Brazil to propose embryo of Brics currency at summit

[OSR stands with Israel]

You quite like it, huh? Which part do you like the most- the country currently brutally invading its neighbor, murdering innocents and raping little girls? Or maybe the country currently geocoding an ethnic minority and using force to put formerly democratic societies under oppressive authoritarianism? Oh, oh, how about the country in the tweet OP, soon to join them, that kills women for being immodest and executes gay people for existing? Do you like seeing your country’s flag next to theirs?

What a silly little rant this is, even if BRICS is something that many people put too much expectations into. People serious about diplomacy know you work with anyone and everyone to push what you want done. That's why, we worked with the Russians in order to try to get the Iranian nuclear deal to work out. Realists who knew how to get the job done...career foreign  affairs ministry bureaucrats in America and elsewhere who help make international solutions possible. The deal fell apart because Trump left it...and trust in us (rightfully) declined as a result (where we misstep as a country we should be judged for it). And now nuclear proliferation risk is on the up, instead of the down.
This attitude your post espouses is not how you run a foreign policy and if this was the attitude of our great bureaucracy, then we'd deserve to be a second-rate power, we'd deserve it. Coordination with other countries is important for global stability. Both when we are operating with a cloak and dagger, and when we are shaking hands.

By this standard, Joe Biden merely offering Putin a meeting in Oval Office on the eve of February 22nd indicts him, because he'd be seen walking alongside Putin himself had the latter taken him up on the offer.

Fortunately the bureaucracies of both Russia and America are saner in dealing with each other than the most inflexible partisans of either are towards the other. In fact, our intelligence community's awareness of what is going on in Putin's Russia is a product of our successful ethos in dealing with them.

Yes, making a common currency and integrating with genocidal states is the exact same as negotiating with them to achieve concrete purposes. I'm a IR grad, "realists" don't impress me.

Realists won the Cold War and helped bring down one of the most evil empires that ever existed . The US moving away from realism is why our FP has mostly sucked since the end of the Cold War . We can easily stop stuff like this happening if we became less ideological in foreign policy and had a more realism based foreign policy .

No , that does not mean we have to become pro Russia , it just means we have to work with some of these nations in a more transactional basis .

Google Mearsheimer and his takes on the war.

Oh his takes are awful but I wouldn’t really consider himself a realist as his FP ideas go against our interests.

What I mean more is we should work with nations on transactional basis to advance our interests and undermine China and Russia even if it means compromising some of our ideological goals . For example with India , neither major party is gonna back us on Ukraine (Rahul Gandhi praised Modi for his handling of the conflict) but that does not mean it’s impossible for them not to take actions that will hurt Russia .

For example if we made a weapons or energy deal with them , then they wouldn’t need Russia as much in either situation and that would end up hurting Russia which advances our interests and at the same time still gives India what they want materially which advances there interests.

[Хahar 🤔]

I am now going to list just the problems with this idea that some guy with an Econ minor thought of in the past five minutes

– Currency would need a central bank located somewhere and accountable to someone – big problem in a group with multiple aspiring global powers
– Currency would strip member states of independent monetary policy which is a big deal for large, export-heavy economies like China's
– If you can't actually buy stuff with this currency in any arena besides international trade I have no idea if or how that would even work as fiat currency
– If you try to avoid that problem by begging the BRICS currency to some other currency then now you have just created the Eurozone but even worse

I think BRICS such as it is could possibly be a useful institution in easily allowing third-world countries to seek financial assistance from multiple large economies that aren't economically aligned with the United States, but this whole currency thing is completely moronic and you're setting yourself up for disappointment, Red Velvet

This is an idea that we're only hearing about because journalists are bored, but in defense of this proposal, I don't think that its more serious versions would resemble the euro (the banknotes posted in his thread notwithstanding). The idea is that this would be a unit by which international trade would be denominated, replacing the dollar in that role: IMF special drawing rights have also been proposed for this role in the past, although it is maybe indicative that this has never gotten any traction.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

I am now going to list just the problems with this idea that some guy with an Econ minor thought of in the past five minutes

– Currency would need a central bank located somewhere and accountable to someone – big problem in a group with multiple aspiring global powers
– Currency would strip member states of independent monetary policy which is a big deal for large, export-heavy economies like China's
– If you can't actually buy stuff with this currency in any arena besides international trade I have no idea if or how that would even work as fiat currency
– If you try to avoid that problem by begging the BRICS currency to some other currency then now you have just created the Eurozone but even worse

I think BRICS such as it is could possibly be a useful institution in easily allowing third-world countries to seek financial assistance from multiple large economies that aren't economically aligned with the United States, but this whole currency thing is completely moronic and you're setting yourself up for disappointment, Red Velvet

This is an idea that we're only hearing about because journalists are bored, but in defense of this proposal, I don't think that its more serious versions would resemble the euro (the banknotes posted in his thread notwithstanding). The idea is that this would be a unit by which international trade would be denominated, replacing the dollar in that role: IMF special drawing rights have also been proposed for this role in the past, although it is maybe indicative that this has never gotten any traction.

Good points. The novelty factor helps further...And if there's anything journalists and those in the media ecosystem like, it's some grand narrative for clicks. (see also: their push for "populism" to be an actual ideology)

[America Needs R'hllor]

Oh his takes are awful but I wouldn’t really consider himself a realist as his FP ideas go against our interests.

What I mean more is we should work with nations on transactional basis to advance our interests and undermine China and Russia even if it means compromising some of our ideological goals . For example with India , neither major party is gonna back us on Ukraine (Rahul Gandhi praised Modi for his handling of the conflict) but that does not mean it’s impossible for them not to take actions that will hurt Russia .

For example if we made a weapons or energy deal with them , then they wouldn’t need Russia as much in either situation and that would end up hurting Russia which advances our interests and at the same time still gives India what they want materially which advances there interests.

He is THE realist, as far as IR studies go. You might be talking about a different sort of "realist".

For someone who is an IR grad...how did you get the idea that the feeling we could fully or mostly isolate Russia internationally isn't utterly delusional?
Let Brazil do what Brazil wants to do, we just remain competitive against Russia at its own game and maintain a strong outreach to the Third World more generally (something Biden is handling decently well). BRICS has contradictions in itself anyway...if it does actually turn into "integration" then we're facing bigger problems...even a common currency for all BRICS countries feels very remote considering neither China nor India are yet prepared to set aside their differences.
It's frankly silly to let Western notions for what these countries are like blind us to what drives Third World countries. EU and USA+Canada is around a billion people...on a planet of eight billion. Not everyone dances to our tune or sees things the way we do. And let's be blunt here...decision makers in the West have to factor in the fact that money talks and elites in these places are filthy rich. Just look at where sporting events have been held...China...Russia...Qatar...
RedVelvet, I, and the bulk of the State Department bureaucracy aren't too different in how we approach this. It's just how the world works...

International relations are a far more interesting genre of theory than "everything is simply interests, I am very smart". Dogmatic realists, just like dogmatic liberals or marxists, are simply delusional, and we've seen this very clearly in their failure to predict the strength of the global pushback against Russia's war.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

For someone who is an IR grad...how did you get the idea that the feeling we could fully or mostly isolate Russia internationally isn't utterly delusional?
Let Brazil do what Brazil wants to do, we just remain competitive against Russia at its own game and maintain a strong outreach to the Third World more generally (something Biden is handling decently well). BRICS has contradictions in itself anyway...if it does actually turn into "integration" then we're facing bigger problems...even a common currency for all BRICS countries feels very remote considering neither China nor India are yet prepared to set aside their differences.
It's frankly silly to let Western notions for what these countries are like blind us to what drives Third World countries. EU and USA+Canada is around a billion people...on a planet of eight billion. Not everyone dances to our tune or sees things the way we do. And let's be blunt here...decision makers in the West have to factor in the fact that money talks and elites in these places are filthy rich. Just look at where sporting events have been held...China...Russia...Qatar...
RedVelvet, I, and the bulk of the State Department bureaucracy aren't too different in how we approach this. It's just how the world works...

International relations are a far more interesting genre of theory than "everything is simply interests, I am very smart". Dogmatic realists, just like dogmatic liberals or marxists, are simply delusional, and we've seen this very clearly in their failure to predict the strength of the global pushback against Russia's war.

Few people really expected Ukraine to do this well when the war started. And correctly so...they weren't going to do this well without US aid, which they received in numbers far larger than most would have anticipated when the war began.

And the very fact that there is weariness from many towards the idea of a West (never mind we aren't completely unified, that's a false belief of many in other places and within it as well)-dictated state of affairs in Ukraine, at least among the political classes in some areas. If Russia really was the pariah some think it to be, then BRICS (as in the group of Russia, China, India, South Africa, and Brazil...two of which have more people than EU+US+Canada combined) would have met the same fate as the G8 did in 2014. You are wildly overestimating the Western narrative's power globally, as well as underestimating Russia's remaining levers of power.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

GLOBAL DEPOLARIZATION BEGINS IN FIVE MINUTES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

Anyway, back in the developed world:
https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1700630187421921597

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

It's worth noting that this includes three countries that are also in BRICS+. So whatever BRICS+ is accomplishing, it's certainly not building a consistently counter-West power bloc.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Ok mr fascist mods who deleted the "stop fetishizing the global south" thread? I was proud of my joke in that!

[Red Velvet]

Ok mr fascist mods who deleted the "stop fetishizing the global south" thread? I was proud of my joke in that!

Yeah, I also liked my post there

So I will just post this related Robin Brooks tweet here:

https://twitter.com/RobinBrooksIIF/status/1700997639683424663
Brazil surpluses come from exports to China and Latin America and other 3rd world nations.

Imports from Russia are fertilizers, necessary products for the exportation business.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]

Ok mr fascist mods who deleted the "stop fetishizing the global south" thread? I was proud of my joke in that!

Yeah, I also liked my post there

So I will just post this related Robin Brooks tweet here:

https://twitter.com/RobinBrooksIIF/status/1700997639683424663
Brazil surpluses come from exports to China and Latin America and other 3rd world nations.

Imports from Russia are fertilizers, necessary products for the exportation business.

Exports are a very reliable source of income, which is why Brazilian GDP has declined 40% since 2010 after the commodities crash while US GDP has gone up by 35%.

[All Along The Watchtower]

I still don’t understand what “BRICS” is supposed to mean. I do know what the acronym refers to, but that isn’t an explanation.

[CumbrianLefty]

I still don’t understand what “BRICS” is supposed to mean. I do know what the acronym refers to, but that isn’t an explanation.

According to Wikipedia, it was coined by a Goldman Sachs bro in 2001 - together with a prediction that said group of countries would dominate the world economy 50 years later.

How's that progressing?

[Red Velvet]

I still don’t understand what “BRICS” is supposed to mean. I do know what the acronym refers to, but that isn’t an explanation.

Reference of “BRICS” is to literally bricks, which together can build a wall.

When you think of a wall, you think of something that’s constructed to protect residents of a house, blocking external threats like wind, rain, etc.

That’s exactly the purpose of BRICS. The biggest emergent countries together can have a major leverage over developed countries and use this to their collective self-protection.

Russia for example, in the midst of Western sanctions, can rely on turning to BRICS in order to safeguard them from these attacks. It’s exactly what a house, built by walls and brics, is supposed to do.

A bric by itself is nothing, but together we can construct something much bigger and stronger. That’s the symbolism behind and why with more “brics” the stronger the house structure gets.

[GeneralMacArthur]

I still don’t understand what “BRICS” is supposed to mean. I do know what the acronym refers to, but that isn’t an explanation.

About 25 years ago, some guy at Goldman Sachs identified 4 developing nations as likely to collectively take over the world economy in the future.  Brazil, Russia, India and China.  BRIC.  A decade later, those four countries decided that was actually a pretty cool idea and started unironically having summits where they got together and talked about their plans for economic development.  Shortly thereafter, South Africa begged to join the cool kids club, so it became BRICS.

Since then, they've had annual BRICS meetings, but nothing much has come of it and most people had never even heard of this.  The Russian invasion of Ukraine has polarized global alliances though, with India and China both openly taking Russia's side while Brazil and South Africa have both said that Ukraine should just surrender and let Russia have whatever it wants (but have not, to my knowledge, supplied Russia or propagandized to their populations on its behalf).  That's led Russia/India/China to more aggressively pursue this idea of an anti-Western economic bloc to rival the G7 (which used to be the G8 until Russia was kicked out after taking Crimea).  Of course neither BRICS nor the G8 is really an "economic bloc" in the same way as the EU or the Warsaw Pact, but they are nations that are openly saying that their priorities are at least somewhat aligned, and it's fair to say that this is an ambition for Russia/India/China.

The upshot of this is that many other nations that don't like the west have recently asked to join the anti-West cool kids club and get a seat at the table in what's looking to be a set of countries that may increasingly divorce themselves from western markets.  Last month, BRICS formally invited Saudi Arabia, Iran, UAE, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Argentina to join.  And several other nations from Africa, South America and Southeast Asia have expressed interest.  So that expansion has got people talking because it's certainly "doing something."  It's unlikely to actually amount to much -- two pairs of those newly-added nations (Saudi Arabia / Iran, Egypt / Ethiopia) are on the verge of war with each other, and they are all much poorer than Russia/China/India (unlike the G7, which is the other 7 of the world's top 10 countries by GDP).  But the idea of some grand alliance of "global south" countries led by China to challenge the western world order is certainly interesting to speculate about.

[Kahane's Grave Is A Gender-Neutral Bathroom]