DOCSLIB.ORG

The BRICS in International Development: the New Landscape

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The BRICS in International Development: the New Landscape EVIDENCE REPORT No 189 IDSRising Powers in International Development The BRICS in International Development: The New Landscape Richard Carey and Xiaoyun Li April 2016 The IDS programme on Strengthening Evidence-based Policy works across seven key themes. Each theme works with partner institutions to co-construct policy-relevant knowledge and engage in policy-influencing processes. This material has been developed under the Rising Powers in International Development theme. This report, written by Richard Carey and Xiaoyun Li of the IDS Rising Powers in International Development Programme Advisory Council, provides an overview of key developments in the role of the BRICS in the evolution of the international development landscape. It takes forward the analysis in IDS Evidence Report 58 on The BRICS in the International Development System: Challenge and Convergence, published in March 2014, co-authored by Xiaoyun Li and Richard Carey. It also reflects the work of the IDS Rising Powers in International Development Programme over the intervening two years on the BRICS, to be drawn together in a volume to be published later in 2016 by Palgrave MacMillan that will include chapters on the development cooperation programmes of each member of the BRICS as well as looking into possible futures for BRICS development cooperation work. The material has been funded by UK aid from the UK Government, however the views expressed do not necessarily reflect the UK Government’s official policies. AG Level 2 Output ID: 199 THE BRICS IN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT: THE NEW LANDSCAPE Richard Carey and Xiaoyun Li April 2016 This is an Open Access publication distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are clearly credited. First published by the Institute of Development Studies in April 2016 © Institute of Development Studies 2016 IDS is a charitable company limited by guarantee and registered in England (No. 877338). Contents Abbreviations 2 Summary 3 1 In the beginning: what’s in an acronym? 4 2 The BRICS as an economic vector 5 3 The BRICS as a political vector 7 4 Global governance in a world of new political and economic geographies 9 5 The BRICS as a development cooperation vector 12 6 Conclusion 14 References 15 1 Abbreviations AIIB Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank BRICS Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa ICT information and communications technology IMF International Monetary Fund NDB New Development Bank OBOR One Belt, One Road OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development SCO Shanghai Cooperation Organisation UK United Kingdom UN United Nations US United States 2 Summary This Evidence Report provides a summary account of the role of the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) in shaping the current global development landscape. It first looks at the origin of the BRICS as a political association, then considers their economic trajectories in the first decade and a half of the new century, followed by an investigation of the political and global governance implications of the involvement of the BRICS in the new economic and political geographies unfolding in the multipolar world of today. Finally, the report considers the BRICS as a vector in the evolving development cooperation scene. 3 1 In the beginning: what’s in an acronym? It is commonly understood that the political association now functioning under the acronym BRICS was inspired by the acronym BRIC, created in a paper written in 2001 by Jim O’Neill (now Lord O’Neill), then Chief Economist of Goldman Sachs. The Goldman Sachs article proposed that on the basis of their dynamic economic performance in the 1990s, Brazil, Russia, India and China would be the drivers of world economic growth in the foreseeable future and should all be invited to join the G8 (Russia had been part of the G7/8 since 1997) (O’Neill 2001). The first decade of the new millennium validated this economic prognosis. And in 2008, in the midst of severe financial crisis, all of the BRICs were included along with other major players in the global economy in the G20 Heads of State Summit, a historic global governance innovation created overnight by building on the established G20 Finance Ministers process that included South Africa as well. Yet the etymology of the BRICS can be derived another way, more closely entwined with the ongoing political association that held its first Heads of State Summit Meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia, in 2009.1 Here, the history begins with the RIC club – Russia, India and China – meeting informally in New York in the margins of United Nations (UN) General Assemblies from 2003, and annually on a formal basis at the level of foreign ministers since 2005. The idea of establishing a BRICs grouping came as a carefully thought-through Russian initiative worked out by Foreign Minister Lavrov and President Putin. In 2006, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov invited Brazilian Foreign Minister Celso Amorim (building on a long-established personal friendship) to an informal lunch of RIC foreign ministers in New York. Following from that first contact and on the initiative of President Putin, a BRIC foreign ministers meeting was convened in September 2006 in New York, and again in 2007, on the fringes of the UN General Assembly. The first stand-alone BRICs Heads of State meeting was convened by President Medvedev in Yekaterinburg in July 2009. After the second BRICs Summit meeting in 2010 in Brasília, an invitation to South Africa to attend the 2011 Summit meeting in Sanya (Hainan, China) as a new member, generated the acronym BRICS (Shubin 2013). Alphabetical serendipity thus complemented the economic and political logic, while serving to reinforce the existential ambiguity of the BRICS acronym with its dual etymology. 1 A history of the origins of the BRICS as a political association can be found in Kornegay and Bohler-Muller (2013), which assembles a comprehensive set of perspectives by authors from each of the BRICS. 4 2 The BRICS as an economic vector As a symbol of the broader emerging markets phenomenon, the BRICS acronym, applied in its broader common usage (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), captured a remarkable transition in the global economy. According to the Chief Economist of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), in the 1980s, emerging and developing countries accounted for 36 per cent of world output in purchasing power parity terms, and 43 per cent of world growth in that decade. In 2010–15 those numbers leapt to 56 per cent of world output and 79 per cent of world growth. The conclusion to be drawn is that a predominantly advanced developed country lens is an ever more outmoded approach to viewing the world economy (Obstfeld 2016). The emerging markets story, including the BRICS and beyond, has thus been a powerful catalyst for trade and investment and poverty reduction globally over this period, notably helping to boost growth in the Asian, Latin American and African regions. This ‘shifting wealth’ phenomenon has underpinned the basic agenda of the BRICS as a political association working to shift global governance norms and arrangements established under a United States (US)-led post-Second World War, to reflect the present and future configuration of world economic and political power. At the same time, the extraordinary role of China in generating the emerging markets phenomenon in general and the economic trajectories of the BRICS as a particular group is essential to this story. As it integrated into the global trade regime and opened up to foreign investment, China’s growth surged, generating a super-cycle in commodities that lifted growth rates in commodity-exporting countries around the world, in rich and poor regions alike. China’s own investments in creating commodity supply chains further pushed this process, along with the ‘going out’ policy to encourage direct investment by Chinese companies, notably in the construction and information and communications technology (ICT) industries. When China countered the global recession of 2009 with a major investment package for provinces and local governments in China, the macroeconomic impact via commodity markets was global, helping commodity exporters to survive the financial crisis generated in the financial markets of the US and Europe. Among the major beneficiaries were fellow members of the BRICS – Brazil, Russia and South Africa. From 2014, the BRICS economic vector changed. China’s move to a lower ‘new normal’ growth path based on domestic consumption and decarbonisation of the economy rather than investment and exports has pushed the commodity cycle into reverse, exposing the weaknesses in the economic structures and testing the political systems of the commodity- exporting BRICS. Brazil, Russia and South Africa each have particular structural and political challenges of a medium-term nature and are unlikely to be in the ranks of emerging country growth stories again until they find a new way forward. Meanwhile it is India that is moving forward at a fast pace (albeit with major social and structural challenges), spurred by economic reforms that favour private sector development and mass consumption, with ICTs helping to rationalise and improve poverty reduction programmes.2 Assuming that China will be able to manage its ambitious and comprehensive reform agenda in a way that maintains the ‘new normal’ growth rate of 6.5 per cent, there is hence the 2 A key point to note, however, is that poverty reduction in India (which still has far to go) has occurred not only because of economic growth but also because of legislation such as the Right to Food and associated policies such as the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act (MGNREGA) as well as empowerment of the local government system (Panchayats) linked with reservations for women and other historically marginalised groups, and other social sector schemes.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • India-Brazil Bilateral Relations Are in a State of Clearly Discernible Upswing
    India-Brazil Relations Political: India-Brazil bilateral relations are in a state of clearly discernible upswing. Although the two countries are divided by geography and distance, they share common democratic values and developmental aspirations. Both are large developing countries, each an important player in its region, both stable, secular, multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, large democracies as well as trillion-dollar economies. There has been frequent exchange of VVIP, Ministerial and official-level visits in recent years resulting in strengthening of bilateral relationship in various fields. Jawaharlal Nehru Award for International Understanding for 2006 and Indira Gandhi Prize for Peace, Disarmament and Development for 2010 was conferred on President Lula. Our shared vision of the evolving global order has enabled forging of close cooperation and coordination in the multilateral arena, be in IBSA, BRICS, G-4, BASIC, G-20 or other organizations. VVIP visits from India: Vice President S. Radhakrishnan (1954), Prime Minister Indira Gandhi (1968), Prime Minister Narasimha Rao (1992 - for Earth Summit), President K.R. Narayanan (1998), Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh (2006 and April 2010) ,President Pratibha Patil (2008) and Prime Minister Dr Manmohan Singh (June 2012-for Rio+20 summit). Other important visits from India in recent years: Kumari Selja, Minister of State of Urban Development and Poverty Alleviation, Mr. Anand Sharma, Minister of State for External Affairs, Mr. Rao Inderjit Singh, Minister of State for Defence Production, Mr. Subodh Kant Sahai, Minister of State for Food Processing Industries, Shri Pranab Mukherjee, Minister of External Affairs (Feb 2008), Shri P. Chidambaram, Finance Minister from India (Nov 2008) and Shri S.M.
    [Show full text]
  • BRAZIL, a LEGITIMATE LEADER: from PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS to PERMANENT VACANCY in the UN SECURITY COUNCIL Giulia Scortegagna1 Jeancezar Ditzz De Souza Ribeiro2
    DOI 10.21544/1809-3191.v25n2.p 492-516 BRAZIL, A LEGITIMATE LEADER: FROM PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS TO PERMANENT VACANCY IN THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL Giulia Scortegagna1 Jeancezar Ditzz de Souza Ribeiro2 ABSTRACT From a brief analysis of its performance in the United Nations Security Council during the 2010-2011 biennium, it is intended to examine the legitimacy of the discourses and leadership of the Brazilian performance in the Council and in Peacekeeping Operations. Brazil, as an actor that values diplomatic and multilateral means, has gained great prominence within the United Nations and its instruments of maintenance of international security. The mission in Haiti, MINUSTAH, had great repercussions, because besides the military component being led by a Brazilian, Brazil was engaged in it in various ways, even emotionally, as said by Chancellor Celso Amorim. But the major problem is: would Brazil be a leader? How did it perform in the years 2010 and 2011, when it was a temporary member of the Security Council? And finally, does its legitimacy emanate from the Missions of Peace? Keywords: Peacekeeping Operations. Brazilian Foreign Policy. Security Council. 1 Bachelor’s degree from the Laureate International Universities (IBMR – Centro Universitário), Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brazil. E-mail: [email protected] / Orcid: https:// orcid.org/0000-0002-4751-1276 2Doctor. University of São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil. E-mail: [email protected] / Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7856-5640 2 Doctorate Degree. University of São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil. E-mail: jeanditzz@ hotmail.com / Orcid: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7856-5640 R. Esc.
    [Show full text]
  • Featured Q&A with Our Board of Advisors
    Monday, January 29, 2007 BOARD OF ADVISORS Featured Q&A With Our Board of Advisors Bernard Aronson Peter Hakim Managing Partner, President, Latin America's state-owned mium for multinationals firms to do busi- ACON Investments LLC Inter-American companies are gaining in impor- ness in 'sensitive' sectors, let alone enter Diego Arria Dialogue tance as renewed nationalism into partnership with the state-owned Director, Donna Hrinak has taken hold in several coun- enterprises. Partnerships work best for all Columbus Group Director for Corporate Q tries. But partnerships with the private when there is in place a government that Genaro Arriagada and Govt. Affairs, sector remain key to the success of state- respects private enterprise, the rule of law, Kraft Foods Inc. Board Member, Banco owned enterprises, nearly all government and the sanctity of contracts, and where del Estado de Chile Jon Huenemann officials in the region say publicly. When there is an environment conducive to for- Joyce Chang Principal, and why should a multinational company eign investment. For the multinational International Global Head of decide to seek strategic partnership with firm, the nature of the investment (e.g., Emerging Markets Department, Research, J.P. Morgan Miller & Chevalier state-owned industry players? How can large, export-oriented) as well as the level Chase & Co. James R. Jones these partnerships be structured to be of know-how (technology) and human Adrian Cruz Co-chair, beneficial for all parties, including the capital required (highly skilled technical Founder and Senior Manatt Jones region? Aside from the publicly-owned and managerial people) will determine its Partner, Global Strategies LLC companies, how can the private sector, bargaining position.
    [Show full text]
  • Segurança Internacional, Estudos Estratégicos E Política De Defesa
    Belo Horizonte, Coração Eucarístico da PUC Minas, 29 a 31 de julho de 2015 Área temática: Workshop Doutoral – Segurança Internacional, Estudos Estratégicos e Política de Defesa Título do trabalho: A ATUAÇÃO DO BRASIL EM PAZ E SEGURANÇA INTERNACIONAL COMO FONTE DE NOVAS CATEGORIAS DE ANÁLISE PARA A TEORIA DAS RELAÇÕES INTERNACIONAIS Autora: Mariana Alves da Cunha Kalil, Universidade de Brasília (UnB) e Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) 2 RESUMO A partir da narrativa sobre a história da política externa brasileira, busca-se compreender se o comportamento do Brasil no cenário internacional enseja o reconhecimento de novas categorias de análise para a Teoria das Relações Internacionais. Delimita-se essa narrativa àquelas acerca de temas sobre paz e segurança internacional, que envolvam, por exemplo, princípios como os de soberania e de não intervenção, sobretudo em arranjos multilaterais. Como agentes constituintes dessa narrativa, selecionam-se as publicações de acadêmicos sobre o tema, os pronunciamentos de autoridades como os Presidentes da República, os Ministros das Relações Exteriores, os plenipotenciários do Estado brasileiro em fóruns como o Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, as notas à imprensa do Ministério das Relações Exteriores, os documentos e as notas lançados pelo Ministério da Defesa e os pronunciamentos do Ministro da Defesa. Foram feitas pesquisas de campo no Haiti, em Dezembro de 2014, e na Missão do Brasil nas Nações Unidas, em Janeiro-Fevereiro de 2015. Busca-se, neste momento, reunir estas oportunidades com as pesquisas em fontes primárias e secundárias em projetos para qualificação no Doutorado em História das Relações Internacionais do Brasil (IRel-UnB), a realizar-se até Novembro de 2015, com ao menos um capítulo da tese também já pronto, como requer o programa.
    [Show full text]
  • Media and Foreign Policy in Lula's Brazil
    Austral: Brazilian Journal of Strategy & International Relations | e-ISSN 2238-6912 | ISSN 2238-6262| v.1, n.2, Jul-Dec 2012 | p.201-224 MEDIA AND FOREIGN POLICY IN LULA’S BRAZIL Guilherme Stolle Paixão e Casarões1 Introduction The interaction between the mass media and foreign policy in Brazil has always been a delicate one, slight at most times, but never meaningless. It has become commonplace to say that, due to the virtual monopoly the Brazilian Foreign Ministry (Itamaraty) has enjoyed over foreign policymaking from the early days of its most important chancellor, Barão do Rio Branco (1902-1912), public debate on the country’s goals and strategies has never really taken place (CHEIBUB, 1985; LIMA, 2000; FARIA, 2008). Instead, diplomacy has been by far one of the most undisputed public issues throughout the twentieth century, having survived two long authoritarian periods and several political upheavals. When the first civil president was elected in early 1985, after two decades of military regime, he is said to have decided to keep foreign policy untouched for it represented a supra-partisan consensus that had successfully pushed development forward (RICUPERO, 2001). Only recently have some studies unveiled the role of public opinion and the mass media in times when foreign policy goals were subject to controversy (MANZUR, 1999; 2009; FRANCO, 2009; FERREIRA, 2009). What these works suggest is that public debate over foreign policy goals grows more intense as polarization within Itamaraty becomes salient. Although such relationship seems quite obvious at first, it is not that much straightforward for two reasons. 1 Teacher of undergraduate courses in International Relations (Faculdades Integradas Rio Branco - FIRB - and Fundação Armando Alvares Penteado - FAAP) and a post-Graduate (lato sensu) in International Relations at FAAP.
    [Show full text]
  • BRICS Summit What Future for the 'Emerging Power' Bloc?
    Briefing October 2016 Towards the eighth BRICS Summit What future for the 'emerging power' bloc? SUMMARY The next BRICS Summit will take place in Goa, India on 15 and 16 October 2016. This is the eighth year that the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (since 2011 only) will come together since the institutionalisation of cooperation among the major emerging economies in 2009. While a range of doubts exist regarding the longevity and cohesion of the bloc, given the disappointing economic performance of several of its members in recent years, the group appears confident that the summit will lead to further intra-BRICS cooperation, including in the areas of customs authorities, environment and agriculture. Terrorism will also be a key issue in the discussions. According to observers, the aim of the summit will be to consolidate existing institutions, including the BRICS-led New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement. It will also be an opportunity for India to underline its prime status among emerging powers, as it is currently growing faster than any other major economy. In 2017 the BRICS chair will be taken over by China. In this briefing: Background The Indian chair and the run-up to the Goa Summit Agenda and expected results Main references Endnotes EPRS | European Parliamentary Research Service Author: Elena Lazarou Members' Research Service PE 589.838 EN EPRS Towards the 8th BRICS Summit Glossary BRICS: Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa. BIMSTEC: Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (Bangladesh, Bhutan, India, Burma/Myanmar, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and Thailand).
    [Show full text]
  • From Yekaterinburg to Brasilia: BRICS and the G20, Road to Nowhere?
    Article From Yekaterinburg to Brasilia: BRICS and the G20, road to nowhere? DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202000109 Rev. Bras. Polít. Int., 63(1): e009, 2020 Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional Abstract ISSN 1983-3121 The BRICS have forged a collective identity to become a new driving force http://www.scielo.br/rbpi in Global Governance. They have used bodies such as the G20 to produce changes at global governance levels. This has raised two questions on their Niall Duggan1 role. First, can they hold a common position despite different developmental 1University College Cork, Government, agendas? Second, has the China’s economic leap produced a unique (Chinese) Cork, Ireland agenda rather than a collective (BRICS) one? ([email protected]) ORCID ID: Keywords: BRICS; Emerging powers; China; G20; Global governance. orcid.org/0000-0002-3578-1068 Juan Carlos Ladines Azalia2 2Universidad del Pacifico, International Received: January 15, 2020 Business, Lima, Peru. ([email protected]) Accepted: June 13, 2020 ORCID ID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9327-9068 Introduction he BRICS differ from one another culturally, politically, and Tdemographically. What these countries do share, however, is an aspiration to be “rule makers” instead of “rule takers” within global governance. The 2009 BRIC summit’s joint declaration outlined foundations for a common “thought” among member states, including the primacy of the rule of law and multilateral diplomacy with a leading role for the UN (Ministério das Relações Exteriores do Brasil 2008, 2). This produced a common standpoint and meant that the BRICS became a new driving force for change within global Copyright: governance, leading to the promotion of South-South cooperation.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 September 21, 2007 VIA E-MAIL and FAX Celso Amorim, Foreign
    September 21, 2007 VIA E-MAIL AND FAX Celso Amorim, Foreign Relations Minister, Brazil Dilma Roussef, Presidential Chief-of-Staff, Brazil Your Excellencies: We are writing to express our support for the process initiated in August between the republics of Bolivia and Brazil for the formation of bi-national working groups to assess the potential impacts on Bolivia of the Santo Antônio and Jirau dams on the Madeira River, the Amazon´s principal tributary. Official project studies and independent expert opinions indicate that there is a distinct probability that Bolivia could suffer flooding of territories in Pando province, possibly including the Bruno Racua Wildlife Reserve; loss of fish species and serious impacts on some of the most important fish currently populating the upper Madeira; and health impacts, including proliferation of vectors of malaria and methylation of toxic mercury in the reservoirs. The need for prior assessment of the possibility of negative impacts of this significance using the “precautionary principle” is affirmed in international treaties, including the Montreal Protocol (1987) and the Rio de Janeiro Declaration on Environment and Development (1992). The Convention on Biological Diversity (1992), which both Bolivia and Brazil have subscribed to, holds that sovereign states have “the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction”. As the work of these bilateral working groups moves forward, we trust that representatives of civil society organizations (CSOs) and independent technical experts will be guaranteed participation in this process, and that the working group meetings will be conducted in a transparent manner.
    [Show full text]
  • BRICS Voices Is a Quarterly Newsletter to Foster Greater Engagement of Csos on BRICS with a View to Promote Inclusion and Accountability
    B R I C S VOICES Voices from BRICS Civil Society NEWSLETTER SEPTEMBER / 2015 BRICS People’s Summit, BRICS People’s Summit, CIVIL BRICS Summit, India 2016: People’s Summit or China 2017: People’s Summit or Durban, South Africa, 2013 Fortaleza, Brazil, 2014 Moscow, Russia, 2015 Civil BRICS? Civil BRICS? (Not yet confi rmed) BRICS Voices is a quarterly newsletter to foster greater engagement of CSOs on BRICS with a view to promote inclusion and accountability. An initiative of civil society groups on BRICS issues from the member countries, in partnership with Oxfam India, the newsletter shares thought pieces and information with a view to amplify voices from the ground to influence the Policies at BRICS summit. SECTION I VIEWPOINT CIVIL BRICS VS. PEOPLE’S SUMMIT Within the Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) from the BRICS Countries, there are two viewpoints – one in favour of participating in the “Civil-BRICS”, while the other is in favour of a People’s BRICS, which is an alternate forum for CSOs from BRICS Countries to air their views on BRICS Policies. Counter views from the civil society - one in favour of a people’s summit, versus another that believes in participating in both the Civil BRICS as well as People’s Summit is presented as follows. For an Inclusive, Democratic CIVIL-BRICS – An interesting Social Participation Space in the experience – but can it be BRICS institutionalized? A Brazilian contribution to the debate By Srinivas Krishnaswamy, Chief Executive Offi cer, Vasudha Foundation, New Delhi *By Janine Salles de Carvalho, political advisor for REBRIP (Brazilian Network for the Integration of The CIVIL-BRICS in Russia, 29th June to 1st July 2015, was Peoples), and Nathalie Beghin, Advisory Coordinator the fi rst time ever that Civil Society Groups were offi cially for Inesc and for REBRIP’s Coordination.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazil and the Nuclear Issues in the Years of the Luiz Inácio Lula Da Silva Government
    Artigo Brazil and the nuclear issues in the years of the Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva government (2003-2010) O Brasil e as questões nucleares nos anos do governo de Luís Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010) CARlo PATTI* Rev. Bras. Polít. Int. 53 (2): 178-197 [2010] Introduction Since the Brazilian participation in the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission in 1946, Brazilian foreign policy has given special consideration to nuclear issues. In the last sixty years, with democratic and military governments, one of the country’s goals was the development of an autonomous nuclear industry through the acquisition of technology for enriching the uranium found in the country. Brazil was a persistent opponent of the unequal non-proliferation agreement that divided the world into two groups of countries – those with and those without a nuclear military capability, and which reflected the order established by the two Cold War superpowers. The end of the bipolar system marked an important change in the Brazilian attitude. With the process of democratization and the change in the international system, Brazil gradually adhered to the regimes of nuclear non-proliferation, eventually signing the Non-Treaty in 1998, and becoming one of the most significant supporters of global disarmament and denuclearization. During the presidency of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (2003-2010), the nuclear questions continued to have crucial importance for an emerging country such as Brazil. Brazilian diplomacy in fact had played a prominent role in the international negotiations involving atomic issues. Indeed Itamaraty (the Brazilian Ministry for Foreign Affairs) participated not only in the initiatives for strengthening the NPT, with the 2005 and 2010 review conferences, but recently brokered a nuclear deal between the nuclear weapon states (NWS), as well trying to revive the talks with Iran, which has been accused of developing a clandestine nuclear military program.
    [Show full text]
  • Redalyc.From Tegucigalpa to Teheran: Brazil's Diplomacy As an Emerging
    Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional ISSN: 0034-7329 [email protected] Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais Brasil Quirino Steiner, Andrea; de Almeida Medeiros, Marcelo; Mesquita de Souza Lima, Rafael From Tegucigalpa to Teheran: Brazil’s diplomacy as an emerging Western country Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, vol. 57, núm. 1, 2014, pp. 40-58 Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais Brasília, Brasil Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=35831639003 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal Journal's homepage in redalyc.org Non-profit academic project, developed under the open access initiative ARTIGO From Tegucigalpa to Teheran: Brazil’s diplomacy as an emerging Western country De Tegucigalpa a Teerã: a diplomacia do Brasil como um país ocidental emergente http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329201400103 ANDREA QUIRINO STEINER* MARCELO DE ALMEIDA MEDEIROS** RAFAEL MESQUITA DE SOUZA LIMA*** Rev. Bras. Polít. Int. 57 (1): 40-58 [2014] Introduction For almost two decades—not only due to its economic growth but also because of increasing social and political developments—, Brazil has undeniably arisen as a full-fledged actor in the international scenario. Such a change has certainly been felt by global regimes and by other international actors. For most of the 20th and early 21st century, Brazil’s foreign policy has been characterized by a quest for autonomy (Fonseca Júnior 1998; Magnoli et al. 2000; Lafer 2009), which has been undertaken, according to Vigevani and Cepaluni (2007), through three main approaches: distance, participation and diversification.
    [Show full text]
  • BRICS and the G20, Road to Nowhere? Revista Brasileira De Política Internacional, Vol
    Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional ISSN: 0034-7329 ISSN: 1983-3121 Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais Duggan, Niall; Azalia, Juan Carlos Ladines From Yekaterinburg to Brasilia: BRICS and the G20, road to nowhere? Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional, vol. 63, no. 1, e009, 2020 Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais DOI: https://doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202000109 Available in: http://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=35862763011 How to cite Complete issue Scientific Information System Redalyc More information about this article Network of Scientific Journals from Latin America and the Caribbean, Spain and Journal's webpage in redalyc.org Portugal Project academic non-profit, developed under the open access initiative Article From Yekaterinburg to Brasilia: BRICS and the G20, road to nowhere? DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0034-7329202000109 Rev. Bras. Polít. Int., 63(1): e009, 2020 Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional Abstract ISSN 1983-3121 The BRICS have forged a collective identity to become a new driving force http://www.scielo.br/rbpi in Global Governance. They have used bodies such as the G20 to produce changes at global governance levels. This has raised two questions on their Niall Duggan1 role. First, can they hold a common position despite different developmental 1University College Cork, Government, agendas? Second, has the China’s economic leap produced a unique (Chinese) Cork, Ireland agenda rather than a collective (BRICS) one? ([email protected]) ORCID ID: Keywords: BRICS; Emerging powers; China; G20; Global governance. orcid.org/0000-0002-3578-1068 Juan Carlos Ladines Azalia2 2Universidad del Pacifico, International Received: January 15, 2020 Business, Lima, Peru.
    [Show full text]