ISLAMABAD: The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) can change the economic dynamics of the Asia-Pacific region, especially Pakistan as the group is ostensibly created to encourage regional economies to “decouple” from the Chinese market by providing them alternative supply chains. Advocate Muhammad Hamza Qamar, writing in Daily Parliament Times, said that Washington believes it will help […]
JUNE 23: The group, which owes its name to the initials of its five member states - Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa - is holding its annual summit on Thursday, but without much fanfare or huge expectations.
Talks will also be held in a virtual format, for the third consecutive year. The last two were held during the Covid pandemic, but it's not clear why the leaders chose to skip face-to-face meetings this year.
It's in stark contrast to the Quad - which groups India with Australia, Japan and the US - whose leaders met in person in Japan last month amid the global media glare.
Some analysts say that this is also partly due to the fact that the Brics hasn't really lived up to expectations over the years. When it was formed in 2009, the group was expected to reshape the global economy and create a new financial order to help the developing world.
Its success can be described at best as moderate, but its importance can't be overstated. Brics nations have a combined population of 3.23 billion and their combined GDP is more than $23tn.
"The Brics may seem irrelevant because it hasn't really moved the needle forward on its long-standing efforts to usher in viable global economic alternatives to the US-led existing system," says Michael Kugelman, deputy director at the Wilson Center think-tank in Washington.
But he adds that writing the Brics off will be a mistake because of its collective economic might, "even though it often tends to punch below its weight".
The economy has always been at the heart of the Brics but the Ukraine war is likely to loom large over the summit on Thursday.
The nations may not overtly mention the war, but it will definitely be discussed when Indian PM Narendra Modi, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa and Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro talk to each other.
Pratyush Rao, director for South Asia at the Control Risks consultancy, says Ukraine, without a doubt, will be the elephant in the room.
"A lot of people will be keeping an eye on the summit, especially on the dynamics between Russia and China over Ukraine," he says.
While China has been more open about its support for Russia, India, South Africa and Brazil have tried to walk the diplomatic tightrope over the war. They haven't openly criticised Russia but have advocated talks to end the war.
But a lot has changed since the war started. The economic impact of the war and the West-led sanctions is showing across the world - inflation is up in many countries, global supply chains have been disrupted and there are fears of food shortages.
Russian commentators have been talking about the importance of the Brics nations in blunting the impact of the sanctions.
Mr Rao says some pushback against Western sanctions can be expected at the summit, and that will be comforting for Russia.
"But it should not be interpreted as an endorsement of Russia's actions," he adds.
However, Brics members would want to be seen as taking an initiative to help developing nations overcome the economic impact of the war.
"I expect the summit to underscore the group's global importance because of its collective demographic and economic clout. I also expect it to help poorer and middle-income countries build resilience to deal with the economic impacts of the Ukraine crisis," says Mr Kugelman.
But then there will be challenges within the group. Beijing and Moscow might agree on taking tougher lines against the West, but Delhi would not like the summit to be used to openly criticise the US and more broadly the West.
Delhi takes pride in its "strategic autonomy" and the policy of non-alignment and has proven that it can be a significant member of even competing multilateral forums.
"India has an independent strategic policy and an independent autonomous voice on the global stage and it wouldn't want to compromise on that," says Mr Rao.
Both Russia and China have criticised the Quad as "Asia's Nato" but this hasn't deterred Delhi from pledging its support to the group's initiatives in the Indo-Pacific, which Beijing considers as its area of influence.
Analysts say that Russia and China will mostly likely overlook these irritants for the larger goal of establishing the Brics as a viable financial institution to help the developing world, and also stay relevant in the fast-changing geopolitical order.
Meanwhile, there are reported differences between Delhi and other members over the expansion of the Brics.
Bloomberg news agency recently reported that Delhi would push back against Beijing's plan to include new members into the group.
"India wouldn't want to see more members in a group where China plays a dominant role. India will fear more Chinese influence," says Mr Kugelman.
The success of the summit will also depend on how the two countries manage their differences over this and other issues, which includes their ongoing border disputes.
Both Mr Kugelman and Mr Rao believe that the two nations have the ability to overlook their differences when it suits their mutual interests.
They are partners in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which is an alliance of eight nations, and have also co-operated at the COP26 summit to push back against accepting hard targets to cut emissions.
Against this backdrop, Ukraine can be a point of convergence for the Brics. It can serve as an opportunity for the group to convince the world that it can be a viable financial option against Western-led institutions like the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
So, some concrete announcements on financial aid and more investment into the Brics-led New Development Bank can be expected.
And analysts say that this would be a step in the right direction for the Brics to get more clout as a serious global player.
With inputs from BBC
MAY 24: The group - composed of Japan, the US, Australia and India - seems to be emerging from the shadows of the Covid-19 pandemic and, to some degree, from Russia's invasion of Ukraine as well.
The top leaders are gathering for the fourth time - they have already met once in Washington last September and twice virtually - in less than two years. That underscores the importance of the Quad, which was largely just a concept until 2017.
That year, then-US President Donald Trump revived the group in a bid to take on China in its own backyard.
But analysts say the steady decline in each Quad nation's bilateral ties with China in the past few years appears to have given it new impetus.
Michael Kugelman, deputy director at the Wilson Center think-tank, says the latest meeting is likely to sharply focus on the Indo-Pacific.
"With the pandemic in the rear-view mirror and an understanding over India's stand on Ukraine, the Quad will get down to focusing on its core business of ensuring an open and free Indo-Pacific," he says.
India has so far refused to directly criticise Russia over its war in Ukraine but it has reiterated the importance of respecting the sovereignty of each nation.India has so far refused to directly criticise Russia over its war in Ukraine but it has reiterated the importance of respecting the sovereignty of each nation.
After initial anger against India's stand, the US and other Western countries seem to have understood Delhi's position.
The 2+2 Dialogue - attended by the foreign and defence ministers of the US and India - in April helped smooth their differences over Ukraine.
The US has acknowledged that India's heavy dependence on Russia for its defence imports could not be overlooked.
So the Quad will focus on mutual points of convergence - and China is the biggest of these.
China has become increasingly assertive in the region, with ongoing maritime disputes with several countries and a land boundary conflict with India.
Beijing is investing heavily in strengthening its navy and its recent security pact with the Solomon Islands has stoked fears in Australia. A leaked draft of the agreement - which was verified by the Australian government - said Chinese warships would be permitted to dock on the islands and that Beijing could send security forces "to assist in maintaining social order".
It will be interesting to see how Anthony Albanese, Australia's newly elected PM, deals with this threat and how he raises the issue within the Quad framework.
Japan, for its part, has become increasingly wary of what it calls routine "incursions" from the Chinese navy.
As for the US, it is evident that it wants to protect its interests in the region.
The launch of the US-led Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF), which has 13 regional players, is a step in that direction. It aims to promote regional growth, sustainability and inclusivity in the region.
It comes on the back of US President Joe Biden's recent meeting with the Association of South East Asian Nations (Asean) leaders in Washington.
The region's importance can be understood from the fact that it has some of the world's most heavily used shipping lanes, including the Strait of Malacca. Around 30-40% of the world's trade, including goods and crude oil, passes through these lanes.
So when Indian PM Narendra Modi, Mr Biden, Mr Albanese and Japanese PM Fumio Kishida meet in Tokyo, they may not mention China directly - but regional security will be on top of their agenda.
The Quad has several working groups, including on cybersecurity, health, infrastructure and education, but it has not explicitly spoken about any defence co-operation.
However, it's likely to announce a joint strategy to tackle illegal fishing in the Indo-Pacific region - which analysts say is largely aimed at China.
Mr Kugelman says this announcement would be quite significant because it involves the use of satellite imagery and active intelligence sharing - which will have security implications.
But he adds that the group will need to do a lot more before Asean nations see it as a major counterbalance to China.
It's not that there is no defence angle to the Quad. The four countries, and a few others, have taken part in India's Malabar naval exercises, and issues such as Afghanistan and North Korea's nuclear programme have been discussed at the Quad.
But Mr Kugelman points out that both Asean and Quad nations have significant trading volumes with China and they will try to avoid any direct confrontation with Beijing - at least until the Quad can emerge as a net security provider in the region.
Moreover, Delhi is a partner with Beijing in several multilateral forums, including Brics - which also includes Russia, South Africa and Brazil.
"The Quad has come a long way but it still has an informal structure and has no secretariat. So, it needs to keep evolving," Mr Kugelman says.
Meanwhile, Russia's growing ties with China will most likely feature as well as they don't suit Delhi's geopolitical calculations.
Some analysts have predicted that the Ukraine war may "send Russia into China's arms" and Beijing might be able to persuade Moscow to increase its presence in the Indo-Pacific.
If that happens, it will upset Delhi's interests the most as it has close ties with Russia and an ongoing dispute with China.
It's just a scenario at the moment, Mr Kugelman says, but one that can't be completely overruled, especially since Russia has been quite critical of the Quad.
Beijing's initial reaction to the Quad was to dismiss it, saying the group would "dissipate like sea foam". But it later sharpened its criticism of the group, calling it the "Asian Nato".
On Sunday, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said the Quad was formed "to contain China".
With such hardening of positions from both sides, Asean nations - some of whom have active maritime disputes with China - may find themselves between what one analyst called "a rock and a hard place".
With inputs from BBC
APRIL 22: At a meeting in Delhi, the pair are also set to talk about a trade deal, ahead of a new negotiations next week.
However, the prime minister is likely to face more questions about his leadership and lockdown parties in No 10.
On Thursday, MPs gave the go ahead to an inquiry into whether he misled Parliament over the issue.
The government had tried to delay the vote by MPs, but made a U-turn after opposition from within its own party.
The PM now faces an investigation by the House of Commons Privileges Committee, which will launch once the Metropolitan Police has finished its own probe into the gatherings.
Last week, Mr Johnson was fined for breaking Covid laws at an event in Downing Street. He had previously told MPs laws were not broken in No 10, leading to accusations from opposition parties that the prime minister had misled them.
The meeting between Mr Johnson and Mr Modi in India's capital comes on the final day of Mr Johnson's two-day trip to the country, which has been much delayed by Covid. Mr Johnson will then give a press conference.
Ahead of their meeting, Downing Street announced the UK planned to streamline its licencing rules for exporting military hardware to India.
Mr Johnson said the UK would support India to construct fighter jets, in an attempt to reduce the volume of weapons bought from Russia.
No 10 also said the two countries would be boosting their security co-operation in the Indo-Pacific region, including the Indian Ocean.
And there was a commitment to increase research into lowering the cost of "green" hydrogen power - part of the UK's renewable energy plans.
The two leaders will also discuss the latest in UK-India trade talks - where Mr Johnson has set an autumn target for an agreement to be signed.
Ukraine stance
However, conversations between the leaders on the invasion of Ukraine are likely to prove more difficult.
Mr Johnson has pledged to raise the issue of India's relations with Russia during his trip.
Along with other Western countries, the UK has been trying to persuade India to drop its neutral stance and join in condemning Moscow, which is its biggest arms supplier.
Earlier this month, India condemned killings in the Ukrainian town of Bucha - the strongest statement it has made since Russia's invasion. But it stopped short of blaming Russia for the violence, and has not criticised Russia directly since its invasion in February.
Mr Johnson acknowledged on Thursday that India, which has strong ties to Russia, was "not in the same place" as the UK over the conflict.
But he told reporters there was still a "huge amount we can work on together".
Ahead of his meeting with Mr Modi, Mr Johnson said collaboration with India on issues including climate change and security was of "vital importance".
He added: "The world faces growing threats from autocratic states which seek to undermine democracy, choke off free and fair trade and trample on sovereignty.
"The UK's partnership with India is a beacon in these stormy seas."
MARCH 11: China has refused to outright condemn the invasion of Ukraine and has not imposed any sanctions on Russia.
India, Pakistan, Vietnam, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Laos and Mongolia also sat out the vote on a United Nations' resolution to demand the end of Russia's military operations in Ukraine.
While Western allies like Australia, Japan, South Korea and Taiwan have imposed sanctions, with Tokyo and Seoul blocking some Russian banks from the Swift global payments system, the impact is limited.
That is because the Asian nations who joined western-led sanctions make up only 8% of Russia's global trade.
"Without having the two Asian giants China and India on board on sanctions who account for 18% of Russia's trade, there is unlikely to be any significant impact on Russia," says Professor Syed Munir Khasru, chairman of the international think tank, the Institute for Policy, Advocacy, and Governance.
And President Putin has been preparing in advance. Since Russia annexed Crimea eight years ago, Moscow has been targeted with Western sanctions.
"After 2014, Russia started cutting down the reliance on US dollars as part of foreign currency reserve and moving to gold and the Chinese yuan," he adds.
What's behind China's stance?
For Beijing, it is about weighing up the benefits versus costs of not taking action against Russia.
China is already Russia's largest trading partner and in the weeks before the invasion, Beijing lifted restrictions on wheat imports and signed a 30-year deal to buy more Russian gas.
Meanwhile, an increasing number of Russian companies and banks, including the oil arm of Russian gas giant Gazprom, has started using China's currency, the yuan, in settlements.
China has three objectives, according to Bilahari Kausikan, Singapore's former ambassador to the UN and Russia.
Firstly, China is quite sensitive about certain principles of international relations, such as sovereignty, territorial integrity and non-interference because of Tibet, Xinjiang and Taiwan.
"Russia's invasion of Ukraine is a direct and gross violation of these norms but there is a second objective. China has no other partner, anywhere near the strategic weight of Russia," Mr Kausikan says.
They also share a discomfort with a Western-dominated international order but Mr Kausikan adds that "China is much more invested in that order" and "the US, Europe and Japan are more important markets than Russia", which is why Beijing is keen to stabilise the situation in order to avoid becoming collateral damage of the Russian sanctions.
Whose side is India on?
For India and Vietnam, Russia is their largest arms supplier while Pakistan's prime minister Imran Khan was in Moscow last month to discuss a major gas pipeline deal with President Putin.
"India has a very large stock of Soviet era weapons that it needs to keep operational," says Mr Kausikan. "And the reason he needs to keep them operational is China."
Despite its strong ties with Russia however, India is also part of the US-led Quad with Japan and Australia, which is seen by many as an alliance against China's growing presence in the region.
"Whose side is India on?," tweeted the country's former ambassador to Russia, Pankaj Saran. "We are on our side."
In many ways, that is how Asia's actions against Russia can be seen.
Governments here are no stranger to having to pick a side on anything from trade conflicts to human rights issues but they have invariably been pragmatic when it comes to economic issues.
"India, the largest democracy in the world, you would have expected it to have condemned the Russian invasion," says Professor Munir.
"But nations are more driven by their own geopolitical and economic interests, and less by principles or respect for international norms."
Caught between major powers
And the UN vote on condemning the invasion of Ukraine further highlight divisions in the region.
North Korea was one of the five countries - which unsurprisingly included Russia - to vote against the resolution.
Myanmar voted to condemn Russia but that can be put down to its UN representative being part of its ousted government in exile. The country's military junta, which grabbed power last year, has been openly supportive of Russia, which continued to supply Myanamar with weapons despite the coup.
Other smaller Asian economies find themselves caught between Russia, China and the West, according to Chong Ja Ian, an associate professor at the NUS Department of Political Science.
"In general, they avoid criticising major powers like China and Russia which they believe are likely to punish them," says Associate Professor Chong.
"There is recognition that Russian aggression is egregious and also challenges the institution of sovereignty on which they depend, so they choose to keep silent as they do not want to criticise Moscow but also do not support it," he adds.
He points out that even among western allies, "South Korea is more cautious as they see a need to work with Russia on North Korea issues and because they are also cautious about crossing China unnecessarily".
What worries Asian governments, many of which have territorial disputes with China, is that Beijing is seen as closely watching what happens in Ukraine for what it may or may not be able to achieve in future disputes.
"Most Asian countries want a Chinese presence in the Indo-Pacific balanced by the United States," says Manjari Chatterjee Miller, Senior Fellow for India, Pakistan and South Asia at Council on Foreign Relations.
But she says that India and many South East Asian countries want Russia to play a balancing role when it comes to China.
While that explains why some countries have chosen not to outright condemn Russia, the flip side is: what lessons could China draw from the Russian invasion?
"What would it spell to China if Russia was unable to be constrained? If sanctions didn't work? What would that mean for Chinese encroachment in the Indo-Pacific or for the future of Taiwan?"
Where it is going to get tricky, she says, is as oil prices go up, the invasion drags on, and the atrocities pile up, how long the fence sitters can stay silent.
BBC
While scanning MCC, Nepal can also learn from the Sri Lankan experience where a US aid scheme sparked debate and MCC was not approved. Critics argue that the MCC’s primary commitment is not poverty reduction but to reshape the legal, institutional, infrastructural and financial contexts of poorer countries to better suit US economic and Indo-Pacific Strategy Pact interests of the government and becoming an instrument of the new imperialism pursuing economic hegemony through the extension and ever-deepening penetration of neoliberal capitalism. Vietnam has already rejected MCC.
While scanning MCC, Nepal can also learn from the Sri Lankan experience where a US aid scheme sparked debate and MCC was not approved. Critics argue that the MCC’s primary commitment is not poverty reduction but to reshape the legal, institutional, infrastructural and financial contexts of poorer countries to better suit US economic and Indo-Pacific Strategy Pact interests of the government and becoming an instrument of the new imperialism pursuing economic hegemony through the extension and ever-deepening penetration of neoliberal capitalism. Vietnam has already rejected MCC.