The Evolution and Potential of BRICS in the Global Economy
Origin and Transformation of BRICS
The term "BRICS" was originally coined by Jim O’Neill of Goldman Sachs in 2001, during a pivotal time when China was on the brink of joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2002. This inclusion was endorsed by global powers such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Russia, and France.
Interestingly, despite O’Neill’s dismissal in 2023 of BRICS’s strategic depth, attributing its origin to an American-Pakistani intern at Goldman Sachs, its significance was ironically underscored by then-White House economist Joe Neil later that same year.
The Concept and Critique
According to O’Neill, the current state of BRICS diverges significantly from its original vision. Initially conceived as a burgeoning economic coalition consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, BRICS has been critiqued by O’Neill as evolving into what he describes as merely a "political club."
Expansion and Influence
Contrarily, former White House economist Tom Sullivan views the expansion of BRICS membership to include nations like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Ethiopia as a transformative development. Sullivan argues that this broadened membership has positioned BRICS to potentially disrupt the international trading system dominated by the US dollar. Highlighting the strategic control these countries exert over the Suez Canal, through which approximately 12 percent of global maritime trade passes, Sullivan believes the new BRICS could become a formidable economic force.
Moreover, Sullivan envisions these countries trading primarily in their national currencies, reminiscent of global trade practices before World War II. Prior to WWII, international trade was predominantly conducted using local currencies, supported by a thriving currency exchange market. However, the post-WWII era saw the widespread adoption of the US dollar, driven by the presence of US armed forces around the globe.
Implications for Global Trade
Contemplating a reversion to pre-WWII trade practices is not to forecast the demise of the US dollar. Rather, it suggests a potential recalibration of the Federal Reserve’s influence on other nations’ economic policies. This shift could herald a more multipolar financial landscape, reducing the hegemonic sway of the US currency in international transactions.
For further insights and updates on the evolving global economic environment, subscribe to "Viewpoint" from The Jakarta Post, your go-to source for engaging with contemporary issues.
