English

The Silence of the BRICS

Aug 27, 2014 Jaswant Singh

The world, it seems, is in the grip of geopolitical anomie, with no leader, group of leaders, or institution commanding sufficient authority to restore order. For many, this global rudderlessness recalls Europe’s sleepwalk into catastrophe 100 years ago.

NEW DELHI – The world, it seems, is in the grip of geopolitical anomie. No leader, group of leaders, or institution commands sufficient authority to restore any semblance of international order and peace. For many, this global rudderlessness recalls Europe’s sleepwalk into catastrophe 100 years ago.

There are certainly some uncanny similarities between current events and that fateful time. The downing in eastern Ukraine of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 echoed the 1914 assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in its recklessness, not to mention the failure of governments and citizens to recognize that diplomatic rivalry can quickly give way to violence.

Indeed, even after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and incitement of secessionist movements in eastern Ukraine, airlines did not consider it necessary to reroute flights. This reflected the international community’s response – or lack thereof – to the menacing developments. With Russian forces now directly participating in the unrest in eastern Ukraine, the match lit by President Vladimir Putin could spark a conflagration.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world's foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads, book reviews, and insider interviews; Big Picture topical collections; Say More contributor interviews; Opinion Has It podcast features; The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

Jaswant Singh

Writing for PS since 2010
53 Commentaries

Jaswant Singh was the first person to have served as India’s finance minister (1996, 2002-2004), foreign minister (1998-2004), and defense minister (2000-2001). While in office, he launched the first free-trade agreement (with Sri Lanka) in South Asia’s history, initiated India’s most daring diplomatic opening to Pakistan, revitalized relations with the US, and reoriented the Indian military, abandoning its Soviet-inspired doctrines and weaponry for close ties with the West. His most recent book is India at Risk: Mistakes, Misconceptions and Misadventures of Security Policy.

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 10 Comments on this article

Naren Narendran Apr 10, 2015

Does international order mean become a US alley?. In todays world order there is a systematic push towards western dependence among all poor and developing nations. Predicament to russia and other former CIS nations is that become a western puppet of remain power. This is not good for the emerging new world UN should be empowered to become the only adminstrative super power arms control economic sanctions should be perogative of only the independent UN constitution .
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Sep 1, 2014

Mr. Jaswant Singh regrets "the silence of the BRICS" - silent about Russia's aggression and Putin's revisionist ambition! He criticises that the "West’s response to the crisis in Ukraine has been weak and misguided, the reaction of the world’s rising powers has been one of willful blindness".
India is a BRICS member. While he spares his country from criticism, he rebukes China, saying it "has effectively endorsed Russia’s annexation of Crimea and intervention in eastern Ukraine". Then he shows his real concern, implying Russia's aggression in Ukraine has "set off alarms bells in India, given China’s claims on large swathes of Indian sovereign territory, but there is no sign yet that anyone has noticed".
Mr. Singh said India didn't condemn the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. Instead it "repeatedly abstained from United Nations resolutions urging the withdrawal of Soviet forces – resolutions that had overwhelming support among the other non-aligned countries". This just shows that India prefers to stick to its realpolitik, instead of criticising the Soviet Union then and Russia today for violating other countries' sovereignty.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi attended the BRICS summit in July, hosted by Brazil. It was his first conference since assuming office in May. Yet the media in India were more interested in Modi's first appearance on the world stage, praising him for putting India "squarely on the path of pragmatic internationalism" and outlining his priorities in foreign policies - to forge good ties with China and Russia.
Russia and India have had historically close links since Soviet times. Energy is the core of their relations today. India wants to import more oil and gas from Russia, and Moscow is eager to sell arms to India. Yet the India-China relationship is equally important. Despite the border dispute, India is banking on improving ties with China, hoping it would contribute to regional stability, given Beijing's strong influence on Pakistan.
The other two BRICS members: Brazil and South Africa seem to be playing the second fiddle. On the whole the BRICS nations are still not yet ready to assume global responsibilities. Their co-ordination among themselves on international political issues leaves much to be desired. It explains why they prefer to remain silent about its fellow member, Russia.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Willard Hoffer Aug 31, 2014

Unfortunately the U.S. lost credibility with the rest of the world when it presented it with false information as justification for invading Iraq, the second time. Because of this, Putin is able to deny whatever the U.S. or its allies puts forward as evidence of Russian forces in the Ukraine.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Andrew Zimin Aug 31, 2014

Useful Vanguard broad.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Onyedimmakachukwu Obiukwu Aug 30, 2014

There has always been this sort of silence from emerging powers, and indeed other nations, to political crises where Russia and the West play a role. The Georgia invasion, and this Ukrainian crises are latest examples that showcase the disinterestedness of 'other countries'.
This happens because issues like these are seen in the scope of 'a match between the big boys' with the duty of other countries to be to sit and watch as spectators. This is wrong because these issues demand the stand, and if possible support, of all nations to point the defaulting nation- in both cited cases russia, and enforce through international mechanisms the principles of international law.
I share the writer's frustration; while emerging countries- and others watch the Ukrainian crises as a spectacle between powers and await who'll be the Victor between Russia and the West, the victims- Ukraine, other less powerful countries and international law are the suffering vitims.
And indeed this crisis is truly not about world powers but the victims- Ukraine which continues to suffer a blatant invasion and sponsorship of its destabilization; other countries, especially emerging powers whose sovereignty when trampled on by super powers- in the future- would be seen as just another power match. International laws and principles are also victims, discarded in this conflict, they are rapidly losing their relevance thanks to much of the world not interested in enforcing it or condemning its violation.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Jean-Louis Piel Aug 28, 2014

Very good article . Thank you
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Velko Simeonov Aug 28, 2014

When the local police chief starts stealing beers from the 7eleven store (US invading Iraq using obviously bogus arguments and outright lies) don’t expect the school security guard to fight the armed gang lounging in the school yard every night.
- Andrew Zimin Aug 31, 2014
  
  Neat remark!
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
hari naidu Aug 28, 2014

Singh writes, "China, for example, has effectively endorsed Russia’s annexation of Crimea and intervention in eastern Ukraine. That should have set off alarms bells in India, given China’s claims on large swathes of Indian sovereign territory, but there is no sign yet that anyone has noticed."

First, there is no evidence provided by Singh on his claim that mainland China endorsed annexation of Crimea and eastern Ukraine. On the contrary, People's Daily refused to endorse Putin's annexation of Ukraine's sovereign territory and abstained on it in UNSC.

Second, Singh is not privy anymore, of course, to what Modi-XI are wheeling & dealing on their future cooperation in the region. However, if Modi had the political courage to publish the *1962 War Report* prepared for Nehru's Government by an Australian defense expert, the issue of Himalayan boarder transparency - i.e. southern Tibet - would become less contentious. Having lost 1962 war by using false (UK) maps, India must now reconcile and formalize its boarders with China - +5000 Kilometers!

Finally, reference to Fukuyama and Zbig doesn't in any way provide credibility to your arguments. One is a failed historian. The other is a Polish intellectual with disdain for Russian atrocities against his former country. In terms of realpolitik, neither of them will surely admit they really understand what up with Putin in Ukraine.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
jim bridgeman Aug 27, 2014

One also has to wonder whether the earlier Malaysia air tragedy was connected to some internal China politics or rebellion.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.