On January 9^th BLB Law Firm had the pleasure of attending the meeting with Professor Toloraya about BRICS, which took place in Rome at SIOI (i.e. the Italian Society for International Organization).

The word BRICS is the acronym for the five countries that, according to the report drawn up in 2001 by the investment bank Goldman Sachs, will dominate the global economy during the next few decades. Those countries are Brazil, Russia, India, China and, from 2010, South-Africa. Today, each of those countries has a think tank, meaning a research organisation that develops strategies relating to BRICS; Professor Toloraya is the Director of the Russian Research Think Tank and managed the period of Russian presidency, preceding the current Indian presidency.

In the introduction of the meeting, the organisers report the idea, expressed on many official occasions by Chinese representatives before, that since the European Union is adopting an ambiguous and contradictory position about BRICS – on the one hand, EU recognizes the importance of BRICS in the global context while, on the other hand, the Member States are required to establish only bilateral relationships with the individual countries –, the Mediterranean reality, and in particular Italy, can serve as a bridge between those two entities.

After this reflection, the word goes to Professor Toloraya, who outlines how the year just ended left us with the awareness that the world order born after World War II came to end. The novelty of the new global balance is that, for the first time in history, it is not happening through a war, but peacefully, based on the characteristics of the BRICS system, where there is not a dominant force and which is based on the principles of law, of the respect of the sovereignty of each country, of the democracy and of the sustainable development, from which any person involved in the international relations should ideally benefit.

Its is the peaceful development of the international relations which allows to talk about a new world order, defined as “Post-West”, even if it is impossible to hide the contradictions between BRICS Countries concerning, for example, the different development modalities and capabilities: in fact, what keeps those five countries together is the common and tacit determination of their political élite to propose this organisation as a mechanism of a peaceful development of international relations.

As already known, over the last years BRICS encountered many criticisms which ridiculed the organisation itself, representing it as artificial, temporary and, most of all, conservative rather than reformatory; in the opinion of the Russian professor, those criticisms ignore the very essence of BRICS, which, even if created by Goldman Sachs as a prospect for affordable investments, because of the global financial crisis that started in 2007, has lost this meaning, transforming into a forum for consultations between the five countries.

Concerning the substantial differences between BRICS States, it can be outlined, for example, that while Russia is rich in raw materials, China is still characterized by imports, or that the market share for trade between BRICS Countries and the West is even greater than that within BRICS Countries. Moreover, it is known that Russia is subject to penalties and has a negative growth, in particular in monetary terms, with the crisis of Russian rouble; that China, while still rising, has a growth which is slowing down and an acute social instability; that Brazil, after the change of government, has various internal contradictions and there is no lack of people asking if it is still interested in BRICS; and that South-Africa has many social difficulties while India, even if it is growing by 7%, is characterized by social problems linked to the slow democratic mechanisms.

On the grounds of this analysis, the BRICS system is criticized, on one hand, for the lack of unity and, on the other hand, for the impossibility to imagine that some Countries can propose valid solutions, ideas and motions if they are so not homogeneous and in crisis.

Under the first aspect, Professor Toloraya outlines that the real objective was never to give a unified image of BRICS States, nor to impose a dominant model, while, under the second aspect, the answer is – in a certain sense -  paradoxical, because it is possible to outline that the more the crisis grows in those States, the more the need for a solidarity mechanism between the same States emerges, as it is shown by the coordination between BRICS during the last G-20.

As far as BRICS organisation is concerned, it is possible to observe the provision of various types of official meetings, from the summits to the inter-ministerial meetings, from academic think tanks to business or cultural meetings. It happens through a system which – unlike in strictly Western international organisations – is based on the equality of member States and, consequently, on a certain degree of slowness of the decision-making process: the result and the reason of those elements is the circumstance that any decision is taken by the individual State only in the case in which it has a specific interest, without any kind of imposition between BRICS.

Professor Toloraya proposes therefore to develop the structuring of the organisation, which in practise must invent itself, with the only condition that it happens without any kind of imposition, because of the common fear of an international organisation imposed from above. He hopes so in the institution and in the full functioning of a Virtual Secretary by the end of this year, in the adoption of a mechanism of regular consultation between the Ministers of Foreign Affairs and in the possibility of signing a declaration of principle of BRICS States on peace and cooperation which also includes a general non-aggression pact.

Any analysis on the future must necessary incorporate an examination about the future western policy: in fact, after the unexpected election of President Trump, the American policy will be probably characterized by a principle of isolationism and by a focus on the internal development, and by a consequent reduced attention to the export of ideological models.  

This changing scenario must produce more and better chance of cooperation not only between BRICS States and with them, but also with other emerging countries and, in this context, the role that the European Union decides to play will be of crucial importance: in fact, Professor Toloraya hopes that a real “Euro-BRICS Process” will come to life.

The Russian professor, asked about the possible inclusion of other States in BRICS organisation, appears not completely favourable: in his opinion, the current members have specific qualities and each of them ideally represents one of the current global civilizations; this circumstance makes BRICS not an international organisation in the strict sense of the word, but a meeting point between different civilizations. Under this aspect, if it is needed to include new States, the preference is given without any doubt to a State representative of the Islamic world and, in particular, to Indonesia, considered more stable than Turkey. On the other hand, the Russian professor appears more favourable to imagine the official adoption of an alternative system – already adopted in practise – of the Out-reach, which, while maintaining the current number of members, allows each State to reach and involve in BRICS organisation several other bordering countries and also the groups of States, such as, for example, European union.

Lastly, to the question if BRICS must be considered as an anti-West model, the answer of Professor Toloraya can only be negative, because, in his opinion – maybe considered utopian and naïve – the key word can not and should not be “against”, but “together”.

BLB Law Firm was really pleased of joining this event in which it received further and authoritative confirmations of the opportunity to continue building a bridge between Italy and BRICS States. From a legal standpoint, BLB enforced such a bridge assisting (with a special focus on China) Italian and foreign enterprises in mutual investments and business projects.