Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

BRICS and SCO - "As NATO Grows, China and Russia Seek to Bring Iran, Saudi Arabia Into Fold" from Newsweek - Multipolar International New World Order

Recommended Posts

As NATO Grows, China and Russia Seek to Bring Iran, Saudi Arabia Into Fold

By Tom O'Connor July 1st, 2022


Finland and Sweden's green light to join NATO is set to bring about the U.S.-led Western military alliance's largest expansion in decades. Meanwhile, the G7, consisting of NATO states and fellow U.S. ally Japan, has adopted a tougher line against Russia and China.

In the East, however, security and economy-focused blocs led by Beijing and Moscow are looking to take on new members of their own, including Iran and Saudi Arabia, two influential Middle Eastern rivals whose interest in shoring up cooperation on this new front could have a significant impact on global geopolitical balance.

The two bodies in question are the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) and BRICS. The former (BRICS) was established in 2001 as a six-member political, economic and military coalition including China, Russia and the Central Asian states of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan before recruiting South Asian nemeses India and Pakistan in 2017, while the latter is a grouping of emerging economic powers originally consisting of Brazil, Russia, India and China (BRIC) upon its inception 2006, and including South Africa in 2010.

"The BRICS and the SCO share one important ideological quality: they are both focused on multipolarity, and their summits have even been held back to back with one another at times," Matthew Neapole, an international affairs expert and contributor to the Macdonald-Laurier Institute in Canada, told Newsweek.

"Both are angling to act as force multipliers for this drive for multipolarity, to help along with alternatives [i.e, in currency or banking]," he added. "It could, in theory, facilitate economic linkages and step into gaps that U.S. institutions are not filling due to sanctions, such as those laid on Russia."


Iran, already an SCO observer, began its formal membership ascension process amid the latest leaders' summit in September. On Monday, the Iranian Foreign Ministry announced the Islamic Republic would also seek to join BRICS.
Across the Persian Gulf, Saudi Arabia has also reportedly considered applying for BRICS membership, as revealed by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov during his visit to the kingdom in late May. The announcement followed Saudi Arabia joining Argentina, Egypt, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Nigeria, Senegal, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates at China's invitation for a "BRICS+" discussion, after which Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin announced members had "reached consensus on the BRICS expansion process."
Of these candidates, Argentina has already applied for membership, potentially advancing the group's status toward being a major player in international economic relations. And with the SCO seeking to grow as well, Beijing and Moscow might be poised to advance their effort to sway the international influence equilibrium toward a broader group of countries that do not necessarily sign on to an explicitly U.S.-led international order.
And while Neapole argued that there would be "big hurdles to get over" in trying to transform this vision from ambitious talk to substantive action, he said a cohesive SCO-BRICS bloc could have a huge impact on reshaping the world order.
"If it can be successful in positioning itself as the standard-bearer of the Global South or G20, develop strong organizational mechanisms and integrate more thoroughly," he said, "it could be quite influential."
BRICS' multipolar approach to international affairs has proven attractive to both Iran and Saudi Arabia alike. The two nations, however, have their own unique reasons for seeking membership.
For Riyadh, the move would likely be less about choosing sides against the close ties it has fostered for decades with Washington and more about the kingdom's own growing status as an independent player.
"China's invitation to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to join the 'BRICS' confirms that the Kingdom has a major role in building the new world and became an important and essential player in global trade and economics," Mohammed al-Hamed, president of the Saudi Elite group in Riyadh, told Newsweek. "Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 is moving forward at a confident and global pace in all fields and sectors."
This vision, unveiled by Prince Mohammed bin Salman a year before being appointed as heir to the throne and de facto ruler of Saudi Arabia in 2017, outlined a plan to diversify his country's oil-dependent economy and present a new image of the kingdom to the international community.
And while Crown Prince Mohammed has sought to enhance cooperation with the U.S., especially as President Joe Biden prepared this month for his first visit to the monarchy he once branded a "pariah" over alleged human rights abuses, the Saudi royal has also expanded ties with Russia and China in recent years. Joining BRICS would demonstrate a commitment to Riyadh's resolve in dealing with other major powers and mark a significant win for the effort to boost economic frameworks established outside of the auspices of the U.S. and its immediate allies.
"This accession, if Saudi joins it, will balance the world economic system, especially since the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is the largest exporter of oil in the world, and it's in the G20," Hamed said. "If it happens, this will support any economic movement and development in the world trade and economy, and record remarkable progress in social and economic aspects as Saudi Arabia should have partnerships with every country in the world."
This approach came in stark contrast to that of Washington, which has regularly shut out countries it disagreed with through a growing list of sanctions. The U.S.' dominant position in the global financial system has traditionally left few options for these nations, but that situation has gradually changed as frameworks like BRICS offer potential ways to dodge these restrictions.



Among those countries looking to counter U.S. economic pressure is Iran. International sanctions against the Islamic Republic in response to its nuclear activities were lifted in 2015 after a multilateral nuclear deal was reached with the U.S. and other major powers, including China, France, Germany, Russia and the United Kingdom, but then-President Donald Trump abandoned the deal in 2018, severely impacting Tehran's ability to trade with the international community.
Biden has set out to negotiate a potential return to the accord that was reached during his vice presidency under former President Barack Obama. However, a series of negotiations held since April of last year has left the U.S. and Iran at an impasse and another set of talks held in Qatar this week appeared to end early with no sign of a breakthrough.
Frustration over shifting politics in Washington has led Tehran to increasingly look to its own region for strategic partnerships, which it has increasingly forged with Beijing and Moscow.
"Iranian officials have come to the conclusion that the U.S. and its Western allies will never allow the Islamic Republic of Iran to play its well-deserved regional role as a middle power," Zakiyeh Yazdanshenas, a research fellow at the Center for Middle East Strategic Studies in Tehran, told Newsweek.
"Therefore, they have decided to neutralize U.S. attempts to isolate Iran by further closing to non-western bodies like SCO and BRICS," she added. "In addition, Iranians consider the future world order to be Eastern and they are trying to get closer to organizations in which Eastern powers such as Russia and China play a significant role."
This doesn't mean that the two blocs are necessary anti-Western in nature. Though a concerted effort has emerged to empower countries outside of the traditional G7 grouping from which Russia was suspended in 2014 as conflict first erupted over Ukraine and other major economies such as China and India have not been invited, the SCO and BRICS, which are not formal military alliances like NATO, saw themselves as inherently inclusive.
"The SCO and the BRICS have not been established as an alternative to Western organizations," Yazdanshenas said, "and their specific function has not been defined on the basis of confrontation with the West or the existing world order."
Still, she argued that growing international competition has only intensified "the balancing function of non-Western organizations" such as the SCO and BRICS. And here, she said Iran could serve as an important asset for both coalitions.
"Joining a moderate power with an anti-Western approach such as Iran to these bodies can strengthen this aspect of SCO and BRICS," Yazdanshenas said. "Iran has been under the most severe sanctions in the last decade, yet it has been able to significantly expand its power in the region."
And, like Saudi Arabia, Iran's oil and gas reserves make it an important strategic partner, especially given the worsening frictions over global energy that have been exacerbated by Western sanctions on Russia, and heated rivalry between Beijing and Washington.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


by James Corbett
June 26, 2022

There was no shortage of coverage in the independent media of the recent World Economic Forum meeting in Davos, the first in-person gathering of so-called "Davos man" since the beginning of the scamdemic.

Similarly—as noted in a recent edition of New World Next Week—there was at least some coverage of Bilderberg 2022 in the alt media, although arguably not enough.

And you're probably going to see some coverage in the alternative press about next week's NATO Summit in Madrid. (Have you heard that the summit will be hosting Asia-Pacific leaders for the first time?)

But there was another assembly of globalist super-gophers that took place last week. Didn't hear about it? That's not surprising. This conference—unlike the flashier Davos or Bilderberg or NATO meetings—barely gets any mention at all in the Western press, MSM or independent.

Today, let's learn more about this neglected elitist confab and why you likely didn't hear anything about it.




Everyone has heard of the BRICS by now.

Many know that "BRICS" is an acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa, the states that comprise the membership of this alliance.

A few might even know that it was originally BRIC—South Africa not joining the group until 2010, the year after the inaugural BRIC summit.

But how many people know where the idea for a BRICS (or even a BRIC) grouping originated? Not that many, I'd venture to say.

Luckily, you're a student of Corbett Report University so you already know (or are about to find out) that the BRICS grouping was not the brainchild of some diplomat or politician who found some connecting thread uniting these seemingly unrelated states. Nor was it the spontaneous decision of the countries' leaders to unite around a specific cause.

No, the BRIC concept was first proposed in a Goldman Sachs white paper called "Building Better Global Economic BRICs," where Goldman's then-chief economist, Jim O'Neill, identified Brazil, Russia, India and China as the world's four fastest-growing developing nations and suggested that "world policymaking forums should be re-organised" to reflect this fact. (BONUS FACT: Jim O'Neill is now chair of the Chatham House Council, another fact that Corbett Report University students will understand the significance of.)

Of course, the fact that the BRICS actually originated in a Goldman Sachs white paper is not in and of itself reason for suspicion of the grouping. To argue such would be to employ the genetic fallacy. But, as I have pointed out time and time again, that is most assuredly not the only reason to be suspicious of claims—frequently heard in certain quarters of the suspiciously pro-Putin and pro-Xi "independent" media—that the BRICS are actually some sort of anti-globalist organization.

For instance, in Phony Opposition: The Truth About the BRICS, I noted that the BRICS' New Development Bank (NDB)—touted in those same pro-Putin/pro-Xi circles as an alternative to the International Monetary Fund (IMF)/World Bank mafia—is in fact staffed by the head stooges of that very IMF/World Bank mafia:

What none of these experts has bothered to report (for obvious reasons) is the remarkable fact that the Vice President of the NDB is also an Executive Board member of the IMF, who then went on to pledge cooperation and joint action between the NDB and IMF. Also missing from this narrative is the fact that the NDB's chief, Kundapur Vaman Kamath, is a former staffer of the supposed NDB "rival" Asia Development Bank.

And in The BRICS Summit: What You Need to Know, I pointed out that the Ninth BRICS Summit—held in Xiamen in Southeast China in 2017—featured a reaffirmation of the group's commitment to the United Nation's Agenda 21/2030 scam, a recommitment to fostering a "global economic governance architecture" and a renewal of their subjugation to the World Trade Organization.

In fact, nothing about this Goldman Sachs-conjured group has ever lived up to the promise of "anti-globalist crusading" that its boosters have assured us it really represents.

But they just held their 14th summit in Beijing this past week, so maybe they unleashed their plan for taking down the New World Order when no one was looking, right? Let's take a look.




So, did the BRICS leaders use the occasion of the 14th BRICS summit in Beijing to stick it to the globalists?

Well, before I answer that question, take a look at the leaders' photo from the summit above. Does it look odd to you? As if it's been photoshopped? Well, you're right! It is a fake (although official) "virtual" photo, constructed from separate photos of each of the leaders.

Why? Because they weren't all in the same room for this year's summit. In fact, they weren't even in the same country. This was a virtual summit. You know, because of the deadly COVID scamdemic. We're talking about committed pushers of the globalist COVID scamdemic like Xi "Lockdown" Jinping, Vladimir "Clot shot" Putin, Narendra "Test, Trace and Isolate" Modi, Cyril "Save the Vaxx Plant" Ramaphosa and . . . well, actually Jair Bolsonaro has been better than most world mis-leaders in standing up to the scamdemic nonsense, but he's the exception that proves the rule. The RICS, at any rate, have pushed the biosecurity nightmare as hard as any of the Western globalist regimes, which should give you an indication of how interested they are in "sticking it to the globalists" and freeing the peoples of the world from the death grip of the technocrats.

In fact, biosecurity nonsense was featured heavily in discussions at this year's BRICS summit. Ramaphosa used the opportunity of his pre-recorded speech to complain about "Lack of access to lifesaving vaccines and treatments." Modi's speech centered on the post-COVID economic recovery (failing to note that without the scamdemic policies there would be no slump to recover from). And Xi, true to form, managed to tie praise for the United Nations' Agenda 2030 Sustainable Development scam into the COVID-1984 biosecurity scam:

Today, the global development process has hit major roadblocks, the momentum of international development cooperation is being weakened, and development gap between the North and the South keeps widening. As a result, the global efforts to implement the UN's 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development have suffered major setbacks. Almost 1.2 billion people in nearly 70 countries are confronted with COVID-19, food, energy and debt crises. What has been achieved in decades of global poverty reduction efforts could be lost.

In case anyone missed the point, later in his speech Xi once again reiterated his call on all countries "to implement the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development" and to "engage in cooperation on COVID-19 response and provide more anti-COVID medicines to developing countries so as to beat the virus at an early date."

But it wasn't all COVID nonsense, of course. There were some legitimate grievances aired at this year's BRICS summit as well. Xi took time to call out the US for "weaponizing" the financial system with its sanctions against Russia (including getting Russian banks blocked from the SWIFT interbank payment network) . . . without so much as naming the US or SWIFT. "Politicizing, instrumentalizing and weaponizing the world economy using a dominant position in the global financial system to wantonly impose sanctions would only hurt others as well as hurting oneself, leaving people around the world suffering," he said in the practiced blather of the lifelong politician.

It's one thing to point out the perfectly obvious problem. The rubber really meets the road when one asks: What are you planning to do about the problem?

Putin's answer apparently involves a BRICS currency basket, which, he suggests, could serve as an alternative to the IMF's Special Drawing Rights currency basket and thus as a potential world reserve currency. "We are exploring the possibility of creating an international reserve currency based on the basket of BRICS currencies," he announced, adding, "Together with BRICS partners, we are developing reliable alternative mechanisms for international settlements."

Ahhhh, yes, an "alternative" payment system to go with the "alternative" reserve currency. Of course! I mean, we all saw how well that went with the "alternative" New Development Bank, right? Or do you remember when China created a SWIFT "alternative" . . . that relied on the SWIFT network to transmit its payments?

Yes, as you might have guessed, this currency/payment "alternative" is a booby trap, too. It turns out that what the BRICS leaders mean when they say they need an "alternative" payment system is that they want to create some form of digital currency grid (perhaps an mCBDC bridge!) that will smooth over payments so that no SWIFT middleman is necessary. As Peking University economist and BRICS booster Cao Heping puts it in a recent CCP propaganda piece: "Along with the development of the mobile internet, digital payment has also become a tool for cross-border transactions. More opportunities are expected in this regard."


Beyond that, the BRICS are also getting into the 21st-century's next multi-trillion dollar military-industrial boondoggle: space. That's right, according to the China National Space Administration, 2022 marks the "year of launch" for cooperation on joint observation and data-sharing among the BRICS nations' respective satellites. Yes, that awkward phraseology is direct from their propaganda puff piece and might lead the casual reader to believe that the BRICS are going to jointly launch a satellite this year. In reality, they're only agreeing to share data among their existing satellites (China's Gaofen-6 and Ziyuan-3 02; the CBERS-4 co-developed by Brazil and China; Russia's Kanopus-V type; and India's Resourcesat-2 and 2A, for those keeping track at home).

In short, this year's BRICS summit was about what you'd expect from a public-facing globalist confab (as opposed to a private one, like Bilderberg): A lot of hot air and political blather interspersed with some genuinely alarming statements about the global nightmare that these world mis-leaders are working to bring about, from the UN's Agenda 2030 to the world of digital currency.




As I said at the beginning, whether you follow the dinosaur mainstream media or the online independent media, chances are you didn't encounter anything substantive about this year's BRICS summit in your usual news feed.

Why is that?

Well, for starters, the BRICS summit didn't involve any of the leading Western powers, so people who see the world only through an anti-NATO lens are inherently disinterested. And the lack of Kissingers and Schwabs in attendance means it doesn't flip any switches with the online conspiracy crowd.

Secondly, the BRICS are increasingly seen as a failure even by the mainstream pundits whose job it is to prop up all of the sides in the fake and staged wrestling match that is global politics. In fact, the BRICS' progenitor, Jim O'Neill, has given up and is now penning editorials about how the grouping has provided "20 Years of Disappointment."

Thirdly, the summit didn't provide much opportunity for those supposedly independent media pundits—who champion the BRICS bloc as some sort of globalist resistance force—to make their case. Other than touting the idea of a BRICS currency basket (without mentioning the digital currency push), what would they highlight, exactly, to make their case that the BRICSters are standing up to the global agenda? Certainly not Xi's constant praise for the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. (Oh, and did I mention that the BRICS launched a Vaccine Research and Development Center this year to "pool together the advantages of the BRICS countries in the field of vaccine development and research which will boost the capacity of the BRICS countries to control as well as avoid infectious diseases"?)

No, the BRICS summit is something that all sides are happy to sweep under the rug. But that doesn't mean we should let them do it. We need reminding from time to time that the belief that the BRICS group (or any combination of its members) represents a true opposition to the global agenda is hopium of the worst sort. And what better way to do that than by quoting their own speeches from their own socially-distanced, biosecurity-promoting, "vaccine"-loving, digital currency-pimping summit?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0