The BRICS Coalition Meets In India

/

The coalition of second-tier and second-rate countries calling themselves the BRICS (an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) has just wound up its annual “summit,” this year held in New Delhi, India.

In the twenty years since the BRICS coalition’s founding, its membership has expanded beyond just the countries forming the acronym, with additional attendees at this year’s event including the likes of Egypt, Ethiopia, Indonesia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE. Of those new members, only Indonesia really has a claim for even second-rate status. Saudi Arabia and UAE are wealthy, but owe the wealth almost entirely to the good luck of oil discoveries; and the remaining three of Egypt, Ethiopia and Iran are more like fifth-rate.

Most heads of state actually attended, including Vladimir Putin and Xi Jinping, although Lula da Silva of Brazil skipped the conference, purportedly to participate in campaigning in Brazil’s upcoming elections.

This BRICS summit understandably generated almost no news that I have seen here in the U.S. However, one thing that did catch my eye was an opening address given on September 12 by Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India. The conference was being held in India, and India was serving as this year’s conference chair, so this was kind of Modi’s moment. Following the motto “Why go small?”, Modi used the occasion to call for a “transformation of global governance,” and in particular to demand that the so-called “Global South” be given a greater voice in “global decision-making” (whatever that may mean).

The Indian government website ddnews has a report on Modi’s address. Here are some highlights:

PM Modi called for a fundamental transformation of the existing international system to give the Global South a stronger and more meaningful voice in global decision-making. He said BRICS must not limit itself to strengthening cooperation among its members but should also contribute to reshaping global institutions so that representation better reflects present-day realities. “The Global South is today in the front row of global crises, but in the back row of decision-making. We must transform this “pyramid of privilege” into a “platform of partnership”, where every country has a voice, every member has a stake, and the advancement of humanity remains at the heart of every endeavour,” PM Modi said.

I particularly like the description of the current global system as a “pyramid of privilege.”

But here’s the problem, Narendra: The BRICS, India included, are second-tier and second-rate countries (at best) for a reason. All of them engage, to a greater or lesser degree, in counter-productive and self-destructive public policies that have the effect of keeping their economies well below their potential. Clout on the world stage is very much a function of economic performance. That means that countries that, through ignorance or incompetence, degrade their own economic performance, inevitably fall behind in world competition.

And thus we have the UN, the very epitome of a system of “global governance” designed to give the Global South the majority in world decision-making. In the General Assembly, every country gets one vote. Therefore the “Global South” can always vote for and pass whatever resolution it wants. But nobody who counts pays any attention. All the “Global South” ever wants anyway is handouts from the much smaller number of more successful countries.

So why don’t the countries of the “Global South” engage in the free-market economic policies that would lead to economic success and thus to greater clout on the world stage? Because if a country protects private property, including the property of people without connections to the powers that be, and allows relatively free exchange of property interests, then the next thing you know you get a collection of successful businesses and wealthy businesspeople. And then those people think that they should get to support alternative leaders who might be less corrupt and who might adopt better policies. All of which would then threaten the power and wealth of the reigning dictators, strongmen, and/or bureaucrats. No how, no way. The powers that be in the second-rate (and third and fourth and fifth-rate) countries much prefer maintaining their status as the permanent and unchallengeable elites in poor countries, while demanding handouts from the West, all of which will be taken for the benefit of the elites and never improve the situation of the poor.

To add some context for this post, I thought it might be interesting to collect some data as to how various countries of the world have fared economically relative to each other since the fall of the Soviet Union back in 1991. Start with the United States. The conventional wisdom during these past several decades has been that the U.S. will inevitably see its share of world production decline over time as the developing world gradually joins and participates in the world economy. Therefore, you may be interested to learn that, according to World Bank data, the share of the U.S. in global GDP in 1990 was 26%, and in 2026 is estimated to be 26%.

A site called theglobaleconomy.com collects huge amounts of economic data on the countries of the world, including relative percentages of global GDP by year going back to 1990 (and in many cases even before that). Here are their data for some of the BRICS:

  • Brazil: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 1.69%; in 2025: 1.96%.

  • Russia: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 2.27%; in 2025: 2.2%

  • India: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 1.41%; in 2025: 3.4%

  • China: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 1.59%; in 2025: 16.75%. This is the one BRICS country to make substantial gains in this 35-year period. However, note that according to theglobaleconomy.com, China’s share of world GDP reached a peak of 18.62% in 2021, and has declined substantially since. Also note that at 16.75% of world GDP and with four times the population of the U.S., China’s per capita GDP is only about 16% that of the U.S.

  • South Africa: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 0.55%; in 2025: 0.37% (a substantial decline).

  • Indonesia: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 0.47%; in 2025: 1.24% (Note that the population of Indonesia at about 290 million is very close to that of the U.S.)

  • Egypt: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 0.19%; in 2025: 0.31%

  • Ethiopia: Percent of global GDP in 1990: 0.05%; in 2025: 0.11%. This for a country with a population of 139 million people, about 40% of U.S. population!

I leave out Iran and the Gulf Petro-states because their GDP figures mostly just represent fluctuations in the price of oil.

My comments: China is the one country that seemed to have figured out how to make big gains on U.S. economic dominance; but in the most recent years, under the increasingly tight control of Xi, it has begun to move in reverse. India has begun to move up some, and has a big opportunity for future gains if it can resist the temptation to tighten its regulations and impede business growth. The rest of these countries are huge lost opportunities. Russia under Putin has stagnated and continues to be dragged down by the failed Ukraine adventure. South Africa is moving rapidly backwards as its racial spoils regime takes increasing control.

So, Mr. Modi, you can complain all you want, but you will have a bigger role to play on the world stage when you decide to behave like a grown up country.