By Kestér Kenn Klomegâh
China, South and India (BRICS members), during the past two years, have made conscious efforts and provided crucial roadmaps for brokering peace between former Soviet republics: Russia and Ukraine.
At least, the BRICS members have signalled that, despite the worsening relationships and the economic instability created by this Russia-Ukraine conflict, there has to be a ceasefire preceding ‘political dialogue and mechanism of diplomacy’ in the peace process.
Notwithstanding that, BRICS members still have significant hope that Russia would adhere to the concrete aspects of BRICS declarations and communique on conflict resolution and show respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity.
In this September WhatsApp conversation with Matthew Ehret, a Senior Fellow and International Relations Expert at the American University in Moscow, he offers an insight into some aspects of the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the ongoing peace process debates within the context of the emerging new global order. Here are the interview excerpts:
The Russia-Ukraine conflict has raged on since late February 2022, and now the main question is why BRICS+, an informal association, has not so far been successful in brokering peace?
As you said, BRICS+ is not a cohesive command and control institution but rather a general umbrella where 10 nations have chosen to ally together under a philosophical framework outside of the dying closed-system rules-based international order. Although the alliance has become enhanced and empowered in recent years, it is still predominantly a dialogue platform designed to facilitate coordination on matters of geo-economic policy, this lacking the clout to project power or concerted action as a thing unto itself.
In its several declarations and communique, BRICS+ has collectively stated ‘political dialogue’ and ‘mechanism of diplomacy’ in resolving political crises and conflicts. Are these methods, dialogue and diplomacy, working in the case of the Russia-Ukraine conflict?
In theory, it is solid and represents the only viable approach to cutting through Gordion knots designed to trap target nations into war. However, the reality which the member states of the BRICS+ find themselves navigating is extraordinarily complex and animated by extremely powerful sociopathic power structures which are ideologically intent on tearing down the framework of the sovereign nation-state system to bring about a new world (depopulated) order and will go to any extent to make this happen including launching a thermonuclear war. It is very sensitive and the slightest mistake in addressing this time bomb on any front (such as Ukraine, Israel/Gaza or increasingly Taiwan) may result in a detonation that would set the world on fire and threaten to plunge the world into a prolonged dark age.
How do you assess efforts made by China, India and South Africa during these past two years? And what are your views and interpretations of the proposal, which underlined ‘constructive role’ in the process for another future Peace Summit by India?
I think the effort has been laudable but often lacking an appreciation for the ideological commitment to total uncompromising victory on the part of the death cult managing the Western unipolar agenda. I think the strategy adopted by the intelligentsia of the BRICS+ is rooted in buying time by invoking consistent common sense proposals which only insane and dishonest actors would wish to reject to 1) buy time while the trans-Atlantic system continues to collapse in on itself through its systematic incompetence and 2) set a framework of consistency and common sense which a humbled, crisis-ridden west may be able to accept under foreseeable crisis conditions.
Can BRICS+ use its boastful numerical strength (as more than 40 countries have been listed awaiting ascension) and with reverberating voices on the platform, particularly during the forthcoming BRICS+ Summit in October 2024, to attempt brokering peace between Russia and Ukraine?
I hope so. Participatory nations must move more quickly to make concessions to give their alliance a force and power of common action via such mechanisms and the BRICS New Development Bank and AIIB, new alt-IMF Contingency Reserved Mechanism, Silk Road Fund etc which have not been permitted to play a proper offensive role in the fight to establish a viable new economic architecture. The SCO is complementary but also must integrate with the BRICS+ to establish an integrated security framework which can replace the dying rules-based idiocy.
