Dan Drezner a href="http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=21688"warns against overemphasizing the power and influence of the BRIC/a in international affairs. But I think he is too quick to dismiss the grouping, even though he's right about the challenges it faces and its structural weaknesses.br /br /For me, what is most important at this point is that there is now a regular set of meetings taking place between four major powers that otherwise might not and would not meet. That to me is significant in and of itself.br /br /This is what I posted, in part, on Dan's site:br /br /blockquotea href="http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/17/bric_a_brac#comment-75827" ... we should not overestimate the power and relevance of the BRIC. But I think we should also recognize that at this point in its existence, simply continuing to exist marks a major step forward for the BRIC. Yekaterinburg-2008, the first BRIC meeting, ended up not becoming a one-hit wonder. Despite predictions to the contrary (especially after the Russia-Georgia war), India and Brazil still see value in being associated with Russia and China in this format. Each time the BRIC meets--whether in a summit or at the UN--it is one more bean filling the sack. Each time the BRIC meets it moves the concept further away from a Goldman Sachs reports and gets the foreign ministries of the four countries used to preparing for these summits. There is also a particular view of international politics, as underdeveloped as it may be right now, which stresses state sovereignty. (The 2008 summit, for instance, produced a unanimous conclusion on not supporting independence for Kosovo.)br /br /If in 2015 the BRIC summits are like the G-8, issuing meaningless and uneforceable declarations, that will be a separate question.br /br /Not hyping the BRIC as representing a real challenge in 2009 to an American-led global order makes perfect sense. But it could easily evolve into a way for these four states to use their assets to renegotiate the terms of their positions within that order.br //a/blockquotediv class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/19194934-930234560633370197?l=washingtonrealist.blogspot.com'//div
Friday, June 26, 2009
Drezner and the BRIC
Dan Drezner a href="http://www.nationalinterest.org/Article.aspx?id=21688"warns against overemphasizing the power and influence of the BRIC/a in international affairs. But I think he is too quick to dismiss the grouping, even though he's right about the challenges it faces and its structural weaknesses.br /br /For me, what is most important at this point is that there is now a regular set of meetings taking place between four major powers that otherwise might not and would not meet. That to me is significant in and of itself.br /br /This is what I posted, in part, on Dan's site:br /br /blockquotea href="http://drezner.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/06/17/bric_a_brac#comment-75827" ... we should not overestimate the power and relevance of the BRIC. But I think we should also recognize that at this point in its existence, simply continuing to exist marks a major step forward for the BRIC. Yekaterinburg-2008, the first BRIC meeting, ended up not becoming a one-hit wonder. Despite predictions to the contrary (especially after the Russia-Georgia war), India and Brazil still see value in being associated with Russia and China in this format. Each time the BRIC meets--whether in a summit or at the UN--it is one more bean filling the sack. Each time the BRIC meets it moves the concept further away from a Goldman Sachs reports and gets the foreign ministries of the four countries used to preparing for these summits. There is also a particular view of international politics, as underdeveloped as it may be right now, which stresses state sovereignty. (The 2008 summit, for instance, produced a unanimous conclusion on not supporting independence for Kosovo.)br /br /If in 2015 the BRIC summits are like the G-8, issuing meaningless and uneforceable declarations, that will be a separate question.br /br /Not hyping the BRIC as representing a real challenge in 2009 to an American-led global order makes perfect sense. But it could easily evolve into a way for these four states to use their assets to renegotiate the terms of their positions within that order.br //a/blockquotediv class="blogger-post-footer"img width='1' height='1' src='https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/tracker/19194934-930234560633370197?l=washingtonrealist.blogspot.com'//div
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment