The Role of the USA in Relations with BRICKS Countries in the 21st Century

Introduction to BRICKS Countries and the USA

 The BRICS countries play a crucial role in the post-bipolar world order. Their combined share in the global economy is approximately 17%, and in the global population, it is close to 42%. These figures are indicators of not only their significant economic growth but also their rising political influence. BRICS is an acronym denoting five emerging economies: Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. BRICS members differ from the major economic powerhouses mainly in terms of their influence in global governance and as counter-hegemonic agents in international relations. However, they also claim to share some common goals of reforming global economic governance, perpetuating international peace, security, and development, maintaining a multilateral ethos of socio-political cooperation, and promoting alternative governance norms in developing regions.

A systematic assessment of the respective roles of the US in their foreign relations is imperative, especially at a time when the power shift in world politics implies that the public leadership and the foreign policies of major countries have to somehow be brought to sync with each other’s larger strategic, political, and economic realities. Alongside, these calculations and aspirations of global hegemonic power are largely consistent with a strong sense of national identity internally as well as a desire to become a pole in the new multipolar world. These are not merely issues for policymakers but also call for scholarly scrutiny. How the BRICS dialectically engage with the US will determine more than merely the character of these five countries; it will also determine the character of the emerging multipolar world.

2. Historical Context of USA-BRICKS Relations

The dynamics of world development often depend on the character of interstate relations. In the 21^st century to date, one of the most obvious and wide-ranging features of these has been the escalating rivalry between the US and members of the BRICS political grouping, which played a significant part in international and world politics. This report looks at the role of the US in interstate relations with the BRICS.

American diplomat and scholar Norman S. Hill lists three basic directions in which American interest in Brazil, Russia, India, and China has been growing in the first decade of the 21^st century: broadening of the US’s participation in international cultural and educational activities; the transformation of international trade problems into opportunities; and dealing with new actors on the international stage of newly developed states that have interests in broad political as well as trade and financial cooperation with the US. The US is giving thought to new structures that will be capable of providing a forum for dialogue that is at the same time a setting for consultation on a wide range of themes: political, economic, social affairs, and international relations in general. In the light of the wider role progressively being taken on by some important states that have gained or are striving for major-power status, a fresh look at US relations with developing states, and with the new powers in particular, proves interesting from the standpoint of world politics. In the decade now ending, US relations with China, India, Brazil, South Africa, and Russia have comprehensively risen in importance. In terms of high-level visits, state and diplomatic contacts, the US has substantially shifted its emphasis.

3. Economic Interactions and Trade Agreements

Economic Interactions. The USA has been increasingly engaging in economic relations and policy with the BRICS countries. The economic relations and trade between the USA and BRICS countries in the 21^st century are done primarily via trade agreements, which provide rules and regulations aimed at facilitating trade flows between the economies. The BRICS countries are significant trading partners in contrast to the USA’s other trading blocs such as the Asian Bloc and the EU. Despite these opportunities, global trade has its complications; the USA and the BRICS countries possess trade imbalances and tariff disputes. Trade imbalances can create sustainability issues, and tariffs can cause widespread economic difficulties. Coordination between the USA and the BRICS countries is important for regional and global political and economic stability. The trading relations between the USA and the BRICS countries go beyond the relationship between the North and South; there is extensive trade between the countries at the microeconomic level.

The world is rapidly changing in this technological age. The USA and BRICS countries trade in technological developments through research and development, with a lot of technological and skilled trade being conducted between the USA and BRICS countries. These countries are sharing linked industries as well as manufacturing technologies. All BRICS countries have proven to be key energy players, and the USA is engaging with BRICS countries to conduct research and development for sustainable energy. In addition, the USA is involved in the BRICS countries’ energy sector via investments and trade in industries. The USA, especially Brazil and China, is heavily investing in agriculture to ensure food security for its ever-growing population.

The US-BRICS trade in various industries is conducted via multilateral and bilateral arrangements through different international trade organizations. Facilitating trade through free trade agreements, multilateral organizations can be extremely beneficial for both parties. The biggest obstacle could be the countries’ protectionist agenda, which could hurt their global expansion strategy. Despite this, the USA is doing everything it can to ensure free trade with BRICS countries to maintain trade surplus and ensure better economic growth, economically and politically, to promote global policies in addition to enhancing diplomatic relations with BRICS countries and the Global South. The USA considers the BRICS countries as part of its strategic position to engage east and west to achieve the highest level of economic value. The BRICS countries’ economic position thus impacts US policy in the production and distribution of goods, as well as intermediates in a key industry or sector, specifically in trade policy with BRICS. The USA is the world’s largest economy and one of the world’s largest exporting nations; thus, it is significant to consider the BRICS as one of its primary trading blocs, which has grown in trade. The purpose of considering monetary policy as the main focus is because the development of production and trade is multifaceted and interconnected due to the globalization of production and trade.

4. Political and Diplomatic Relations
5. The USA in the Multifaceted World of the BRICS Countries
6. Political and Diplomatic Relations

Political systems of BRICS countries influence procedures and mechanisms to make foreign policy, especially in terms of bilateral relations with the USA. Liberal democratic systems in the USA and India contribute to more democratic, open, and responsive diplomacy vis-à-vis the general public and interest groups. Attempts have been made for further democratization of foreign policy in Brazil by increasing the role of parliament in major regional and international policy. The political systems of Russia and China show elements of single-party unilateralism with limited rule and are dominated by military-industrial complexes and elites. The foreign policies of these countries are shaped by inter-party and elite agreements.

Intermingling of divergent national interests, ideologies, capabilities, and personalities is a complex game that influences the course and direction of contemporary international relations. The politico-diplomatic engagement and interaction between the USA and BRICS on different platforms are influenced by a mosaic of conflict, cooperation, tension, and transaction. Several developments have given rise to the progress of diplomatic relations. Important multilateral platforms, at the highest level, where the USA and BRICS countries played an active role, include the World Economic Forum, United Nations in New York, Dublin, and Durban, G-5, G-8, G-20, and other relevant forums. The USA and BRICS countries have held high-level meetings and dialogue sessions in the Security Council Summit, UNHRC, SCO, BRICS, EU-UNDP, RIC, Peace Summit, P-5, NAM, Group of 77, and WTO.

Among the BRICS countries, Russia, China, and India had divergent views and competing national interests with the USA and Western powers on a number of issues such as same-sex marriage, gender, environment, security, human rights, trade, WMD and nuclear issues, missile issues, and immigration, besides the issue of BRI, OBOR, and CPEC. The USA and Russia had sharp differences concerning the Helsinki Accords, Iran, Syria, Ukraine, Crimea, Afghanistan, North Korea, and chemical weapons. France had strong complaints with China over the Tibet issue, carbon emissions, and the sale of defense systems and equipment. The USA has substantial charges against Brazil on climate issues, while the majority of the BRICS states have economic and strategic relations with the USA and Western countries. Demonstrating soft power and cultural diplomacy, the BRICS members have encouraged people-to-people cooperation. The growing confrontations with the USA, Japan, and some Western countries among the BRICS member states compel the BRICS member countries to reaffirm their stand against neoliberal globalization.

India, under American pressure, mainly avoided taking sides in Cold War politics and participated in Western-sponsored international platforms. International relations have encouraged India to expand its international cooperation with the Northern and Southern Hemispheres in terms of non-alignment. The over-extended politico-economic globalization process in the USA and Western countries, the domestic crisis of liberalism, neoliberal democracy, and the U.S. economic recession compelled India to strengthen relations with IBSA, BRI, and the SEA, including ASEAN, and also initiate dialogue on a new international economic order by taking the lead in key IBSA regional and international forums. Changes in the international environment and economy, shifting geopolitical landscapes, changes in foreign policy, and national security strategies were unconsciously altered in favor of greater Sanskritization of international relations, as seen in the Government of India foreign policies at least in the 21^st century.

4. Future Prospects and Challenges

The final decade of the 21^st century has not yet arrived, and it is difficult to predict the future in such diverse relations, which leads to different possible scenarios. In relations between the USA and BRICs, we must take into account the qualitative changes in the political, economic, and social spheres taking place today and awaiting us. However, it is possible to consider the existing scenarios and accordingly develop relevant policy recommendations to increase either the level of confrontation and conflicts or cooperation and peacebuilding. Future developments will be mixed. Despite the possible decline in the position of the USA in global politics, it is still, however, an important political, economic, military, and ideological center. Relations between the USA and BRICs will be determined by a number of factors, including decisive breakthroughs and failures in the Fourth Industrial Revolution, climate change, as well as the course that global governance will take. The West, China, and other non-major actors will interact through a system of mutual benefits and threats, accommodation of differences and conflicts, and primarily diplomacy and conflict resolution mechanisms, not prohibitive measures. The West will use a system of checks and balances to force China and other actors to adjust to the rules and values that it will establish to align with limited interests and capacities. Limits to USA-China cooperation or US-Russia confrontation lie in the security dimension. Local and regional conflicts may result from the physical, human, cyber, and conceptual applications of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. United clashes are unlikely until non-state actor groups become leading security threats.