Global posturing and domestic exigencies: Should the BRICS Summit be taken seriously?

“States should support existing civil society initiatives and social practices and develop partnerships with civil society institutions to implement these decisions”.

The above statement was part of a declaration of the first ever Civil BRICS held in Ufa, Russia during June 29-July1, 2015, ahead of the just concluded seventh BRICS Summit hosted by Russia.

“Civil society structures---and trade unions as their broadest representatives---are to exert constructive pressure upon leaders of their states, public authorities and  employers in order to encourage them to establish effective mechanisms for a more stable world order.”

The above statement was part of the declaration of IVth Trade Union Forum of BRICS Countries adopted on July 9, 2015 in Ufa, Russia.

The recently concluded Summit of the Heads of States from BRICS countries in Russia, has developed an ambitious action plan to be carried forward in 2015 under the leadership of the Russian Presidency. It has decided to coordinate its positions and thinking with respect to all international issues, institutions and commitments. This will be most visible in the next UN General Assembly and agreements on Sustainable Development Goals in New York in September, 2015, the G20 Heads of States meeting in Turkey in November 2015 and the Climate negotiations later in the year.

Every aspect of the development agenda is now being proposed to be coordinated by BRICS governments. Ministers and senior officials of Agriculture, Health, Education, Disaster Management, Science & Technology, Culture & Youth have also met in preparation of this Summit and prepared plans for future cooperation amongst themselves, in addition to finance, trade and security ministers and officials. In addition, there was a meeting of the BRICS Business Council on July 8 and a first BRICS Youth Forum July 4-7, 2015 in Ufa. In its future programming, the BRICS Summit declaration recommends coordination of their positions in the UN Human Rights Commission and coordinated training of young journalists and bloggers.

But the Summit declarations only show the faces and names of five Heads of States - there is no mention of which trade union and civil society representatives met in Ufa and agreed to these declarations. Also, there is no information about which delegates participated in the Business Council and Youth Forum.

Should citizens of the world take note of these declarations? Should citizens of BRICS countries pay attention to these commitments being made on their behalf? Should civil society organisations of BRICS countries -- including trade unions, development NGOs, media and social movements -- look seriously into the implications of these declarations in their own communities and societies?

At one level, the emergence of BRICS as an informal club of ‘then’ emerging economies made geo-political sense as a block in various international forums dominated by traditional OECD countries. It was seen as a voice of the ‘excluded’, though powerful, economies. But the world, and the BRICS countries themselves, have changed since 2009.

At this juncture, all the five BRICS countries are shining a bit less than 2009. The economies of Brazil and South Africa have weakened; China has slowed down and its reserves have dipped to 3% of GDP (as opposed to 10% five years ago); sanctions from Europe and North America and low price of oil has reduced the economic muscle of Russia and India’s economy is hoping to pick-up steam in the near future.

The domestic environment in these BRICS countries has also seen some disturbing trends. The severe suppression of dissent, both social and political, has become widespread. Russian democracy has centred around the ‘muscular and aggressive’ personality of Putin, so that people like homosexuals or singers can be jailed at will. China never proclaimed democratic pretensions, and has systematically violated rights of dissenters and ethnic minorities, including Draconian controls on the Internet. 

The three democracies — IBSA — have been experiencing curtailments of various democratic freedoms for its citizens. In Brazil, the political crisis around the new president’s efforts to move towards a neo-liberal economic policy has seen widespread citizen resentment. In South Africa, the ruling ANC political party activists have been systematically harassing opposition leaders and dissenting voices. Recent controls and increased harassment of civil society in India is part of the similar pattern of ‘silencing’ the voice of disagreement.

In such a scenario, ignoring the declarations of the BRICS Summit (and associated meetings) concluded recently in Russia may not be a good idea. Coordinated controls may be more effective and damaging than individual ones. Common positions in international fora and institutions may be difficult to challenge alone. Hence, the citizens in BRICS countries need to find ways to engage with their own governments as well as with the BRICS process more seriously. Academics need to interrogate these commitments; trade unions need to show examples of curtailment of workers’ rights as deviations from these commitments; media needs to investigate these commitments; youth leaders and civil society activists may want to hold those who represented them accountable for their words and deeds.

There is a special responsibility on Indian society — citizens, media, trade unions, youth, civil society — because India has agreed to host the BRICS Summit in 2016 (a year ahead of its turn, due after five years of the previous Summit held in Delhi in March 2012).

Are we willing and ready?

The author is the Founder-President of PRIA