Latest news with #Countries
Indian Express
a day ago
- Business
- Indian Express
How BRICS is chipping away at the Western order
The recent 2025 BRICS summit, held in Brazil, did not appear dramatic on the surface. There were no loud declarations or confrontations. However, the agenda was quietly ambitious, and the message it sent was unmistakable – the West no longer has a monopoly on how the world should work. BRICS is quietly rewriting some of the rules of global politics. From de-dollarisation to alternative development models, it is increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order. One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government. Countries can agree on rules, but no one can force them to follow them. This is what some international relations scholars call an 'anarchic system,' not because it's disorderly, but because there is no overarching authority to enforce rules. Countries act in their own interests. Cooperation happens, but it's often fragile. Power matters. Strong states often do what they can. Weak ones suffer what they must (Recall the Melian Dialogue from Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War). Power is distributed unevenly, and when a few countries have more of it, they tend to shape the rules in their favour. The Western-led liberal international order grew out of this system after World War II. The US, along with its allies, built a network of institutions, like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, that reflected its values and priorities. This order was based on free markets, democracy, and above all, the dominance of the US dollar in global finance. For a while, that order worked – at least for the West. But now, the rest of the world is starting to ask why a system created in 1945 should still define the rules of the 21st century. For a long time, emerging powers like Brazil, China, India, and South Africa largely accepted this structure. However, with the global economic landscape shifting and the world becoming more multipolar, they are pushing back. BRICS is the most visible platform for that push. One of the loudest messages from the BRICS summit in Brazil was about de-dollarisation. It sounds technical, but it's deeply political. This idea has been gaining ground for some years, but recent events, especially the weaponisation of financial systems through sanctions, have brought it to the forefront. The issue is that most global trade and finance depend on the US dollar. When India buys oil from Russia, it usually has to pay in dollars. When Brazil takes a loan, it often does so in dollars. When China invests abroad, the transaction typically moves through dollar-based systems like SWIFT. This gives the US not just financial influence but also political leverage. At the Brazil summit, countries once again floated the idea of a BRICS currency – not an immediate project, but a signal of intent. In the meantime, they are promoting trade in local currencies. Russia and China already conduct over 80 per cent of their trade in Roubles and Yuan. India has begun using rupees for some transactions with Iran and Sri Lanka. India and the UAE have begun settling some oil deals in rupees and dirhams. The New Development Bank, created by BRICS, is now issuing loans in local currencies to avoid dollar exposure. This is not just about saving on transaction costs. It's about creating freedom from a system that many in the Global South see as tilted against them. This is not going to be easy. The US dollar dominates because it is stable, widely accepted, and backed by a deep financial system. But the fact that BRICS countries keep returning to this topic shows how deep the frustration runs. De-dollarisation may not happen overnight, but the intent is clear – reduce exposure to a system controlled by Washington. BRICS claims to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed. The group presents itself as a voice for the Global South. It talks about fairer development, more inclusive trade rules, and reforms in global institutions. It also backs concrete alternatives. The NDB offers loans without the political strings often attached to IMF or World Bank funding. BRICS countries are exploring joint investments in infrastructure and clean energy. There's talk of creating a BRICS rating agency to counter the dominance of Western credit rating firms. BRICS also pushes for reforms in the UN Security Council and the World Bank's voting rules to give more voice to emerging powers. Here, Brazil, India, and South Africa play a bridging role. They are democracies with growing economies, often seen as more acceptable faces of BRICS to other developing countries. China brings deep pockets and strategic weight. Russia, increasingly isolated from the West, is strengthening its ties with non-Western partners. This effort to build new platforms and institutions reflects a shared frustration that the rules of the global system are often written elsewhere, by people who don't face the same challenges as those in the Global South. Together, BRICS is trying to change not just policies but also the narrative about what kind of development is legitimate and who should lead. Notably, international relations theory can help us understand why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why it matters. Realism Realism, one of the oldest schools of international relations, sees power as the main force shaping global affairs. States act primarily in their own interest. Institutions and alliances matter only if they help countries protect or expand their power. From this perspective, BRICS is not a community of like-minded nations but a strategic arrangement – a balancing act against Western dominance. When Russia promotes de-dollarisation or China supports the NDB, they are not guided by ideals of fairness or cooperation. They are responding to the realities of power politics. A good example of this logic came after the US froze Russian central bank assets following the Ukraine war. Many countries saw how exposed they were if their reserves were held in dollars. The concern wasn't ethical. It was practical. It was about survival. Liber theory On the other hand, liberal theory, which posits that cooperation is possible and institutions matter, would argue that if the global order is unfair, countries will attempt to establish new institutions. That's exactly what BRICS is doing by creating alternatives to Western-run systems, not through war, but through investment, banking, and trade. It believes that the way to change the system is to create better alternatives within it. The NDB isn't just a protest against the World Bank. It's a real bank giving loans, financing projects, and developing regulations. That's classic liberal theory in action – solving global problems through cooperative institutions. Constructivism Constructivist theorists go a step further. They argue that power is not just about money or military strength, but about ideas. It's also about whose story is seen as legitimate. BRICS challenges the idea that Western liberal democracy is the only valid model of progress. It says there are many ways to grow and that the West doesn't have a moral monopoly. BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. When BRICS leaders speak of 'mutual respect' and 'non-interference,' they are offering a different political culture – one that appeals to countries tired of lectures from the West about democracy and governance. Whether this rhetoric matches reality is debatable, but the narrative matters. These theoretical perspectives are not mutually exclusive views. They all help explain why BRICS is doing what it's doing and why the West is starting to take it more seriously. However, none of this means that the Western-led order is collapsing. The US dollar still dominates global trade and finance. Western-led institutions still make the rules. The US still has unmatched military power. Western technology and capital continue to dominate global supply chains. At the same time, BRICS has its own internal differences. China and India are locked in border tensions. Russia is diplomatically isolated. Brazil and South Africa are wary of being seen as backing an anti-Western front. The NDB is still small compared to the World Bank. However, the system is no longer a one-way street. Something is shifting. The fact that major economies are even talking about bypassing the dollar or creating their own financial systems was unthinkable two decades ago. The fact that they are acting on it, even though cautiously, means the world is entering a new phase. This isn't about tearing down the West. It's about making space for the rest. The BRICS summit in Brazil didn't create headlines because it didn't need to. It was not designed to shock. It was designed to show that the world is no longer waiting for change from the West. It is building change elsewhere. One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government, prompting some international relations scholars to call the international system 'anarchic'. Comment. How is BRICS rewriting some of the rules of global politics, and increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order? BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. Evaluate. By claiming to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed, BRICS presents itself as a voice for the Global South. Do you agree? How do theoretical perspectives, realist, liberal, and constructivist, help explain why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why the West is starting to take it more seriously? (The author is a Professor at MMAJ Academy of International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.) Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week. Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
Jordan News
5 days ago
- Politics
- Jordan News
New U.S. Plan to Deport Migrants to Third Countries - Jordan News
New U.S. Plan to Deport Migrants to Third Countries A senior official in U.S. President Donald Trump's administration revealed in a memo that immigration authorities may deport migrants to countries other than their country of origin with as little as six hours' notice, offering a glimpse into how upcoming deportation operations may unfold. اضافة اعلان The memo, dated Wednesday, July 9, was authored by Todd Lyons, acting director of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). It states that the administration generally plans to wait at least 24 hours before transferring individuals after informing them of their deportation to a so-called 'third country.' However, under 'urgent circumstances,' the memo allows deportations to proceed with only six hours' notice, provided that the individual has been given an opportunity to speak with a lawyer. The policy also permits sending migrants to countries that provide assurances they will not be persecuted or tortured, without requiring additional legal procedures. This new ICE policy signals that the Trump administration intends to move swiftly in deporting migrants to various countries around the world. In June, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned a lower court ruling that had limited such deportations without first examining whether the migrants feared persecution in the third countries. Following the Supreme Court decision and a subsequent court order, the Trump administration deported eight migrants from Cuba, Laos, Mexico, Myanmar, Sudan, and Vietnam to South Sudan. According to Reuters, the Trump administration last week pressured officials in five African nations—Liberia, Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Mauritania, and Gabon—to accept deported individuals who hold other nationalities. The Washington Post was the first to report on the new ICE memorandum.
Straits Times
15-07-2025
- Business
- Straits Times
US tariffs may last well after Trump; crucial for countries to deepen trade ties: SM Lee
SINGAPORE - Countries that support free trade should strengthen cooperation and work together to adapt to evolving global trade dynamics in response to the United States' increasingly protectionist stance. This is crucial, as it may be difficult for the US and the rest of the world to return to the pre-April 2 landscape, when President Donald Trump unveiled his so-called reciprocal trade policy, said Senior Minister Lee Hsien Loong. The former prime minister was speaking at the Economic Society of Singapore's (ESS) annual dinner on July 15. SM Lee noted that once tariffs are in place and new businesses emerge that rely on that protection, it becomes politically unfeasible to remove them, as these businesses, now with vested interests, will push back against any rollback. 'It will not go back to the status quo in trade policy, in economic policy. Once you make a move, you can't take it back.' He noted that former US president Joe Biden did not overturn earlier tariffs that Mr Trump imposed on China in his first term. SM Lee said that it is unclear if the US will in the future abandon its protectionist stance, but that should not stop other countries from strengthening international cooperation among one another. He noted that the US has taken a more narrow, bilateral and transactional view of international trade, and, while not perfect, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) framework has nonetheless enabled extensive free trade among many countries. 'We will have to see whether that is (still) possible, because when you have the biggest economy in the world taking a radically different approach and really not just withdrawing from, but expressing its disapproval of the WTO system, that will have repercussions.' Acting in defiance of economic laws and the interests of other countries will be very hard to sustain for the US, SM Lee said. 'One thing I have learned in government is that you can fail to follow economic principles, but you cannot repeal an economic law, whether you follow (it) or not, the economic law exists. 'That's just the way the world works. That's just the way human society works, and if you don't follow it, you may have your reasons and you want to override it and do something different, but market forces, incentives for people to act in certain ways in their own interests are very powerful,' he said. He noted that the Americans still have to trade with the rest of the world, such as in rare earths. 'Maybe at some point you (the US) can come back and participate again in a more open and constructive way, but that's the best possible scenario. It may or may not happen.' Asked what other countries should do in the meantime, SM Lee said they can build partnerships with like-minded economies within a region such as Asean, a broader grouping like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, or through wider trade pacts such as the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership. 'And I think we can also work together on the WTO to make the WTO work without being paralysed by consensus gridlock.' He said countries should also diversify their trade relationships by exploring new markets in regions like Latin America and Africa. SM Lee's dialogue with ESS president Euston Quah also touched on domestic economics and policies, such as on Singapore's certificate of entitlement (COE) system. A preferential system where COEs are offered at a lower cost to certain groups is not feasible for Singapore, SM Lee said. He was responding to a question by Prof Quah which made reference to calls for COEs to be made more affordable to some drivers, based on need, such as families with young children. This cannot work in tandem with the current COE system, which is meant to allocate scarce space on the road according to economic principles, SM Lee said. 'It becomes very difficult for the government to design a system which takes into account how many kids you have, how young they are, whether you've got somebody disabled in the family, whether you have an old folk, whether your job requires you to go place to place, delivering supplies, meeting customers, or whether you are driving to a place of work very far away,' he said. 'I think if you want to design a scheme which worries about all those things, it would fail.' He likened the COE to a proxy for road space, with prices fluctuating depending on demand from prospective car buyers. This system is working quite well, SM Lee said, adding that the government has issued additional COEs to give more people the right to own vehicles. 'If you want the price to be lower, then you must put out more COEs, which is what the government is now doing. We took from the future. We are putting out five, 10 per cent more, and therefore the supply is higher,' he added. 'There's really no easy way to make something which is valuable be distributed fairly, and at the same time, very cheap.' The Land Transport Authority has said it would add up to 20,000 additional COEs across all five vehicle categories over several years from this February. SM Lee also cited the Chinese city of Beijing, which adopted lotteries to determine which drivers could own licence plates. He said he did not believe this was the right solution for Singapore. 'I can guarantee every Singaporean affordable, convenient transportation. I cannot guarantee every Singaporean an affordable car.' He added that cars differ from Housing Board flats, where 'every Singaporean can get one, maybe three-room, maybe five-room, maybe two-room, but every Singaporean household can get one. But cars, no'. SM Lee noted that it is better to provide direct cash assistance to the group in need instead of creating complicated schemes to help them. 'You have a special need, for example, you have a kid. Rather than I give you a cheaper COE, I give you a bigger baby bonus, and if you want, you can use that to... help to pay for a little bit of a car,' he said.
Al Jazeera
14-07-2025
- Science
- Al Jazeera
Non-proliferation appears to be a thing of the past
The New Global Nuclear Arms Race Project Force Countries are building more weapons and newer systems to extend their reach Video Duration 03 minutes 23 seconds 03:23 Video Duration 03 minutes 03 seconds 03:03 Video Duration 02 minutes 55 seconds 02:55 Video Duration 03 minutes 18 seconds 03:18 Video Duration 02 minutes 57 seconds 02:57 Video Duration 03 minutes 00 seconds 03:00 Video Duration 02 minutes 15 seconds 02:15
Qatar Tribune
12-07-2025
- Business
- Qatar Tribune
Trump slaps Brazil with 50% tariff, says copper levy due on August 1
Agencies U.S. President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday he would introduce a steep 50% tariff on Brazil, as he blasted the trial of the country's ex-leader, and said a U.S. 'national security' levy on copper would begin in August. In a letter addressed to Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Trump criticized the treatment of his right-wing ally Jair Bolsonaro as an 'international disgrace.' Bolsonaro is facing trial over accusations he plotted a coup after his narrow 2022 election loss to Lula. In response to Trump's tariff letter, Lula warned of possible reciprocation, writing on X that 'any unilateral tariff increases will be addressed in light of the Brazilian Law of Economic Reciprocity.' Brazil earlier on Wednesday said it had summoned the U.S. charge d'affaires over Trump's previous criticism of the Bolsonaro trial. The 50% U.S. tariff on Brazilian goods will take effect Aug. 1, Trump said in his letter, mirroring a deadline that dozens of other economies face. On that same date, a 50% tariff on U.S. imports of copper – a key metal used in green energy and other technologies – will take effect, Trump announced Wednesday evening on social media. He said the move followed a 'robust NATIONAL SECURITY ASSESSMENT,' likely alluding to a Department of Commerce investigation into copper launched earlier this year. 'Copper is the second most used material by the Department of Defense!' Trump said. Trump's message to Lula was the latest in more than 20 such letters the U.S. president has released since Monday, after repeatedly threatening to simply decide a rate for countries as negotiations continue over his elevated 'reciprocal' tariffs. Brazil had not been among those threatened previously with duties above a 10% baseline, and the U.S. runs a goods trade surplus with Brazil. On Wednesday, Trump also addressed letters to leaders of the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Brunei, Algeria, Libya, Iraq and Moldova, spelling out duties ranging from 20% to 30% that would also take effect on Aug. 1. Similar to a first batch of documents published Monday, the levels were not too far from those originally threatened in April, although some partners received notably lower rates this time. While Trump in April imposed a 10% levy on almost all trading partners, he unveiled – and then withheld – higher rates for dozens of economies. The deadline for those steeper levels to take effect was meant to be Wednesday, before Trump postponed it further to Aug. 1. Countries that faced the threats of elevated duties began receiving letters spelling out U.S. tariff rates on their products. In the messages, Trump justified his tariffs as a response to trade ties that he says are 'far from Reciprocal.' The letters urged countries to manufacture products in the U.S. to avoid duties, while threatening further escalation if leaders retaliated. Other countries that have received Trump's letters include key U.S. allies Japan and South Korea, as well as Indonesia, Bangladesh and Thailand. Analysts have noted that Asian countries have been a key target so far. But all eyes are on the state of negotiations with major partners who have yet to receive such letters, including the European Union. The Trump administration is under pressure to unveil more trade pacts. So far, Washington has only reached agreements with the U.K. and Vietnam, alongside a deal to temporarily lower tit-for-tat levies with China. Trump on Tuesday said his government was 'probably two days off' from sending the EU a letter with an updated tariff rate. An EU spokesperson said Wednesday the bloc wants to strike a deal with the U.S. 'in the coming days,' and has shown readiness to reach an agreement in principle. Apart from tariffs targeting goods from different countries, Trump has rolled out sector-specific duties on steel, aluminum and autos since returning to the White House in January.
