UNITED STATES, NATO, THE WEST AND THE BRICS

Foreword

The current strategic context is the result of events that have characterized the international scenario since the end of the Second World War to the present. In 1945 the Soviet Union, instead of demobilizing its massive war arsenal, kept it almost unchanged, arousing apprehension in the Western world. And the beginning of what we call the Cold War can be traced back to the 1946 famous speech given by Winston Churchill at the Fulton University of Missouri in the presence of American President Henry Truman.

Churchill declares: "From Stettin in the Baltic to Trieste in the Adriatic, an iron curtain has descended across the continent. Behind this line lie all the capitals of the old states of Central and Eastern Europe".

The world is officially divided into two blocks led by the United States and the Soviet Union: two blocks inspired by opposing political, economic, and social ideals.

In 1949, the fear of a possible third world war pushes Western countries to create a defensive alliance: NATO. In turn, the countries of the Communist bloc create the Warsaw Pact in 1955. Those who are not part of the two sides will constitute the Third World.

Subsequently, in 1985, the crisis of the Soviet Union led to the election of Mikhail Gorbachev as Secretary General of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Gorbachev launched three watchwords: Glasnost, Perestroika and Uskorenie (transparency, restructuring and acceleration of economic development). Watchwords that should have started the reformation of the Soviet system, overcoming the perspective of a planned and centralized economy.

But the reform was not successful and soon in the Soviet Union and its satellite countries protests occurred that reached their peak with the fall of the Berlin Wall which represented the watershed between two ways of conceiving security and international relations. If before everything was centred and fixed on the logic of the blocks, from November 1989 the world started moving again. 

The multiplication, diversification and complexity of new scenarios have a profound impact on international relations. The re-emergence of sovereign states and national claims put in serious crisis international and regional organizations: organizations in clear difficulty in dealing with the catastrophic events, political and humanitarian, occurred in Kuwait, Somalia, Rwanda and the Balkans. Added to all this is the appearance of international terrorism on September 11, 2001. The world has become more unpredictable and dangerous due to hotbeds of instability and crises caused by ethnic, social and religious factors in conjunction with the lack of tolerance and the constant recourse to conflict. It is clear that no existing organization nor any nation acting unilaterally is capable of dealing with such a situation. A crisis management global intervention is therefore necessary: an intervention coordinated by the United Nations.

The United States and NATO

While much of the world was in flames during World War II, the United States with its main infrastructures were (and are) safe between two oceans: this is also why Washington managed to reach the position of global hegemonic power in the post-war period.

NATO, in the words of its first Secretary General Lord Ismay, was born in 1949 to "keep the Soviet Union out, the Americans in, and the Germans down." The role of NATO was immediately clear: a military pact, even if defensive, that transforms the European states into American satellites and gives the European soil the function of a front-line entrenchment of armies that are in reserve on the other side of the Atlantic.

The new world order resulting from the disintegration of the former Soviet Union (1991) and the consequent disappearance of the bipolar system have upset the balance of power that had previously created its own form of stability.

To cope with these new developments, the entire NATO alliance, under the leadership of the US, went through a period of profound transformation, reorganization and expansion. But NATO means North Atlantic Treaty Organization: therefore its theatre of operations included just the two shores of the North Atlantic. The USA decided that NATO, from a defensive alliance, had to become an offensive alliance by including all the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and intervening militarily in the former Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria.

NATO is responsible for the first bombing of a European city (Belgrade) in the post-Second World War era. More than 80% of the victims of the conflict in Kosovo died during or as a result of NATO bombings. The objective of changing the borders of a European state (Serbia) was pursued without any authorization from the UN (Camp Bondsteel, the largest American base abroad was created then in Kosovo) and has represented a modus operandi used in numerous other contexts: Iraq and Libya above all.

All this to create or maintain spheres of influence in which one state exercises superior power over others: naturally in compliance with the Monroe Doctrine of 1823 which "is as relevant today as it was the day it was conceived" (as stated on February 1, 2018 by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson).

Over the past 70 years, this doctrine, according to which the US would not tolerate any interference in American affairs, has influenced Washington's policies in what it considers its closest sphere of influence: dozens of governments in Central and Southern America have been overthrown and/or bombed on the basis of this assumption.

Cuba is an example. But also Hawaii, annexed by the US in 1959 despite the fierce opposition of the native Hawaiians.

These days Trump wants to take over Greenland and Panama to guarantee himself the routes, resources (mineral and commercial) and systems necessary to impose himself in the technological competition that pits the US against China. The aim is to stop the decline of US global hegemony and defend its spheres of influence and market shares (particularly from China).

Thus the imposition of duties on Canada, Mexico and China, as well as the veiled obligation imposed on all NATO countries to increase their defense (buying weapons from the US) and to buy US gas and oil are part of this picture.

The US has over 750 military bases in 80 countries around the world. African and Asian political leaders who have tried to hinder this reality have been militarily attacked and ousted, or isolated and boycotted. The so-called Atlantic order no longer exists, opposed by the majority of the world's population. Until the West renegotiates and readjusts the balance of power, mankind will experience one of the most unstable periods in its history.

The religious, philosophical, cultural and political arrogance of the West

The West has the illusion of being at the centre of the world and that everything revolves around it. It thinks that other cultures exist, but its culture is better and superior, forgetting that each civilization and population brings a contribution. The West must not throw itself away but must realize that it is one among many. It is mere arrogance thinking that the West is the first, the only, the true one who has understood which political, economic and religious system it must convince others to adopt. That is a proof of mental obtuseness.

AI Deep Seek was a blow for America and the West: a revenge for China and the East (with a US AI investment of 500 billion dollars for the next 5 years against home-made AI that cost 6 million dollars). The stock markets lost 1,000 billion dollars (Nvidia 600 billion) in a single day.
Enough with this idea that the West (with 1 billion people) is the first, the best and all the others (the Rest = 7 billion people) are worthless!

Philosopher Zimmer (one of the greatest scholars of Indian thought) in his “History of the philosophies of India” addresses the political aspects and the Indian philosophies of pleasure and duty. Finally, religions and philosophical currents are extensively discussed: Jainism, Yoga, Brahmanism, Buddhism, Tantrism. The style is never academic: the philosophical themes are told and illustrated with anecdotes, legends, fascinating mythologies. Zimmer maintains “In India they were already very old and very wise when the Greek thinkers (who in our schools are considered as the initiators of Western thought) in the 6th century BC uttered their first cries.

We assert that our Western civilization was born with the Greeks. That the Greeks learned nothing from anyone. That they were born from the foam of the sea already perfect and formed. Instead, they learned a lot especially from Egypt: the great Greek mathematicians Thales and Pythagoras went to Egypt to learn and to rinse their clothes in the Nile.

We are Eurocentric, Western-centric and we do wrong because we have blinkers. We do not learn other people's thoughts, art, literature, and philosophy.

Our philosophers say that the Indians may have thought, but philosophy is only Western. But, as detailed in A comparative history of world philosophy, in Indian philosophy often centuries, if not millennia before, there were the same schools that then arrived in Europe: rationalism, empiricism, critique with thoughts that are proposed again.

We instead think we are unique, unrepeatable and superior: this is our great original sin. Also because it is what leads us to be colonialists. We go and indoctrinate others believing we are better and superior.

The travellers of the past (Marco Polo, Matteo Ricci) did not have this arrogance, bullying, pride, hypocrisy: they went, observed and enjoyed what they saw and learned.

Is the hegemony of Europe and the United States over? The rise of BRICS

BRICS (acronym for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) is an alliance that is growing at a dizzying pace. It is a political player, rich in energy and raw materials, representing more than 1/3 of global oil production.

BRICS has over 4.3 billion people (55% of the world's population) and represents 35% of global GDP. Nigeria (230 million inhabitants and Africa's leading oil producer) is the latest to join BRICS as a Partner.

Indonesia (the most populous Islamic state with 285 million inhabitants) as well as Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran and the United Arab Emirates have already joined the 5 original states.

Thailand, Malaysia, Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan with further 9 new countries are on the waiting list to become member states. Is this the economic decline of the West and the birth of a new multipolar world?

Indonesia (a giant in Nickel production, necessary for renewable energy) with its strategic position in Southeast Asia is an ace up the sleeve. It controls Malacca Strait, a vital artery for global trade and a critical point for Chinese access to maritime routes. Across the Strait, Malaysia hosts hundreds of Chinese companies ready to pour capital into AI, semiconductors, biomedicine.

Thailand is Asia's Detroit, leading the revolution in the automotive sector and constituting the hub for electric vehicles (80% Chinese).

A very hard blow for the West. Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan are the energy jewels of Central Asia. Kazakhstan is the world leader in uranium production. Uzbekistan has large reserves of gold that will help the BRICS reduce their dependence on the US dollar.

BRICS is an unstoppable economic alliance.

Also on the home straight are Bolivia and Cuba that will provide new life to the coalition. Bolivia has the largest reserves of lithium in the world (a transformative opportunity for industrialization, modernization and green transition). Cuba after 60 years of isolation has broken the chains and found an economic lifesaver through both trade in currencies alternative to the dollar and the port of Mariel, a modern logistics hub, the perfect bridge between BRICS and the Americas.

Cuba is a key asset in global trade. For decades, the US embargo has tried to suffocate the island by imposing restrictions and limiting trade and development. Thanks to currencies such as the Russian ruble and the Chinese yuan, it can now bypass the dollar-based system, reducing the effectiveness of sanctions. A leader in bio-technological and healthcare innovation, Cuba has developed cutting-edge vaccines and accessible treatments despite great economic difficulties. It now collaborates in research projects, pharmaceutical development, and healthcare initiatives with giants such as India and China.

The foundations for a world much less dependent on the West have been created. This year, Brazil holds the BRICS presidency with the intention of strengthening South-South cooperation and reforming global governance institutions by developing alternative means of payment to the dollar for trade between BRICS. Last but not least: also Turkey has applied for membership in BRICS!

Are BRICS scaring the West? It is unlikely that BRICS will create a unified currency that competes with the dollar at the moment. Instead of an alternative currency, an alternative payment system will consist of using rupees, rubles, yuan, digital currencies bypassing the dollar. China has already developed CIPS (Cross-border Interbank Payment System) soon nicknamed China's SWIFT-Killer.

These are the first steps towards a multipolar financial system. The new MBridge System (a multiple central bank digital currency platform developed to support real-time, peer-to-peer, cross-border payments), a digital platform that connects the central banks of China, Hong Kong, Thailand and other countries shows that the alternative to the dollar is not just theory.

BRICS is experimenting with various non US dollar instruments, including payment systems, cryptocurrencies, digitalized mechanisms for trade in national currencies or through barter, and hubs for commodities trading outside of dollar dominance.

China and Russia, the current BRICS leadership, have expanded their cooperation in sectors such as energy, nuclear and aero-space. In 2024, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin held three bilateral meetings. The two militaries also conducted several joint exercises in different parts of the world in 2024.

China and Russia are weakening the underpinnings of American leadership on the world stage and core elements of the existing rules-based international order. Beijing and Moscow are disseminating narratives of terminal US decline across the Global South and developing alternative supply chains and financial institutions to insulate themselves from US sanctions. The two states are determined to end what they see as a US-dominated international order. With the support of the Global South, they are seeking to create an order in which the United States and its Western partners have a diminished role,

It’s easy but dangerous to dismiss BRICS. The dominant view in the US is that the grouping of emerging economies can't present a real challenge to the current order. But the United States should be more careful in its assessment and avoid snubbing or disparaging what has been clumsily called the Global South.