In 2024, Russia holds the BRICS Сhairmanship. The summit in Kazan was a key event. What would you note if you summarised its main results as well as the results of Russia’s Chairmanship as a whole?

 

The summit demonstrated the rapidly growing authority of BRICS and the desire of more countries to join its work. A number of countries have officially requested to join as full members. Others have expressed interest in becoming partner countries. This is a new category that the Kazan Summit agreed upon. We have increased the number of member states from five to ten in 2023. At this stage, we decided to limit ourselves to the creation of the category of the partner countries, to form this group so that the “new” full-fledged and “old” BRICS members could work together in the new composition.

 

The Russian Chairmanship has done a lot in this regard. The work was cohesive. Mutual understanding was reached on almost all major issues. There are always nuances. We managed to agree on the declaration adopted on the basis of a balance of interests. No one (as it happens in Western forums) tried to put pressure on anyone. We were looking for mutually acceptable formulations. They were found on all issues. The main “pathos” of this declaration is the need to significantly increase the share of the Global South and Global East in the mechanisms of global governance, including the UN Security Council, IMF, World Bank, and WTO.

 

Regarding the international monetary and financial system. The common view is that there are two main conclusions. The first is to demand that developing countries, especially the BRICS countries as the fastest growing economies, receive the number of votes in the IMF and World Bank boards of directors that would correspond to their real weight in the world economy and share in the world gross domestic product. That number of votes is now significantly understated because the United States is adamantly unwilling to reallocate quotas and give up its votes. At this point in the IMF, the United States has a “package” that allows it to veto any decisions. This is not correct.

 

It’s the same in the WTO. For years (at least a decade), the United States has been blocking the dispute settlement body. This is exactly what the WTO was created for. Inevitably arising contradictions between market participants, accusations of dumping, overpricing, unjustified tariff increases – all this should be considered by the dispute settlement body. It is blocked; there is no quorum. The United States is not going to fix this situation.

 

 

Reform of the existing institutions remains on the agenda, but in parallel, this is the general opinion and one of the most important conclusions of the BRICS work at this stage, before the final part of the Russian presidency, everyone wants to create alternative payment mechanisms: interbank settlements using national currencies, insurance mechanisms that will not be directed against the system that has developed since World War II around the dollar as the pivot. A parallel system is needed, given that the dollar is increasingly being used as an aggressive weapon in the world economy. No one knows who will be the next. No one is immune to dollar arbitrariness given the desperate position of the United States in today’s world. They feel that hegemony is slipping away (and it will do so not quickly, but for a long time), but they want to use everything, including the most forbidden techniques, to keep it.

 

To insure against this, to create settlement systems, payment platforms that will not depend on such risks – this is now a common task. It was on the agenda of the summit in Kazan and at the meetings held throughout the year between finance ministers and heads of central banks. Recommendations have already been developed. They are not final yet, but they already give us an opportunity to start creating reliable, sustainable, long-term systems. I am sure that Brazil, as the next Chairmanship country, will continue this work. Undoubtedly, in addition to the backbone of the monetary and financial sphere, which serves the real economy, there was also support for purely sectoral initiatives, including our initiative to start preparations for the creation of a BRICS grain exchange, investment, and geological platforms. This was primarily the idea of the African countries that are members of BRICS. In addition, we put forward two projects – to create working groups on transport and nuclear medicine. This was supported both at the BRICS meeting and in the adopted declaration. When the next day of the Kazan event was followed by a summit meeting in the outreach/BRICS plus format, all 35 participants – the BRICS member states and invited guests – supported this spirit, this direction of movement, which had developed in previous years but which was accelerated under the Russian presidency. This happened largely because we are witnessing a sharp increase in interest in the association. It is perceived as the vanguard of a movement towards a more just world, in defence against the dictates and arbitrariness that are still widely used by the “collective West” in international relations.

 

How would you assess the results of the implementation of one of Russia’s priorities during its presidency, strengthening inter-parliamentary cooperation among the participating countries?

 

There have been several meetings between members of legislative bodies from BRICS countries, their outreach supporters, and simply from other states that have not yet established any ties with the association. For example, a session of the Inter-Parliamentary Union was held in Geneva in 2024. Russia participates in this organisation. On the margins of the session, there was an event between BRICS parliamentarians and others interested in establishing relations with it.

 

The second issue in our inter-parliamentary programme was holding the first ever meeting of the heads of the international affairs committees of national parliaments in the history of BRICS. That was the BRICS Plus meeting. It will already become a permanent element of the work of our association for the years to come.

 

The 10th BRICS Parliamentary Forum was held. This structure has existed for quite a long time. Parliamentarians from the CIS Interparliamentary Assembly were involved in the work of the Forum. The Chairman of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, the Head of the Parliament of Tanzania, also participated. He was tried to be criticised, but this criticism was brushed aside, as the Inter-Parliamentary Union (especially its leadership) should interact with all legislative structures of the participating countries.

 

I see a good future for the parliamentary dimension. We will support it in every possible way.

 

You have already mentioned the expansion of BRICS. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates have joined the group. What positive changes have taken place in the association due to their accession?

 

It is authority. The “new” BRICS (as our Chinese comrades say – “big BRICS”), already produces 35 per cent of the world’s GDP, if you count it in purchasing power parity. Russian President Vladimir V. Putin referred to this figure, stressing that it exceeds the share of the G7 countries in the world gross product by several per cent. 42 per cent of the world’s population is a serious figure, more than 30 per cent of the landmass, and on average, a quarter of goods exports. It will only grow as industrial production grows rapidly in the BRICS member countries and in the states that seek to unite.

 

As for the countries that have joined. Egypt is the leader, the largest economy, and the most influential country in North Africa and the Arab League (Cairo is where its headquarters are located).

 

Ethiopia is the headquarters of the African Union. This partner serves in two capacities: nationally and as a representative of the entire African Union. The Islamic Republic of Iran is a potentially economically strong state. It has the third largest oil reserves in the world.

 

The United Arab Emirates is one of the leading logistics, trade, and re-export centres of the modern world economy. This is well known. Saudi Arabia is the leader of the Muslim world. The country where the two sanctuaries of Islam are kept.

 

Each of these members has its own well-deserved reputation, is respected in the world, and strengthens the credibility of BRICS itself.

 

Another post-expansion figure is that the combined population of the countries in the grouping has surpassed 3.2 billion. In this regard, can we say that today BRICS influences global processes not only within the group but also in the states of Asia, Africa, and Latin America?

 

It influences domestic processes in the sense that the population, receiving information about the BRICS work, its successes, the plans put forward by the association and achieved by it, wants to join this equal and mutually beneficial process. In elections, people in the Global East vote mostly for politicians who promote the same slogans and declare their desire to get closer to BRICS in one way or another. I have already mentioned that a number of countries want full membership. This issue will be considered during the next year. But many want just to be participants in BRICS events. There are more than thirty of them. As I have already mentioned, the criteria for forming the category of “partner countries” will be agreed upon. The Russian Chairmanship sent invitations to some of the states that requested to join our work after the Kazan summit. There are more than ten such countries that enjoy consensus among the current BRICS members.

 

We have an agreement that as soon as we receive a response from an invited country, it will be announced that this state has joined BRICS as a partner country. We assume that they will have the opportunity to participate in all BRICS events. There will probably remain a separate format of meetings where only full members will participate, but the rest, including outreach plus summits, meetings of foreign ministers, and sectoral structures (energy, economy, trade, health, culture), will be available to them. We are interested in partner countries getting involved in all work. They will participate in almost all events.

 

How is the interaction on cultural and humanitarian cooperation between the BRICS and BRICS Plus countries developing now?

 

There have been many events. They have aroused wide interest and resonance. The BRICS Sports Games were held for the first time this summer in June. They were open to all comers. The number of participating states exceeded 80. Twenty-seven sports disciplines were represented at the BRICS Games. I am sure that we will endeavour to make them regular.

 

From humanitarian affairs. Party activity is partly a humanitarian sphere. The first International Inter-Party Forum was held in Vladivostok in June this year, which was attended by about 40 parties of the BRICS states and partner countries. The inter-party movement “For the Freedom of Nations!” was established. The aim is that the ruling parties (not only the ruling parties, but other parties can join) promote the task of eradicating the remnants of colonialism.

 

There are still a number of non-self-governing territories. Most importantly, colonial and neo-colonial practices from international trade have not gone anywhere. The West’s relations with Africa are characterised by colonial methods, where raw materials are exported and all the value added and profits from it remain with them. The forum is interesting and has been well received. “Novelties” in our Chairmanship were still related to local self-governance. There was a forum of cities, a municipal forum. There was an interesting discussion about how people live and how (roughly speaking) the chairmen of city councils and village councils solve their problems. A topic that comes from life.

 

I see many directions that will enrich our humanitarian and cultural cooperation. All BRICS countries are invited next year to the international song contest Intervision, which is being organised here. We have decided with our colleagues from television to revive the name, which was in Soviet times and meant a music contest of the member countries of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance. “Intervision” will become an important cultural factor for everyone, which will send a signal to humanity that it is better “not to scatter to their flats”, but to live together on one planet.

 

“In life with a song”?

In life with a song.

 

Information exchange plays an essential role in the development of partnership relations between the BRICS countries and BRICS+. In this regard, how would you assess the recent opening of the BRICS+ Information and Cultural Media Centre in Moscow?

 

Positively. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs had something to do with it. Our official representative was involved in the preparatory process and in the opening event of this centre.

 

The year 2024 also saw major events in the media sphere. In September of this year, we held a Media Summit, timed to coincide with the 120th anniversary of TASS. There were interesting speeches there. The participants enjoyed this kind of communication. We will certainly continue to use our capabilities, including the newly created BRICS+ Information and Cultural Media Centre.

 

You have already mentioned that Russia is passing the BRICS Chairmanship to Brazil. Apart from the payment system and this topic, what other discussions and results do you expect from the work of the group in 2025?

 

I think that the payment platform, settlement mechanisms, insurance mechanisms will be among the priorities of the Brazilian presidency.

 

Brazilian President Lula da Silva initiated the topic of the Russian presidency on alternative payment systems at the BRICS summit in Johannesburg in 2023. It was in response to this initiative, enshrined in the Johannesburg declaration, that finance ministers and central bank governors worked. There is progress. But we need to take it to its logical conclusion, so that there are ready mechanisms for use.

 

I have no doubt that our Brazilian colleagues will work with triple energy, given that this is an initiative of their President. I think that President Lula da Silva himself will make sure that this topic is one of the most important ones.

 

We are looking forward (I am sure we will) to the continuation of work on Russian initiatives. This is a grain exchange, an investment platform, a group on transport, and nuclear medicine. These are all purely applied things in which all BRICS members are interested. I have no doubts about this. We will actively support the Brazilians.

 

Undoubtedly, this philosophical basis of the association’s activities will remain in place. I am referring to the general movement for democratisation of international relations, increasing the role of developing countries and the “World Majority” in the mechanisms of global governance. I mentioned the IMF, the World Bank, and the WTO. This work will continue in parallel with the creation of our own system, independent of external risks.

 

More equitable representation of the Global South and East in the mechanisms of global governance implies reform of the UN and its Security Council. We have clearly reaffirmed our position: we support only increased representation of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. The West is already unfairly represented there: of the fifteen members of the Security Council, six represent the West. That does not jibe with any statistics on the population, industrial production and size of the countries concerned. Specifically, we support India, Brazil and the collective initiative promoted by the African Union on Security Council reform.

 

I would not be able to present all aspects of our work in Kazan without touching on a few foreign policy themes that emerged from the discussion and are enshrined in the declaration. Particular attention was paid to the crisis in the Middle East, the catastrophe of the Palestinian people, which is now “spilling over” to neighbouring countries – Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen. The declaration formulated a rather strong paragraph on the need to urgently stop this bloodshed.

 

We have not avoided discussing the Ukrainian crisis. On the contrary, in preparation for and during the summit, we proactively spoke about it, and Russian President Vladimir Putin touched upon this topic. We agreed on a fundamentally important formulation in the declaration, in which, in addition to the general reaffirmation by the countries of their well-known positions expressed both at the UN General Assembly and at other forums, it was emphasised that the main thing now is to seek solutions that will be based on the principles of the UN Charter in their entirety and interrelation. So far, there have been numerous initiatives (many of them formulated with the best of intentions) in relation to the Ukrainian crisis, but none of them contains a phrase that the principles of the UN Charter should be applied not selectively but in their entirety.

 

What does this mean? The West prefers to talk about Ukraine, recalling only the principle of territorial integrity and formulating it as if there are no other principles in the UN Charter. But there is also the principle of self-determination of peoples. The UN General Assembly has decided that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all states whose governments respect the principle of self-determination of peoples and therefore represent the entire population living on a given territory must be respected.

 

Did the racist regime that settled in Kiev after the coup in 2014 represent the south-east of Ukraine, Crimea, which refused to recognise the putschists ten years ago?

 

Most importantly, the UN Charter (before mentioning the principles of territorial integrity and self-determination of peoples) requires all UN members to respect human rights, regardless of race, gender, language, and religion. The West, which shouts on every corner and on every occasion that it is the “champion of human rights”, has never mentioned this in the Ukrainian crisis. The fact that the laws that have been adopted over the past ten years, which prohibit the use of the Russian language in any sphere: in education, in the media, in culture, and in everyday life, are in flagrant violation of the UN Charter, the “supporters” of the settlement do not notice and do not want to notice. Just as they “did not notice” the ban on the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church.

 

The Nazi regime in Kyiv is flagrantly violating key principles of the Charter, while the West praises it and says that they are defending “European values”. They must be brought to justice.

 

In this sense, I consider the fact that the declaration of the Kazan summit, in relation to the Ukrainian crisis, for the first time enshrined an approach that requires respect for the principles of the UN Charter in their entirety and interrelation to be one of our main political achievements at this event. Especially given that this declaration was signed by respected, influential, fast-growing, and politically active countries.

 

There is always room for improvement. But we are pleased with the way our Chairmanship is proceeding and with the culminating event, the summit meeting in Kazan.

 

Photo: TV BRICS