploiting their natural resources in exchange for military equipment and weaponry as well as military training. Burkina Faso signed a Memorandum of Understanding on nuclear energy with the State Atomic Energy Corporation (Rosatom) during the Russia-Africa summit held in St. Petersburg in July 2023.

Russian President Vladimir Putin mentioned security issue and economic cooperation during his opening and closing speeches at the summit and even previously, indicating its importance on Russia’s agenda with Africa. In fact, there were five key summit documents and one of them focuses on ‘Strengthening Cooperation to Combat Terrorism’ which neatly relates to this article theme here under discussion.

Although Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have abundant human and natural resources, offering tremendous potential for rapid growth, there are existing deep-rooted challenges – environmental, political and security – that may affect the prosperity and peace of the region. Therefore, external support is badly required and which is why Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger have to look up to Russia as their economic and security saviour, particularly this changing geopolitical situation in the world.

According to various narratives, Russia has embarked on fighting “neo-colonialism” which it considers as a stumbling stone on its way to regain a part of its Soviet-era influence in Africa. Russia has sought to convince Africans over the past years of the likely dangers of neocolonial tendencies perpetrated by the former colonial countries and the scramble for resources on the continent.

In pursuit of its geopolitical interest, Russia has ultimately begun making inroads into the Sahel region, an elongated landlocked territory located between North Africa (Maghreb) and West Africa, and also stretches from the Atlantic Ocean to the Red Sea.

With human and natural resources, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger China are undertaking giant economic and social transformation. Quite essentially, Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger, within the geopolitical reconfiguration in West Africa, are desirous to ensure their political sovereignty, engage in development which Russia has expressed interest to support.

Certainly, the three have pledged to work together to find common solutions, and are oriented towards multipolarity. In this way, they could consolidate its integration to become a center of influence, diversify the economy to become prosperous in the region. Burkina Faso, Mali and Niger are expected to continue to advance their collective interests for the purposes of their development, prosperity and stability.

Continue Reading

World

Mali, Burkina Faso, Niger Slam 0.5% Import Levy on Nigeria, ECOWAS Nations

Published

on

ECOWAS Court

By Adedapo Adesanya

Mali, Burkina Faso and Niger – all under military rule- have announced a new 0.5 per cent levy on imported goods from Nigeria and other Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) member-nations.

The development comes as they seek to fund a new three-state union after leaving the larger regional economic bloc, they said in a statement.

Recall that the West African regional bloc, in January, in the spirit of regional solidarity, said they will recognise the national passports of the three countries bearing the ECOWAS logo until further notice and will allow for free trade with the three states under military rule and free movement will happen without visas.

However, the three nations, according to an official statement, said the levy was agreed on Friday and will take effect immediately, noting that it will affect all goods imported from outside the three countries but will not include humanitarian aid.

Funds from the levy would be used to “finance the activities” of the bloc, the group said, without giving details.

The move ends free trade across West Africa, whose states have for decades fallen under the umbrella of the ECOWAS, and highlights the rift between the three states that border the Sahara Desert and influential democracies like Nigeria and Ghana to the south.

The three countries, each ruled by military juntas that came to power through recent coups in 2023, had established the Alliance of Sahel States as a security agreement following their exit from ECOWAS bloc.

Over time, this alliance evolved into an aspiring economic union with plans to promote deeper military and financial integration, including introducing biometric passports.

Last year, the three nations left ECOWAS, citing claims that the bloc had not sufficiently supported them in fighting Islamist insurgencies and addressing insecurity in their countries.

The three countries, which are former colonies of France, have lamented the excesses and involvement of the European country on its affairs and resources. It has since built new relationships with Russia, Turkey, and Iran.

The three Sahelian countries have teamed up to form a separate confederation called the Alliance of Sahel States (AES).

Continue Reading

Trending