By Dr Subhash Kapila
30-Jul-2014
BRICS and SCO are basically China-Centric multilateral organisations. They perceptionaly stand designed to counter United States and Western domination of the global geopolitical space and of global financial institutions.
India is one of the founder member states of BRICS which now six years old comprises Brazil, Russia, India and China originally, and with South Africa as a recent entry.
SCO membership comprises China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. Observer States Status was extended to India, Pakistan, Iran, Mongolia and Pakistan. SCO has three Dialogue Partners ---Turkey, Belarus and Sri Lanka.
SCO is headquartered in Beijing and the BRICS Bank finalised in BRICS Summit 2014 is to be located ate Shanghai. In essence therefore, the alternatives to US-dominated geopolitical and financial groupings/organisations will be headquartered in China.
BRICS advocates cite statistical evidence and a very impressive list too, of the combined weight of the six-member economically vibrant nations. However what is lost sight of is that in terms of economic systems, economic policies and strategies all six member-states are widely divergent. Economic integration is a far cry and even the recently announced BRICS Bank and BRICS Contingent Reserve Fund materialisation would take years to fructify.
Besides in India where strategic vision of the policy establishment is confined to economics and economic gains linked to development and infrastructure plans it needs to be reminded that economic strategies of countries like China are determined by geopolitical priorities. China is prone to jettison any economic collaboration/cooperation in any bilateral or multilateral system if China’s strategic aims are not met.
Within BRICS, China economically stands out in asymmetric proportions with Russia, India and the others. At the recent 2014Summit India is reported to have blocked China to contribute the maximum contribution of $41 billion initially in one go as against the $ 5 billion each to the BRICS Bank that was agreed to. The Chinese aim was clear --to gain initially the upper hand in controlling the BRICS Bank and this needs to be taken as a trend that would be repeated by China in the coming years.
How advantageous it is for India to be a member of BRICS as a global alternative to the IMF and World Bank? Would it lead India not to go to World Bank or IMF for diversified financial needs? Would membership of BRICS lead to India exercising greater leverages in terms of its financial dealings with the global economic powers and global financial institutions?
One is afraid that no advantages accrue to India other than sitting at the same table with two Permanent Members of the UN Security Council, namely Russia and China who today are at loggerheads with the United States and which on its own is seeking to restore impetus in the US-India Strategic Partnership independent of India’s association with BRICS or SCO.
The only beneficiary of BRICS is China which needs respectable avenues to channelize its vast US Dollars reserves in trillions. The BRICS route offers that advantage. Its predominance in BRICS may add certain leverages to China at the global level both geopolitically and financially.
Through the BRICS route Chin could muscle into India’s economy even in sensitive sectors which ordinarily would stand greater scrutiny. Though not related to BRICS but as an example of Chinese investments economic penetration has been the reported news of Anil Ambani’s Reliance Communications w securing a $1.9 billion loan advance from a Chinese bank. This also has strings attached in that the PLA owned Huawei Technologies emerges as the main actor from the Chinese side. It needs to be recalled that Indian intelligence agencies have opposed HUAWEI entering sensitive sectors in India like digital communications.
Though the apex appointments in BRICS Bank and other mechanisms are being shared by all the member states but it stands to reason that in the overall policy directions and strategizing, the will of China as a BRICS dominating partner will outweigh that of other member states. Also to be noted is the fact that Russia even though it may be inclined to align with India against outright Chinese domination of BRICS will not be able to do so simply for the reason that for geopolitical compulsions, Russia would be forced to go along with China.
It needs to be pointed out that the last BRICS Summit held last month in Brazil was a virtual non-event as far as India was concerned as one did not see any major English TV channels in India conducting debates on the advantages to India of BRICS membership.
Overall, there are many faltering steps that await the full integration and materialisation of the BRICS Bank and Contingent Reserve Fund besides harmonising the different economic ideologies of member states into a workable and unified approach so as to provide a credible alternative to the World Bank, IMF and ADB.
What does India do in the interim when it requires prompt infusion of massive financial inputs for its infrastructure development? Having type- casted itself with a grouping supposedly challenging existing global financial institutions, would India have a call on them? Then why get avoidably type-casted when industrialised economic powers are as it is excited in investing in India’s potential as an emerging power?
Moving to SCO, two things need to be pointed out even though India has only an Observer Status, but is being wooed to take Full Member status. SCO is an out and out China-Centric geopolitical organisation in what was earlier touted as being an Eastern NATO designed to checkmate the eastern creep of NATO towards Russian and Chinese peripheries.
Has SCO been successful in countervailing United States and NATO predominance on Chinese peripheries? Has SCO been successful in countervailing US predominance in the Asia Pacific? Other than Russia, has China been able to enlist any other major power to align with the China-dominated SCO?
The answer is in the negative and Russia too was a reluctant entrant to SCO as a result of United Sates not resetting US-Russia relationship. Russia had to add some strategic ballast to its aspirations to emerge as an independent power centre and Russia does still retain certain leverages with the Central Asian Republics members of SCO and which does give it a handle deal with China within the SCO.
So where does India fit into this geopolitical framework and especially when China and India have competing strategic interests in Asia Pacific and China would oppose India gaining any economic or strategic foothold in the Central Asian Republics.
In February 2014 the SCO Secretary General was in New Delhi to motivate India to become a full-fledged member of SCO. This was partly in response to the previous Government’s Foreign Minister expressing such thoughts at the last SCO Submit.
Indian advocates of India becoming a full-member of SCO forget that China needs this as an excuse to add Pakistan also as a full member of SCO. Also such advocates plead that joining SCO would enable India to enter the Central Asian Republics markets for energy security needs and trade. They seem to forget that China would never assist a competing power like India for such an entry and that too in a region where China as it is involved in a tussle with Russia.
Concluding one would like to emphasise that India as a rising power should rise on its own strengths and its own two legs rather than hope that it can successfully reach the top by piggy-backing on China-Centric multilateral organisations and groupings.
India hardly garners any substantial advantages by getting type-casted into alignment with China-Centric organisations. If India lacks the political guts and will to use its extensive power attributes to ‘ride alone’ in pursuit of regional and global power and feels impelled to join a “posse” then it would be well advised to join a US-led posse rather than a China-led posse
No comments:
Post a Comment