THE BRICS AS A SELF-FULLFILED PROPHECY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS

IN THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF THE INTERNATIONAL REALITY

Major : International Relations (IR)

Focus : Discourse analysis
Supervisor : Professor Lu Jin (Ph.D)
Candidate : Guadalupe Ximena Garca Hidalgo

2015

DECLARATION

I hereby declare that this thesis is my original work and it has been written by me in its
entirety. I have duly acknowledged all the sources of information which have been used in
the thesis.

This thesis has also not been submitted for any degree in any university previously.

Guadalupe Ximena Garca Hidalgo

Beijing, June 2015.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I want to thank my mother, the greater example of love and strength in my life, for being
always with me despite the distance.

I want to thank all my friends, within China and abroad, who directly and indirectly
accompanied me through all this time.

I want to thank the Peoples Republic of China and the China Foreign Affairs University for
giving me the opportunity to conclude this Master program.

I want to thank the universitys staff for all the help.

I want to thank all the professors who taught me much more than what I expected to learn.

I want to thank Professor Wen Zha for all the support and my thesis supervisor, Professor Lu
Jing, for guiding my research and allowing me to be creative at the same time.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Declaration. 1
Acknowledgements.....2
Summary..4-5
Introduction..6-7
Chapter 1. Theoretical Framework.....8-22
1.1. The Social Construction of Reality..8-12
1.2. Constructivism in International Relations.12-16
1.3 The Self-Fulfilling Prophecies in International Relations..18-22
Chapter 2. The Origin, Consolidation and Expansion of the Concept..23-39
2.1. Goldman Sachs as a Social Constructor of Reality....23-29
2.2. The Adoption of the Concept by the Member Countries..29-36
2.3. The Inclusion of South Africa36-39
Chapter 3. The Implications of the Self-Fulfilled Prophecy in the International Order...40-64
3.1. The Dominant Discourses of the International Economic System...40-44
3.2. The Discourse of the BRICS..45-55
3.3. Implications of the BRICS in the International System.56-60
3.4. The Benefits of Being a BRICS.60-64
3.5. Final Considerations..65-68
Conclusion...69-82
Bibliography83-89

SUMMARY

This thesis aimed to show that the concept of BRIC became a self-fulfilling prophecy which,
despite demanding reforms and changes, provides stability and legitimacy to the current
international system. For developing this hypothesis, this work is divided into three
chapters. The first describes in broad terms the main theoretical tools for developing the
hypothesis of this work. In order to do so, it starts with an overview of the conception of
reality as a social construction and the processes involved in it; followed by a brief
explanation of the constructivist approach in International Relations; and finally,
considerations regarding the operations of the self-fulfilling prophecies in the social world.
The second chapter explains how the origin of the concept and its dissemination
turned it into a self-full filed prophecy. The first part describes the emergence of the acronym,
how it became a legitimate concept to describe realities in the international financial context,
the role played by the different actors involved and the processes of social construction of
reality and of self-fulfilling prophecies they unleashed through their actions. In the second
part, it points out the similarities in the foreign policy discourses that facilitated the adoption
of the concept by Brazil, Russia, India and China, as well as the manner in which the process
of appropriation was carried out, followed by the way in which it intervened in the social
construction of reality. Finally, it narrates the expansion of the concept by the inclusion of
South Africa, as well as its implications.
The third chapter describes the characteristics of self-fulfilling prophecy for the
international system. To begin with, it presents the various speeches that have been created
4

to explain and legitimize the international economic system, in order to explain the context
in which the BRICS are inscribed. Subsequently, it summarizes the discourse of the BRICS,
based on the main speeches and documents published by the group and representatives of the
member states. Then, through an analysis between the discourse and the actions of the group,
it explains the main implications of the BRICS in the international system. To continue, the
contributions of the different members of the group, and the benefits they get from being part
of the BRICS. Finally, it presents final considerations on the differences between the group
and its relationship with the West and the international system.

INTRODUCTION

The BRIC bloc is one of the most visible symbols of the new world order currently taking
shape; one of its stronger brands
Marcos Galvo

Since the acronym appeared for first time in 2001 in a report by Goldman Sachs, but
especially since the group became a reality and a mechanism for economic and political
cooperation among Brazil, Russia, India, China in 2009 and later included South Africa in
2011, the BRICS have become the most visible forum for advancing the interests of the
developing world, as well as the main voice for modifying the international economic and
political institutions in order to increase the representation of the South. Subsequently, many
articles, papers and books have been written about them. However, most of them focus on
their economic aspects, specifically, in enumerating their economic strengths or limitations.
On the other side, some studies have been written about the political implications of the
group. Little has been written about the meaning of the concept and its implications on the
identities of the member states, as well as in the social construction of the international
reality.
This thesis is an effort to compile the existing papers from this perspective and, based
on them, analyze the discourse and production of social knowledge carried on by the BRICS.
That way, this work offers the opportunity to study the institutions, interests and interactions
of the different actors from a constructivist point of view. Accordingly to what has been
stated above, the hypothesis of the thesis is, that the BRICS concept became a self-fullfiled
prophecy which, despite demanding changes and reforms, provides stability and legitimacy
6

to the international system. It was decided to base the methodology of this work in the
constructivist approach and hermeneutical positions, because, as explained in the later
chapters, the possibility that countries that had so little in common came together in a forum
for multilateral cooperation of such a magnitude can only be explained through the
similarities of their identities and the symbolic benefits from being part of the group all of
which cannot be explained by the realist or liberal traditions: mainly, the possibility to
influence the social construction of reality and exercising symbolic power .
This work is divided in three chapters. The first one describes the theoretical
framework, through an overview of the

conception of reality as

a social

construction, followed by a brief explanation of the constructivist approach in International

Relations and considerations about self-fulfilling prophecies in the social world. The second
chapter explains the origin of the BRIC, its adoption by the member states and its further
expansion with the inclusion of South Africa; in a few words, how the origin of the concept
and its dissemination turned it into a self-full filed prophecy. The third chapter is responsible
for describing the content of the speech of the BRICS and its implications for the international
system. In short, the characteristics of self-fulfilling prophecy.

CHAPTER 1. THEORETICAL

FRAMEWORK: THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY,

CONSTRUCTIVISM AND SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES

We construct worlds we know in a world we do not

Nicholas Onuf

This section describes in broad terms the main theoretical tools for developing the hypothesis
of this work, according to which the emergence of the BRICS became a self-fulfilling
prophecy which, despite pledging for a reform of the international order, it actually
strengthens its stability and legitimacy. In order to do so, this chapter starts with an overview
of the conception of reality as a social construction and the processes involved in it; followed
by a brief explanation of the constructivist approach in International Relations; and finally,
considerations regarding the operations of the self-fulfilling prophecies in the social world.

1.1 THE SOCIAL CONSTRUCTION OF REALITY

In the study of human systems, there are two different dominant positions. The first
one considers the social world as a given and as an objective reality. Inspired by the natural
sciences, it aspires to objectivity, scientific precision and the identification of universal laws
with some degree of predictability. On the other hand, the other approach sees the world as
a socially constructed reality and focuses on understanding rather than explain the different
meanings of human action. Unlike the positivist, the latter approach associated with
hermeneutics, critical theory and constructivism does not conceive the researcher as an
outside observer who studies the object, but as part of it. The contrasts between the two have
important consequences and, while using different methods, they emphasize or ignore and
8

interpret differently the characteristics of social reality. And most importantly, they also
sustain opposite philosophical and normative implications. Positivism, for example, is more
related to the search for certainty and universal values, as well as the exaltation of rationality,
while hermeneutical approaches favor relativism, sensitivity and plurality. For some authors,
positivism, considering the social world as an objective reality governed by immutable laws,
promotes a conservative and determinist view of it. For others, the hermeneutical methods
lack the scientific approach for a systematic study of the social. Having explained this
division, and to begin developing the hypothesis of this thesis through a theoretical sphere,
this section will proceed with a description of the process of social construction of reality,
whose design is based on hermeneutical positions. To do this, it presents a brief summary of
the book The Social Construction of Reality, written by Peter L. Berger and Thomas
Luckmann, which, besides being one of the most influential works in contemporary social
sciences, addresses the issue of systematically and from a sociological perspective.1
For Berger and Luckman, reality is defined as the quality assigned to phenomena that
are recognized as independent of human will, which is created and maintained in and through
the thoughts and actions of the members of society. Through this quality, the everyday world
is taken for granted. This means, that it presents itself as self-evident and compelling without
requiring verification. It is differentiated from other realities that are also accessible to human
consciousness through its intersubjectivity, what means, that it is shared with
others. Intersubjectivity is possible thanks to the ability of the objectification of
intersubjective processes of men, defined as the manifestation and expression of these in
products of human activity, which are available to other people besides their creators. These

Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckman, The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the Sociology
of Knowledge , London, Penguin Books, 1966.

products are converted into objects that make the reality of everyday life possible.2 The
everyday reality is apprehended through characterizations on different members of society,
which affect the interactions between them and determine appropriate actions in specific
situations.3 When they get repeated and internalized, they become progressively anonymous
and routinized. Thus, human interactions become patterns based on an economy of
effort. However, they are not rigid, but subjected to negotiations between the actors. In
consequence, they must be understood as a continuum, rather than as rigid and inflexible
classifications. The social structure is the sum of these characterizations and patterns of
interaction that are established through these products and interactions.
Oral language defined as a vocal system of signs, plays a key role, perhaps the most
important, in the social construction of reality, because it is through it that the objectifications
and characterizations are made. Besides, its structures the social world spatially and
temporarily, an order that makes it possible to make sense. This way, it channels the thoughts
and actions of the members of society within their patterns, a function which standardizes
and economizes the practices of individuals, and also allows their effective allocation and
identification. All this, in addition to ordering the social world, provides language with the
ability to control and coerce the socially constituted actors.
The more actors and actions are typified and the more this characterizations spread
and become routine, more social knowledge is produced and accumulated, that is, the
certainties shared by the members of society. Social knowledge serves as a channel for the

In addition to describing the processes by which reality is socially constructed, the authors consider
plausible their argument because the human fetal period extends until the first year after birth. By then, they
argue, the child continues to develop while biologically related to the outside world in various complex forms,
which enables the social construction of reality, in ibid , p.68.
3
One could understand the characterizations also as "tags", which determine, for example, if a
particular social actor is treated as male / female; young / old; employee / employer, etc. Ibid p. 45

10

externalization of subjective processes of men. The process of accumulation of social

knowledge produces complex and detailed information on the sectors within men conduct
their actions and present reality in an integrated when they structure knowledge in terms of
relevancies,

which

means:

differentiated

between

areas

of

familiarity

and

remoteness. Through this process, certain areas of reality are enlighten, while others remain
opaque and the totality of the world remains neglected.
One of the main pillars of reality are socially constructed institutions, which occur
when the characterizations become reciprocal. It is important to emphasize that reciprocity
does not only happen between the actions of the different actors involved but also in the
recognition of their identities, also typified. As a result, all institutionalized behavior involves
creating roles. These take on different degrees of importance and represent the integration of
institutions in a world capable of making sense for members of society. The roles assigned
to the different actors established within institutions help to maintain the notion of sense in
the world and play a special role in legitimizing the social apparatus. Thus, institutions define
and channel the actions of individuals, which limits the possibilities of their actions, increases
predictability and reduces the danger to others.
This way, human activity becomes a subject to social control when it becomes
institutionalized. The ultimate aim of the institutions is to convert the actions of the actors in
routines taken for granted, which explains that institutions need to be translated into human
behavior to keep on existing. Consequently, the expansion of the construction of social reality
is achieved when more and more aspects of human life become subject to the scope of
institutions. Through the explanation of the processes of objectification, standardization and
institutionalization, describe how man builds every day the social order in which it operates,

11

whose characteristics are not predetermined biologically or by the natural environment.4 It

is not part of the nature of things and is not derived from natural laws. Therefore, the social
world exists only as a product of human activity.

2.2 CONSTRUCTIVISM
Constructivism introduced the conception of reality as a social construction to the
study of international relations.5 As you it can be inferred, it is based on hermeneutical
methods and focuses on the historicity of the systems and institutions, as well as the
importance of ideas and meanings in the actions of the states. Its appearance is explained
largely through the questioning of the binomial science-progress which served as base for
Modernity and contributed to the weakening of the positivist position in the social sciences
during the decades of the seventies and eighties.6 Suspecting that materialism was not enough
to explain the complexity of international phenomena, constructivism emerged as an
alternative to realism and liberalism as well as its derivations, approaches that occupied a
dominant place since the founding of the discipline. Constructivism not only offers different
understandings on the main concepts of international relations, but represents an ontological
and epistemological revolution that changed the way in which reality is conceived, as well
as the methods to apprehend it.7

While recognizing that the natural environment does have some influence on technological or
economic arrangements of the social world. Ibid, p.69.
5
In international relations, constructivism is part of the sociological approaches, together with the
English School, as well as other critical and postmodern theories. It is considered that its foundational works
are World of Our Making (1989) by Nicholas Onuf and Anarchy is What States Make of It (1992) by Alexander
Wendt.
6
Jonathan Arriola, El constructivismo: su revolucin onto-epistemolgica en las Relaciones
Internacionales [Constructivism: the onto-epistemological revolution" in international relations], Revista
Opinio Filosfica, Vol. 4, No. 1 (2013), p. 383.
7
Op.cit., p. 378.

12

Since its consolidation in the early nineties as a legitimate approach to study

international relations, different schools and debates have developed within constructivism.
However, it is not the intention of this section to provide a description of them, but to present
a general overview of the approach. To begin, it is worth mentioning that it is based on the
ontological assumption that inter-subjective understandings are constitutive not only of
action, but of the actors and the structures in the international level, while it also focusses on
the historicity of them. Having said that, the main positions regarding the central concepts of
the approach are presented main positions.
The relationship between structure and agency is one of the major debates of
International Relations.8 Its importance is such, that some authors propose a division between
theories that consider the opportunities and limits determined by the structure as the
determining factor in international relations and on the other hand, the ones that emphasize
the role of actors and units. Regardless of which part is considered more influential, both
positions conceive the structure and agency as separate and demarcated entities, although
they influence each other. Constructivism overcomes this debate by arguing that the agent
and the structure are mutually constituted through practice. For constructivists, the structure,
in fact, channels the practices of individuals. However, its efforts would be meaningless
without a set of rules and intersubjective meanings internalized by the actors. At the same
time, the actors reproduce and through it strengthen the structures when they act respecting
their parameters, or weaken them when they do not.9 Consequently, the institutions that are

Structure is understood as the distribution of capabilities of the different parts in the international
system; as agency, they actors or representatives of political units, mainly States.
9
For example, the appeasement of Vietnam by the United States was an unviable option, although it
was probably the most pragmatic, because the prerogative to intervene militarily was a mainstay in the
constitution of the United States as a great power during the War Cold. With the military intervention, the
United States reproduced its identity as a great power and at the same time, it also reproduced the structure that

13

part of the structure are also originated the interaction of the actors and their participation in
collective consciousness. So, they are cognitive entities that do not exist independently of the
ideas of the actors about the way the world works. Thus, the relationship between structure
and actors becomes no longer unidirectional, but reciprocal and mutually constitutive,
allowing a wider understanding of the complexity of phenomena at the international level.10
Anarchy is also one of the central concepts of the discipline. The predominant
approaches define it as the absence of a central authority, which results in a permanent state
of threat and insecurity in the international arena. Given the urgency to ensure its survival,
the primary interest of states is to increase their safety through power politics and attitudes
of "self-help". Positivist approaches consider anarchy an immutable property of the
international system. For some, it can be managed, but never changed. In this case,
constructivism also offers a more complex response, conceiving anarchy as a result of the
practices of states. As part of this reasoning, power politics are regarded as institutions
socially constructed within the framework of anarchy, which could change if states would
modify their actions, thereby altering the intersubjective knowledge that constitutes the
system.11 That's why Alexander Wendt defined anarchy as "what states make of it.12
The next concept to be addressed is identity. Realism and its branches have given
little importance to identity as an explanatory variable, while interpreting state interests as a

gave meaning to its actions, in Ted Hopf, "The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations
Theory," International Security, Vol. 23, No. 1 (summer 1998), p. 172.
10
H. Leonardo Carvajal, El constructivismo: su utilidad para analizar la poltica exterior
colombiana" [Constructivism: its utility for analyzing the Colombian foreign policy], OASIS , No. 14 (2009),
p. 207.
11
Jonathan Arriola, El constructivismo: su revolucin onto-epistemolgica en las Relaciones
Internacionales [Constructivism: the onto-epistemological revolution" in international relations], Revista
Opinio Filosfica, Vol. 4, No. 1 (2013), p. 381.
12
H. Leonardo Carvajal, El constructivismo: su utilidad para analizar la poltica exterior colombiana"
[Constructivism: its utility for analyzing the Colombian foreign policy], OASIS , No. 14 (2009), p. 205.

14

result of their physical attributes. Liberalism and its branches tend to explain the differences
in attitudes of states based on the division between democratic and non-democratic
ones. Again, constructivism represents a turning point in the discipline considering the
identity of a state as variable and decisive in defining its interests and the actions they choose
to achieve them.13 It is also important to mention the multi-directionality that constructivism
recognizes in this regard, as considering that the practices of a state, at the same time, have
the ability to strengthen or weaken the construction of their identity. The explanation of this
argument lies in the social function of identity stating to oneself and others who one is and
who the others are, through which it allocates values, norms and action parameters. It is
important to mention that states do not have full freedom in defining their identity, as the
consolidation of it depends on the interaction with others. As explained by Ted Hopf, "an
actor cannot act according to its identity until the community of meaning with the power to
do so recognizes the legitimacy of its action."14 Another advantage of the constructivist
conception of identity is that it is capable of studying ts historicity. That is, the manner in
which the different identities of one or more states emerge, consolidate, modify or disappear
according to their practices and interactions with others. Positivist approaches are unable to
explain the lack of interests and practices which, although they may represent a benefit, for
states, are not adopted by them. Constructivism is able to fill this theoretical void considering
that the absences are also a product of intersubjective understandings and constitutive of
action, as the acting of states cannot be based on interests that are not consistent with the

13

Ibid.
Ted Hopf, "The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory," International
Security, Vol. 23, No. 1 (summer 1998), p. 178.
14

15

practices and structures that constitute their identity without representing a higher cost,
whether symbolic or material.15
The change in the international system is also a phenomenon that has been poorly
studied by the positivist approaches that dominated the study of international relations over
the past century, in part because its consideration of reality as given and independent of social
actors reduces the ability to recognize the historicity and temporality of them. By contrast,
constructivism gives change an important role in the international system and proposes
considerations of how and when it occurs. At this point, it is important to mention that one
of the factors that influenced the consolidation of constructivism was the fall of the Berlin
Wall and the Soviet Union, not only because the precepts of neorealism and neoliberalism
were based on the conditions of War Cold, but also because the failure of both traditions to
conceive and explain changes of such magnitude revealed the lack of capacity of this to study
the historicity of structures and enable variables to change.16 As a result of the events,
historicity became important, not as an accident or emergency, but as an intrinsic part of the
international systems. However, it is worth clarifying that, despite conferring it an important
place, constructivism considers changes as possible, but not easy to achieve, because the
structures are maintained by real interests and material capabilities. Besides, actors also play
their limitations through their daily practices.17 Identity politics are not a neutral, but a
struggle for control over the need and power to produce meanings within a community. The
change is explained when actors with sufficient material and symbolic resources engage in

15

Ibid., p. 176.
Jonathan Arriola, El constructivismo: su revolucin onto-epistemolgica en las Relaciones
Internacionales [Constructivism: the onto-epistemological revolution" in international relations], Revista
Opinio Filosfica, Vol. 4, No. 1 (2013), pp. 379-80.
17
Ted Hopf, "The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory," International
Security, Vol. 23, No. 1 (summer 1998), p. 180.
16

16

practices that can alter the intersubjective structures successfully. As long as there is
difference, there is potential for change.
Finally, constructivism also offers a wider and complex proposal for conceiving
power. Positivist approaches usually consider it a significant and causal intervention. That
is, the ability of A to establish its will on Bs actions, even despite its resistance. Power, for
them, is mainly based on the material resources of a state such as economy, military
capacities, territory, natural resources, etc. On the other hand, constructivism and its precepts
recognize and are able to study a different conception of power: the symbolic power. This is
understood as the ability to define a specific situation, to turn a vision of things and the world
as obvious and indisputable and thus influence the actions of others in a subtle or even
invisible way. Its purpose is to legitimize a social order and determine intersubjective
meanings established through shared knowledge.18 This type of power is exercised through
ideas, culture, ideology, speech and language.19 Likewise, constructivism reveals the power
that is exercised through social practices, which are able to produce and reproduce or modify
and question intersubjectivity meanings that are constitutive of social structures and actors.
Social practices authorize, discipline and exert surveillance, and therefore have the power to
replicate entire communities, in this case, the international community. Therefore, through
their daily practices, states appropriate or limit themselves, as well as structures in which
they operate.20

18

Steven Lukes, El poder, un enfoque radical [Power, a radical approach], trans. Jorge Deike,
Mxico, Siglo XXI, 1985, pp.15-16.
19
Ted Hopf, "The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory," International
Security, Vol. 23, No. 1 (summer 1998), p. 177.
20
Ibid. p. 179.

17

2.3. THE SELF-FULFILLING PROPHECIES IN INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS

As explained in previous sections of this chapter, the hermeneutical positions, in
which constructivism is included, consider that the intersubjective knowledge not only
reflects the social reality but has also the capacity of creating and shaping it. Therefore, the
ideas, when formulated by actors with the material and symbolic resources necessary to
disseminate and made them legitimate, have the power to get registered within the
intersubjective meanings and knowledge, and thus reproduce the realities they
propose. Similarly, when they have a negative or preventive intention, they are capable of
suppressing actions and results. That is, to become self-fulfilling or self-denying
prophecies.21 It is necessary to clarify that an idea does not have to be "right" or "wrong" to
become a self-fulfilling prophecy. Although its proximity with reality makes it easier to
acquire materiality, what matters is its ability to modify the behavior of social actors in order
to make them act in accordance with them.
Economic life is very often guided by self-fulfilling prophecies, originated by
concepts or perceptions. For example, in the case of predictions regarding the alleged
weakness of a currency or the shortage of a product shortage.22 In the social level, stereotypes
and relations between ethnic groups are usually established through mechanisms of selffulfilling prophecies. In international relations, some authors have studied the security
dilemma as a self-fulfilling prophecy, recognizing that the belief in the inevitability of
conflict can become one of its main causes. Similarly, some studies have shown how the
21

A self-fulfilling prophecy is understood as a specific kind idea that contains and generates its own
confirmation. Consequently, a self-denied prophecy is a specific kind of idea containing and denying its own
confirmation.
22
For example, when beliefs about the weakness or instability of a currency are propagated, its demand
decreases and therefore, its price also. In the second example, the expectation of some product shortages rapidly
increases its demand, which also raises its prices and ultimately, the shortage occurs. Similar situations also
happen with stock market crashes and economic depressions.

18

Global War on Terrorism, conducted by the United States after September of 2001, coincides
with an exponential and unprecedented increase in the recurrence of violence and terrorismrelated attacks. While the military offensive of the United States and its allies aimed to ensure
global security and weaken terrorist groups, attacks soared in Iraq and Afghanistan when
they military operations of the West began, a phenomenon which also extended to the Middle
East, Africa and Asia.23 The prophecy of the Global War on Terrorism, based on the
assumption that the inevitable increase in power and activities of terrorist groups required
military action by the international community, came true after the beginning of the military
operations. In addition, certain authors believe that some of counterterrorism legislation in
Western countries could increase the marginalization of Muslim communities, and thus feed
the feelings of violent extremist groups.24
By moving this reasoning to the academy, it is possible to recognize that concepts and
theories have the potential to unleash the potential these same mechanisms. Investigations
are not only explanatory, but also have inherent constitutive and creative abilities. In this
case, academic communities are primarily responsible for the processes of diffusion and
legitimation. However, decision makers and ordinary people are usually not aware of
academic theories and do not act in accordance with them; the chain of causality is more
complex and difficult to trace. First, they may be transmitted through the media, Internet,
publications and opinion leaders, until they are internalized in the consciousness of the elite
and later, of the people. As a result, research findings are interpreted as a reality and actors

23

The think tank Global Research published in 2013 a report on the increase in terrorist attacks in
different parts of the world. In Iraq, Afghanistan, and the Middle East in general, as well as Africa and Asia,
there was an exponential increase from 2002, accessed in 2015 in http://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-war-onterror-has-increased-terrorism/5355073
24
David Cortright, "Could New Laws to Fight Terrorism Actually Help Fuel It?" IPI Global
Observatory , March 31, 2015, accessed on April 2015 in http://theglobalobservatory.org/2015/03/terrorismfinancing-civil-liberties/

19

modify their behavior in response to the dominance of a theory. To investigate mechanisms

of self-fulfilling prophecies produced by academic ideas reveals how humans can also change
the laws of the social sciences in the process of socially constructing their reality; another
difference with the study of the natural world. Adapting the famous words of Alexander
Wendt to this context, "every theory is what actors make of it".25
Previously, this section described cases of self-fulfilling prophecies in international
relations. However, to understand the mechanism by which the creation of the BRICS
triggered a mechanism of self-fulfilling prophecy, it is prudent to mention other cases of
academic concepts that showed a similar development. For example, internationalist
Alexander Wendt and John Vazquez consider the realistic approach as a self-fulfilling
prophecy. The structures and mechanisms of the international system in which it is based on
such as anarchy, the security dilemma and the policies of "self-help" is based and its
dissemination through the most prestigious epistemic communities of the world allows them
to get internalized by scholars and policy makers as precepts, prescriptions and lines of action
in the interactions between states. Consequently, when they get translated into action, they
become a reality, a process which, at the same time, increases in the relationship between
realism and reality.
Ted Hopf argues that the theory of democratic peace in international relations, is also
a self-fulfilling prophecy. For this, he starts through the argument that there is no plausible
explanations that connect the characteristics of democracy within a state and its alleged
peaceful behavior, considering that the former can show quite aggressive and bellicose
behavior internationally. To Hopft "democratic theory is an empirical reality in search of a

David Patrick Houghton, The Role of Self-Fulfilling and Self-Negating Prophecies in International
Relations, International Studies Review, vol. 11, no. 3 (September, 2009), p. 552.
25

20

theory." Arguments about the externalization of national beliefs, as well as the predominance
of the rule of law also result unconvincing. Similarly, the manner in which the administration
of George W. Bush effectively mobilized an entire population which decided to go to war,
shows that institutional arguments of democratic peace theory have little empirical
support. Despite their theoretical and empirical weaknesses, it is a legitimate theory widely
accepted and reproduced in the academy, even slightly questioned and mostly considered as
legitimate. Its predominance is also explained by its usefulness for the legitimation of the
identities and actions of Western powers, because it implies that their institutions are
preferable to the ones of other countries, which represents a major asset for the exercise of
soft and at the same time justifies their dominance in international institutions, as well as
their eagerness to intervene and modify the internal policies of other countries. As for how it
affects the actions of the actors, it is likely that the leaders of the so-called democratic states
believe that liberal democracy has, indeed, peaceful properties and therefore increase their
trust on other liberal democracies, which increases trust and confidence and promotes
cooperation between them. For Ted Hopf, the theory that links economic interdependence
with peace is also a self-fulfilling prophecy, with similar characteristics of the ones of the
democratic peace theory.26 In his article, Ted Hopf proposed at least four stages or
preconditions for an idea or theory to become a self-fulfilling prophecy in international
relations and within the social world in general. First, the idea or theory must contain specific
expectations or predictions about the behavior of certain actors or political outcomes. Second,
it must be related to "institutional" facts, as opposed to natural events. Third, the idea must
be articulated and widely disseminated within the community; and finally, the actors must

26

This example also lacks a convincing causal mechanism between the two variables.

21

change their behavior consistently with the predictions of the theory.27 Having explain all
this, the next chapter proceeds with describing and analyzing the origins and existence of the
BRIC in their different dimensions.

David Patrick Houghton, The Role of Self-Fulfilling and Self-Negating Prophecies in International
Relations, International Studies Review, vol. 11, no. 3 (September, 2009), p. 563.
27

22

2. THE ORIGIN, CONSOLIDATION AND EXPANSION OF THE CONCEPT

This chapter explains the origin of the BRIC, its adoption by the member states and
its further expansion with the inclusion of South Africa. The first part describes the
emergence of the acronym, how it became a legitimate concept to describe realities in the
international financial context, the role played by the different actors involved and the
processes of social construction of reality and of self-fulfilling prophecies they unleashed
through their actions. In the second part, it points out the similarities in the foreign policy
discourses that facilitated the adoption of the concept by Brazil, Russia, India and China, as
well as the manner in which the process of appropriation was carried out, followed by the
way in which it intervened in the social construction of reality. Finally, it narrates the
expansion of the concept by the inclusion of South Africa, as well as its implications. In a
few words, this chapters objective is to explain how the origin of the concept and its
dissemination turned it into a self-full filed prophecy.

2.1 GOLDMAN SACHS AS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCTOR OF REALITY

The story is well known: the acronym first appeared in November 2011, when the
multinational financial consulting firm Goldman Sachs published a report written by Jim
O'Neil, then head of Global Economics Research, entitled "Building Better Global Economic
BRICs." The text proposed that the development of global economic policies should be
reorganized to increase the representativeness of the BRIC, taking into account the size of
their economies, measured in terms of GDP growth and predictive models, according to
which Brazil, Russia, India and China would gain more and more weight in the international

23

economy, with a chance to match or surpass the G-7.28 Subsequently, the concept of BRIC
was strengthened through the publication of more reports.
In October 2003, an article entitled "Dreaming With BRICs: The Path to 2050",
released also by Goldman Sachs extended the scope of the predictions and the importance of
the five countries in the future of the world economy. Based on demographic projections and
models of capital accumulation and productivity growth, the report estimated that BRIC
could represent more than half the size of the economies of the G-6 by 2025 and that they
could even surpass the group in 2050.29 According to the text, the weight of the BRICs
economies could transform international financial flows, while increasing their importance
in investment portfolios and demand for capital. It also predicted that the increase in their
productivity would significantly appreciate their currency and that they could get
strengthened by 300% by 2050. It also estimated that the size of Chinese economy would
surpass the United States in 2041 and that India would overcome Japan in 2032.30
As a response to questions about the predictions and the accuracy of including so
different countries in a same group, the report "How Solid Are the BRICs'", published in
2005, re-evaluated the performance of the four, established that the predictions of the
previous reports would become a reality sooner than expected and assured that the BRIC

28

Furthermore, according to the report, if considered through the percentage of world GDP values
based on purchasing power parity, China represents the second largest market in the world, while India the
fourth, in Jim O 'Neill, "Building Better Global Economic BRICs " Global Economics Paper No. 66 , London,
Goldman Sachs, November 30, 2001, consulted online in February 2015 in http://www.goldmansachs.com/ourthinking/archive/archive-pdfs/build-better-brics.pdf
29
Dominic Wilson and Roopa Purushothaman, "Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050," Global
Economics Paper No. 99, London, Goldman Sachs, October 1, 2003, Consulted online in February 2015
in http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/brics-dream.pdf
30
The predictions were based on a long-term model and 2003 prices to avoid biases in the economic
cycle, as well as inflation, op.cit.

24

were on the lead of the developing countries.31 Although the document also described the
limits and challenges the countries would face for maintaining their economic growth, it
justified the utility and importance of the concept through numbers and indicators, according
to which the four countries had been contributing for years with almost one third of the global
growth and with almost half of international trade. Similarly, it estimated that they counted
on about a third of global foreign exchange reserves and that the surplus in their current
accounts granted them a growing role as a suppliers of world savings.32 It was approximately
afterwards that the concept began to be mentioned more often as a reality of international
finances in specialized newspapers, magazines and blogs. It is noteworthy to mention that
the Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times, two of the most widely read specialized
journals worldwide, played a very important role in the proliferation of the concept, as well
as the blog Beyondbrics, in which also recurrently participated Jim O' Neil.33 In the financial
area, investment funds targeting the four countries proliferated significantly.
Although reports of financial consulting firms are presented as studies based on
objective information and methods with a high degree of scientific accuracy and claims of
infallibility, it is important to recognize that the consultants are also actors in the international
economic system, with visions, values and own interests. By studying the reasons for
Goldman Sachs to characterize the four countries within the same group and emphasize the
growing importance of their economies, different authors associate the appearance of the first

31

Anna Stupnytska, Dominic Wilson and Roopa Purushothaman Jim O'Neill, "How Solid Are the
BRICs?" Global Economics Paper No. 134, London, Goldman Sachs, December 1, 2005, Consulted online in
February 2015 in http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/how-solid.pdf
32
Ibid.
33
References to the BRIC increased exponentially since 2005, although with much more magnitude in
the Wall Street Journal, in Marion Fourcade, "The material and symbolic construction of the BRICs:
Reflections inspired by the RIPE Special Issue", Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 2, No. 2
(2013), p. 263.

25

reports with the strategy of the company to diversify its investments outside the Western
world.34 In the first articles published about the BRIC, the emphasis on the advisability of
investing in them rather than in other economic indicators is remarkable, as evidenced by one
of the opening paragraphs of the 2005 report: Higher growth may lead to higher returns and
increased demand for capital. The weight of the BRICs in investment portfolios could rise
sharply. Capital flows might move further in their favour, prompting major currency
realignments.35
According to the theory of the social construction of reality, discussed in the previous
chapter, the publication of the reports by Goldman Sachs represents a process of
objectification of their interests, by which these are manifested and expressed in human
products of human activity, available and visible to others. In this case, the product is the
concept of BRIC as a legitimate concept to describe reality. It is also important to mention
that the privileged position of Goldman Sachs, one of the largest and most powerful financial
consultants in the world, notably linked to governments and banks in industrialized Western
countries, influenced the legitimization and consolidation processes of the acronym, because,
as mentioned in the theoretical section, many aspects of economic life are based on
perceptions and feelings: In this case, the prestige and credibility of the company. Probably,
the BRIC would have received less attention and dissemination if the concept had originated
in the academy, and had been received with more skepticism if they had been an initiative of
one of the member countries.36
Op.cit., p. 264 and Mariano Turzi, Qu importancia tiene el BRIC? [How important is the BRIC],
Estudios Internacionales, Vol. 43, No. 168 (2011), p. 91.
35
Dominic Wilson and Roopa Purushothaman, Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050, Global
Economics Paper No. 99, London, Goldman Sachs
36
Both in the press and in the academy, there are publications related to the links between Goldman
Sachs and the governments of the United States and European countries, as well as Western financial
institutions. Undoubtedly, the consultancy is one of the pillars of the status quo of the current economic
34

26

In addition to the process of objectification, Goldman Sachs participated in the

process of social construction of reality while presenting the results of its researches as given
facts and almost infallible predictions, based on scientific and objective methods. Despite the
sophistication of the tools used in reports, some authors doubt that all members of the group
had really been attractive destinations for foreign investment. One of the main criticisms
clarifies that the high growth rates do not automatically mean higher profits for foreign
investors, because they must take into account the protection of property rights and other
financial indicators.37 Accordingly, Goldman Sachs documents did not explain why an
investor would prefer Brazil over South Korea or Malaysia. It has also been criticized that
the reasoning of the reports was based on considering the size of the economies as
synonymous with dynamism. That means, they proposed that the enormous growth of the
domestic markets would mean a significant expansion of the middle class and therefore
consumption and demand. However, they focused on the idea that large markets tend to be
less vulnerable to external shocks, without taking into account that this is not the case of the
economies of Russia and China.38
Regardless of its relationship with givens and future results, the presentation of the
economies of the four countries as a natural group and as an unquestioned part of the
international situation represented an exercise of symbolic power by the multinational

system. Critical studies also denounce the predominance of white men of a certain socioeconomic background
in key positions of the company, "At Goldman Sachs, The Masters of the Universe are all White", The Journal
of Blacks in Higher Education, No. 21 (Autumn 1998), pp. 34.
37
Besides, just as growth stocks Have lower returns than value stocks, growth nations do so Have
lower returns than value nations; Often emerging markets returns to show disappointing Problems with
corporate governance, share dilution: such as unwarranted. In addition, the growth of the economies of the
BRIC was very different from 2000 and 2006; Brazil grew 3.1 percent; Russia and India, 6.7 percent, while
China, 9.4 percent in Leslie Elliott Armijo, "The BRIC Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) as
Analytical Category: Mirage or Insight?" Asian Perspective, Vol. 31, No. 4 (2007), p.11.
38
Kaushik Basu, (ed.), The BRICS Report: A Study of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa
With special focus on Synergies and complementarities, Oxford University Press, 2012, p. 34.

27

consultancy, through which it re- narrated a specific cluster of large emerging economies
interpreted as secure and as long term financial asset providers through a comprehensive set
of financial, narrative and discursive tools.39 Specifically, it exercised power through the
categorization and promoting of characterizations about international actors based on their
interests, and through it influenced the definition of accurate actions in specific situations.
All this increased the power of Goldman Sachs to define the international economic situation
and its prestige among financial service providers. When creating a novel concept, it
extended the characterizations of economic actors, which also participated in the
accumulation of social knowledge the shared certainties and with the lighting and dimming
of different areas of reality; in this case they increased the visibility of the four countries and
darkened the one of other emerging economies that were not included in the group.
Regarding the phases of the realization of a self-fulfilling prophecy, mentioned in the
previous chapter, the reports published by Goldman Sachs meet all the requirements
proposed by Ted Hopf. First, they are based largely on expectations and specific predictions
about the behavior of certain actors, as well as on the outcome of their actions. Second, they
are related to institutional facts unlike natural facts , such as indicators, models, economic
policies and interactions and processes of the international system. Third, with the
publication of more articles and diffusion through the media, the financial consulting and
other actors contributed to spreading it within the community of those interested in
international finances. Finally, different actors changed their behavior in line with the
predictions of the reports, given that, since 2005, with the consolidation of the concept as a
valid category to describe the processes of transformation of the international economy,

39

Cornel Ban and Mark Blyth, "The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: An introduction", Review
of International Political Economy", Vol. 20, No. 2 (April, 2013), p. 243.

28

products and funds directed towards BRIC proliferated, as well as investment and consulting,
branding and marketing activities, and also the profits of investment banks and credit ranking
agencies.40 In short, just five years after the first appearance of the concept, and thanks to the
favored position, resources and legitimacy of Goldman Sachs, the BRIC turned into a selffullfiled prophecy in international finances.

2.2 THE ADOPTION OF THE CONCEPT BY THE MEMBER COUNTRIES

It is rare that a concept consolidates and becomes a self-fulfilling as quickly and as
easily as the BRIC did in the financial field, which can be attributed largely to the reputation
of Goldman Sachs and the major specialized journals that contributed to its
spreading. However, few could have foreseen that the concept would transcend the financial
sphere and would be appropriated by member countries as part of their identity and foreign
policy, expanding the scope of self-fulfilling prophecy originated by the report of O' Neil to
the political international arena just within a few years. As mentioned above, these
phenomena do not occur often, as the viability of self-fulfilling prophecies also depends on
its relationship with the objective reality. Although the relevance and even consistency of the
concept has been questioned by several authors both economically and politically, the ease
with which the concept transcended the financial sphere and go adopted by Brazil, Russia,
India and China lies partly in the similarities the four countries had in their previous
identities, reinforcing the viability of the concept to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. This
section presents a brief descriptions of the main aspects that the foreign policies of the

40

Marion Fourcade, "The material and symbolic construction of the BRICs: Reflections inspired by
the RIPE Special Issue", Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 2, No. 2 (2013), p. 264.

29

different countries shared since the decade of the nineties and during the first years of this
century.
In the case of Brazil, the foreign policy of the administration of Fernando Henrique
Cardoso (1995-2002) was based on the promotion of democracy, free markets and social
justice. Its aim was to present the country as a responsible partner, able to be a leader in the
region and to promote the interests of Latin America in a peaceful way emphasizing the
importance of disarmament and the idea of not basing the power of states on their military
capabilities without demanding radical changes in the international economic order. It was
then that the identity of Brazil as a developing country, seeking prosperity for all countries
based on economic stability and sustained growth by overcoming the divisions between
North and South was consolidated. Although with different intensity, the Brazilian foreign
policy also denounced that developed countries imposed their interests unilaterally,
sometimes at the expense of developing countries and through the use of force, which
reiterated the importance of designing cooperation mechanisms to increase the representation
of the South and to promote joint profits. The foreign policy of the next administration, led
by Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva (2003-2010), was also based on the developmental rhetoric. The
country projected a new concept of geopolitics and became active in promoting cooperation
among developing countries. However, it clarified that it had no intention to confront the
centers of power, but to build a multipolar world, increasing the representativeness of the
South in international institutions. At the same time, it stated that liberalization should not be
a recipe imposed without taking into account the unique conditions of each country and that
it should not be an obstacle to the economic autonomy of the states.41

41

See John L., Hammond and Joo Roberto Martins Filho, "Introduction: Brazil under Cardoso", Latin
American Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 5 (September 2007), pp. 5-8; Marcelo Fernandes de Oliveira. Timothy

30

The Russian Federation emerged after the traumatic collapse of the USSR in 1991.
Following the failure of Soviet communism, the new economic program and its foreign
policy were based on the support for democracy, market economy and the rejection of
confrontation with the Western industrialized countries. However, at the same time it rejected
the unipolar system and advocated the emergence of new global centers of power and growth
as well as global governance by a collective leadership, as opposed to the exclusive
leadership of the West. It is important to note the recognition given by the Russian foreign
policy to international institutions, mainly to the United Nations and its Security Council, as
legal multilateral structures for the protection of the rights of the states. Accordingly, one of
its major concerns since has been promoting the cooperation and integration of the country
within the international economy. Thus, as it can be observed in Russian foreign policy, on
the one hand, it defends its sovereignty and its regional and international geopolitical interests
and forms close relationships with countries not aligned with Western power centers; and on
the other hand, it also has and promotes deep links with the international economy and the
Western industrialized countries, mainly its relations with the European Union in the field of
energy. Although Russia could be considered as the BRIC with more potential to have
frictions with the industrialized North, it is worth recalling the significant contrast between
the present and the conflicts and tensions during the Cold War, when the Soviet Union was

Thompson, and Tullo Vigevani, "Brazilian Foreign Policy in the Cardoso Era: The Search for Autonomy
through Integration ", Latin American Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 5, (September, 2007), pp. 58-80; Sean W.
Burges, "Self-Esteem in Brazil: The Logic of Lula's South-South Foreign Policy", International Journal , Vol
60, No. 4 (Autumn 2005), pp.. 1133-1151; Omar G. Encarnacion, "Lula's Big Win", World Policy Journal ,
Vol. 19, No. 4 (Winter 2003), pp. 73-77

31

identified as the opposite pole of the capitalist world and actively promoted a global
revolution in its favor.42
In the case of India, its foreign policy since the decade of the nineties also criticized
an unfavorable international economic environment for the developing countries. Unlike
Russia, it denounced that Western institutions, such as the United Nations, were to serve the
interests of a few, instead of representing the majority. Taking up echoes of the Non-Aligned
Movement, it promoted South-South cooperation and the importance of giving voice and
representation to previously colonized countries. In a similar way to Brazil, it emphasized
the link between peace and economic development and the tried to include it in the
international agenda through the multilateralism, especially in the United Nations. Although
the country did not abandon its old ties with the West, it sought new partners to diversify its
relations and promote economic development. As the new century began, India's foreign
policy assumed a more conciliatory and pragmatic tone, leaving behind the discourse of
confrontation with the West, while promoting the developmental policy of the South.43
The PRC was also guided by principles of the Non-Aligned Movement during the
decade of the nineties. Its foreign policy discourse denounced the prevalence of a unipolar
world, an unjust economic order and inequality between rich and poor countries, which
deepened the divisions between North and South. Politically, it rejected hegemonism and
unipolarity in the international system. As well as other members of the BRIC, China
encouraged the move towards multipolarity and tried to include the issue of development on
42

See Alex Pravda and Malcolm Neil, "Democratization and Russian Foreign Policy", International
Affairs , Vol. 72, No. 3 (July, 1996), pp. 537-552, and Paul Kubicek, "Russian Foreign Policy and the
West", Political Science Quarterly , Vol. 114, No. 4 (Winter 1999-2000), pp. 547-568.
43
See Sumit Ganguly, "India's Foreign Policy Grows Up", World Policy Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4
(Winter 2003/2004), pp. 41-47; Kamal Mitra Chenoy and Anuradha M. Chenoy, "India's Foreign Policy Shifts
and the Calculus of Power", Economic and Political Weekly , Vol. 42, No. 35 (September, 2007), pp. 35473554.

32

the agenda of the United Nations, as well as to promote the reform of the Security Council
aimed at increasing the representation of developing countries.44 Economically, it tried to
eliminate protectionism and discrimination against the interests of the underdeveloped
countries,

and

increase

the

representativeness

of

the

latter

in

international

institutions. Accordingly, it called on the developed countries to promote debt reduction,

technology transferences and access to their markets. Militarily, it denounced the expansion
of some organizations, such as NATO, as a reflection of hegemonism in international
relations. However, since the beginning of the process of economic reform and opening up,
China is aware that it cannot develop in isolation and that the best option for global stability
was to maintain cordial relations with the United States and the industrialized North. What
is more, since the beginning of the twenty-first century, China has emphasized pacifism as
the basis for its external relations. As the Russian Federation, the People's Republic has been
actively promoting its relations with the international economic system and has sought to
diversify its economic relations with different countries, both from the North and the South.45
As it can be seen, despite their remarkable historical differences, the foreign policies
of Brazil, Russia, India and China coincided in giving an important place to the promotion
of multilateralism and development during the decade of the nineties and the early years of
the XXI century, denouncing to a greater or lesser extent, the gap between the North and the
South, as well as its implications in the international economic system. However, the four

44

Even in 2009, President Hu Jintao stated that China supported the reform of the Security Council to
include countries in Africa.
45
See Sheng Lijun, "China's Foreign Policy Under Discrepancy Status, Status
Enhancement", Contemporary Southeast Asia , Vol. 17, No. 2 (September 1995), pp. 101-125; Abanti
Bhattacharya, "Chinese Nationalism and China's Assertive Foreign Policy", The Journal of East Asian Affairs,
Vol 21, No. 1 (Spring / Summer 2007), pp.. 235-262 and Yi Xiaoxong, "Chinese Foreign Policy in Transition:
Understanding China's Peaceful Development", The Journal of East Asian Affairs , Vol 19, No. 1 (Spring /
Summer 2005), pp.. 74-112.

33

countries ruled out strategies of confrontation with the industrialized North. Instead, they
considered that their relations with them, specifically with the United States, played a key
role in their economic development strategies. At the same time, they kept the desire to
promote the representation of developing countries in international economic policies and
institutions as well as to promote South-South cooperation. These coincidences in the BRIC
assumed identities through their foreign policies enabled the concept to transcend the
financial sphere.
Thus, as the group received increasing attention in the media and academy, the leaders
of the four countries began to use it to increase their visibility in the international arena. In
2006, the Foreign Ministers of the BRIC countries met for the first time in New York in the
eve of a session of the United Nations General Assembly. A year later, the Finance Ministers
gathered in So Paulo and issued a joint statement before the meeting of the Ministers of
Finance and Governors of Central Banks of the G-20, where they discussed joint proposals
on the financial crisis and the need to reform international institutions.46 Since then, meetings
between representatives of the four countries proliferated significantly, until June 2009, when
BRIC consolidated as political and economic reality of the international system through the
First BRIC Summit in Yekaterinburg, Russia, attended by the heads of State of the four
countries. The main objective of the event was to coordinate positions on the summits of the
G-20 and G-8, which were scheduled for the same year. That way, the BRIC transformed
from being a concept of international financial arena to a mechanism of political coordination
among its members.

46
"Brazil, Russia, India and China First Meeting of BRIC Finance Ministers Joint
Communique", consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics5.co.za/about-brics/sectorialdeclaration/financial-ministers-meeting/first-meeting-of-finance-ministers/

34

Thereafter, the foreign ministers of the BRIC have met seven times: twice in 2009 in
Yekaterinburg (concluding with the publication of a joint statement) and in New York; once
in 2010 in New York; twice in 2011 in New York and in Moscow (also concluding with the
publication of a joint statement); once in 2013 in New York; and twice in 2014 in The Hague
and New York. Finance Ministers have met twice in 2009 in the UK; once in 2001 in
Washington DC; in 2014 in Brazil; in 2014 in Australia; and again in 2015 in Washington
DC. Most meetings culminated with the publication of joint statements and were held in
reference to the G-20 summits, the IMF and the World Bank to coordinate the actions of the
four. Meanwhile, the agriculture ministers have met five times since 2010, producing
statements in each one of the events. It is important to mention that the 2011 meeting in
Chengdu produced an action plan for Agricultural Cooperation between BRIC Countries,
scheduled for 2012-2016, as well as a document on the working procedures of agricultural
cooperation. They has also been meetings between the Ministers of Education, Environment,
Health, Trade and Science and Technology. However, the most important and visible
meetings are those of the Heads of State during the annual summits that have taken place in
Brazil in 2010, in Sanya in 2011 in New Delhi in 2012; in South Africa in 2013; in Brazil in
2014 and soon in Russia in 2015.47 Since then, in addition to the joint declarations and the
coordination of actions to promote common interests, probably the most important
achievement of the BRICS it has been the creation of the New Development Bank BRICS,
in July 2014, as an alternative to the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.
As it can be seen, the adoption of the concept by the member states is also a process
of objectification of their interests and certain characteristics of their previous identities, so

47

BRICS Official Documents and Meetings, BRICS Information Centre, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/

35

that their actions like those of Goldman Sachs contribute to the social construction of
reality. Specifically, an international reality in which the BRIC represent the most advanced
efforts to promote multilateralism and the representativeness of the developed countries in
international institutions. With the internalization and reiteration of their new identities as
BRIC, they continue with the process of classification of states, which began with the report
of Jim O'Neil in 2001, and used the social function of identity to promote values, norms and
action parameters. The products of human activity in which the BRIC objectified their
interests and identities are the summits, meetings, joint communiques, working papers, since
these are visible and available to all other members of the international community, which in
turn contribute to the accumulation of social knowledge. It is also important to mention that
the concept gained increasingly materiality and thus more strength and even got
objectivized in an institution one of the pillars of the social construction of reality through
the creation of the new development bank. At the same time, the practices of the BRIC
reproduce the second, third and fourth stages of the self-fulfilling prophecies, as both its
consolidation as an economic-political group as their statements and actions are based on
institutional facts (opposed to natural events). At the same time, they promoted the
dissemination of ideas within the international community and modified the behavior of the
actors in such a manner consistent with the predictions of the theory. In addition to the above,
the group still gained more strength and independence of the reports of Goldman Sachs when
with the inclusion of South Africa, a process which is described in the following section.

2.3 THE INCLUSION OF SOUTH AFRICA

Beginning in 2010, the president of South Africa conducted negotiations and state
visits to prepare the request for the inclusion of the country in the BRIC, which was formally
36

presented during the G-20 summit of the same year in Seoul.48 Later that year, the South
African Foreign Ministry received a call from its Chinese counterpart, confirming the
invitation to the summit in Sanya. In February 2011, the Finance Minister of India confirmed
the entry of South Africa to the group and the process became official in April, through wich
the final "s" was added to the acronym. South Africa's entry to BRIC was controversial
because the country did not have the size of the population and economy of the other four
members. The same Jim O'Neil stated that it made no sense and said that Nigeria could have
been a better choice to represent the continent.49 In addition, two years before, the country
had been considered by The Economist the number 17 among the most risky emerging
markets to invest, because of the relationship between the characteristics of its foreign debt
and monetary policy,50 which contradicted the original reason for creating the
group. However, precisely for this reason and the fact that South Africa was chosen over
other countries, perhaps more akin to the financial profile of the four such as Mexico,
Turkey and Indonesia , is that the expansion of BRIC to BRICS represents a transition from
the financial to the economic sphere and mainly, to the political. Similarly, it consolidated
the adoption of the concept by the member states and its independency of the characteristics
and limitations imposed upon the concept by the reports of Goldman Sachs.
Particularly striking is the speed with which the process of inclusion of South Africa
to BRIC was conducted. This is partly explained by economic and political interests of the
five countries, but also because of discursive similarities with the identity of the other four;

48

Carla Maria Morasso, Los intereses de Sudfrica como BRIC [The interests of South Africa as
BRIC], Conjuntura Austral, Vol. 4, No. 18 (June-July 2013), p. 12.
49
Ibid, p. 13.
50
Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African Within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 1 (2013), p. 252.

37

during the nineties, South Africa also expressed concerns about the marginalization of
developing countries. In foreign policy, it sought to increase the visibility of disadvantaged
countries in the international system and to promote South-South relations. However, it
maintained good relations and a friendly tone with its traditional partners and urged the
establishment of mechanisms for cooperation between developed and developing countries
to reduce the gap between them.51 Moreover, since it proposed its request for joining the
group, South Africa carried out modifications to align the country with the new identity and
functions of the BRIC. Economically, it instituted policies to encourage business with other
countries and to increase economic penetration into its territory.52 In foreign policy, the
"Strategic Plan 2001-2014" emphasizes the development, cooperation, and participation in
the system of global governance through multilateralism, strengthening South-South
relations and ties with strategic partners in the North as well as the recognition of the United
Nations as guarantor of regional and international peace.53
As for the processes of the social construction of reality, the inclusion of South Africa
also constitutes an objectification, because through it interests of both the four original
members as of the African country were expressed and materialized.54 This did not only
strengthened the characterization of states promoted through the idea of BRIC while
contributing with its repetition and internalization and strengthened the legitimacy of the

51

Leslie Elliott Armijo, "The BRIC Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) as Analytical
Category: Mirage or Insight?" Asian Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), p.29.
52
Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African Within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 1 (2013), p. 263.
53
Carla Maria Morasso, Los intereses de Sudfrica como BRIC [The interests of South Africa as
BRIC], Conjuntura Austral, Vol. 4, No. 18 (June-July 2013), p. 13.
54
As mentioned in the theoretical chapter, an objectification is the manifestation and expression of
intersubjective processes into products of human activity, available to other subjects in addition to the
creators. Material and symbolic benefits of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa through their
memberships to the BRICS are described in the following sections.

38

identity of the BRIC countries as the most advanced representatives of the developing world,
but it also expanded the characterization and thus the accumulation of social knowledge to
a territory where the concept had no presence: an area that had been sentenced to opacity by
the Goldman Sachs reports brightened. Finally, the inclusion of South Africa shows how the
concept of the BRIC continued to operate as a self-fulfilling prophecy, as it was conducted
through institutional mechanisms, in opposition to natural facts; continued spreading the idea
within the international community and modified the actions of the actors, especially those
of South Africa. Although it could be argued that the inclusion of the country opposes the
predictions of the reports that created the BRIC, it also meant its independence of the limits
set by Goldman Sachs and its appropriation by the member states, which also represents a
renewal and expansion of expectations on the translation of economic dynamism and political
representation to other poles of international geography.

39

3. THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SELF-FULFILLED PROPHECY AND ITS IMPLICATIONS IN THE

INTERNATIONAL ORDER
The second chapter of this work described the origin of the BRIC and the way in
which they became a self-fulfilling prophecy. This one is responsible for describing the
content of the discourse of the BRICS and its implications for the international system. In
short, the characteristics of self-fulfilling prophecy. This develops the second part of the
investigations hypothesis, according to which the BRICS are a self-fulfilling prophecy that
gives stability and legitimacy to the international order. To begin with, this chapter presents
the various speeches that have been created to explain and legitimize the roles and differences
among the countries of the center, the periphery and semi-periphery in the international
economic system, in order to explain the context in which the BRICS are inscribed.
Subsequently, this chapter describes the discourse of the BRICS, based on the main speeches
and documents published by the group and representatives of the member states, through
which they define their identity and actions, as well as various aspects of the international
system. Then, through an analysis between the discourse and the actions of the group, this
section explains the main implications of the BRICS in the international system. To continue,
the contributions of the different members of the group, and the benefits they get from being
part of the BRICS. Finally, this chapter presents final considerations on the differences
between the group and its relationship with the West and the international system.

3.1 THE BRICS AND THE DOMINANT DISCOURSES OF THE INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC SYSTEM
Economic life is governed not only by numbers, processes and objectives laws, but
these, while being expressed through language, acquired a symbolic and emotional
dimension that influences the perceptions and actions of social actors. As a result, economy
40

is also interpreted through a moral dimension, in which the actors individuals, corporations
and states, institutions and processes are grasped not only through numbers, but also
through categories that evoke the desirable or reprehensible, the virtues or vices, and what is
considered good or bad. Therefore, concepts are not isolated evocations, but exist in relation
to other within discursive positions.55 The BRIC are no exception. As mentioned in the
previous chapter, the scientific methodology of the reports of Goldman Sachs, its prestige
and relations with financial institutions and governments, as well as the dominant position of
the media which contributed to the spreading of the concept were factors involved in its
acceptance, consolidation and legitimation, whereby the financial consulting firm captured
the imagination of investors and decision-makers worldwide. However, these elements are
not sufficient to explain the speed and success of the idea of the BRIC, as these are also
explained based on the emotional evocations of the narratives within which the concept is
inscribed. Therefore, to understand the role of BRIC within the dominant discourse of the
international economic system, it is necessary to describe the narratives that preceded it and
the way in which they interpreted the relationship between the countries of the core, the semiperiphery and the periphery of the world.56
Each established order, or status quo, uses speeches to justify their existence and
permanence. In the case of the international economic system, much of its legitimacy lies in
different explanations presented to explain the inequality between the core countries and the
periphery. During the sixties and seventies, the dominant discourse both in politics and in

55

Marion Fourcade, "The materials and symbolic construction of the BRICs: Reflections inspired by
the RIPE Special Issue", Review of International Political Economy, vol. 2, no. 2 (2013), p. 262.
56
For the theorist Immanuel Wallerstein, the world economic system is divided into the center the
industrialized countries, the semi-periphery and periphery. The division is based on trading goods and the
earnings of the world economy, in Immanuel Wallerstein, World systems analysis, an introduction, Mexico,
Siglo XXI Editores, 2005, p. 10.

41

social sciences was based on the theory of modernization, according to which any country in
the semi-periphery or periphery could move towards the center i.e. achieve its
industrialization as long as it was able to allocate and use resources efficiently, largely
through market liberalization, trade and financial flows. On the other side, although they were
never part of the dominant discourse, the theories of dependency and imperialism emerged
to challenge the theory of modernization, arguing that underdevelopment was the result of
the unequal exchange between center and periphery, and that the liberalization of economic
relations both inside and outside the State carried the potential to generate and strengthen
economic inequality between countries and between individuals. Given the weakening of the
modernization theory, the neoliberal counteroffensive arrived, which went even further in its
endeavor to deregulate the economy and minimize the role of the State. This new discourse
became legitimized through the industrialization of the four "Asian tigers" in the early
seventies, representing their success as the result of neoliberal policies. However, a decade
later, with the arrival of the debt crisis in Latin America, neither the World Bank nor the
International Monetary Fund the two most representative institutions of neoliberal thought
were able to avoid the two lost decades in the subcontinent. Then came the discourse of
globalization, which is based largely on the precepts of neoliberalism, but coated with
optimism and new politically correct concepts.57
As it can be seen, the international economic system based on the hegemony of the
United States and its industrialized allies the center of the international economy generated
dominant discourses which became spread and reproduced by the academia, the media and

57

Radhika Desai, "Dreaming in Technicolour? India as a BRIC Economy ", International

Journal, vol.62, no. 4 (2007), pp. 783-786.

42

political statements about the position and the possibilities of the countries of the periphery
and semi-periphery the modernization theory, neoliberalism and globalization, through
which optimism and the idea of consensus on the directions imposed by the global ruling
class were promoted. During the second half of the twentieth century, every discourse on
developing countries and the global economic order tended to be more market-oriented and
increasingly modest about social achievements through which it became legitimized. First,
with the modernization theory, the idea of reaching the industrialized countries was
promised; with neoliberalism, the advance economic development and eventually the
reduction of poverty; finally, with globalization, desirable objectives were reduced to meet
the basic demands of the population and preventing armed conflicts.
It is within this continuum of discourses that the transition process of the international
economy, marked by a lower growth in the United States and Europe in relation to previous
periods as well as breakthroughs that occurred in some economies of the semi-periphery to
the late twentieth century is inscribed. This not only generated the institution of mechanisms
for dialogue between the two groups for managing the transition within established
institutions of the status quo, such as the G-20, but in accordance with what was mentioned
earlier in this chapter, also had impact on the emotional and discursive fields. To retain
legitimacy and excitement about the future of the international economic system, countries
of the semi-periphery were described as emerging markets, a strong concept with positive
connotations such as movement, dynamism and opportunities, as well as politically correct.
This is the discourse referent within which the BRICS are inscribed, whose emotional capital
explains the speed and ease with which the acronym captured the attention of investors and
economic players worldwide, even though the original concept is based primarily on

43

projections grounded in the demographic weight of the four countries, ignoring many other
economic indicators and other developing countries.
Returning to the reality of the international economic system, following the process
of empowerment of developing countries towards the end of the twentieth century, they
began to increasingly denounce their lack of representation in international institutions both
economic and political, as well as demand mechanisms for cooperation between North and
South to reduce the gap between them; all this without assuming attitudes of confrontation
or directly challenging the established order. Thereafter, the legitimation of the status quos
institutions the IMF, World Bank and WTO faced strong criticism and began to open
spaces of representation though more symbolic than effective for developing
countries.58 This process and its narrative, meanwhile, is what explains the ease with which
the BRIC transcended the financial sphere and became a political and economic reality to be
adopted as part of the identity of the member countries, through which they were able to
become representatives of the rise of the emerging economies. As Marion Fourcade writes,
the strength and attraction of the concept, as well as its ability of the member states to present
themselves as a coherent group, despite the significant differences between them, comes from
its symbolic dimension, in particular, the identity of its members as outsiders and the feeling
of complaint toward the exclusion of developing country in international institutions.59 This
is described below.

58

Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1 (2013), p. 257.
59
Marion Fourcade, "The materials snd symbolic construction of the BRICs: Reflections inspired by
the RIPE Special Issue", Review of International Political Economy, vol. 2, no. 2 (2013), p. 262.

44

3.2 THE DISCOURSE OF THE BRICS

The reports of Goldman Sachs about the BRIC when the concept was primarily a
financial category presented the four as developing countries with the potential to become
a dominant force in generating growth, whose economic weight based on their demographic
profiles, comparative advantages, natural resources and macroeconomic policies, could
promote stability and determine the evolution of the global economy. In short, the BRIC were
drawn as the vanguard of nations with growing power in the international system, 60 as "the
rising economic powers."61 The emergence of the acronym represented an innovation in the
classification scheme in the international economy. Thus, this represented an exercise of
symbolic power, because by expanding the characterizations of developing countries, both
the financial consulting firm as the different actors reproducing the concept, put into practice
their ability to define a given situation, in this case, the transition processes in the
international economy. A few years later, when the member states adopted the concept and
turned it into a mechanism of projection and policy coordination, the scope of the meaning
of the BRIC expanded exponentially and became independent from its original limitations.
What will be understood as the discourse of the BRICS in this work are the
pronouncements verbal or written through which the group as a whole or the
representatives of the member states have described its characteristics, actions, values and
interests, and their relations with the international economic and political system. In short,
the official pronouncements by which the BRICS have outlined the group's identity. It was
decided to leave out newspaper articles on the BRICS, although they also affect the

60
Leslie Eliott Armijo and Paul Soter, "Brazil: To be or not to be a BRIC" Asian Perspective, vol. 31,
no. 4 (2007), p. 61.
61
Cornel Ban and Mark Blyth, "The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: An introduction", Review
of International Political Economy, vol.2, no. 20 (April, 2013), p. 241.

45

construction of its identity, because their content depends on the agenda of different media
and not of the decision-makers who are part of the group.62 The importance of analyzing the
discourse of the BRICS is that, through its consolidation and dissemination, the group
members contribute to the social construction of reality and therefore influence perceptions,
beliefs and actions of the various actors in the international system. With its projection, the
BRICS members use the social function of identity, through which they tell themselves and
others who they are and, at the same time, define who the others are. In this way, they promote
the legitimacy of values, rules and parameters of action, both for themselves and for
others. At the same time, they exert the symbolic power to define a situation; in this case, the
characteristics and situation of the international economic and political system and turn their
construction as an indisputable vision. Through this, as mentioned in the theoretical chapter,
a given social order is legitimated and intersubjective meanings are determined through the
construction of shared knowledge.
The first official documents produced by the BRIC were one press release after the
meeting of Foreign ministers and the first joint statement after the meeting of the Finance
ministers, both published in 2008. However, the most influential documents and speeches
presented on behalf of the group are the ones made by the heads of State of the member
countries at the annual summits, as these events and representatives have more symbolic
resources. An important process to recognize is, that the group's identity and its scope has
extended over time, demonstrating the consolidation and strengthening of the group,
represented through the succession of summits and the proliferation of meetings between

62

Although it is recognized that to understand in depth the phenomenon of BRICS research is needed
to explore ways in which they are interpreted in the media

46

officials of different government levels. This shows how reality is constructed and reinforced
when the characterizations about the world are repeated and internalized.
BRICS describe themselves as a platform for dialogue and cooperation, whose
importance and capabilities and, in the symbolic level, its legitimacy and force rely in the
fact that they concentrate about 40 percent of the world population and contribute with almost
15 percent and 20 percent of global trade and production, respectively. 63 Therefore, the
groups identity is largely based on economic features. Consequently, the group also
considers itself as a dynamic element of the global economy, whose size makes them
necessary for guaranteeing a balanced growth of the worlds economy and gives them the
capacity

to

contribute

significantly

for

overcoming

the

global

economic

slowdown.64 Interestingly, when speaking about its origin, the BRICS do not mention the
reports published by Goldman Sachs, where the acronym appeared for the first time and
without which the group very likely would have never came to exist. This might be because
the definition of the group according to the reports considerably limits its features and
capabilities and therefore its meaning and symbolic scope mainly to the international
financial arena.65 Thus, the BRICS describe its origin within the context the 2008 financial
crisis and the need to develop joint policies to mitigate its consequences, particularly in

63

"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html and Hu Jintao, "Strengthen Mutually Beneficial
Cooperation to Create a Better Future ", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-hu-statement.html
64
Dilma Rousseff, "Declarao imprensa Da da Repblica President Dilma Rousseff aps assinatura
cerimnia
of
Atos",
New
Delhi,
2012,
Consulted
in
February
2015
inhttp://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329- rousseff-statement-br.html and Hu Jintao, "Strengthen Mutually
Beneficial Cooperation to Create a Better Future", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
inhttp://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-hu -statement.html
65
The definition of the BRICS as reported by Goldman Sachs is mentioned in the first part of the first
chapter.

47

developing countries.66 With regard to the significant differences between the member states,
which have been the subject of skepticism and major criticism about the group, the BRICS
interpret them, in their discourse, as a source of diversity that increases their capacities for
solving major world problems.67
The BRICS portray the overall international situation as dual. On the one hand, they
consider that emerging countries grow healthily and increase their contributions to global
trade and growth, which at the same time increases their role in the maintenance of peace,
security and stability in the world.68 On the other hand, they recognize a number of obstacles
to face; for example, the economic slowdown, volatile prices of food and energy resources,
the challenge of reconciling growth with environmental protection, political uncertainty in
East Asia and violence in the Middle East and Africa. In response, according to the discourse
of the BRICS, the institutions of international economic and political governance have failed
to keep catch up with the changes and situations that have arisen in the world, especially the
increasingly important role of emerging economies and developing countries.69 Therefore,
the main objective of the BRICS, present in every speech and an official document of the
group, is to build a more equitable and democratic multipolar international system, based on
the rule of law and multilateral diplomacy.70 Consequently, the dialogue between the BRICS,

66

"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html
67
Dilma Rousseff, "Declarao imprensa Da da Repblica President Dilma Rousseff aps assinatura
cerimnia
of
Atos",
New
Delhi,
2012,
Consulted
in
February
2015
inhttp://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329- rousseff-statement-br.html
68
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html
69
Dilma Rousseff, "Declarao imprensa Da da Repblica President Dilma Rousseff aps assinatura
cerimnia
of
Atos",
New
Delhi,
2012,
Consulted
in
February
2015
inhttp://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329- rousseff-statement-br.html
70
Joint Communiqu of the Foreign Minister's During the BRIC Summit meeting in Yekaterinburg,
Russia in 2009, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/080516foreign.htmland "Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders ", Brasilia, 2010 Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/100415-leaders.html

48

according to their pronouncements, is intended to serve the common interests of emerging

and developing countries. Reflecting the strengthening of the group achieved through South
Africa's entry to the group, since 2012 BRICS speeches emphasize its presence in Asia,
Africa, Europe and Latin America and thus the transcontinental dimension of its
representation capacity and identity.71
Thus, the BRICS are self-defined as a group representing the interests of the countries
of the periphery and semi-periphery of the world economic system. All this with the goal of
building a harmonious world of lasting peace, justice and common prosperity, based on an
enlightened scientific temper.72 Consequently, the group has stated repeatedly its ability
and willingness to contribute to the development of humanity in general and has matched the
benefits to its members as benefits for the world.73 As it can be seen, the BRICS define
themselves as emerging countries, a concept that implies, among other characteristics,
regional preponderance and aspirations to play an important role in the international events.74
Specifically, the purpose of the BRICS is to reform international political and economic
institutions to make them more representative and thereby also more effective and efficient,

71

"Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhi-declaration.html and "Joint Statement of the BRIC
Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414leaders.html
72
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Yekaterinburg, 2009 Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090616-leaders.html and "Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration",
New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhideclaration.html
73
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html and Dilma Rousseff, "President da Imprensa
Declarao da Repblica, Dilma Rousseff, aps assinatura cerimnia of Atos ", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in
February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-rousseff-statement-br.html
74
Neil Mac Farlane, The R in BRICs: Is Russia an Emerging Power? , International Affairs, vol.
82, no. 1 (January, 2006), p. 41.

49

which has been described as "acting together for inclusive development."75 In the medium
and long term, they seek to establish themselves as a key part of the system of global
governance in the political, legal, financial and economic areas.76 As for the means to achieve
this, the BRICS have repeatedly stated that they will seek to achieve their objectives in a
pragmatic way, through an inclusive and non-confrontational cooperation.77 Accordingly,
the have declared themselves ready to work with developed and developing countries for
facing the challenges and opportunities of the international system.78
Economically, they recognize that the global financial architecture maintains the
stability and integrity of the monetary and financial systems. They seek to strengthen the
representation of emerging and developing countries, so that the institutions become more
effective and can establish a better and more just monetary system, which would serve the
interests of all countries and support the development of emerging and developing
countries.79 Specifically, the BRICS have announced that their objective is to reform the
Bretton Woods institutions, due to their lack of legitimacy for the reasons mentioned
above. They seek mainly to change the voting power of the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund. At the same time, they try to diversify the staff of both institutions and
increase the participation of members from developing countries. In the specific case of the

75
Dilma Rousseff, "Declarao imprensa Da da Repblica President Dilma Rousseff aps assinatura
cerimnia
of
Atos",
New
Delhi,
2012,
Consulted
in
February
2015
inhttp://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329- rousseff-statement-br.html
76
Vladimir Putin, Statement after the Plenary Session of the 5th BRICS Summit, Durban, 2013,
Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327-putin-statement.html
77
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html
78
"Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhi-declaration.html
79
"Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhi-declaration.html and "Joint Statement of the BRIC
Countries'
Leaders
",
Yekaterinburg,
2009
Consulted
in
February
2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090616-leaders.html

50

IMF, according to the discourse of the group, the BRICS will support candidates from
developing countries.80 Similarly, the institution will seek cooperation between the North
and the South to promote equal partnerships aimed at development, capable of overcoming
the dichotomy between donor-recipient countries.81 They also propose cooperation between
emerging market and developed countries in order to turn both sides in engines of economic
development and prosperity, also demanding the transfer of technology from the developed
countries.82
Meanwhile, they recognize the importance of international trade and foreign direct
investment for the recovery of the international economy. On several occasions the BRICS
have also announced that the group is ready and willing to contribute to anti-recession
measures within the framework of the G-20, which is recognized as the premier forum for
international economic cooperation and the best mechanism to coordinate responses to the
crisis which and to stabilize financial markets and to promote global growth. They state that
the forum has become increasingly inclusive, diverse and representative.83 The group has
also expressed concern about the instability of the markets in the Eurozone, which in turn
affects international markets. In response, they propose to increase the regulation and
supervision of international finances as well as the coordination of policies and the adoption
of

more

responsible

macroeconomic

and

80

financial

policies

by

advanced

"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Brasilia, 2010 Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/100415-leaders.html
81
"Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhi-declaration.html
82
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Yekaterinburg, 2009 Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090616-leaders.html
83
"BRICs Finance Communiqu", United Kingdom, 2009, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090314-finance.html and "Joint Statement of the BRIC
Countries' Leaders", Sanya, 2011 Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414leaders.html

51

economies.84 Accordingly, they have denounced protectionism of industrialized countries as

"a threat to the world economy" as a "risk" and a "disruptive force".85 In the commercial
arena, they recognize the leading role of the World Trade Organization and similarly, they
have spoken in favor of diversification of the international monetary system and promoting
exchanges in national currencies.86 On several occasions, they have also promoted specific
objectives, such as the inclusion of the issue of development and the reduction of
protectionism in industrialized countries during the Doha Round in 2008;87 during the
summit in South Africa in 2013, the BRICS included within their aims to unlock the potential
of Africa through cooperation, infrastructure development and the advancement of
industrialization through foreign direct investment.88 Finally, they have described the
creation of their new development bank as a contribution consistent with their challenges, as
their contribution to the financing for development. The BRICS have interpreted it as an
effort to complement existing financial institutions, with the objective of mobilizing
resources for infrastructure and sustainable development and thus cover the lack of financing
faced by developing countries.89

84

"Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration", New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhi-declaration.html
85
"Communiqu Finance BRICs", United Kingdom, 2009, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090314-finance.html
86
Dilma Rousseff, "Declarao imprensa Da da Repblica President Dilma Rousseff aps assinatura
cerimnia
of
Atos",
New
Delhi,
2012,
Consulted
in
February
2015
inhttp://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329- rousseff-statement-br.html
87
"Brazil, Russia, India and China First Meeting of BRIC Finance Ministers Joint Communique", S o
Paulo, November 2008, and "Press Release: Meeting of BRIC Foreign Ministers", New York, 2008, in February
2015 Consulted in http://www.brics5.co.za/about-brics/sectorial-declaration/financial-ministers-meeting/firstmeeting-of-finance-ministers/
88
"BRICS and Africa: Partnership for Development, Integration and Industrialization. EThekwini
Declaration, Durban, 2013, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327statement.html
89
Statement by BRICS Leaders on the Establishment of the BRICS-Led Development Bank, Durban,
2013, Consulted in February in 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327-brics-bank.html

52

In the political arena, they advocate peaceful, diplomatic and multilateral resolution
of disputes and conflicts between states and have stated their will to avoid political
disruptions that create volatility in international markets.90 They confer a central role to the
United Nations, as the most important body for dealing with international threats and
challenges. However, they also recognize the importance of increasing the representation of
emerging and developing countries within the institution.91 With the groups expansion, its
consolidation and the repetition and dissemination of its pronouncements, it has also
expanded its scope and objectives. Thus, they have come to define themselves in relation to
various issues, such as the fight against climate change and diseases, and the promotion of
science, education and cultural exchanges.92 They have also adopted as causes the fight
against poverty and hunger, representing another example of the remarkable expansion and
independence that the group has acquired, since none of the reports of Goldman Sachs
predicted that the living conditions of the populations of the BRIC would significantly
modify, much less the influence of the economic development of the group in the living
conditions of other countries. In contrast, in the 2003 report, the authors warned that despite
much faster growth, individuals in the BRICs are still likely to be poorer on average than
individuals in the G-6 economies by 2006. Russia is the exception, essentially catching up

90

Manmohan Singh, "Prime Minister's Statement at the Plenary Session of the Fourth BRICS Summit",
New Delhi, 2012, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-singh-

statement .html
91

Dilma Rousseff, "Declarao imprensa Da da Repblica President Dilma Rousseff aps assinatura
cerimnia
of
Atos",
New
Delhi,
2012,
Consulted
in
February
2015
in
http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329- rousseff-statement-br.html and Joint Communiqu of the Foreign
Minister's During the BRIC Summit meeting in Yekaterinburg, Russia in 2009, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/080516 -foreign.html and "Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries'
Leaders", Sanya, 2011, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html
92
Joint Communiqu of the Foreign Minister's During the BRIC Summit meeting in Yekaterinburg,
Russia in 2009, Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/080516-

foreign.html
53

with the poorer of the G-6 in terms of income per capita by 2050. Chinas per capita income
could be similar to where the developed economies are now. By 2030, Chinas income per
capita could be roughly what Koreas is today93 This is why it is important the success
that represents for the group that, even so, they have managed to project themselves as the
representatives of the developing world, synonymous with future development and hope,
through the pronouncements of the various representatives of its member states.
As part of this process, the interests of the group have also expanded to the scope of
international security, in which, similarly to the different institutions mentioned above, they
give a prominent place to the United Nations Security Council which they define as the
primary responsible of maintaining international peace and security, while at the same time,
denouncing a necessary reform to give more representation to emerging and developing
countries. In some occasions, they have also denounced the imposition of solutions by means
of interventions in the internal political processes of weaker states.94 Since the early years,
the group has made explicit its condemnation of terrorism, which also represented a symbolic
benefit for its members, since, in 2014, during the meeting of the Foreign ministers, Brazil
and China expressed their solidarity with the peoples and governments of Russia and India
regarding the terrorist attacks that occurred in their territories earlier that year. 95 During the
summit in Durban in 2013, they also expressed themselves about combating drug trafficking
and on cyber security.96

93
Purushothaman, Roopa and Wilson, Dominic, Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050, Global
Economics Paper No. 99, London, Goldman Sachs, October 1, 2003, consulted online in February 2015 in
http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/brics-dream.pdf
94
Meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers, [press release], New York, 2014, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/140925-foreign.html
95
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Brasilia, 2010 Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/100415-leaders.html
96
Vladimir Putin, Statement after the Plenary Session of the 5th BRICS Summit, Durban, 2013,
Consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327-putin-statement.html

54

Since 2014, the group has also make statements about the situation in Syria. That year,
they reported that increased sanctions against Damascus would only increase confrontation
with the authorities and aggravate the situation, through which they defended very different
position from the one promoted by the United States and its main allies. In this regard, the
BRICS stated that the only solution to the crisis were peaceful negotiations and a dialogue
between all parties within the framework of the Arab League.97 With regard to Libya, they
defended the role of the United Nations Security Council, but also mentioned the need to
prevent abuse in the sanctions against the country.98 That same year, the Foreign ministers
met in Moscow to discuss the situation in the Middle East and North Africa. 99 They
emphasized the need to resolve the crisis peacefully and without the use of force. Regarding
the Arab-Israeli conflict, they support the establishment of a Palestinian state with full
sovereignty within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital, statements through
which they also defend a different view from the one of the US-led coalition.100 In addition
to statements in favor of the peaceful resolution of the problems on the situations in Africa
the Middle East, as the war in Afghanistan and Iran's nuclear program, they have advocated
the resolution of conflicts in Africa by means of African leaders and the African Union, with
support from the United Nations.101

97

Meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers, [press release], New York, 2014, Consulted in February 2015

in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/140925-foreign.html
98
BRICS Foreign Minister's Meeting, press release, New York, 2011, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110923-foreign.html
99
Meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers, [press release], New York, 2014, Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/140925-foreign.html
100
Op.cit.
101
Ibid.

55

3.3 IMPLICATIONS OF THE BRICS IN THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM

The previous section of this chapter described the discourse of the BRICS, through
which they create their identity and influence the social construction of international reality,
thus affecting the perceptions, attitudes and actions of other actors. However, to understand
the general implications of the phenomenon of BRICS, one must also consider their real
actions, not only to know how they directly and materially change the international system,
but also to understand the relationship between these and the rhetoric of their
pronouncements. As mentioned above, the BRICS defined themselves, broadly, as a platform
for dialogue and cooperation in order to promote growth, stability and world peace and,
specifically, enhance the representativeness of emerging and developing countries especially
in international economic institutions, but also in the political ones. To achieve this, they
propose pragmatic and non-confrontational means through which the cooperation of the
North is promoted to foster the economic development of the South. In addition to promoting
economic development of the countries of the semi-periphery and periphery without the
imposition of policies by the North and through the peaceful resolution of disputes between
states, the BRICS have spoken out against terrorism and in favor of the preservation of the
environment, as well as the fight against poverty and drug trafficking, among others.
With regard to economic development, during the first decade of the century, the
BRICS have managed to institute different policies and evade the restrictions of the
institutions of the Washington Consensus. The four original members have maintained a
significant level of state intervention in their domestic economies. Although Brazil may be
the country that has liberalized its economy the most, compared to the others, it stopped the
privatization of social services and, on the other hand, conducted a welfare program
expansion. Russia and India, for example, significantly distanced themselves from the
56

policies promoted by the International Monetary Fund. Overall, the BRICs have managed to
balance the institution of policies proposed by the Washington Consensus, while maintaining
and even reinventing development policies directed by the State. By achieving high growth
rates despite the differences between them and without following to the letter the
prescriptions of the Washington Consensus, the BRIC managed to consolidate their
legitimacy as well as the role of government in economic development. However, it is
important to mention that their "hybrid" policies do not question the existing capitalist
order.102 In this sense, the content of their discourse according to which the BRICS
represent alternatives for different development policies dictated by the industrialized
countries, but without antagonizing or being revisionist is coherent with the the reality of
their economic policies.
Similarly, they have also achieved reforms in the voting rights inside of the IMF and
the World Bank, as well as the inclusion of the issue of economic development of nonindustrialized countries in various international forums, such as the G20. At the same time,
they have not only coordinated positions on the economic slowdown of the United States and
the European Union,103 but also have reduced inflationary pressure in those countries
through trade, investment and the delinking of stock prices in their own financial systems
during the financial crisis.104 Also in line with their speech, in practice the BRICS defy the
prerogative of industrialized countries as the only producers of high value-added goods, such
as IT and advanced manufacturing advanced.105 In the monetary sphere, Russia and China

102

See Ban Cornel and Mark Blyth, "The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: An
introduction", Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 20, No. 2 (April, 2013).
103
Marion Fourcade, "The material and symbolic construction of the BRICs: Reflections inspired by
the RIPE Special Issue", Review of International Political Economy, Vol. 2, no. 2 (2013), p. 257.
104
Ban Cornel and Mark Blyth, "The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: An introduction", Review
of International Political Economy, Vol. 20, No. 2 (April, 2013), p. 243.
105
Ibid.

57

have expanded trade exchanges through their national currencies, a possibility that they are
also exploring with Brazil.106 It is noteworthy to mention, that also in agreement with the
content of their discourse, this policies do not intent to weaken the dollar, as this would have
negative repercussions for them, especially for China's reserves.107 Similarly, the creation of
the new development bank contributes to increase the sources of financing for emerging and
developing countries. However, the distance between the discourse of unity and the
differences of their real interests became noticeable when they were unable to agree on one
candidate for the presidency of the IMF in 2011.108
This, among other reasons, has led some authors to consider that although the BRICS
have identified aspects of the international order that seem unfair and need reform, they have
not been able or willing to create a constructive agenda to achieve all the goals they present
in their discourse. Rather than on concrete and specific actions to change the international
order, consensus among members of the BRICS seems to be on the importance of avoiding
anti-systemic and confrontational attitudes regarding the established order.109 In the field of
politics and security, although they often take different positions than the industrialized
countries mainly Russia and China, none of them is a revisionist country. Probably the
closer member to the interests of the US-led collision is South Africa. In 2011, for example,
in the United Nations Security Council it voted in favor of the NATO intervention in Libya,
despite the opposition of the African Union.110 With the recognition of their legitimacy and

106

Michael A. Glosny, "China and the BRICs: A real (but Limited) Partnership in a Unipolar
World", Polity, vol. 42, no. 1 (January, 2010), p.122.
107
Mariano Turzi, "How important is the BRIC?", International Studies, vol. 43, no. 168 (2011), p. 93.
108
Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1 (2013), p. 265.
109
Leslie Elliott Armijo, "The BRIC Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) as Analytical
Category: Mirage or Insight" Asian Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), p.29.
110
Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1 (2013), p. 262.

58

predominance, the BRICS reaffirm the power structures of the international institutions,
which also promote regional stability; for example, the military presence in Brazil after the
earthquake in Haiti as part of the UN mission and the arms sales by South Africa to political
fractions in African countries, which are suitable for Western interests.111
Critical studies about the actions of the BRICS contrary to what is stated in their
discourse consider that the group contributes to the expansion of imperialism and
encourages its penetration and the benefit for capitalist hegemony in their regions.112 In their
discourse, the BRICS have spoken in favor of environmental protection. However, in
practice, in 2009 and 2011, during the summits on climate change in Copenhagen and
Durban, respectively, Brazil, South Africa, India and China sided with the United States to
stop the establishment of mandatory emission reduction proposed by the Kyoto
Protocol. Russia even formally withdrew from the Protocol in 2012. Besides, according to
their energy needs, elites of the BRICS have financed the permanence of carbon
markets.113 Moreover, during the Durban summit, the historical responsibilities of the
industrialized countries in the devastation of the environment were not mentioned, even
though the event was chaired by the Foreign Minister of South Africa.
Contradicting their intention to collaborate with the industrialization of the least
developed countries in Africa, for example, Chinese, Indian and Brazilian has been linked to
US, European, Australian and Canadian firms in the extraction of minerals, oil and gas, based
on infrastructure and economic colonial relations. Through the expansion of extractive
industries and land grabs, some authors believe that the deindustrialization of Africa is

111

Ibid.
Op.cit., pp. 251-252.
113
Mariano Turzi, "How important is the BRIC?", International Studies, vol. 43, no. 168 (2011), p. 98.

112

59

encouraged.114 As briefly described in the second section of this chapter, the economic
policies of the BRICS match the claims of their discourse about representing an alternative
to the prescriptions of the Washington Consensus and have had relative success in increasing
the representation of emerging countries in financial institutions such as the IMF and the
WB. However, they have also lacked a concrete agenda and the political will to make changes
beyond the ones mentioned above. Apparently, the essence of the consensus among the
members of the group resides in promoting their interests and avoiding revisionist attitudes
and confrontation with the established order. That, coupled with the recognition of the main
institutions of the international status quo, increases its stability and legitimacy. At the same
time, several of their actions, as the ones related to economic interests in Africa and
environmental protection, are in contradiction with the vision and values promoted through
their discourse.

3.3 THE BENEFITS OF BEING A BRICS

Being part of the BRICS undoubtedly represents symbolic and material benefits for
its members. In general, based on what was mentioned in the previous sections, joining the
group allows Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa to define themselves as
representatives of emerging and developing countries; as dynamic centers of economic
growth; and as pragmatic and conciliatory reformers in search of a more just and efficient
international order. Through the consolidation and legitimation of their identity, the BRICS
spread both specific values and a vision of the world, and become a category through which

114

Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1 (2013), p. 253.

60

other actors apprehend international realities and channel their perceptions and actions within
limited and approved parameters. In addition, being part of the BRICS significantly increases
the visibility and prestige of the member states and thus their scope in the international
arena. In short, being part of the group gives the five countries more capacity to influence the
social construction of the international reality.115 However, even within the group there are
differences in the contributions and benefits of the different members. Being aware of this
helps to understand the roles that each plays within the BRICS.
It is almost impossible not to notice the difference between China and the rest of the
group, simply because the size of its economy is bigger than the ones of Brazil, Russia and
India combined.116 Therefore, the membership of China within the group represents a
significant benefit to the other countries, because without it, the group would not have the
importance nor the weight it has in the international arena, considering that its identity is
largely defined on economic factors. Therefore, some authors believe that China is more
important to the group than the other way around, because with or without the BRICS, it is
already one of the most important countries in the world.117 However, being part of the group
also provides China important benefits. As is known, the rise of China has caused mistrust
and uncertainty inside and outside Southeast Asia. Through presenting itself as a BRICS and
reiterating the peaceful objectives and pragmatic and conciliatory methods of the group,

115

As it can be seen, the ability to define characterizations and specific situations and to propagate
values and identities considered legitimate which means, to influence the social construction of reality is
similar to what it is considered as soft power in the mainstream International Relations of the US
academy. However, although the concept probably refers to the same political and social phenomena, it has
been decided to leave the concept out of this study, due to its lack of complexity and sophistication compared
to the concepts and processes already included in the theory of the social construction of reality.
116
According to data from 2009 in Mariano Turzi, "How important is the BRIC?", International
Studies, vol. 43, no. 168 (2011), p.99.
117
Michael A, Glosny, "China and the BRICs: A real (but Limited) Partnership in a Unipolar
World", Polity, vol. 42, no. 1 (January, 2010), pp. 104.

61

China dispels the uncertainty about its peaceful rise or development and prevents the
formation of an alliance of containment against it, while legitimizing its presence in Africa
and Latin America as an engine for the development of both regions.
In the case of Russia, it could be considered that being part of the group represents a
symbolic loss, as its predecessor, the Soviet Union, was considered the other superpower
during the Cold War. However, taking into account the economic and demographic setbacks
faced by the Russian Federation during the nineties, as well as some averseness from the
international community inherited from the Soviet state as a result of its relationship with the
West, being considered an emerging economy, included in a group that promotes changes in
the international arena peacefully and without confronting the established order, is a very
important symbolic gain for it. As for its contributions to the group, the presence of both
China and Russia as the only two members with a permanent seat in the Security Council,
among other factors, represents a significant benefit to the other countries. An example of
this is that IBSA, a platform for cooperation between India, Brazil and South Africa, which
is more institutionalized than the BRICS and presents more uniformity among its members
in terms of economic and political aspects, has much less visibility and weight on the
international community.118
As for Brazil, being in the group allows it to project itself beyond Latin America and
makes it possible to be considered a global power, next to Russia and China, despite
weaknesses in its economic performance. On the other hand, for other countries, Brazil's
leadership in the region and its diplomatic prestige due to its proximity to the West and to

118

Ban Cornel and Mark Blyth, "The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: An introduction", Review
of International Political Economy "vol. 20, no. 2 (April, 2013), p. 251.

62

being considered a liberal democracy, to its pacifism based largely on its renunciation of
developing nuclear weapons and its contribution in various UN peacekeeping missions, as
well as its environmental reputation, represent an important symbolic gain for the
consolidation of the benevolent and peaceful groups identity. It also signifies the inclusion
of Latin America within the group and facilitates the entry of other members to the
region.119 Similarly, India brings to the BRICS the weight of the country regarded by the
West as "the largest [or more populated] democracy in the world," possessor of nuclear
weapons and an important player in the geopolitics of Southeast Asia. In turn, being a
member of the group increased the confidence of national and international elites in
India.120 Finally, South Africa is perhaps the country that benefits the most from being part
of the BRICS, as the size and performance of its economy are far behind the other
members. As described in previous chapters, South Africa was not part of the original
concept created by the reports of Goldman Sachs and even its creator, Jim O'Neil, described
the country's entry to the group as not very coherent. Joining the group represents an
opportunity for South Africa to emerge as a regional leader and representative of the African
continent. On the other hand, it was necessary for the BRIC to include an African country to
legitimize their claims for representing the periphery and semi-periphery of the international
order. In addition, South Africa has served materially to other members as the door and basis
for entering the continent.121

119

Leslie Eliott Armijo and Paul Soter, "Brazil: To be or not to be a BRIC?" Asian Perspective, vol. 31,
no. 4 (2007), p. 51.
120
Radhika Desai, "Dreaming in Technicolour? India as a BRIC Economy", International
Journal, vol.62, no. 4 (2007), p. 782.
121
Bond, Patrick, "Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African Within BRICS duty
deputy sheriff", Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1 (2013), p. 253.

63

In general, being part of the BRICS and emphasizing their peaceful, conciliatory and
pragmatic features helps to decrease geopolitical tensions between Russia, China and
India. As for all the members, the BRICS allows them to promote their interests and tinge
them through a multilateral facade, which avoids possible negative consequences like
distrust or feeling of menace of other countries that could be triggered if they would pursue
the same goals individually, besides the group encourages the diversification of their political
and economic relations and exchanges between the five in different areas, as well as the
opportunity to learn from sharing their different experiences of development. At the same
time, solidarity among its members allows them to legitimize each others actions. For
example, in the context of the "China bashing" promoted by Western countries during the
Olympic Games in 2008, the joint communiqu of the first Foreign Ministers meeting
expressed their support for the event and for the government of China.122 Similarly, in 2010,
the other members of the group expressed their solidarity and support to the actions of Russia
and India after the terrorist attacks that occurred on their territories.123 Finally, the
coordination of policies and pronouncements increases the projection and the negotiating
power of the five members in the international system. With the recognition of international
institutions and the emphasis in peaceful and conciliatory methods, they promote the stability
of the international system and the transition to a multipolar order, whereby they also
contribute to building a favorable environment for their economic development.

122
"Press Release: Meeting of BRIC Foreign Ministers" New York, 2008, in February 2015
Consulted
in
http://www.brics5.co.za/about-brics/sectorial-declaration/financial-ministers-meeting/firstmeeting-of-finance-ministers/
123
"Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries' Leaders", Brasilia, 2010 Consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/100415-leaders.html

64

3.5 FINAL CONSIDERATIONS

As mentioned in the third section of this chapter, the discourse of the BRICS
interprets the significant differences between its members as a source of diversity that
strengthens their capacity to contribute in the solving of major world problems. However,
these differences have already been significant barriers for achieving coordination and
consensus among the members in the past, like their inability to agree on a candidate for the
presidency of the IMF in 2011. Certainly, the BRICS are not an obvious aggrupation, as both
their economies and national institutions are diametrically different. That is why, for some
authors, the notion of the BRICS seems to be too forced.124 Economically, the five have
very different strengths and weaknesses. The economy of China is much more integrated to
the international economy than the ones from Brazil, India, Russia and South Africa. India
has very pronounced trade deficit and foreign debt. Russia is the only member of the G8125 and its exports are concentrated significantly in the energy sector. In China, pollution
and the scarcity of natural resources represent major challenges for its economic
development; India faces a lack of physical infrastructure and violent conflicts between
different sectors of its population; some studies predict a slowdown in the Brazilian
economy; while corruption and its dependence on the international gas market are an obstacle
to Russia's economic performance. Furthermore, the growth rates of the five members of the
BRICS differ remarkably as their different relationships with fluctuations in the value of the
US dollar or the Chinese renminbi.126

124

Leslie Elliott Armijo, "The BRIC Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) as Analytical
Category: Mirage or Insight" Asian Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), p.8.
125
Although it has been temporarily excluded of the group because of the recent events in Crimea.
126
Between 2000 and 2006, growth rates among the member states were very unequal, Brazil grew
3.1 percent, less than the world average of 3.3 percent, India and Russia grew 6.7 percent and China grew 9.4
percent, op.cit., p.9.

65

In the energy sector, the BRICS also have very different profiles. China has a huge
demand for energy and is one of the main producers of emissions in the world. Although
India is less vulnerable, it lacks fossil fuel reserves. Russia is a net exporter of energy
resources, with 12 percent of the world oil production and 22 percent of the natural gas
production. Brazil imports oil and gas, but produces 83 percent of its consumption through
hydroelectric power and is the world's largest ethanol producer.127 Demographically, the
differences are also more than the similarities. India has the youngest population in the group,
which is in the early in the cycle of declining fertility, but still growing; while China and
Brazil have low rates of mortality and fertility, with a tendency to stabilize their
population. Russia is in the most advanced stage of demographic transition, with declining
population and fertility rates. For the period 2010-2030, the UN estimates that the
economically active population will increase 9.9 percent in China; 18.4 percent in Brazil; 241
percent in India; and decrease 17 percent in Russia.128
Geography is not the basis of the BRICS, as it is in the case of the other important
international groups, such as the European Union, the NATO, NAFTA or the OAS. By
contrast, while Brazil and South Africa are in different continents, Russia, China and India
share borders and maintain territorial disputes that generate distrust between each other. All
of the members also differ considerably in their historical developments and political
institutions, as well as in their cultural and value systems, not to mention their military
capabilities and positions in international security system. In addition, each has diverse

127

Leslie Elliott Armijo, "The BRIC Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) as Analytical
Category: Mirage or Insight?", Asian Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), p.12 and Leslie Eliott Armijo and Paul
Soter, "Brazil: To be or not to be a BRIC?" Asian Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), p. 61.
128
Op.cit., p.12 and Leslie Eliott Armijo and Paul Soter, "Brazil: To be or not to be a BRIC?" Asian
Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), p. 61.

66

relationships and interests regarding the United States and the West, which might imply a
possible competition and conflicting interests within the BRICS members.129 This, coupled
with the effects of the global economic recession, represent major obstacles that make some
authors think that members of the BRICS will be unable to achieve coordinated actions in
the future and, therefore, become a passing phenomenon in the future.130 As shown through
the different chapters of this work, their similarities and the ability to form a coherent group
are in the symbolic level, as the concept of the BRIC did not appear in the social sciences
and was not intended to describe a reality.
Finally, it is important to note that perceptions that consider the BRICS a group that
seeks to defy the established international order in a disruptive way, are based on inaccurate
interpretations of their actions and discourse. As an example, there are plenty columns and
news articles that interpret the creation of the development bank of the BRICS as a challenge
to the hegemony of the US dollar and the international financial system. As it can be seen
based on the previous chapters, this points of view ignore that the group recognizes the role
of economic and political institutions of the international system and acts within their
frames. They have also frequently stressed the rejection of confrontational attitudes and
methods and their support for pragmatic and conciliatory positions, as well as the peaceful
resolution of disputes between states. None of the countries are interested in engaging in
revisionist actions or disputes with the United States. For example, in 1998 Chinese leaders
rejected the creation of a strategic triangle between Russia, China and India, mainly because

129

Michael A. Glosny, "China and the BRICs: A real (but Limited) Partnership in a Unipolar
World", Polity, vol. 42, no. 1 (January, 2010), p.104.
130
Immanuel Wallerstein, "Whose interests are Served by the BRICS?, May 1 st, 2013, accessed in
the author's web page in 2015, http://iwallerstein.com/interests-served-brics/

67

it could have been seen as a mechanism to confront the United States.131 The diversification
of the centers of economic dynamism and growth is a process that began since the last
decades of the twentieth century. The consolidation of BRICS, as representatives of emerging
economies and developing countries acting within the framework of the mainstream
institutions, grants stability and legitimacy to the international system.

131

Michael A. Glosny, "China and the BRICs: A real (but Limited) Partnership in a Unipolar
World", Polity, vol. 42, no. 1 (January, 2010), p.109

68

CONCLUSION
This thesis aimed to show that the concept of BRIC became a self-fulfilling prophecy
which, despite demanding reforms and changes, provides stability and legitimacy to the
current international system. For developing this hypothesis, this work is divided into three
chapters. The first chapter contains the theoretical framework, based on a description of the
theory of the social construction of reality, the constructivist approach of International
Relations and the characteristics of self-fulfilling prophecies in the international context. It
was decided to base the methodology of this work in the constructivist approach and
hermeneutical positions, because, as explained in the later chapters, the possibility that
countries that had so little in common came together in a forum for multilateral cooperation
of such a magnitude can only be explained through the similarities of their identities and the
symbolic benefits from being part of the group all of which cannot be explained by the
realist or liberal traditions: mainly, the possibility to influence the social construction of
reality and exercising symbolic power .
The theory of social construction of reality defines the latter as the quality assigned
to phenomena regarded as independent of the human will, which is possible through the
intersubjectivity which means the capacity to be shared by others achieved through the
objectification of meanings produced by the inner life of men. Consequently, the social
reality is apprehended through characterizations about the different actors, which gain
strength through its repetition and internalization and thus acquire the capacity of modifying
the characteristics of the interactions between social actors. This objectifications and
characterizations are performed through oral language, which also structures the social world
spatially and temporally that is why the third chapter describes the discourse produced by
the BRICS. The proliferation of characterizations through language increases the stock of
69

social knowledge, through which reality is presented in an integrated way based on the
structure of knowledge in terms of relevancies, which means a differentiation between areas
of familiarity and remoteness that is why the second chapter explains how the diffusion of
the BRIC included the four countries in the familiarity zone and later moved South Africa
out of opacity through its inclusion in the group.
In International Relations, the constructivist approach is based on hermeneutical
methods and focuses on studying the importance of ideas, meanings and the historicity of the
systems and international institutions, unlike the realist and liberal traditions. Constructivism
considers the relationship between structures and agents as mutually constitutive through
practice. That means, that the structures would be meaningless without a set of intersubjective
meanings shared by the actors and that, at the same time, the actors strengthen or weaken the
structures when the reproduced them or not through their practices. Consequently,
constructivism considers the anarchy of the international system, as well as its institutions
and practices as socially constructed and able to be modified by intersubjective knowledge
and actions. Therefore, constructivism is the main approach of international relations which
confers an important role to the study of the states identities as an explanatory variable in
the definition of their interests and the means chosen to achieve them. Based on these
precepts, constructivism is able to study historicity and changes in the international system
and of the of the states identities in this case, the way in which very different states became
the BRICS and modified their identities to become the representatives of the developing
countries. Finally, constructivism offers the opportunity to study the exercise of the symbolic
power of the states through their pronouncements and practices, which means, their ability
to define a situation and turn their interpretations of the world as obvious and indisputable,

70

and therefore, to influence intersubjective meanings and socially construct reality, modifying
the perceptions, beliefs and actions of other states.
Finally, the first chapter describes the characteristics of the self-fulfilling prophecies
in international relations, which are defined as ideas formulated by actors with the material
and symbolic resources necessary to disseminate and legitimate them, through which they
get included within the intersubjective meanings and knowledge of social actors, who
reproduce them through their perceptions and actions. Although their proximity with reality
makes it easier for self-fulfilling prophecies to acquire materiality, whether they are "right"
or "wrong" is not decisive for their ability to influence the behavior of other actors. In the
academy, research findings in this case, the reports of Goldman Sachs which coined the
BRIC acronym become self-fulfilling prophecies when disseminated and interpreted as a
reality. According to the researcher Ted Hopf, an idea or theory must meet four
characteristics or phases to become a self-fulfilling prophecy in international relations: first,
it must contain expectations or predictions about the future; second, it must be related to
institutional facts, as opposed to natural events; third, the idea should be widely disseminated
within the international community; and finally, the actors must modify their behavior so as
to match its predictions.
The second chapter of this study explains how the emergence and spreading of the
acronym made it possible for the BRIC to become a self-fulfilling prophecy in the
international sphere. The first part described the emergence of the concept and how it spread
and became legitimate in the international financial arena. The second part presented the
similarities in the foreign policy discourses of Brazil, Russia, India and China during the
nineties and the early years of the XXI century, which made possible the adoption of the
concept by the four countries. Then, it explained how the acronym became a forum for
71

multilateral cooperation of significant projection and importance in the international

system. Finally, it described the expansion through the inclusion of South Africa into the
group. The implications of the actions and characteristics of the different actors, involved in
the social construction of reality, in the exercise of symbolic power and in the origin,
distribution, consolidation and expansion of the self-fulfilling prophecy of the BRICS are
explained at the end of each sections of the chapter.
The acronym first appeared in 2001 in a report published by the financial consultancy
Goldman Sachs, which proposed that the development of global economic policies should be
reorganized to increase the representativeness of the BRIC, taking into account the size of
their economies and the results of predictive models, under which the four countries would
gain more and more weight in the international economy and could even surpass the G7. Subsequently, the concept spread through the publication of more reports, also by
Goldman Sachs. However, despite the scientific studies of Goldman Sachs, several authors
acknowledge that the emergence of the BRIC coincided with a companys strategy to
diversify its investments outside Western countries. From about 2005, the concept began to
be mentioned more often as a reality of international finances and economics in newspapers,
magazines and specialized blogs. The Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times, two of
the most widely read specialized journals worldwide, played a very important role in the
proliferation of the concept.
According to the theory of social construction of reality, the publication of the reports
by Goldman Sachs represents a process of objectification of their interests, through which
these are expressed as products of human activity. In this case, the product is the BRIC, as a
concept to describe the financial reality. Regardless of its relationship with given facts and
future results, the presentation of the economies of the four countries as a natural grouping
72

represents an exercise of symbolic power. Specifically, the multinational consulting firm

exercised power through the creation and promoting of characterizations of international
actors, through which it also participated in the accumulation of social knowledge and in the
lighting and dimming of different areas of reality. In this case, it increased the visibility of
the four countries and darkened other emerging economies that were not included in the
group. Finally, the creation, dissemination and consolidation of the concept presented the
four conditions or phases for an idea to become a self-fulfilling prophecy in international
relations.
It is unusual for a concept to become a self-fulfilling prophecy with the ease with
which the BRIC did. In addition to the credibility and prestige of Goldman Sachs and the
different media that contributed to its spreading, the speed with which countries adopted the
concept as part of their identity is also due to similarities in discursive characteristics of their
foreign policies during the nineties and the early years of the XXI century. Very broadly and
with different intensities and tones during this period, Brazil, Russia, India and China
individually announced the need to include the growth of developing countries in the
international

agenda,

as

well

as

their

willingness

to

promote

South-South

relations. Sometimes, they also denounced the imposition of the interests of the industrialized
countries, and warned about the importance of building a multilateral world based on a
collective leadership, as well as the need to increase the representation of developing
countries in the various international institutions. However, they always emphasized their
willingness to achieve these goals peacefully and, instead of seeking confrontation with
industrialized countries, they stated the need to establish cooperation mechanisms with them
to narrow the gap between North and South.

73

Based on these similarities, representatives of the four countries began using the
acronym until 2006, when the foreign ministers met for the first time in New York, and a
year later, the finance ministers also got reunited. From then on, meetings between
representatives of the BRIC proliferated, until in June 2009 the group became consolidated
as a forum of political and economic cooperation with the First Summit of the BRIC in
Yekaterinburg, Russia, attended by heads of State. Thereafter, the foreign ministers met
seven times and the finance ministers six times, issuing joint statements with reference to
summits of the G-20, the IMF and the World Bank. There has also been meetings between
the ministers of agriculture, education, environment, health, trade, science and
technology. However, the most important and visible meetings are those of the heads of State
during the annual summits that have been held in Brazil in 2010; in Sanya in 2011; in New
Delhi in 2012; in South Africa in 2013; in Brazil in 2014; and in Russia in 2015. In addition
to the joint declarations and the coordination of actions to promote common interests, the
most important achievement has been the creation of the New Development Bank in July
2014.
The appropriation of the concept by the states represents a process of objectification
of their interests and characteristics of their previous identities. With the internalization and
reiteration of their new identities as BRIC, they continue with the process of criminalization
of the state and use the social function of identity to promote values, rules and parameters of
action. The products of human activity in which the BRIC objectified their interests and
identities are the summits, meetings, joint communiques and statements, which in turn
contribute to the accumulation of social knowledge. It is also important to mention that the
concept became increasingly materiality-and thus more forcefully and even target in a
facility, one of the pillars of the social construction of reality, through the creation of the New
74

Bank of Development. At the same time, the practices of the BRIC reproduce the second,
third and fourth stages of the self-fulfilling prophecies.
After a year of meetings and negotiations, in 2011 the admission of South Africa into
the BRIC was announced, through which the final "s" to the acronym was added. South
Africa's entry to BRIC was controversial because the country did not have the size of the
population and economies of the other four members. However, this step represents the
transit of the acronym from the financial to the political and sphere and consolidated the
appropriation of the concept by the states, as well as its independence from the characteristics
and limitations imposed upon them by the reports of Goldman Sachs. The entry of South
Africa also constitutes an objectification, because through it interests of both the four original
members as the African country were expressed and materialized. With it, the
characterization and accumulation of social knowledge expanded to the African continent,
through condemned to opacity by the reports of Goldman Sachs. Finally, the inclusion of
South Africa shows how the concept of the BRIC continued to operate as a self-fulfilling
prophecy, as it was conducted through institutional mechanisms, continued spreading the
idea within the international community and changed the actions of the actors, mainly South
Africa.
The third chapter is responsible for describing the content of the speech of the BRICS
and its implications for the international system. In short, the characteristics of self-fulfilling
prophecy. This develops the second part of the investigations hypothesis, according to which
the BRICS are a self-fulfilling prophecy that, despite demanding changes and reforms, gives
stability and legitimacy to the international order. To begin with, this chapter presents the
various speeches that have been created to explain and legitimize the roles and differences
among the countries of the center, the periphery and semi-periphery in the international
75

economic system, in order to explain the context in which the BRICS are inscribed.
Subsequently, it describes the discourse of the BRICS, based on the main speeches and
documents published by the group and representatives of the member states, through which
they define their identity and actions. Then, through an analysis between the discourse and
the actions of the group, this section explains the main implications of the BRICS in the
international system. To continue, the contributions of the different members of the group,
and the benefits they get from being part of the BRICS. Finally, this chapter presents final
considerations on the differences between the group and its relationship with the West and
the international system.
During the sixties and seventies, the dominant discourse was the theory of
modernization, according to which any country could industrialize successfully as long as
could to allocate and use resources efficiently. When the modernization theory weakened due
to empirical facts, the neoliberal counteroffensive arrived, which went even further in it
endeavor to deregulate the economy and minimize the role of the State. However, a decade
later, with the arrival of the debt crisis in Latin America, the institutions that represented the
neoliberal thought were unable to avoid the two lost decades in the subcontinent. Then came
the discourse of globalization, which is based largely on the precepts of neoliberalism, but
coated with optimism and new politically correct concepts. It is within this continuum of
discourses that the transition process of the international economy, marked by a lower growth
in the United States and Europe and breakthroughs in some economies of the semi-periphery
is inscribed. As a consequence of the empowering process of the emerging markets, they
began to increasingly denounce their lack of representation in international institutions, as
well as to demand mechanisms for cooperation between North and South to reduce the gap
between them; all this without assuming attitudes of confrontation or directly challenging the
76

established order. The self-fulfilled prophecy of the BRICS and its discourse are inscribed in
this process and its narrative.
What this works understands as the discourse of the BRICS is the pronouncements
verbal or written through which the group describes its characteristics, actions, values and
interests, and its relations with the international economic and political system. With this
projection, the BRICS members use the social function of identity, through which they tell
themselves and others who they are and, at the same time, define who the others are. In this
way, they promote the legitimacy of values, rules and parameters of action, both for
themselves and for others. At the same time, they exert symbolic power to define a situation;
in this case, the characteristics of the international economic and political system. Through
this, they determine intersubjective meanings through the construction of shared knowledge.
BRICS describe themselves as a platform for dialogue and cooperation, whose importance
and capabilities and, in the symbolic level, its legitimacy and force rely in the fact that the
member countries concentrate about 40 percent of the world population and contribute with
almost 15 percent and 20 percent of global trade and production. Since 2012, the BRICS
discourse emphasize its presence in Asia, Africa, Europe and Latin America and thus the
transcontinental dimension of its identity. The group also considers itself a dynamic element
of the global economy, whose size makes it necessary for guaranteeing a balanced growth of
the worlds economy. With regard to the significant differences between the member states,
the BRICS interpret them, as a source of diversity that increases their capacities for solving
major world problems.
The main objective of the BRICS is to build a more equitable and democratic
multipolar

international

system,

based

on

the

rule

of

law

and

multilateral

diplomacy. Consequently, the dialogue between the BRICS is intended to serve the common
77

interests of emerging and developing countries. In the medium and long term, they seek to
establish themselves as a key part of the system of global governance in the political, legal,
financial and economic areas. As for the means to achieve this, the BRICS have repeatedly
stated that they will seek to achieve their objectives in a pragmatic way, through an inclusive
and non-confrontational cooperation. Economically, they recognize important role of the
established institutions in maintaining the stability and integrity of the monetary and trading
systems. At the same time, they seek to strengthen the representation of emerging and
developing countries within them. They also propose cooperation between emerging market
and developed countries in order to turn both sides in engines of economic development and
prosperity, also demanding the transfer of technology from the developed countries.
In the political arena, they advocate peaceful, diplomatic and multilateral resolution
of disputes between states, and also confer a central role to the United Nations. However,
they also recognize the importance of increasing the representation of emerging and
developing countries within the institution. With the groups expansion and strengthening,
they have come to define themselves in relation to various issues, such as the fight against
climate change and diseases, and the promotion of science, education and cultural exchanges.
Regarding security issues, they also give a prominent place to the United Nations Security
Council. At the same time, they find it necessary to reform it and give more representation
to developing countries. In some occasions, they have also denounced the imposition of
solutions through interventions in the internal political processes of weaker states. Since the
early years, the group has made explicit its condemnation of terrorism, and later it has also
make statements about the situation in Syria, Libya and the Arab-Israeli conflict, as well as
armed conflicts in Africa, through which they defended very different position from the ones
promoted by the United States and its main allies.
78

However, to understand the general implications of the phenomenon of BRICS, one

must also consider their real actions, not only to know how they directly and materially
change the international system, but also to understand the relationship between these and
the rhetoric of their discourse. With regard to economic development, during the first decade
of the century, the BRICS have managed to institute different policies and evade the
restrictions of the institutions of the Washington Consensus. By achieving high growth rates
despite the differences between the BRIC managed to consolidate their legitimacy as well as
the role of government in economic development. However, it is important to mention that
their "hybrid" policies do not question the existing capitalist order. In this sense, the content
of their discourse is coherent with the reality of their economic policies. Similarly, they have
also achieved reforms in the voting rights inside of the IMF and the World Bank, as well as
the inclusion of the issue of economic development of non-industrialized countries in various
international forums, such as the G20. At the same time, they have not only coordinated
positions on the economic slowdown of the United States and the European Union, but also
have reduced inflationary pressure in those countries through trade, investment and the
delinking of stock prices in their own financial systems during the financial crisis. Also in
line with their speech, in practice the BRICS defy the prerogative of industrialized countries
as the only producers of high value-added goods, such as IT and advanced manufacturing
advanced. In the monetary sphere, Russia and China have expanded trade exchanges through
their national currencies, a possibility that they are also exploring with Brazil.
Nevertheless, the distance between the discourse of unity and the differences of their
real interests became noticeable when they were unable to agree on one candidate for the
presidency of the IMF in 2011. This, among other reasons, has led some authors to consider
that although the BRICS have identified aspects of the international order that seem unfair
79

and need reform, they have not been able or willing to create a constructive agenda to achieve
all the goals they present in their discourse. Rather than on concrete and specific actions to
change the international order, consensus among members of the BRICS seems to be on the
importance of avoiding anti-systemic and confrontational attitudes regarding the established
order. However, with the recognition of the main political and economic international
institutions and through channeling ling their actions within those frameworks, the BRICS
reaffirm the power structures of the international institutions, which also promote regional
stability.
Being part of the BRICS undoubtedly represents symbolic and material benefits for
its members. In general, based on what was mentioned in the previous sections, joining the
group allows Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa to define themselves as
representatives of emerging and developing countries; as dynamic centers of economic
growth; and as pragmatic and conciliatory reformers in search of a more just and efficient
international order. Through the consolidation and legitimation of their identity, the BRICS
spread both specific values and a vision of the world, and become a category through which
other actors apprehend international realities and channel their perceptions and actions within
limited and approved parameters. In addition, being part of the BRICS significantly increases
the visibility and prestige of the member states and thus their scope in the international
arena. In short, being part of the group gives the five countries more capacity to influence the
social construction of the international reality.
In general, being part of the BRICS and emphasizing their peaceful, conciliatory and
pragmatic features helps to decrease geopolitical tensions between Russia, China and
India. As for all the members, the BRICS allows them to promote their interests and tinge
them through a multilateral facade, which avoids possible negative consequences like
80

distrust or feeling of menace of other countries that could be triggered if they would pursue
the same goals individually, besides the group encourages the diversification of their political
and economic relations and exchanges between the five in different areas, as well as the
opportunity to learn from sharing their different experiences of development. At the same
time, solidarity among its members allows them to legitimize each others actions. For
example, in the context of the "China bashing" promoted by Western countries during the
Olympic Games in 2008, the joint communiqu of the first Foreign Ministers meeting
expressed their support for the event and for the government of China. Similarly, in 2010,
the other members of the group expressed their solidarity and support to the actions of Russia
and India after the terrorist attacks that occurred on their territories. Finally, the coordination
of policies and pronouncements increases the projection and the negotiating power of the
five members in the international system.
It is important to note that perceptions that consider the BRICS a group that seeks to
defy the established international order in a disruptive way, are based on inaccurate
interpretations of their actions and discourse. As an example, there are plenty columns and
news articles that interpret the creation of the development bank of the BRICS as a challenge
to the hegemony of the US dollar and the international financial system. As it can be seen
based on the previous chapters, this points of view ignore that the group recognizes the role
of economic and political institutions of the international system and acts within their
frames. They have also frequently stressed the rejection of confrontational attitudes and
methods and their support for pragmatic and conciliatory positions, as well as the peaceful
resolution of disputes between states. None of the countries are interested in engaging in
revisionist actions or disputes with the United States. Through all of what is mentioned in the
three chapters of this work, it is shown that the BRICS are a self-fullfiled prophecy that,
81

despite demanding changes and reforms, provide stability and legitimize the international
established order.

82

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Arriola, Jonathan, El constructivismo: su revolucin onto-epistemolgica en Relaciones

Internacionales, Revista Opinio Filosfica, vol. 4, no. 1 (2013), pp. 377-396.
Ban Cornel and Mark Blyth, The BRICs and the Washington Consensus: An introduction,
Review of International Political Economy, vol. 20, no. 2 (April, 2013), pp. 241255.

Berger, Peter L. and Luckman Thomas, The Social Construction of Reality. A Treatise in the
Sociology of Knowledge, London, Penguin Books, 1966.
Bhatracharya Abanti, Chinese Nationalismo and Chinas Assertive Foreign Policy, The
Journal of East Asian Affairs, Vol. 21, No. 1 (Spring/Summer 2007), pp. 235-262.
Bond, Patrick, Sub-imperialism as Lubricant of Neoliberalism: South African deputy sheriff
duty within BRICS, Third World Quarterly, vol. 34, no. 1 (2013), pp. 251-270.
Burges, Sean W., Auto-Estima in Brazil: The Logic of Lula's South-South Foreign Policy,
International Journal, Vol. 60, No. 4, (Autumn, 2005), pp. 1133-1151.
Brazil, Russia, India and China First Meeting of BRIC Finance Ministers Joint
Communiqu, So Paulo, November 2008, consulted in February 2015 in
http://www.brics5.co.za/about-brics/sectorial-declaration/financial-ministersmeeting/first-meeting-of-finance-ministers/

BRICS and Africa: Partnership for Development, Integration and Industrialization.

EThekwini

Declaration, Durban, 2013,

consulted in

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327-statement.html

83

February 2015 in

BRICs Finance Communiqu, United Kingdom, 2009, consulted in February 2015 in

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090314-finance.html

BRICS Foreign Ministers Meeting, press release, New York, 2011, consulted in February
2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110923-foreign.html
Carvajal, Leonardo H. El constructivismo: su utilidad para analizar la poltica exterior
colombiana, OASIS, no. 14 (2009), pp. 201-218.
Chenoy, Anuradha M and Mitra Chenoy, Kamal, India's Foreign Policy Shifts and the
Calculus of Power, Economic and Political Weekly, Vol. 42, No. 35 (September,
2007), pp. 3547-3554.
Desai Radhika, Dreaming in Technicolour? India as a BRIC Economy, International
Journal, vol.62, no. 4 (2007), pp. 781-804.
Elliott Armijo, Leslie, The BRICS Countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China) as Analytical
Category: Mirage or Insight?, Asian Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), pp. 7-42.
Encamacin, Omar G., Lula's Big Win, World Policy Journal, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Winter,
2003), pp. 73-77
Fernandes de Oliveira, Marcelo; Thompson, Timothy and Vigevani, Tullo, Brazilian
Foreign Policy in the Cardoso Era: The Search for Autonomy through Integration,
Latin American Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 5, (September, 2007), pp. 58-80
Fourcade, Marion, The material snd symbolic construction of the BRICs: Reflections
inspired by the RIPE Special ISSUE, Review of International Political Economy,
vol. 2, no. 2 (2013), pp. 256-267.

84

Fourth BRICS Summit: Delhi Declaration, New Delhi, 2012, consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-delhi-declaration.html
Galvo, Marcos, Brazil, Russia, India and China: Brand BRIC Brings Change, The World
Today, vol. 66, no. 8/9 (August/September), pp. 13-15.
Ganguly, Sumit India's Foreign Policy Grows Up, World Policy Journal, Vol. 20, No. 4
(Winter, 2003/2004), pp. 41-47.
Glosny, Michael A., China and the BRICs: A real (but Limited) Partnership in a Unipolar
World, Polity, vol. 42, no. 1 (January, 2010), pp. 109-129.

_________________ and Sotero Paulo, Brazil: To be or not to be a BRIC?, Asian

Perspective, vol. 31, no. 4 (2007), pp. 43-70.
Hammond, John L., and Roberto Martins Filho Joo, Introduction: Brazil under Cardoso,
Latin American Perspectives, Vol. 34, No. 5, (Septemberm 2007), pp. 5-8
Hopf, Ted, The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory, International
Security, Vol. 23, No. 1 (Summer, 1998), pp. 171-200.
Hu Jintao, Strengthen Mutually Beneficial Cooperation to Create a Better Future, New
Delhi,

2012,

consulted

in

February

2015

in

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-hu-statement.html

Joint Communiqu of the Foreign Ministers meeting during the BRICs Summit in
Yekaterinburg,

Russia

in

2009,

consulted

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/080516-foreign.html

85

in

February

2015

in

Joint Communiqu of the Foreign Ministers meeting during the BRICs Summit in
Yekaterinburg,

Russia

in

2009,

consulted

in

February

2015

in

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/080516-foreign.html

Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries Leaders, Brasilia, 2010, consulted in February
2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/100415-leaders.html

Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries Leaders, Sanya, 2011, consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/110414-leaders.html

Joint Statement of the BRIC Countries Leaders, Yekaterinburg, 2009, consulted in

February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/090616-leaders.html

Kaushik, Basu (ed.), The BRICS Report: A Study of Brazil, Rusia, India, China, and South
Africa with special focus on synergies and complementarities, Oxford, University
Press, 2012.
Kubicek Paul, Russian Foreign Policy and the West, Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 114,
No. 4 (Winter, 1999-2000), pp. 547-568
Mac Farlane, Neil, The R in BRICs: Is Russia an Emerging Power?, International
Affairs, vol. 82, no. 1 (January, 2006), pp. 41-51.

Meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers on the Margins of the 68th Session of the United
Nations General Assembly, [press release], New York, 2013, consulted in February
2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130926-foreign.html

86

Meeting of BRICS Foreign Ministers, [press release], New York, 2014, consulted in
February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/140925-foreign.html
Mielniczuck, Fabiano, Brics in the Contemporary World: Changing Identities, Converging
Interests, Third World Quaterly, Vol. 36, No. 6 (2013), pp. 1075-1090.
Morasso, Carla Maria Los intereses de Sudfrica como BRIC, Conjuntura Austral, Vol. 4,
No. 18 (Junio-Julio, 2013), p.11-26.
Neil, Malcolm and Alex Pravda, Democratization and Russian Foreign Policy,
International Affairs, Vol. 72, No. 3 (July, 1996), pp. 537-552.
O Neill, Jim, Building Better Global Economic BRICs, Global Economics Paper No. 66,
London, Goldman Sachs, November 30, 2001, consulted online in February 2015 in
http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/build-betterbrics.pdf
___________; Purushothaman Roopa; Stupnytska, Anna and Wilson, Dominic, How Solid
are the BRICs?, Global Economics Paper No. 134, London, Goldman Sachs,
December

1,

2005,

consulted

online

in

February

2015

in

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/how-solid.pdf
Press Release: Meeting of BRIC Foreign Ministers, New York, 2008, consulted in
February 2015 in http://www.brics5.co.za/about-brics/sectorial-declaration/financialministers-meeting/first-meeting-of-finance-ministers/
Purushothaman, Roopa and Wilson, Dominic, Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050,
Global Economics Paper No. 99, London, Goldman Sachs, October 1, 2003,
consulted online in February 2015 in
thinking/archive/archive-pdfs/brics-dream.pdf

87

http://www.goldmansachs.com/our-

Putin, Vladimir, Statement after the Plenary Session of the 5th BRICS Summit, Durban,
2013, consulted in February 2015 in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327putin-statement.html

Rousseff, Dilma, Declarao imprensa da Presidenta da Repblica, Dilma Rousseff, aps

cerimnia de assinatura de atos, New Delhi, 2012, consulted in February 2015 in
http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-rousseff-statement-br.html
Sheng Lijun, China's Foreign Policy Under Status Discrepancy, Status Enhancement,
Contemporary Southeast Asia, Vol. 17, No. 2 (September 1995), pp. 101-125.

Singh, Manmohan,Prime Ministers Statement at the Plenary Session of the Fourth BRICS
Summit,

New

Delhi,

2012,

consulted

in

February

2015

in

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/120329-singh-statement.html

Statement by BRICS Leader son the Establishment of the BRICS-Led Development Bank,
Durban,

2013,

consulted

in

February

in

2015

in

http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/130327-brics-bank.html

Steven Lukes, Steven, El poder, un enfoque radical, trad. de Jorge Deike, Mxico, Siglo
XXI, 1985, pp.15-16.

The 6th BRICS Summit: Fortaleza Declaration, Fortaleza, 2014, consulted in February 2015
in http://www.brics.utoronto.ca/docs/140715-leaders.html

Turzi, Mariano, Qu importancia tiene el BRIC?, Estudios Internacionales, vol. 43, no.
168 (2011), p. 87-111.
88

Wallerstein, Immanuel, Whose interests are Served by the BRICS?, May 1st, 2013,
accessed in the authors web page in 2015, http://iwallerstein.com/interests-servedbrics/

___________________, Anlisis de sistemas mundo, una introduccin,, Mxico, Siglo XXI

Editores, 2005.
Xiaoxong Yi, Chinese Foreign Policy in Transition: Understanding Chinas Peaceful
Development, The Journal of East Asian Affairs, Vol. 19, No. 1 (Spring/Summer
2005), pp. 74-112

89