|
|
The BRICs Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) in the Global System- Leslie Elliott Armijo (pp. 7-42) American hegemony has passed its peak. The twenty-first century will see a more multipolar international system. Yet Western European countries may not be the United States' main foils in upcoming decades. Four new poles of the international system are now known in the business and financial press as the "BRICs economies" (Brazil, Russia, India, and China). Does the concept of "the BRICs" also have meaning within a rigorous political science framework? From the perspective of neoclassical economics, the category's justification is surprisingly weak. In contrast, a political or economic realist's framing instructs the United States to focus on states that are increasing their relative material capabilities, as each of the four is. Finally, within a liberal institutionalist's model, the BRICs are a compelling set, yet one with a deep cleavage between two subgroups: large emerging powers likely to remain authoritarian or revert to that state, and states that are securely democratic. - Paulo Sotero and Leslie Elliott Armijo (pp. 43-70) Brazil will gain a place as a significant player in the multipolar international system taking shape since the end of the cold war simply on the basis of its economic size and material capabilities. However, its potential to influence international outcomes is likely to be determined more by the capacity of the country's elites to identify and harness qualitative assets associated with its stable and democratic governance than by any hard-power assets. Brazil is the quintessential soft-power BRIC. Among the four BRICs, Brazil is the only one positioned to become a potential environmental power in a world increasingly preoccupied with global warming.
RUSSIA: GREAT POWER IMAGE VERSUS ECONOMIC REALITY Russia's vision of itself has largely coalesced around that of a unique regional power, with the natural resources, glorious history, and will power to be a major player in a future multipolar world. As seen by most Russians, under the guidance of President Vladimir Putin, Russia has become an economically powerful actor with an important and independent voice on the international stage, including rebuilding historic economic alliances with states described as rogues by the United States and forming a strategic partnership with China. Some have seen the challenges to the West combined with Russia's close relationship with China as a threat to the United States; but this threat should not be overblown. As China continues to assert itself and eventually challenges Russia's declared dominance of Central Asian resources, the two states may well clash.
INDIA AND CHINA: FROM TRADE TO PEACE? Since the late 1950s, relations between India and China have been fraught with tension and conflict. Yet the two countries have recently enjoyed a significant improvement in bilateral relations. In this article, we explore potential economic reasons for this rapprochement. We set out three possible mechanisms by which commercial interdependence could lead states toward peace, and then examine their operation in the India-China case. We conclude that the most likely explanation for the relational change is the concerted effort in both countries to be seen as responsible participants in the global economy. Thus, general economic prudence, rather than any specific bilateral factor, may be having a positive effect on the India-China relationship.
The remarkable economic growth of China in the past two decades has generated both admiration and concern. As an "undemocratic capitalist" country, Beijing's grand strategy and true intentions once it becomes stronger are under scrutiny by the rest of the world. This article examines how economic globalization has transformed China's national policy preferences. It explores China's foreign economic policy and recent activism in regional and multilateral settings, and within geographic regions that China had minimal contact with as recently as ten years ago. China's resource endowments combined with its rapid and highly globalized growth have shaped its trade profile. The article suggests that, regardless of China's grand strategy or future intentions, its policy options have been deeply constrained by its highly globalized economy.
BUILDING BLOCKS OR A BRIC WALL? FITTING U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
TO THE SHIFTING DISTRIBUTION OF POWER
The U.S. confronts the difficult task of managing change peacefully as the BRICs' economic rise redistributes power in the international system. I consider the insights from four approaches within international relations-Realism, Institutionalism, Constructivism and Liberalism-to draw out possible policy advice. While the first two offer useful thinking, their policies are in fact quite risky and difficult to implement. Constructivism, too, offers insights, but theories from this approach do not articulate practical policy guidance. Liberals direct our attention to the domestic sources of state preferences, suggesting not only how to influence future systemic change, but also identifying ways to make Realist or Institutionalist policies towards the BRICs more applicable and effective. JAPAN'S PROACTIVE FOREIGN POLICY AND THE RISE OF THE BRICs
Within the past decade or so, Japan's foreign policy has become more proactive and assertive than it was during the cold war, placing greater emphasis on non-economic sources of power. Changing bilateral relations with all four BRICs are both causes and consequences of this newly assertive foreign policy stance. Japan's relationship with China is both the most important and the most complicated of the four. At the core of complexity is Japan's deep ambivalence about whether to treat China's economic rise as a threat or an opportunity. Japanese policy has consequently veered between engagement and confrontation, with the paradoxical result that while bilateral trade has exploded, diplomatic relations are the worst in memory. Japan's relations with Russia display a similar if less pronounced ambivalence. Largely as a consequence of heightened concerns about the threats from China and Russia, Japanese policy makers have begun to see the potential of both India and Brazil as useful counterweights, a view that coincides with the newly-articulated "values diplomacy" that stresses the importance of shared democratic values. However, India and Brazil remain relatively unimportant trading partners for Japan. KOREAN FOREIGN POLICY AND THE RISE OF THE BRICs COUNTRIES
In 2003 two emerging markets' investment analysts predicted that four rapidly developing countries-Brazil, Russia, India, and China, collectively the "BRICs economies"-by 2050 would have eclipsed most of the currently richest countries in the world. This article examines the impact of their rise in relation to Korea's foreign policy. Strategically and economically, the apparent power shift seems to have led Korea to doubt the validity and viability of the traditional U.S.-Korea relationship based largely on an asymmetrical military alliance. For example, it is China, not the United States, that has consistently played a crucial role in the Six-Party Talks established to denuclearize the Korean peninsula. China also has been Korea's largest trading partner since 2005, while Russia has abundant natural resources vital to Korea's energy security. Although the Korea-U.S. free trade agreement signed on April 2007 may help resuscitate bilateral relations, increasing interdependence between Korea and the BRICs, especially China, will make some type of realignment of the Korea-U.S. relationship necessary. |
|||||
|
© Copyright 2008, All Rights Reserved
Created by Justin's Web Design of Beaverton Oregon
|
