Can member states develop a meaningful trade agenda?

Report an error

Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The author argues that BRICS is primarily a geopolitical vehicle designed to resist G-7 dominance, which makes a comprehensive trade agreement unlikely due to 'destructive competition' and internal trade disputes. While the group has successfully collaborated on multilateral WTO negotiations and 'low politics' issues like customs procedures, deep integration is avoided to prevent polarising debates. The document also notes South Africa's attempt to position itself as a 'gateway to Africa' within the BRICS framework.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • BRICS is fundamentally a geopolitical grouping aimed at challenging the global dominance of the G-7 developed countries, with its primary focus on 'high politics' such as UN Security Council cooperation and the G-20 economic agenda.
  • A comprehensive BRICS free-trade agreement is unlikely because the member states are divided by 'destructive competition' and trade conflicts, such as disputes over Brazilian poultry dumping and cheap Chinese imports into South Africa.
  • Meaningful trade cooperation within BRICS is most viable when focused on 'low politics'—technical improvements such as visa and customs procedures, shipping connections, and the use of local currencies—rather than broad trade liberalization.
  • The BRICS nations have historically found success in 'intermediate politics' by collaborating within the World Trade Organisation (WTO), specifically through the G-20 group for agriculture and the 'Nama 11' for industrial tariffs, to resist proposals from the US.
  • South Africa is attempting to use the BRICS framework to position itself as the 'gateway to Africa', though the author suggests this may be viewed by other African nations as an expression of a 'big brother' syndrome.

Cite the original document

APA
South African Institute of International Affairs (2013). Can member states develop a meaningful trade agenda? https://saiia.org.za/research/can-member-states-develop-a-meaningful-trade-agenda/
Chicago
South African Institute of International Affairs. Can member states develop a meaningful trade agenda? 2013. https://saiia.org.za/research/can-member-states-develop-a-meaningful-trade-agenda/.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=South African Institute of International Affairs |title=Can member states develop a meaningful trade agenda? |date=3 April 2013 |url=https://saiia.org.za/research/can-member-states-develop-a-meaningful-trade-agenda/ |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{southafricaninstituteofinternationalaffairs2013can, author = {{South African Institute of International Affairs}}, title = {{Can member states develop a meaningful trade agenda?}}, institution = {South African Institute of International Affairs}, year = {2013}, month = apr, url = {https://saiia.org.za/research/can-member-states-develop-a-meaningful-trade-agenda/}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated