Meeting of minds: (From left) Moderator Dr Ngeow Chow Bing, panelist Thitinan, Kuik and Asean executive director Dr Piti Srisangam at the forum. — AZHAR MAHFOF/The Star
KUALA LUMPUR: The BRICS grouping of countries is not an anti-West or anti-United States organisation but an additional mechanism in an era of global uncertainty, say experts.
University Kebangsaan Malaysia professor, Prof Dr Kuik Cheng-Chwee said while some countries in BRICS appear as anti-US, the majority of its other members are not in any conflict with the West.
The perception that BRICS is anti-US is due to the fact that two of its biggest members are Russia and China, he said.
Be that as it may, many countries that are not feuding with the West are considering joining BRICS, Kuik added.
The grouping originally referred to Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – the countries which gave it its acronym. But it now also includes Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the United Arab Emirates and Indonesia.
“BRICS should not be seen as an alternative mechanism, but rather as an addition to the many layers of organisations between countries. It is certainly not an attempt to balance out or counter-balance what’s happening in the West,” he said at the Asean Economic Leaders Conference Outlook for 2025 here yesterday.
Rather, Kuik said the reasons to join had more to do with hedging, and not putting all the eggs in one basket.
“When countries see risks and uncertainties, there are more reasons to have an additional mechanism rather than less. Hedging is about reducing risks and for us here in Asean, it is essential.
“Hedging is a product of uncertainty. You may gain some and you may lose some, but no one does it because of naivety,” he said.
Thai political scientist Dr Thitinan Pongsudhirak said geopolitics is bad for Asean because it has put an end to the good run of globalisation, especially in the early 1990s and 2000s.
He said countries across the world may have thought there was an end to geopolitical rivalry as they continued to progress and grow their economy, but sadly this has emerged today in the form of the US-China trade war said the Chulalongkorn University professor.
“Looking at the past, geopolitics appeared in the form of events like the Cold War and the Soviet Union. Today, the US-China trade war has pushed Asean to become very divided,” he said.
The trade war is not the only thing dividing Asean, as member states are also split on the Russia-Ukraine war, the Myanmar civil war, the South China Sea disputes as well as the Middle East crisis.
“Different countries have taken different stands, and it is no longer a borderless world we live in.
“When countries produce or pursue something, it now depends on what nationalities or values it has, and who it aligns with. This has wreaked havoc on supply chains and multinationals, because all these need to be considered when they operate,” he said.
He added that the effort to de-risk or de-couple from the US-China trade war is going to intensify in the coming months.
“In saying that, we need to think of Asean in variable terms, we have to face up to the fact that Asean no longer consists of 10 countries. That way, more intense effort and energy can be put into moving towards solutions,” he said.
