Wednesday, August 23, 2023

Serbia joins Ukraine's Crimea platform, vows friendship with Kyiv

Reuters
Wed, August 23, 2023 




BELGRADE (Reuters) - Serbia on Wednesday joined a Ukraine-led platform on the reintegration of Crimea, signalling a swing away from Russia, a historical ally and its sole supplier of natural gas.

The move comes a day after a meeting of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy and his Serbian counterpart Aleksandar Vucic in Athens, described by both leaders as good and open.

In an online address to the forum, Serbia's Prime Minister Ana Brnabic said Serbia "sincerely regrets the suffering of Ukraine and Ukrainian people."

She emphasized "our commitment to upholding the principles of international law, territorial integrity and political independence of states," adding, "We genuinely empathise with ... the Ukrainian people and Ukraine who have a true friend in Serbia."

The Crimea Platform was launched by Zelenskiy in 2021 with the aim of reintegrating the Crimea, annexed by Russia in 2014.

A total of 67 countries and organisations, including the United States, Great Britain, NATO and the European Union have joined the platform since.

Serbia has repeatedly condemned Russia's invasion of Ukraine at the United Nations and other international forums, but has so far refused to impose sanctions on Moscow.

Ukraine does not recognise Kosovo, which declared independence from Serbia in 2008. Belgrade, in turn, does not recognise Russia's annexation of Crimea and parts of Ukraine which it occupies.

Serbia remains entirely dependant on natural gas supplies from Russia and maintains trade and military ties with Moscow. But Belgrade is also seeking to join the European Union and diversify its energy supplies.

In April, leaked Pentagon documents showed Serbia had agreed to supply arms and ammunition to Kyiv, or sent them to Ukraine.

Vucic said Serbia had never sold weapons or ammunition to Ukraine or Russia although Serbian arms might have reached the battlefield via third countries.

(Reporting by Aleksandar Vasovic; Editing by Bernadette Baum)

Japan expects big hit from Hong Kong ban on most of its seafood


Wed, August 23, 2023 

Fukushima supermarket owner vows to fight treated radioactive water release


By Yoshifumi Takemoto and Katya Golubkova

TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan expects a "significant" impact from seafood import ban by Hong Kong and Macau due to the upcoming release of treated water from the Fukushima nuclear plant, an official from the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF).

Japan is to start releasing more than 1 million metric tons of treated radioactive water from the destroyed Fukushima nuclear power plant into the sea on Thursday, more than a decade after the accident and amid harsh criticism from China.

China, the biggest importer of Japanese seafood, will take measures to protect its marine environment, food safety and public health, the foreign ministry said on Wednesday. Beijing has already banned imports from some Japanese regions.

In the latest set of measures, the Asian financial centre of Hong Kong and the gambling hub of Macau -- both special Chinese regions -- will ban aquatic product imports from 10 Japanese regions including Tokyo and Fukushima from Thursday.

The impact of the Hong Kong and Macau seafood bans could not be immediately calculated but would be 'significant', the official at MAFF said declining to be identified due to the ministry's policy.

China, also Japan's top scallop buyer and a major consumer of sea cucumbers, imported 87.1 billion yen ($600 million) worth of Japanese seafood last year, or a fifth of Japan's total seafood exports, according to the MAFF data.

Hong Kong, Japan's second biggest seafood market after mainland China, which the ministry calculates separately, bought 75.5 billion yen worth of seafood from Japan, the data shows. Japan seafood export data includes pearl exports.

While strongly criticizing the water release, China has allowed another 9 companies from Russia - which shares some fishery areas with Japan in the Pacific - to export aquatic products, bringing the total number of allowed exporters to 894 firms, Russia's food safety watchdog said on July 31.

Russia and China have questioned the Fukushima water release plan. Japan has said the feedback from the two was 'unsupported by any scientific evidence', adding that pollution levels in the water will be below those considered safe for drinking under World Health Organization standards.

Japan's top fishery lobby has said it feared reputational damage from the water release, which Japan says is safe and has been practised by other countries. The government would be ready to suspend the release if unusually high concentrations of radioactive materials are detected.

($1 = 145.4600 yen)

(Reporting by Yoshifumi Takemoto and Katya Golubkova; Editing by Kim Coghill)


At Brics summit, Argentina's bid for membership is up for discussion and subject to debate


South China Morning Post
Wed, August 23, 2023

As Brics, the coalition of emerging economies made up of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, begin discussions at its 15th summit starting on Tuesday in Johannesburg, the biggest debates may revolve around a country that is not even a member: Argentina.

For the first time in 13 years - South Africa, this year's host, joined in 2010 - the group is considering expanding its ranks.

Argentina, which has applied for entry, regards membership as a way to improve its economy, which has endured inflation of 60 per cent this year alone, a significant devaluation of its peso and the refinancing of a US$46 billion debt to the International Monetary Fund.

Do you have questions about the biggest topics and trends from around the world? Get the answers with SCMP Knowledge, our new platform of curated content with explainers, FAQs, analyses and infographics brought to you by our award-winning team.

Brazil, fearing Brics would become an anti-Western club that could harm its interests in the US and Europe, has long resisted expansion, which was officially proposed by the Chinese in 2021.

When Luis Inacio Lula da Silva was elected Brazilian president last year, though, he changed the picture and for the first time spoke openly in favour of Argentina joining the group. It was the only one of five Latin American and Caribbean applicants - Bolivia, Cuba, Honduras and Venezuela were the others - that could count on his support.



Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva at the 15th Brics Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa on Tuesday. Photo: EPA-EFE alt=Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva at the 15th Brics Summit in Johannesburg, South Africa on Tuesday. Photo: EPA-EFE>

But the results of Argentina's presidential primaries - in which the far-right libertarian Javier Milei emerged as the favourite for the October election - may have jeopardised the nation's candidacy and renewed a sense of caution about admitting new members to Brics.

Karin Costa Vazquez, a non-resident fellow at the Centre for China and Globalisation in Beijing, said that unlike most of the other 23 countries that have applied for membership into the group, Argentina is not under sanctions or facing international isolation.

Yet the South American nation faces serious liquidity issues. Argentina's interest in joining Brics is primarily motivated by its need for alternative financing for infrastructure projects.

Vazquez noted that full membership might also give Buenos Aires access to Brics' Contingent Reserve Arrangement, which offers options to member nations facing pressure on their balance of payments and could provide significant financial aid to Argentina.

Milei has made belligerent comments about Brazil - threatening to withdraw from Mercosur - and suggested he might freeze diplomatic relations with China. His remarks pose a problem for Argentina's Brics application, given the risk that if elected president, he might order an immediate withdrawal from the group.

Argentina has "a lot to benefit from" Brics membership, "but domestic policy dynamics will need to be taken into account", Vazquez said.

"The worst scenario would be for Argentina to enter and leave in a few months."

She added: "It goes against the interest of every member of the bloc, and there is no solution yet. How this is to be addressed remains at the heart of the matter."

While Brics might want to add Argentina for political reasons, given the country's influence in other world blocs like the G20 and its presence in the Latin American economy, Vazquez said that the risks the country might pose to the group if it shifts to the far right may lead to a more cautious approach to the bloc's overall expansion.




Javier Milei, the front runner in Argentina's presidential election in October, has made statements that could threaten the nation's application for inclusion into Brics. Photo: Bloomberg alt=Javier Milei, the front runner in Argentina's presidential election in October, has made statements that could threaten the nation's application for inclusion into Brics. Photo: Bloomberg>

She suggested that negotiations at the summit in Johannesburg should include either announcing specific requirements for membership or unveiling a package of rules, along with identifying the first applicants preapproved to initiate the admissions process.

Jorge Heine, a former Chilean ambassador to China, India and South Africa, said that membership could also bring diplomatic benefits to Argentina, considering that Brics "has made a consistent difference in international politics and in the politics of the Global South".

But the perception that Brics is slowly becoming "an anti-Western club" could raise eyebrows in European capitals and the US, complicating Argentina's renegotiations of its US$46 billion debt to the IMF, where Washington has veto power.

The issue, Heine said, goes beyond Milei. Even among progressive politicians in Buenos Aires, he noted, there is no consensus on whether Argentina should join Brics. Heine said that, between Brics members' caution and the opposition of some Argentines, he was sceptical about immediate membership.

"I think the possibility of Argentina joining Brics, at least in the short term, has considerably diminished," he said.

His fears are shared by Bernabe Malacalza, a senior researcher at Argentina's National Scientific and Technical Research Council, who said that Argentina applied to join Brics without any internal discussion on the purposes of membership and without outlining strategies that could benefit the country's foreign policy.

"Argentina currently requires support to navigate its economic and financial crisis, diversify its foreign relations, and secure financing from multiple actors. The central focus should be on strengthening a national development process with significant state contributions to science and technology," he said.

Malacalza said that he did not think that Argentina's possible election outcome was an impediment to its application, because he believed that Brics "needs to incorporate more actors as it has lost focus and cohesion over time".

If anything, he said, Buenos Aires would need to consider the risks a Brics membership would pose, because of the "growing Chinese dominance" that has turned the bloc into another piece of its conglomerate foreign policy that also includes the Global Security Initiative, the Global Development Initiative and the Belt and Road Initiative.


Copyright (c) 2023. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved.

BRICS leaders weigh expanding 

membership at summit


Nick PERRY and Zama LUTHULI
Wed, August 23, 2023 


Summit photocall: From left, President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva of Brazil;

 Chinese President Xi Jinping; South African President Cyril Ramaphosa; 

Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India; and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov 

(ALET PRETORIUS)



The five BRICS nations are open to expanding the club to new members, South African 

President Cyril Ramaphosa said Wednesday, as it pursues greater clout in shaping the 

world order.

Calls to enlarge the BRICS -- Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa -- has dominated the agenda at its three-day summit in Johannesburg and exposed rifts between its members.

China is seeking to rapidly grow the BRICS amid rising competition with the United States but the bloc's other major power, India, is wary of the intentions of its geopolitical rival.

Nearly two dozen countries have formally applied to join the BRICS, officials say, which accounts for 40 percent of the world's population and a quarter of the global economy.

Some 50 heads of state and government have joined BRICS leaders in Johannesburg.

The BRICS are a disparate mix of big and small economies, democratic and authoritarian states, but share a collective desire to challenge the Western-led global order they say does not serve their interests or rising clout.

The group operates on consensus and officials said the BRICS leaders were deliberating criteria for admitting new members.

On Wednesday, Ramaphosa told the summit that support for expansion "has been articulated by all BRICS members".

Earlier, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi said he supported opening the door to new members and "welcomes moving forward with consensus".

"We stand at the cusp of expanding the BRICS family," said Ramaphosa, who added that he hoped for a "clear solution to this matter" by the summit's close on Thursday.

- 'Turbulence and transformation' -

Chinese President Xi Jinping, on just his second trip abroad this year, said expanding the bloc would "pool our strength (and) pool our wisdom to make global governance more just and equitable."

"We gather at a time when the world is undergoing major shifts, divisions, and regrouping. It has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation," said Xi, whose nation represents about 70 percent of the BRICS total GDP.

US officials have played down the likelihood of BRICS emerging as a geopolitical rival, describing the bloc as a "very diverse collection of countries" containing both friends and rivals.

The summit has underlined divisions with the West over the war in Ukraine, and the support Russia enjoys from its other BRICS partners at a time of global isolation.

South Africa, China and India have not condemned Russia's invasion while Brazil has refused to join Western nations in sending arms to Ukraine or imposing sanctions on Moscow.

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who faces an international arrest warrant over alleged war crimes in Ukraine, was the only BRICS leader not to attend in person, and addressed the summit via video link where he railed against sanctions.

Russia was "desperate for friends and partners so it's not surprising that they are so keen to have an expansion," said Gustavo de Carvalho, senior researcher at the South African Institute of International Affairs.

- BRICS divide -

Analysts said that in considering new members, Brazil, South Africa and India would have to balance a desire for good ties with China and Russia against the risk of estranging the United States, a major trading partner.

Like the BRICS themselves, the countries applying vary greatly, from G20 giants like Indonesia and Saudi Arabia to isolated states like Iran that are openly hostile to the United States and its allies.

BRICS leaders say the level of interest was proof its message resonated deeply in the "Global South" -- a broad term referring to nations outside the West.

Brazil's President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who has championed the BRICS development bank as an alternative to the Washington DC-based lending institutions, said he supported the entry of Argentina.

But the South American powerhouse feared "diluting" the influence of BRICS should it expand too quickly, said Carvalho.

"There is definitely a divide on BRICS members at the moment," he said.

cld-np/ri

Can BRICS challenge the G7?

Harold Maass, Contributing editor
Tue, August 22, 2023 

Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Marco Longari / AFP

Leaders of the BRICS nations — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — are gathering this week for a summit in Johannesburg focused on whether to expand the bloc to make it a stronger rival to the Group of Seven, made up of the world's largest developed economies, including the United States. "If we expand BRICS to account for a similar portion of world GDP as the G7, then our collective voice in the world will grow stronger," said one Chinese official quoted by The Financial Times.

South Africa's president, Cyril Ramaphosa, said ahead of Tuesday's meetings that boosting BRICS' influence would fulfill "a common desire to have a more balanced global order." Russia, desperate for allies as the West opposes Moscow's war in Ukraine, and China, locked in escalating trade and diplomatic clashes with the United States, are particularly eager to strengthen BRICS.

China has long aimed to broaden membership in the bloc, which already accounts for about 40% of the world's population and a quarter of the global economy. But India and Brazil are wary of following Beijing's and Moscow's lead, for fear of losing their own influence and increasing China's dominance. Can BRICS unite and grow enough to seriously counter the G7?

BRICS is no G7, and never will be

BRICS is trying to convince everybody it's a "non- or anti-West geopolitical alternative to U.S. hegemony," said Andreas Kluth at Bloomberg. "But they're not, and never will be." Since the end of the Cold War's "bipolar world," a "dizzying array of blocs" has emerged. Africa has the African Union, of course, but also Comesa, Ecca, Ecowas, and more. Latin American has "SICA, Caricom, Mercosur, and what not." BRICS does boast something like 42% of the world's population, but next to the other groups the BRICS nations "arguably have the least in common, aside from a dislike of U.S. clout in global finance, economics and geopolitics." There's little chance this hodge-podge of "three democracies in different stages of backsliding and two increasingly repressive autocracies" will ever be able to cooperate as well as the G7, "a club of rich liberal democracies with a shared sense of custodianship for the world economy."

Expansion might only weaken BRICS' hand, said Alexandra Wexler in The Wall Street Journal. "The group's size is matched by the scale of its disunity on political and security issues — including relations with the U.S." Expanding the bloc "could multiply those differences." It's true that a beefed-up BRICS "would likely give China another mechanism for exercising leadership of the developing world," and Russia access to new markets in Africa and cheerleaders on Ukraine. But analysts say New Delhi and Brasília "share concerns that an expanded group could become too antagonistic toward the West and destabilize the bloc." And if the current members can't agree on expansion, their ability to "channel discontent and opposition toward the U.S. and its allies through a bloc aspiring to rival the Group of Seven major economies may be hampered."

Dismissing BRICS is a mistake

It's "a mistake" for the West to dismiss BRICS as "a talk shop with little impact on U.S. foreign policy," said Sarang Shidore at Responsible Statecraft. "BRICS is gradually making a mark." More than 20 countries have expressed interest in joining. "When a club has a waiting list for getting in, it is hard to characterize it as irrelevant." Prospective members see BRICS "as a serious attempt to fill a vacuum" in a U.S.-led global order that doesn't meet their needs on issues like development, or pressuring wealthy nations to take more responsibility for fighting climate change. These nations don't necessarily see the U.S. as the enemy. They just think Washington is constantly "impinging on their sovereignty" by insisting they fall in line with its policies. The U.S. should "take seriously" the gripes of smaller nations that are sick of feeling bullied.

This summit could be pivotal, said The Economist, and "the critical dissenting voice is likely to be India's." Early in the bloc's existence, New Delhi needed Russia to help serve as a counterbalance to China, but now it's wielding its own "growing economic and geopolitical" influence. And Moscow is of little help in the fight against Beijing's dominance now that it desperately needs China's cover during its war in Ukraine. India also "frets about some of the wannabes, such as Cuba and Belarus," fearing they "would be mini-Russias, repeating China's talking points" and derailing India's effort to present itself as "a rival to China for leadership of the global south." If China gets the expansion it desires it will prove its "sway on the scene. But if China is blocked it would underline the group's deep divisions."


China-based BRICS bank aims to de-dollarize debt by expanding local currency lending

Filip De Mott
Tue, August 22, 2023

A worker arranges a signboard of the 15th BRICS summit outside the Sandton Convention Center in Johannesburg, South Africa, Aug. 17, 2023. The 15th BRICS summit is to be held in Johannesburg, South Africa, on Aug. 22-24.
Zhang Yudong/Xinhua/Getty Images


  • The BRICS New Development Bank is starting to lend more in member currencies.

  • The bank's president, Dilma Rousseff, told The Financial Times 30% of lending will be in local tenders.

  • In August, it sold its first South African rand bond, and plans to sell Indian rupee bonds in October.

A development bank formed and led by the BRICS economic coalition is approaching de-dollarization from a debt angle, with plans to reduce dollar-denominated lending.

The Shanghai-based New Development Bank is instead focusing on the use of BRICS currencies, such as South African, Brazilian, and Indian tenders.

"We expect to lend between $8 billion—$10 billion this year," NDB President Dilma Rousseff told The Financial Times."Our aim is to reach about 30%of everything we lend . . . in local currency."

Already, NDB has issued its first South African rand bond in mid-August, which attracted 2.67 billion rand of bids, Reuters reported. More recently, the bank announced plans for an Indian rupee bond in October, though provided no specifics on the program's size.

The bank is the creation of the BRICS bloc — Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. Founded in 2015, it was formed as an alternative to the Western-led financial institutions, and has already lent $33 billion for development projects.

As BRICS has recently taken to branding itself as a counterweight to the West, its members have pushed for NDB to focus more on the use of local currencies.

By stepping away from the greenback, Rousseff told FT that member countries are free from the risks associated with exchange rates and US monetary policy. Meanwhile, borrowing from the NDB comes with no conditionality, as is often the case with institutions such as the International Monetary Fund.

"Local currencies are not alternatives to the dollar," she said. "They're alternatives to a system."

Her comments come as BRICS leaders meet for the bloc's 15th annual summit in Johannesburg, South Africa. Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the bloc has grown more vocal about turning away from the dollar, even proposing the formation of its own currency, though analysts doubt this.

But despite the de-dollarization rhetoric, NDB's past lending practices have been highly dependent on the greenback, a factor that has contributed to financial trouble in the recent past.

Given the lender's ties to Russia, NDB suffered a Fitch Ratings credit downgrade last year, while Western investors grew less keen on supplying the bank with dollars. As two-thirds of its borrowing were dollar-denominated, the loss of this funding has meant that NDB's debt servicing has grown substantially more expensive.

Apart from the BRICS, the bank's members include Egypt, Bangladesh, and the United Arab Emirates. Rousseff said the bank has received 15 new membership applications, and is considering 4 or 5.

Dollar dumped? India just bought 1 million barrels of oil from the UAE using rupees instead of USD for the first time — why this could spell doom for the greenback

Bethan Moorcraft
Mon, August 21, 2023 


India and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) have officially started trading with each other in their local currencies.

The Indian government announced on Monday that the country’s leading petroleum refiner, Indian Oil Corp., used the local rupee to buy one million barrels of oil from the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company — not the U.S. dollar.

This monumental transaction follows the sale of 25kg of gold from a UAE gold exporter to a buyer in India for around 128.4 million rupees ($1.54 million), according to Reuters.

So, what could all this mean for the U.S. dollar on the world stage?
Trade talks

Last year, India’s central bank revealed a new framework for settling global trade in rupees — an idea that came into fruition last month, when India is the world’s third biggest oil importer and consumer signed two agreements with the UAE.

First, the two giants agreed to settle trade in their local currencies — in an effort to cut transaction costs and eliminate dollar conversions. They also agreed to set up a real-time payment link to simplify cross-border money transfers.

The agreements will enable “seamless cross-border transactions and payments, and foster greater economic cooperation,” the Reserve Bank of India explained in a recent statement.


De-dollarization trend


India and the UAE are by no means alone in trying to reduce their reliance on the dollar. Powerful nations across the world — particularly China and Russia — are keen to dethrone the dollar in response to aggressive U.S. sanctions and foreign policy plays.

This trend — deemed “de-dollarization” — has gained such sway that some are questioning whether the dollar’s days of dominance are over. But Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said no currency currently exists that could displace the greenback.

Yellen’s reassurance follows a 8% decline in the dollar’s share of global reserves in 2022. In an effort to diversify, central banks worldwide have been starting to ditch their dollar reserves in favor of gold.


A key Russia-friendly bloc may decide to expand. Who stands to benefit?

Analysis by Simone McCarthy, CNN
Tue, August 22, 2023

Members of the BRICS economic group of major emerging economies are meeting this week in South Africa for a summit that could determine the future of the bloc – and how hard it pushes back against a world order it sees as unfairly dominated by the West.

The group of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa has never been more prominent on the world stage. But the BRICS themselves are complicated.

Russia’s leader can’t attend the summit because host country South Africa would be obliged to arrest him for alleged war crimes. Two other members, India and China, have a simmering border conflict. And while Beijing is locked in a rivalry with the United States, New Delhi has close ties with Washington.

It’s not the happiest of families. But nonetheless that family is now entertaining formal bids from nearly two dozen countries to join their bloc of major emerging economies.

Discussions around adding new members are expected to figure high on the agenda of the three-day summit beginning Tuesday, where BRICS leaders – with the exception of Russia’s Vladimir Putin – will gather in-person for the first time since the pandemic.

Putin, who has an International Criminal Court warrant out for his arrest linked to his brutal invasion of Ukraine, will attend virtually.

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa on Sunday threw his support behind BRICS expansion, saying a larger body would “represent a diverse group of nations” that share a “common desire to have a more balanced global order” in a “increasingly complex and fractured” world.

At stake in decisions around expanding is the direction and identity of the group, whose members aim for more say in an international system they see as favoring the West and Group of Seven (G7) nations, despite a shift in who dominates the global economy over recent decades.

The bloc risks becoming more pointedly geopolitical in its bid to rebalance global power, analysts say, especially as China and Russia seek to bring it on side against rising tensions with the West – something its expansion could facilitate.

Speaking at a news conference ahead of the summit last week, China’s envoy in South Africa said more and more countries hoped to join BRICS to “safeguard their legitimate interests.”

“In the face of some countries wielding the ‘big stick’ of unilateral sanctions and engaging in long-arm jurisdiction, the BRICS countries insist on equal dialogue and consultation,” Ambassador Chen Xiaodong said, using Beijing’s typical language to criticize what it sees as US policy.

The issue of expansion may be “the association’s first stress test in its near decade-and-a-half of existence,” according to Bhaso Ndzendze, an associate professor of politics and international relations at the University of Johannesburg.

Adding members “would expand the group’s global presence” and increase buy-in for its agenda to counter Western political dominance, he said.

But there are differences in opinion on whether to expand, and “certainly not all (members) would support entry by the same countries.”

Joining the club

Whether Putin, China’s Xi Jinping, India’s Narendra Modi, Brazil’s Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and their host, South Africa’s Cyril Ramaphosa, decide to add to their bloc – and how they choose those potential members – will have significant global implications, analysts say.

An expansion would only be the second in the history of the group, which focuses on economic development and increasing its members’ voice in global forums.

Built off a term originally coined by former Goldman Sachs economist Jim O’Neill to describe investment opportunities in key emerging markets, the group has persisted despite deep differences in political and economic systems between its members.

It held its first summit in 2009 with four members and then added South Africa the following year. The BRICS launched its New Development Bank in 2015.

Now, 22 countries have formally expressed an interest in joining the bloc, while that many have also made informal inquiries, South African ambassador to BRICS Anil Sooklal said last month.

Those who formally applied include Argentina, Mexico, Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Nigeria and Bangladesh, South African officials have said.

The countries have a range of reasons for applying, from interest in specific economic initiatives such as transitioning to local currencies to “challenging the US,” according to Mihaela Papa, a senior fellow in the Rising Power Alliances Project at Tufts University in the US.

“Then there are those who want easier access to China or other BRICS countries or more control during major power tensions and uncertainty,” she said, adding that for members, “deciding on expansion means deciding on the future direction of the group.”

New joiners with economic clout could catalyze the group’s ability to reshape or create alternatives to existing global institutions of power.

Choosing to include countries that are openly antagonistic toward the West, like Iran, could swing it further toward becoming an anti-Western bloc, experts say.

Adding new members is likely to have at least some positive knock-on effects for the group’s most powerful member, China, especially as Xi tries to position his country as a leader in overhauling a US-led system he sees as bent on constraining his country’s rise.

“The broader its members, the stronger they can claim a collective voice, and the more China as the largest economy will claim leadership and representation of the developing world,” said Yun Sun, director of the China Program at the Stimson Center think tank in Washington.

Countries’ wide interest in joining BRICS is also a boost for Putin – who remains welcome in the bloc despite being seen as a pariah and war criminal in the West. It also points to a widening gap between the priorities of those countries lining up for BRICS and the wealthy Western nations that have united against him in support of Ukraine, analysts say.

Bangalore-based analyst Manoj Kewalramani pointed to a view across the developing world. “There is a lot of frustration that Russia initiated the war, but there is (also) this acknowledgment that you need two hands to clap and there are things which NATO and the United States did” to spark or prolong the conflict, he said.

When it comes to these countries’ interest in seeing the war end, “they will see that isolating Russia doesn’t help them,” said Kewalramani, who heads Indo-Pacific studies at the Takshashila Institution research center.

Countries instead are looking at BRICS as a means to deal with challenges like climate change and limited access to capital and technology, and are deciding to move toward it as “the West seems to be closing in on itself,” he said.

Dividing lines

But even as Xi, Modi, Lula, Ramaphosa and a beamed-in Putin gather in Johannesburg for talks, divisions within the existing group of five may be a barrier to any breakthrough decisions on the issue.

Leaders are expected to review criteria for how to select new members – perhaps rather than name who gets to join the club.

The Russian leader’s virtual presence will be the most obvious indication of awkwardness within the group – whose members include those who have condemned Russia’s invasion of Ukraine at the United Nations, like Brazil, and those who have abstained – China, South Africa and India.

But Moscow’s influence in Africa was underscored as video emerged showing Yevgeny Prigozhin, head of the mercenary group Wagner who launched an abortive mutiny against the Kremlin’s military leadership in June, claiming to be in Africa and talking about making Russia greater on all continents.

When it comes to BRICS expansion, each of the countries have their own reasons to be circumspect about who to let in, since the issue was raised during South Africa’s last chairship in 2018 and then countries decided to explore it further after last year’s virtual summit hosted by China.

For India, which has a border dispute with China and finds itself increasingly drawn to the US over their shared concerns about an assertive Beijing, a strident, anti-US bloc would not be desirable, analysts say.

“India finds itself in a difficult spot, because the group’s identity is shifting, and it does not want that shift,” said Kewalramani, who noted that New Delhi is seen as having slowed the introduction of new members last year by calling first for the creation of criteria.

“But how long and to what extent and to what effect (India can guide the bloc in certain directions) … is not going to be easy, because China is the biggest actor and it’s aligned with Russia much more,” he said.

An expansion, instead of making the group more potent, could also make it “more unwieldy and ineffective” with more contrasting positions between members, he added.

Brazil and South Africa, too, could be open to potential expansion, but would be “more cautious in welcoming clearly anti-US countries” to the bloc, according to Rubens Duarte, coordinator of LABMUNDO, a Brazil-based research center for international relations.

Such a shift might not be what the group seeks, however, he said, and having more members could help bring more diversity of perspective into the discussion on global issues.

But if BRICS does decide to expand and then steps up its global role, this could push larger change that impacts the international influence of Europe and the US, he said.

“The more BRICS becomes active, the more other countries will lose power,” he said.

CNN’s Nectar Gan contributed reporting.

RIGHT WING Brazil Senate agriculture committee passes bill to limit Indigenous lands

Reuters
Wed, August 23, 2023

BRASILIA (Reuters) - The Brazilian Senate's Agriculture Committee on Wednesday voted 13-3 to approve legislation that would rule out recognition of Indigenous lands if they were not lived on by 1988, a bill that is backed by Brazil's powerful farm lobby.

The proposal advances to the Constitution and Justice Committee and could be put to a vote in the plenary as soon as next week.

The Minister of Indigenous Peoples, Sonia Guajajara, said rural interests in Congress were rushing the bill through before the country's Supreme Court can rule whether the 1988 cut-off date violates a constitutional guarantee of Indigenous rights to their ancestral lands.

"We are trying to widen the debate and urge the Senate to also discuss the bill in the human rights and the environment committees," Guajajara told Reuters.

Senators from farm states said the legislation was needed to end land conflicts with Indigenous communities and establish legal security to settlers.

Senator Soraya Thornicke, from Mato Grosso do Sul state,

said Brazil's 1.6 million Indigenous people have 13% of the country's territory protected as reservation lands.

"With so much land, why are they so poor?" she said in committee, backing a bill that will for the first time allow commercial agriculture in Indigenous territories, including with the use of genetically modified crops banned there at present.

The bill approved by the Agriculture Committee would stop the recognition of new reservations on lands claimed by Indigenous people who were not living on the land at the time Brazil's constitution was enacted in 1988.

But it will also allow the expropriation of protected land if an Indigenous community lost its cultural traits, said Guajajara.

More serious, she said, was that the bill would permit easier access to territories where isolated or recently contacted tribes are known to live in the Amazon.

Guajajara hopes leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, who created the ministry of Indigenous peoples when he took office in January, will veto the bill if it passes Congress.

But she is not certain he would be willing to antagonize the farm and agribusiness sectors, whose food exports are the driving force of Brazil's economy.

"I don't know, really," she said.

(Reporting by Anthony Boadle; Editing by Bill Berkrot)
UAW members vote on strike in case Ford, GM deal doesn’t happen

James Dornbrook - Kansas City Business Journal
Tue, August 22, 2023



With thousands of jobs and billions of dollars in economic impact at stake, negotiations over a new labor contract for United Auto Workers members are reaching a crucial phase for the Kansas City-area economy.

The UAW is trying to negotiate a new labor contract with Ford Motor Co. and General Motors Co., which have about 9,500 full-time-equivalent employees at their area production plants.

Mahomes, Kelce invest in popular Kansas City-area pickleball concept

Ford’s Kansas City Assembly Plant (7,250 employees) in Claycomo produces the Ford F-150 and the Ford Transit. GM’s Fairfax Assembly Plant (2,229 employees) in Kansas City, Kansas, produces the Chevrolet Malibu and the Cadillac XT4.

The UAW labor contract is set to expire Sept. 14, and the parties still haven’t reached an agreement.

Concerned about the pace of the negotiations, the union asked members to authorize a strike if the contract expires. The UAW needs to have strike authorization in hand by Thursday. That doesn’t mean a strike will happen; it simply gives UAW leadership authority to call a strike.



Can the UAW afford to strike all three Detroit automakers?


Jamie L. LaReau, Detroit Free Press
Wed, August 23, 2023

In 1998, about 9,200 union members at two General Motors components' plants in Flint went on strike. Flint Metal Center made sheet metal stampings used on most of GM's vehicles; Flint East made the electronics.

The strike at those two important plants forced production to stop at nearly 30 other GM assembly plants and 100 parts plants across North America. Nearly 193,000 GM hourly workers were then laid off and those nonstriking members collected unemployment benefits. The 9,200 strikers were paid from the union's then-$700 million strike fund.


Striking United Auto Workers union workers demonstrate in front of the General Motors Corp. Metal Fabricating Plant on June 10, 1998, in Flint, Mich., as an auto transport truck passes. Nearly 3,400 hourly UAW employees went on strike Friday, June 5, l998 forcing the various GM plants in North America to shut down due to a lack of parts.

That strategy of using key component plants to take down other plants meant the strike could last long (54 days in this case) and cost the union less compared with taking all 202,200 workers off the line and paying them from the strike fund. The strike and shutdowns cost GM about $2 billion in lost profits, according to an article in MLive.

"It was far less costly to the union, but inflicted considerable pain to General Motors, not as painful as a complete shutdown, but it worked," said Harley Shaiken, professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley.

That plan or something similar could be an option this year if the UAW decides to strike one or all of the Detroit automakers next month, experts said. If the tactic is employed, "It can bring down the system and ... this could be a very, very serious situation," said Marick Masters, a business professor and labor expert at Wayne State University.

A United Auto Workers flag flies on a truck outside General Motors' Flint Metal Center in Flint, Mich., on June 17, 1998. A rally was held at the plant where the workers walked out on June 5 in protest of staffing levels, health and safety issues and subcontracting issues.

Labor watchdogs list several tactics the union could take if it strikes. The key for union leaders would be to find the strategy that will inflict the most pain on the company while doing the least damage to the union's $825 million strike fund. For the automakers, it means being prepared to mitigate the damage from a number of scenarios.
Strike authorization vote: Turnout matters

The United Auto Workers declined to comment for this article. In a statement to the Detroit Free Press, President Shawn Fain said, "The UAW does not discuss strike strategy."

Fain also does not discuss the strike fund and how long it could support paying $500 a week to some 150,000 UAW members at GM, Ford Motor Co. and Stellantis, which owns Jeep, Ram, Chrysler, Dodge and Fiat, if it came to that. When asked about the strike fund's ability to fund such a strike at a rally Sunday, he told media that the workforce and the union are prepared to do what needs to be done to get a fair contract.

UAW President Shawn Fain speaks with media during the shift change at the GM Factory ZERO Detroit-Hamtramck Assembly Center in Detroit on July 12, 2023. The UAW will be starting contract talks with management this week.

This week, UAW members at the Detroit Three are being asked to give union leaders the OK to call for a strike. Bargainers continue to negotiate as they come up against the Detroit Three's contract expiration at 11:59 p.m. on Sept. 14.

The strike authorization vote is usually a formality but this year’s heated rhetoric adds more significance to the process. The automakers and the union leaders are watching the vote turnout as an indicator of strike enthusiasm, labor experts said.

"The rallies and the strike vote allow the UAW to collect data as to how willing the workers are to go on strike and that will be calibrated into the union's strike strategy," Masters said. "And, if there is reluctance, that will have an impact on how hard they push these bargaining demands."

The strike authorization results are expected later this week. If voter turnout is high for something that is considered a foregone conclusion, it means the membership is engaged and ready to walk, Shaiken said. That alone could be enough to win a good contract because the companies won't want a strike. For automakers, in today's competitive world, lost sales to imports or competitors like Tesla during a strike are sales they may never get back, he said.

Strike scenario No. 1: Total Conflict

If the automakers won't meet the demands of the UAW, which include wage raises, cost-of-living adjustments, shorter work weeks, pension benefits and more, here are a few strategies the union can deploy in the event of a strike: The first being the "total conflict" approach.

" 'We’re going out on strike across the board and nobody is going to make another automobile at our plants until this is resolved.' That’s maximum pain on both sides of the bargaining table," said Erik Gordon, a business professor at Ross School of Business at University of Michigan. "The idea is, 'We’re going to bring the industry to its knees.' "


Erik Gordon, University of Michigan Ross School of Business professor.

With that approach, Gordon said the automakers could probably last longer than the union because they have more money. But Shaiken added that the broader economic impact could hurt ancillary companies such as smaller suppliers to automakers who could be forced out of business in a prolonged strike against all three car companies.

If all of the nearly 150,000 U.S. union autoworkers at the Detroit Three went on strike, at $500 a week in strike pay, it would cost the union about $75 million a week and six weeks would eat up $450 million — about half the strike fund. That would not include the cost of paying for medical insurance, which is hard to calculate, Masters said, because some workers might be covered by a spouse's insurance. But he estimates medical could add another $100 million in costs over six weeks. The UAW website says the union will cover medical costs and prescription drugs during a strike if the automaker discontinues coverage.

Also, the union would lose a big part of its revenue because all those striking workers would not be paying dues while on strike.

"The cost is higher but they hope, by maximum impact, the strike would be shorter," Masters said of this strategy. "It’s a risk."

The other pain point, Gordon noted, is "although the UAW workers might say they want to strike and they might have saved up for a strike, after you go eight weeks on $500 a week, you realize that — apart from having trouble paying your bills — that new fishing boat you were going to buy, you’re not going to buy now. That vacation you were going to take, you're not going to take it."

Scenario No. 2: The traditional approach

The traditional approach means, about a week before the contract deadline, the UAW selects a target company, usually an automaker they believe will give way on the union's most important issues. If they have a strike, they strike that company only.

This is the tactic the UAW took in 2019 when it went on strike against GM for 40 days. The six-week work stoppage cost GM $3.6 billion and had broad impact across the industry. The UAW paid nearly $81 million in benefits to striking workers.

Strikers walk the line at GM Romulus Powertrain, Monday, Oct. 14, 2019.

Shaiken said even a traditional strike causes economic damage to both sides, but it is less costly than striking multiple companies. For example, if Ford were to be the target, the UAW would be funding 57,000 strikers at about $28.5 million a week (about $171 million over six weeks), not including health care costs. In 2019, GM cut off its health care coverage for strikers, putting those costs in the hands of the union. But the negative public image of doing so prompted GM to reinstate health care coverage about a week later.

Shaiken expects the union would go this route because if they don’t, "Lost sales go to nonunion carmakers and those sales may not be coming back. No. 2, it is far more costly to the UAW to be paying $500 to 150,000 workers, that’s $75 million a week. Third, (in a strike against all three) you're talking 2% of the gross domestic product because you’ve got suppliers who have to start laying off workers, you’ve got level two or level three suppliers that are more vulnerable to bankruptcies and you open the possibility to federal intervention.”

Finally, "Once you get the first company, then the others do fall in line," Shaiken said. "So doing a target is more effective."

A variation of scenario 2

But Gordon said this classic option above isn't consistent with Fain's messaging to date.

“Fain has positioned the contract bargaining as more of a class war than, ‘Just give us these economics,’ “ Gordon said. “It’s ‘Management is the enemy, management is greedy, look how much more management makes than you do.’ So if you pick one company, are you saying that GM’s management is more reviled than Stellantis’ management or Ford’s management is?”

Masters suggests a variation of the traditional approach could be in play, which could be striking one automaker completely and some key parts of the others — enough to hurt the other two, but not be as costly to the union.

"All of these scenarios have implications for solidarity and draining the strike fund so they’re going to take all these things and weight them and come up with an algorithm to devise a strategy that will work best for them," Masters said.
Scenario No. 3: Back to 1998

Labor experts said an "asymmetric" attack is another option. That's the 1998 model: Strike some key component plants across GM, Ford and Stellantis and fund those smaller strikes out of the strike fund as other employees continue to pay into the strike fund, keeping revenue flowing. Then, when other plants must be idled because they can't get key components, those workers get paid by unemployment and possibly sub pay by the company.


Fred Johnson, right, an automatic press operator at the Flint Metal Center, and Richard Stevens, left, a quality control technician, rally passing drivers to honk their horns outside the center in Flint, Mich., on July 13, 1998.

There is just one problem with that, Gordon said.

"Figuring out which key component plants of the automaker — because it can’t be a supplier — they will hit is complicated," Gordon said. “What is the part that is most common across the carmaker's line that you can’t get from a supplier? Engines? Maybe a stamping plant? You have to figure out what appears in an entire platform that would hurt them."

A more doable option would be to strike an automaker's plants that make its biggest sellers.

“Shut down the plants making the pickup trucks and stay on the line in the plants making the cars," Gordon said. "It’s good tactic, but not as good as the shutdown of selective components. But it might be easier to do because you know how to shut down the plants building the F-150, the Silverado or RAMs. That’s doable.”

Masters said Fain is keeping the automakers off balance by not following tradition so far. He forewent the traditional handshake, for example, when negotiations officially started last month.

“One of the things that’s impressed me most about Shawn Fain is he’s keeping all his options open, I don’t think they want the companies to know precisely what they’re going to do whereas in the past the companies kind of knew what they were going to do," Masters said.


UAW president Shawn Fain talks to Ford workers outside of Ford's Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne on Wednesday, July 12, 2023.

He said striking key component plants or plants where the bestselling vehicles are made, might be the best options in terms of managing union costs and balancing impact, but "the question is how are the companies prepared to deal with that? You can easily imagine a scenario where key strikes at key locals could be very impactful.”

More: GM confirms future wage hike for UAW members, but other demands 'threaten' company health

More: 2 auto unions to bargain with the Detroit 3 at same time, each want a share of profits

Contact Jamie L. LaReau: jlareau@freepress.com. Follow her on Twitter @jlareauan. Read more on General Motors and sign up for our autos newsletter. Become a subscriber.

This article originally appeared on Detroit Free Press: How the UAW could strike the Detroit 3 without draining strike funds
Arab Israelis bury official as crime wave toll nears 160

AFP
Wed, August 23, 2023

Arab Israelis protest outside a police station during the funeral for the director-general of Tira city, the latest victim of a crime wave in the Arab-Israeli community (AHMAD GHARABLI)


A high-ranking civil servant buried Wednesday in Israel is the latest victim of a crime wave that has killed almost 160 members of Israel's Arab minority this year.

Abdelrahman Kashua, who held the post of director-general in Tira city, just north of Tel Aviv, was gunned down at a gas station on Monday, police said.

Mourners carrying black flags gathered outside a police station in protest as part of the funeral procession.

Kashua is among 156 Arab-Israelis killed so far this year, according to the Abraham Initiatives which promotes coexistence between Arabs and Jews.

Arab Israelis have long complained of discrimination and police inaction against crime that disproportionately affects their communities.

Experts say Arab gangs have amassed large quantities of illegal weapons over the past two decades and are involved in drug and other crimes.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday condemned Kashua's killing as a "red line" and vowed to use all means "in order to defeat this crime" wave.

But just hours after his remarks, four more Arab men were murdered in the northern town of Abu Snan.

One of the victims, Ghazi Saab, had written on Facebook about his plans to stand in municipal elections later this year, and said "we can no longer remain silent."

"Crime and acts of violence in our villages have crossed all limits," he wrote in July.

"I appeal to all to not deal in violence. There is no reason to kill."

A leading Arab politician, Mansour Abbas, on Wednesday called for greater support for his community.

"Our demand is only one, that the state of Israel carries out its duty to protect the lives of Arab citizens," he said at Kashua's funeral.

Abbas made history in 2021 when his Raam movement became the first Arab party to join a governing coalition, pressing while in power for funds to tackle crime.

Arab Israelis, descendants of Palestinians who stayed on their land after Israel's creation in 1948, make up about 21 percent of the population and many identify as Palestinian.

Earlier this month Netanyahu blamed "out-of-control criminal organisations" for the violence, which has led to other protests by Arab Israelis this year.

In early June, the prime minister said he was "determined to stop this chain of murders" and would see that happen by not only reinforcing police but also "with the help of the Shin Bet", the internal security agency.

str-mib-jd/rsc/it