https://sputniknews.in/20250910/brics-must-lead-says-jaishankar-but-why-and-where-to-9739738.html
BRICS Must Lead, Says Jaishankar. But Why And Where to?
BRICS Must Lead, Says Jaishankar. But Why And Where to?
Sputnik India
It’s always a challenge to all kind of experts, when an obviously serious meeting of international heavyweights takes place, and we are not to know its exact... 10.09.2025, Sputnik India
2025-09-10T16:01+0530
2025-09-10T16:01+0530
2025-09-10T16:01+0530
sputnik opinion
s. jaishankar
donald trump
narendra modi
india
us
russia
european union (eu)
brics
https://cdn1.img.sputniknews.in/img/07e9/08/16/9645503_0:119:3220:1930_1920x0_80_0_0_60d31109a646071cf0d05d14424ba755.jpg
We are only hearing that some serious decisions have been made, and that’s it. And that’s the way it should be, under the current circumstance.All the BRICS nations are in need for stable, predictable trade environments and resilient supply chains that are shorter, redundant, and diversified geographically, said, at that meeting, External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar, representing Prime Minister Narendra Modi. “It is imperative that economic practices are fair, transparent, and to everyone’s benefit,” Jaishankar said. “We must democratise manufacturing and encourage growth across different geographies to build regional self-sufficiency and mitigate global shocks.”And, finally, he said: BRICS must lead the process.Published extracts from speeches made by other leaders are even shorter. So what can that mean, and where we all are going to? Here the experts had to guess, and there are some rather bold guesses.The meeting was not only about exchange of views, a serious agreement has been reached, says Kirill Strelnikov of this agency. That was the agreement, he goes on, about an immediate strategic transition of BRICS from being just a “global club” towards mutual obligation for a common response, as in you attack one of us, we all respond. The West tried to pick the presumed weakest link in BRICS? All right, the rest will now coordinate a unified reaction to such cases.That may be a very optimistic guess, but I’d say the general trend may be just that. India and Brazil, with 50% of American tariffs slapped on them by the US, have been appointed weak links, and some kind of collective response has surely been discussed. The question is, if you are weak, why not give in, at least tactically. And this is where the most interesting comments are flooding in. Russian experts are trying to place themselves in Indian or Brazilian positions and explain the rationale for their active resistance.The thing is, the Russian media, if not the Russian researchers, have erred too long on the side of optimism, based on self-gratification. Some colleagues of mine have been too sure that we, Russia, are such a nice nation, we are so often morally right, that it is only natural that India, China, Brazil and dozens of others are just supposed to side with us on all the major issues there are.Not that fast, says Dmitry Skvortsov of the Vzglyad discussion platform. His piece is called “Why India Has Preferred Russia Over US”, instead of stopping the Russian oil imports. What we have here is reassuringly cold logic, based on the long-term Indian planning of national development. It is, first and foremost, about the global energy and global finance for years to come, and only then about morals and emotions.At the looks of it, says Skvortsov, India loses much more from the American punitive tariffs, than from rejecting Russian energy. The losses of exports to the US are about 43 billion dollars annually, maybe divided by half, since not every item of Indian exports falls under the axe. While doing without oil from Russia only deprives India of about 2 billion per year. But, he says, that’s the short-term picture. Wait till you see what’s coming in, in the long-term.You know what Skvortsov’s opinion reminds me of? A lot of Indian analysis is similar, these days. Like, the recent piece in the Firstpost by Ambassador Prabhu Dayal. He says: “The Donald Trump administration has underestimated both the structural sensitivities of the Indian economy and the strategic implications of overreliance on coercive diplomacy. It miscalculated that under its pressure, India, like Japan and the European Union (EU), would ultimately make major concessions affecting sensitive domestic constituencies. That miscalculation is proving costly for the US”.So what kind of miscalculation is that? Says Skvortsov: the biggest Indian corporations are, maybe, feeling comfortable at the Western financial markets, raising money for their projects in India itself. So Donald Trump may have been too sure that India was safely hooked on that money lifeline. But the trouble is, the US, at least in 2025, is becoming a vacuum cleaner, sucking in the liquidity from the closest allies, and surely people in India know that. Thinking about an alternative financial system seems only too natural in such case. (And this is where BRICS is coming in, to add).Here we have rather an unexpected gentleman entering the discussion. Mr. Anton Kobyakov is an economic advisor to the Russian President Vladimir Putin, and this year he also has been in general charge of the Vladivostok Economic Forum, concluded last week with an unexpectedly big success. So what has caused the general interest in the projects discussed, why so many foreign delegations attended, and why so many deals have been signed? Kobyakov, in response to numerous such questions asked at the final press-conference, has suddenly given a kind of a lecture about the shape of the world to come.Like in the 1930-s and 1970-s, says Kobyakov, the US is trying to solve its financial problems at the expense of the rest of the world, herding everyone into its new cryptocurrencies’ cloud. And then, when most of the US debt will be moved into the stablecoins, the US will devalue that debt. All that will happen very fast, in 3-5 years. In the meantime other nations will be creating an alternative financial system. The “Big Asia” has finally appropriated all the functions of the global economy, the functions that the West used to monopolize. The Middle East is becoming a huge financial center. Production has gone to India, China, Vietnam and such like countries. Technologies are being owned by the Chinese, Koreans and others. In about 5 years West Europe will simply be not needed by anyone.While the Americans, concludes the presidential advisor, are trying to change the rules of the game by raising tariffs for those who know how to produce – and this was the start of big changes. So it’s only natural that the Big Asia is getting closer to those who is willing and able to pursue own independent economic policy.Isn’t it, in other words, just what Minister Jaishankar said: to repeat, “We must democratise manufacturing and encourage growth across different geographies to build regional self-sufficiency and mitigate global shocks.”There is certain logic and convergence in all these attempts to describe the current transitional times. So we are in for more economic diplomacy among the big nations. People who make the right decisions about their future may seem to be bold and controversial today, but these decisions will only look natural in hindsight.Dmitry Kosyrev is a Russian writer, author of spy novels and short stories. He also did columns for the Pioneer and Firstpost.com
https://sputniknews.in/20250909/brics-should-consider-collective-counter-sanctions-on-us-experts-9734975.html
india
us
russia
Sputnik India
feedback.hindi@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
2025
News
en_IN
Sputnik India
feedback.hindi@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
Sputnik India
feedback.hindi@sputniknews.com
+74956456601
MIA „Rossiya Segodnya“
s. jaishankar, donald trump, narendra modi, india, us, russia, european union (eu), brics
s. jaishankar, donald trump, narendra modi, india, us, russia, european union (eu), brics
BRICS Must Lead, Says Jaishankar. But Why And Where to?
It’s always a challenge to all kind of experts, when an obviously serious meeting of international heavyweights takes place, and we are not to know its exact results. That’s how it happened to the sudden and very hush-hush virtual BRICS Leaders’ Meeting, hastily convened by Brazil last Monday.
We are only hearing that some serious decisions have been made, and that’s it. And that’s the way it should be, under the current circumstance.
All the BRICS nations are in need for stable, predictable trade environments and resilient supply chains that are shorter, redundant, and diversified geographically,
said, at that meeting, External Affairs Minister Dr S Jaishankar, representing Prime Minister Narendra Modi. “It is imperative that economic practices are fair, transparent, and to everyone’s benefit,” Jaishankar said. “We must democratise manufacturing and encourage growth across different geographies to build regional self-sufficiency and mitigate global shocks.”
And, finally, he said: BRICS must lead the process.
Published extracts from speeches made by other leaders are even shorter. So what can that mean, and where we all are going to? Here the experts had to guess, and there are some rather bold guesses.
The meeting was not only about exchange of views, a serious agreement has been reached, says Kirill Strelnikov of this agency. That was the agreement, he goes on, about an immediate strategic transition of BRICS from being just a “global club” towards mutual obligation for a common response, as in you attack one of us, we all respond. The West tried to pick the presumed weakest link in BRICS? All right, the rest will now coordinate a unified reaction to such cases.
That may be a very optimistic guess, but I’d say the general trend may be just that. India and Brazil, with 50% of American tariffs slapped on them by the US, have been appointed weak links, and some kind of collective response has surely been discussed. The question is, if you are weak, why not give in, at least tactically. And this is where the most interesting comments are flooding in. Russian experts are trying to place themselves in Indian or Brazilian positions and explain the rationale for their active resistance.
The thing is, the Russian media, if not the Russian researchers, have erred too long on the side of optimism, based on self-gratification. Some colleagues of mine have been too sure that we, Russia, are such a nice nation, we are so often morally right, that it is only natural that India, China, Brazil and dozens of others are just supposed to side with us on all the major issues there are.
Not that fast, says Dmitry Skvortsov of the Vzglyad discussion platform. His piece is called “Why India Has Preferred Russia Over US”, instead of stopping the Russian oil imports. What we have here is reassuringly cold logic, based on the long-term Indian planning of national development. It is, first and foremost, about the global energy and global finance for years to come, and only then about morals and emotions.
At the looks of it, says Skvortsov, India loses much more from the American punitive tariffs, than from rejecting Russian energy. The losses of exports to the US are about 43 billion dollars annually, maybe divided by half, since not every item of Indian exports falls under the axe. While doing without oil from Russia only deprives India of about 2 billion per year. But, he says, that’s the short-term picture. Wait till you see what’s coming in, in the long-term.
You know what Skvortsov’s opinion reminds me of? A lot of Indian analysis is similar, these days. Like,
the recent piece in the Firstpost by Ambassador Prabhu Dayal. He says: “The Donald Trump administration has underestimated both the structural sensitivities of the Indian economy and the strategic implications of overreliance on coercive diplomacy. It miscalculated that under its pressure, India, like Japan and the European Union (EU), would ultimately make major concessions affecting sensitive domestic constituencies. That miscalculation is proving costly for the US”.
So what kind of miscalculation is that? Says Skvortsov: the biggest Indian corporations are, maybe, feeling comfortable at the Western financial markets, raising money for their projects in India itself. So Donald Trump may have been too sure that India was safely hooked on that money lifeline. But the trouble is, the US, at least in 2025, is becoming a vacuum cleaner, sucking in the liquidity from the closest allies, and surely people in India know that. Thinking about an alternative financial system seems only too natural in such case. (And this is where BRICS is coming in, to add).
Here we have rather an unexpected gentleman entering the discussion. Mr. Anton Kobyakov is an economic advisor to the Russian President Vladimir Putin, and this year he also has been in general charge of the Vladivostok Economic Forum, concluded last week with an unexpectedly big success. So what has caused the general interest in the projects discussed, why so many foreign delegations attended, and why so many deals have been signed? Kobyakov, in response to numerous such questions asked at the final press-conference, has suddenly given a kind of a lecture about the shape of the world to come.
Like in the 1930-s and 1970-s, says Kobyakov, the US is trying to solve its financial problems at the expense of the rest of the world, herding everyone into its new cryptocurrencies’ cloud. And then, when most of the US debt will be moved into the stablecoins, the US will devalue that debt. All that will happen very fast, in 3-5 years. In the meantime other nations will be creating an alternative financial system. The “Big Asia” has finally appropriated all the functions of the global economy, the functions that the West used to monopolize. The Middle East is becoming a huge financial center. Production has gone to India, China, Vietnam and such like countries. Technologies are being owned by the Chinese, Koreans and others. In about 5 years West Europe will simply be not needed by anyone.
While the Americans, concludes the presidential advisor, are trying to change the rules of the game by raising tariffs for those who know how to produce – and this was the start of big changes. So it’s only natural that the Big Asia is getting closer to those who is willing and able to pursue own independent economic policy.
Isn’t it, in other words, just what Minister Jaishankar said: to repeat, “We must democratise manufacturing and encourage growth across different geographies to build regional self-sufficiency and mitigate global shocks.”
There is certain logic and convergence in all these attempts to describe the current transitional times. So we are in for more economic diplomacy among the big nations. People who make the right decisions about their future may seem to be bold and controversial today, but these decisions will only look natural in hindsight.
Dmitry Kosyrev is a Russian writer, author of spy novels and short stories. He also did columns for the Pioneer and Firstpost.com
