Interview

The Observer Research Foundation's Centre for International Relations President and former Indian Foreign Secretary Ambassador M Rasgotra was recently interviewed by the newspaper Oriental Morning Post on June 17, 2009. Here's the full interview.

Indian foreign secretary Shivshankar Menon this May said in a seminar called `Brics in the New World Order', the BRIC countries, despite their differences, have to work together to have more say in international matters,and that the international role of the BRIC countries will increase further. Can we see the upcoming summit of the four developing powers as the openning-up of an age of new world order?

Rasgotra: With the rise of new powers, especially China's rise as a great economic and military power, World Order, so-called, has been changing for quite some time. Brazil, Russia and India are also gaining economic strength. Therefore, each one of these countries, in particular China, is bound to have more say in international matters. With the four countries working together, their voices will carry even greater weight in international affairs, specially in international economic matters.

Can this summit be seen by the west as a threat to the existing world order?

Rasgotra: In no sense is BRIC a gang-up against the West; there is no reason for the West to see it as a threat.

In terms of the differences within these four countries, some pessimistic analysts even expect that BRIC would quickly collapse and get into different directions in the near future, even with a result of abandoning this BRIC framework, do you think so?

Rasgotra: No. I donot think so. There are bound to be difference between any two or more countries; even the closest neighbours differ, have different economic and security perceptions and interests. These are not necessarily a bar to cooperation. The four rising Bric economies have much to gain from increased contacts and cooperation. In a globalising world cooperation among nations is natural, in fact an unavoidable necessity. Bric is a platform for exchanging views and experiences; it should become a framework of co-operation among its members: I do not see why it should collapse or be abandoned.

With regard to the relation between China and India, is India afraid of the prospect that "Chimerica", rather than "Chindia", will dominate the world stage? thus, damaging or abating the BRIC framework?

Rasgotra: There is no fear in India, nor any special concern over close China-US relations. "Chinmerica" (it sounds better than "Chimerica") is ok. It is better for the world that its two leading powers should be interdependent and working closely together rather than be in contention or confrontation. We in India, like "Chindia" also, and are trying to strengthen relations with the U.S. as well.

In this day and age there is no room for any one power, or a combination of powers, to "dominate" the world stage. Attempts to dominate generate resistance and debilitating conflict. I personally view powerful countries not as hegemons, but as leaders in thought, culture, science and technology and, cooperation among them as a means of humanity's advance.

There were many reports on new waves of concerns about China's danger or threat to India no matter politically or economically. Meanwhile, India has been actively supporting BRIC frameworks, is there any contradiction or disagreement in Indian policy community?

Rasgotra: India is a democracy, and our people enjoy complete freedom of thought and speech. Some of our media, and some individuals have expressed concern over China's growing military power or over occasional war threats emanating from some Chinese quarters. Our people, as a whole, and the Indian government want a relationship of peace and cooperation with China, in BRIC, in other fora, and bilaterally.

I do not view China as a danger or threat to India. In quiet diplomatic parleys China and India should candidly discuss their strategic and security perceptions / concerns and interests : that will enhance mutual confidence and trust.

Are you optimistic about the future of this framework? Can it become a stable and solid organization or a framework like G7 or SCO? Can it expand and attract more members?

Rasgotra: It is too early to think of Bric as an 'organization': as contacts among our leaders grow, a pattern of organizing BRIC's meetings, agenda and the mechanism needed for the same will emerge. As other major new economies begin to rise they can be brought into the group. For the present, I think it would be a good idea to bring in South Africa and change the acronym BRIC to BRICKS. That will also give representation to another disadvantaged continent.

When we are talking about BRIC, it seems more economic than political or militarized : does it mean we should not have any expectations on its political or military significance in the future?

Rasgotra: In my view, Bric should never have a military dimension The era of military alliances is now history. As economic cooperation among Bric countries expands, their views on certain political and security matters could also begin to converge.

It is hard to ignore the sequence of the four countries within BRIC, could you give us your list? do you think this sequence will undergo some changes in the near future?

Rasgotra: Correspondingly with the size of the four economies, the more appropriate sequence would be China, Russia, India, and Brazil. The acronym that emerges - CRIB - is not a happy one : Embarking on a new course of cooperation, these four dynamic countries should not be dubbed as Cribbers. But, then, what's in a name!