SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
February 2013
South Africa in the BRICS Forum
Portfolio Committee on International Relations and Cooperation, with SAFPI *
This Policy Brief records the presentations and
discussion from a workshop hosted by the
Parliamentary
Portfolio
Committee
on
International Relations and Cooperation, in
conjunction with SAFPI, to discuss the
forthcoming fifth BRICS Summit. South Africa will
host the Summit from 26 - 27 March 2013 in
Durban. A panel comprising Mr Ebrahim Ebrahim,
Deputy Minister of International Relations and
Cooperation, and representatives from the
Department of International Relations and
Cooperation (DIRCO), the Institute for Global
Dialogue and the South African Foreign Policy
Initiative outlined the role of South Africa in
BRICS, and responded to questions from
Members on various issues. This Policy Brief
summarises the presentations and the ensuing
discussion.
Introduction
The Deputy Minister examined how South Africa’s
role in BRICS could strengthen economic
development within South Africa and Africa at
large, how South Africa’s involvement in BRICS
could benefit South Africa and its economy, and
assist in achieving the country’s developmental
and security goals. BRICS had been created as a
structure to provide an alternative to the
traditional global economic setup, by bringing to
the fore the voices of developing economies, and
by providing an alternative institution to the Wold
Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
for financing development in poor countries,
predominantly on the African continent. The
BRICS Parliamentary Forum would create the
necessary space for robust debate around the
issues of domestic challenges within BRICS
Physical Address:
2nd floor, B2, Park Lane, Corner of Park & Alexandra
Roads, Pinelands, Cape Town, South Africa, 7405
partners. The Deputy Minister said that there was
a need for a greater understanding within South
Africa and the rest of the international community
about the role of South Africa in BRICS. The
global, regional and domestic dimensions of
engagement were discussed in greater depth. It
was stressed that South Africa’s membership of
BRICS offered the potential for attracting
investments into its own economy, for contributing
to the growth of its exports, and creating
conditions for employment creation. Some of the
comparative advantages that South Africa had to
other BRICS countries were outlined, specifically
its mineral wealth, highly sophisticated mining
related professional services, and significant
contribution to the BRICS resource pool, including
its excellence in science and technology.
In the second part of the discussion, the Institute
for Global Dialogue made a presentation on ‘The
idea of BRICS and Africa’, which focused on the
challenges
currently
facing
Africa.
The
fundamental problem facing Africa was that not all
African countries were viable, and were not selfsustaining, being highly dependent on foreign
financial aid. Another major hindrance was the
overriding tendency for African countries to export
primary resources, and import manufactured
goods. BRICS-Africa relations were therefore of
vital importance, and African countries needed to
be persuaded that donor aid was no longer good
for Africa’s development. BRICS could create an
opportunity for alternative pools of capital to
finance effective and sustainable growth in the
South and in other parts of the world, with the
establishment of the BRICS bank being a major
source of financial assistance in developing and
advancing African infrastructure, trade and
Tel: + 27 21 511 1679
Fax: + 27 21 511 5058
E-Mail: [email protected]
Postal Address:
P.O. Box 143, Howard Place, Pinelands,
Cape Town, South Africa, 7430
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
The 5th BRIC Summit, to be held in Durban on 26
and 27 March completed the first cycle of BRICS
Summits. BRICS was founded in Russia and
South Africa was admitted into this forum in Brazil
in 2010. For South Africa, the origin of its
relationship with BRICS could be traced back to
the support that the country’s liberation
movement enjoyed at the time from BRICS
countries. BRICS formation was therefore a
model for future international partnerships for
economic development. Within BRICS South
Africa was a comparatively smaller economy with
a limited market. However, the fact that it had
built its own profile on peacemaking and
humanitarian assistance on the African continent,
and maintained an enabling environment for
democratic governance were attributes that had
given it more credibility within the international
community.
economic development.
Members made the point that South Africa’s
interaction with BRICS should be centred on
South Africa’s national interests, and stressed the
importance of pursuing an agenda of regional
integration in the Southern Africa Development
Community (SADC). This would also involve
better integration of public and private sectors.
They highlighted the existing tensions between
the Departments of International Relations and
Cooperation and of Trade and Industry, stressed
the need to invest in and promote the people of
South Africa as one of its comparative
advantages, questioned the role of BRICS in
bilateral trade agreements and growth in SouthSouth relations and trade, and asked to what
extent the BRICS structure was developing trade,
how BRICS was evolving and how it fitted in with
G20 relations. Members also asked for comment
on apparently unequal trade between BRICS
partners South Africa and China, and the
implications of China’s move to a consumptiondriven economy.
The Chairperson argued that, contrary to popular
belief, South Africa was not regarded as the
‘gateway’ into the African continent. Many
international organisations had opted to deal with
Africa through engagement with South Africa,
predominantly due to the country’s strengths,
such as the soundness of its banking system, its
corporate bonds and involvement in global
governance structures. BRICS was therefore
created as a structure to provide an alternative to
the traditional global economic setup by bringing
together voices of developing economies, and to
provide an alternative institution to the Wold Bank
and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) for
financing development in poor countries,
predominantly on the African continent. The
BRICS Parliamentary Forum would therefore
create the necessary space for robust debate
around the issues of domestic challenges by the
BRICS partners. There was a need for a greater
understanding within South Africa and the rest of
the international community about the role of
South Africa in BRICS. It was therefore important
Minutes:
Chairperson’s introductory remarks
The Chairperson, Mr HT Magama, highlighted
that this Portfolio Committee, in collaboration with
the South African Foreign Policy Initiative (OSFSA) had facilitated dialogue and discussion
around the role of South Africa in the
Brazil/Russia/India/China/South African forum
(BRICS). This was aimed at strengthening South
Africa’s role in BRICS, strengthening economic
development within South Africa and Africa at
large and, most importantly, this dialogue also
formed part of the oversight mandate to establish
how South Africa’s involvement in BRICS would
benefit South Africa and its economy and assist in
achieving the country’s developmental and
security goals.
2
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
past decade, making it the principal driver of
global economic development. The global agenda
of BRICS was therefore highly complementary
especially in advancing South Africa’s foreign
policy goals.
to understand the values of BRICS and the
strategy around engagement.
The Chairperson then pointed out that since
BRICS was not an alliance, the decisions and
discussions were not binding. BRICS needed to
have a stronger focus on the facilitation of trade,
by forging strong alliances with government,
business and academia.
Regional dimension
Mr Ebrahim highlighted that economists, such as
those from Standard Bank, reported regularly on
the dramatic rise in BRICS-Africa trade and
engagement, and the importance of such
developments in light of their role in ongoing
structural diversification of the global economy.
Trade flows between developing countries,
spearheaded by BRICS countries, were therefore
rapidly increasing and had specific implications
for Africa, such as increased flows of trade and
investment toward the continent. BRICS countries
had therefore moved Africa from the periphery of
the global economy into a wider and inclusive
centre.
Presentation by Mr Ebrahim Ebrahim, the
Deputy Minister of International Relations and
Cooperation
The first point of discussion was the rationale
behind South Africa’s membership of BRICS.
BRICS members played an important role in
remapping the international economic structure,
as policy making was a multi-dimensional
approach. BRICS countries were therefore
emerging powers who were ‘fellow travellers as
Africans in the struggle against colonialism’, so
they needed strong ties of solidarity and
partnership in the development and reconfiguring
of the existing structures of power in international
relations.
He outlined why Africa was so important. Africa
had 60% of the world’s unused arable agricultural
land, a young growing population, a growing
middle class with considerable purchasing power.
This continent offered the highest returns on
investment of any region, and was the second
fastest growing region after Asia. In 2010, six of
the world’s ten fastest growing economies were in
Africa and seven African countries were expected
to be in the top ten over the next five years
Mr Ebrahim structured the presentation around
three themes; the global dimension, regional
dimension and the domestic dimension, as
follows:
Global dimension
Mr Ebrahim stated that the end of the cold war
brought about the emergence of ‘new’ countries,
which shifted the economic development from
that of the traditional Western way of doing
things. These ‘new’ countries were expected to
reshape the economic and political power
relations in the world. BRICS provided for a new
global template and caucus overriding the
previous East-West and North-South constructs
and divisions. With regard to the BRICS profile,
he noted that BRICS’s contribution to global
economic growth had reached over 50% over the
Africa’s output was expected to expand by 50%
over the next four years, from US$1.6 trillion in
2010 to approximately US$2.6 trillion in 2015.
Economic growth was projected to expand by an
annual average real rate of 5.5% each year
through the five year period
Estimates of the total infrastructure spending
need for Sub-Saharan Africa ranged between $75
and $100 billion a year, more than 12% of the
region’s GDP. BRICS-Africa trade was projected
3
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
the world. South Africa had therefore established
relations with India and Brazil through its
membership of the Tripartite IBSA relationship
and had a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership
with China and a Treaty on Friendship and
Partnership with Russia. This meant that South
Africa had already had standing relationships with
BRICS countries before it joined the alliance.
to increase threefold from US$150 billion in 2010
to $530 billion in 2015. BRICS’s share of Africa’s
total trade would increase from the one-fifth of
2010, to one third over the next five years.
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) from BRICS was
projected to increase from $60 billion in 2009 to
more than $150 billion by 2015
For all these reasons, the partnership between
South Africa and BRICS was crucial for the
economic growth and development of the African
continent. Sub-Saharan countries were spending
nearly 8 percent of their GDP on roads, power,
aviation, telecommunications, and other sectors,
and African countries were therefore investing
aggressively in infrastructure, spending about $45
billion, with projected needs expected to double
for the next ten years. The estimated financing
requirement to close Africa’s infrastructure deficit
amounted to US$ 93 billion annually until 2020.
Whilst this financing requirement was a
challenge, African governments had a wide range
of policy options that could open new sources of
finance.
Mr Ebrahim moved to outline the role of BRICS in
South Africa, stating that Cabinet had approved
the BRICS Strategy (classified Top Secret) on 19
September 2012. That had included extensive
consultation with government stakeholders and it
would guide South Africa’s strategic engagement
in BRICS. This strategy therefore outlined the
envisaged role of South Africa in BRICS with
regard to its foreign policy objectives and its
comparative advantages.
The role of South Africa in BRICS and its foreign
policy objectives were also outlined. Mr Ebrahim
stated that the mission of the Department of
International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO)
was to promote South Africa’s national interests
and values in the world, to promote human rights,
democracy, and good governance, and to and
champion the African Agenda. South Africa’s
constructive role in global governance structures,
as well as its position within organisations such
as the AU, G77 and China, and the Non-Aligned
Movement (NAM), was appreciated by BRICS
members and other like-minded partners. South
Africa was also the only African country
represented in the G20.
Domestic dimension
Mr Ebrahim said that the Minister had also
emphasised that membership in BRICS offered
South Africa prospects to attract investments into
the economy, contributing to the growth of
exports, and creating conditions for employment
creation.
Bilateral SA-BRICS trade grew
substantially in 2011, powered by significant
increases in trade and exports. Bilateral trade
between South Africa and China last year grew
by 32%, trade with India by 25%, and trade with
Brazil by 20%. South African exports to China
grew the most - at 46% - while exports to India
grew by 20%, to Brazil by 14%, and to Russia by
7%.
Following the 4th BRICS Summit, held on 29
March 2012 in New Delhi, BRICS leaders said:
“We have considered the possibility of setting up
a new Development Bank for mobilizing
resources for infrastructure and sustainable
development projects in BRICS and other
emerging economies and developing countries, to
supplement the existing efforts of multilateral and
Mr Ebrahim stated that South Africa’s financial
systems were sophisticated and robust, with the
banking regulations ranked as among the best in
4
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
New York. The Minister proposed some key
Summit outcomes or deliverables that were
supported in principle by BRICS counterparts.
These were the launch of the BRICS-led new
Development Bank, the BRICS Leaders-Africa
Dialogue Forum, the launch of the BRICS
Business Council, and the launch of the BRICS
Consortium of Think Tanks.
regional financial institutions for global growth and
development. We direct our Finance Ministers to
examine the feasibility and viability of such an
initiative, set up a joint working group for further
study, and report back to us by the next Summit”.
After that Summit, it was agreed that India (as
incumbent Chair) and South Africa (as incoming
Chair) would co-chair the Joint Working Group
(JWG) that would prepare this study.
Discussion
South Africa’s objectives in relation to BRICS
could therefore be summarised as:
i. to advance the country’s national interests
as outlined in the President’s State of the
Nation Address;
ii. to promote its regional integration
programme
and
related
continental
infrastructure programmes;
iii. to partner with key players of the emerging
world on issues related to global
governance and its reform.
A Committee member began by stating that the
presentation highlighted the broader significance
of BRICS, not only from its trading perspective,
but also as a catalyst in the development of Africa
as a whole, and in development of South-South
cooperation, which would enable ‘newly’
developed countries to compete on an equal
footing with countries of the North. BRICS
therefore offered the opportunity to these
developing countries to disengage from their
former dependence on the North, anchored to
early historic ties, as well as releasing them, more
recently, from the dependence on financial aid
and assistance. The proposed parliamentary
forum dedicated by BRICS to reinforce
cooperative alliances would receive adequate
support from the Committee.
Mr Ebrahim then outlined some comparative
advantages that South Africa had in its
membership with BRICS. Much of this was based
on South Africa’s considerable non-energy
mineral wealth (estimated at $2.5 trillion or R18
trillion). South Africa was the world's largest
producer of platinum, chrome, vanadium and
manganese, and the third-largest gold miner, as
well as offering highly sophisticated miningrelated professional services. It contributed
significantly to the BRICS resource pool. South
Africa’s excellence in science, technology and
innovation was also recognised, as evidenced by
the fact that it had been awarded the majority
stake in controlling the Square Kilometer Array
(SKA).
The idea of BRICS and Africa: Institute of
Global Dialogue presentation
Dr Siphamandla Zondi, Executive Director,
Institute of Global Dialogue, thanked Mr Ebrahim
for the space to interact and discuss issues
pertaining to BRICS. The institute for Global
Dialogue had some concerns that there had not,
to date, been enough communication and
engagement with the public about the role of
BRICS. It was wise for South Africa to join
BRICS, even though it was considered to not be
on par with the rest of the BRICS countries,
economically, politically and otherwise. This was
a similar project as that initiated by the likes of
Julius Nyerere, former President of Kenya, who
In closing, Mr Ebrahim drew reference to a
statement made by Minister Nkoana-Mashabane
at the annual meeting of BRICS Ministers of
International Relations/Foreign Affairs, on the
margins of UNGA68, on 26 September 2012 in
5
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
countries were accustomed to this dependence.
Therefore it was necessary to question, for
instance, whether Africa was ready to depart from
the North and whether the policies already in
place were sufficient to weight the debates not
only towards the donors, who currently tended to
dictate policies. BRICS countries should therefore
push for a “disobedience” to the current world
economic order, keeping in mind that old global
powers would not allow BRICS to take over, and
prepare Africa to deal with these challenges. The
inherited economic structure, which assumed that
aid was the only logical recourse for African
development assumed that Africa was the land of
the empty, and this clearly needed to be
challenged, with the African Union being one of
the greatest anchors in this regard. The benefits
for Africa were now only a promise rather than a
reality. It was necessary that the continent make
very difficult decisions to change the current
structure of the inherited economic logic, which
advocated for the export of primary resources and
the import of manufactured goods, as well as
perceptions around culture.
had envisaged a structure that included a
disobedient order in the post cold war era, a
building of a third world (where “third world”
meant worlds in sequence), where new visions
would be created by those who had previously
suffered, and where developing countries would
become agents rather than objects of global
change, being willing to take full responsibility for
their growth and development. South-South
cooperation would have to move towards
widening development options across the region.
BRICS countries were therefore part of a global
world order and sought to use their different
resources to address their separate and different
needs, widening development opportunities.
BRICS was part of the global world order and
therefore faced many challenges which stemmed
from processes such as globalisation, which give
rise to issues of exclusion and inclusion. BRICS
countries were significant in GDP, capital and
legitimacy terms within Africa, and thus opened
up new economic opportunities for these
developing countries in global reform, which had
been unbalanced due to the nature of
relationships with other global powers in the past.
BRICS was therefore an evolving initiative and it
still needed to be shaped.
Discussion
A Member highlighted that South Africa’s
interaction with BRICS should be centred around
South Africa’s national interests, and stated that,
given the country’s economic size in relation to
the rest of BRICS countries, it would be in the
country’s interests to pursue an agenda of
regional integration in the Southern Africa
Development Community (SADC). In order to do
that, South Africa needed to also be able to sell
itself abroad, primarily by integrating the private
and public sectors. As a point of reference, the
well known tensions between the Department of
Trade and Industry (dti) and the Department of
International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO)
in regard to trade needed to be addressed, so
that the country could thrive. There was a need
BRICS created an opportunity for alternative
pools of capital to finance effective and
sustainable growth in the South and in other parts
of the world. The fundamental problem facing
Africa was that this continent had various
countries that were not viable as they depended
on donors and were not sustainable on their own.
About 65% of African countries depended on
foreign financial aid for budget support. Another
hindrance to the development of Africa was that
many countries exported raw and imported
manufactured goods. BRICS-Africa relations were
therefore of vital importance. African countries
therefore need to be convinced that donor aid
was not good for Africa’s development, as many
6
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
trade relationships. South Africa needed to
develop its own manufacturing base. South
Africa, in its relations with China, was not taking
into account the fact that China was moving from
an export-led economy to a consumption-led
economy, and the impact that this would have on
trade relations around the world.
also to invest in and promote the people of South
Africa as one of its comparative advantages.
Mr Ebrahim responded that regional integration of
SADC was at the top of South Africa’s agenda,
and that the trilateral agreement in SADC
between India, China and Brazil strengthened
these ties. Involvement of the private sector in
trade relations was also an issue that was high on
the country’s agenda, as evidenced by the
success of the business community indabas.
Mr Ebrahim agreed that trade with China had
increased tremendously, and that South Africa
had a strategic relationship with China. The dti
had identified ten value added products that could
be exported from South Africa to China in an
attempt to balance trade. Also BRICS countries
play an important role in developing and
enhancing trade relations between their member
countries, and Africa was an important
development point. It would therefore not be very
long that the Chinese economy would surpass
that of the United States. The impact of this on
the world’s economic, political and financial
systems would need to be evaluated. Fortunately,
all five BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India,
China and South Africa) were all members of the
Security Council and reached consensus on a
number of issues.
Mr Ebrahim said, in relation to the apparent
tensions between dti and DIRCO, that both these
departments placed much emphasis on economic
diplomacy, even though the dti was not as
‘equipped’ to deal with such matters, which was
why DIRCO now had a special course offering
training to ambassadors and diplomats on
economic diplomacy.
Ms S van der Merwe (ANC), Portfolio Committee
on Trade and Industry, began by highlighting that
the levels of trade between South Africa and
BRICS countries was highly commendable. She
questioned the role of BRICS in bilateral trade
agreements and growth in South-South relations
and trade, and asked to what extent the BRICS
structure was developing trade. She also asked
how BRICS was evolving and more especially
how it BRICS fitted into South Africa’s relations to
the G20 and the non-aligned movement.
Dr Anil Sooklal, Deputy Director General, Asia
and Middle East, DIRCO, responded that South
Africa’s approach to BRICS was three-fold. It
would, firstly, advance the national agenda,
secondly would develop and strengthen regional
integration, and thirdly would empower BRICS
partners in influencing and informing the global
economic and political agenda. With regard to
government and private sector relations, BRICS
participated in the business forum and drove the
idea that both government and the private sector
need to have a common approach to international
trade. During a BRICS Summit the challenge was
identified that leaders of industry did not have the
opportunity to interact directly with the BRICS
leaders, but this had since been changed.
Mr I Davidson (DA) pointed out that BRICS had
enormous potential as a developmental tool. He
added that there needed to be a common value
system within BRICS, just as in any other
international organisation. He commented on the
internal contradictions among BRICS members;
for instance, there had been high levels of trade
between China and South Africa, but the nature
of that trade had been primarily that South Africa
exported
commodities
and
imported
manufactured goods, so this was not an equal
7
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
countries had a mandate to restore African dignity
following its colonial history. There was also
agreement about the point that people were a
major element of the developmental agenda, and
he stressed the importance of issues such as
access to proper health and education systems.
Dr Sooklal also commented tensions between
DIRCO and dti were not something new, and
fighting for space was a natural phenomenon
around the world. However, it was a clear
economic mandate of DIRCO to advance
economic development, highlighting the need for
it to offer the economic diplomacy course, with
the assistance of the dti. The dti did not have the
capacity to deal with economic diplomacy. It was
also agreed that one of South Africa’s
comparative advantages was indeed its people
and DIRCO was looking into creating a youth and
women forum within BRICS, in an attempt to
involve the broader civil society. Bilateral
arrangements among BRICS countries were a
major contributor in advancing trade relations.
South Africa also had very strong trade relations
with SADC countries as well, so that strong
bilateral trade among both BRICS countries and
SADC countries were crucial. The BRICS
Business Council would be an important structure
in advancing trade relations.
Dr Zondi responded to Ms Van der Merwe that
trade had been growing significantly among
BRICS country members. Research about trade
was largely donor funded and was therefore at
the risk of being biased, so this funding for
research needed ideally to come from within
South Africa, not from outside. The BRICS
strategy needed to be promoted and not be kept
secret by government.
Dr Dot Keet, Research Associate, Alternative
Information Development Centre (AIDC), stated
that South Africa could not be seen as a
‘gateway’ to Africa and therefore could not speak
on behalf of other African countries. There
seemed to be different criteria for BRICS
membership and partnerships. She noted that the
partnerships among BRICS countries should be
about rebuilding trade criteria that had been lost
during the periods of imperialistic rule. Therefore,
she suggested that BRICS needed to set its own
developmental criteria that acknowledged that
Africa had its own developmental framework and
criteria and that it should put forward to other
countries in their relations with Africa.
Dr Sooklal also agreed that DIRCO was well
aware of the changes taking place in China’s
trade industry. It was doubtful whether equal
relationships would ever exist, as seen by the G8
members. BRICS was trying to bring about new
trade relations, based on sustainability and
collaboration.
In conclusion, Dr Sooklal stated that the World
Bank did not fund any hydro power project in the
African countries, and that about 60% of African
countries were still dependent on foreign aid for
green projects, which was why the development
bank now proposed was a new avenue for
fundamental development needs of African
countries. It would concentrate on funding for the
development of infrastructure.
Ms Michelle Pressend, Coordinator: Tax Justice
and Political Economy, Economic Justice
Network, drew attention to that fact that the social
inequality aspect of development had not been
discussed. The main interests on which
discussion had focused now were those of
business and finance. She questioned whether
the BRICS bank would operate based on the
frameworks outlined by the International
Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, or
Dr Zondi made the point that national interests
needed to encompass African needs and values,
and that, as Africans, South Africa and other
8
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
Dr Sooklal added that the Ministers of Agriculture
and Health had met in New Delhi to collaborate
and to deal with issues of social inequality,
poverty, underdevelopment and unemployment.
These issues were therefore incorporated into the
programme of action of BRICS.
whether it would it be an alternative mode of
banking, and questioned its feasibility.
Mr Daouda Cisse, Research Fellow, Centre for
Chinese Studies, University of Stellenbosch, drew
attention to the imbalanced content of trade
imports and exports between African countries
and the rest of the world. It would therefore be
important to devise policies that would seek to
improve Africa’s manufacturing industries, so as
to promote the export of goods rather than raw
materials. Another point raised related to the
partnerships that BRICS had with the African
Union and SADC, and the role that they play in
the development of fair trade on the continent.
Dr Sooklal responded to questions on the BRICS
bank by noting that its mandate was not to
compete with any other financial institutions, and
that it was rather to help grow investment from
BRICS countries into each others’ sectors. He
highlighted, by way of example, the capital
investments that were flowing from Brazil and
India into South Africa.
Dr Zondi said that economic diplomacy was an
important element in attracting investment in the
African region, particularly since a common
mistake had been to pay insufficient attention to
the fact that all African countries were not equal
and should not be treated the same. The new
Asia-Africa partnership was a very important
initiative in region-to-region diplomacy.
Mr N Gcwabaza (ANC), Portfolio Committee on
Trade and Industry, stated that a large section of
the world’s population lived on less than US$2 a
day, largely in developing countries. He asked
how BRICS was developing the agricultural
sector in Africa, noting that Africa had enough
land to feed half the world’s populations, yet still
suffered from huge hunger and poverty. He also
made the point that it was worrying that mining
industry had the responsibility to dig and export,
but apparently not to develop the mining sector,
which begged the question where then this
particular responsibility lay. Government could not
be solely responsible.
Mr Richard Humphries, Consultant, South African
Foreign Policy Initiative, enquired about the depth
of sectoral collaboration that was currently taking
place in New Delhi, and wondered whether
BRICS would have a permanent secretariat in the
future, in order to strengthen region-region
diplomacy.
Ms Naidu raised a question on the currency issue
in China.
Ms
Marianne
Buenaventura
Goldman,
Governance Advisor, Oxfam asked how BRICS
would be dealing with social inequality issues,
and asked whether there were any other ways
that civil society could engage in dialogue with
BRICS.
Mr Ebrahim agreed that people, being such an
important resource, needed to be supported and
developed, which was why the outreach
programme by DIRCO was an important factor.
On the issue of agriculture and land, there was
agreement that food security was indeed an
important issue and that it was the responsibility
of government and business to deal with it.
Dr Sooklal responded that BRICS was a relatively
young institution and that the question on whether
it would establish a permanent secretariat would
be discussed at a later stage. There were various
9
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.
SAFPI Policy Brief No 23
different social forums and platforms where the
public could already discuss social issues, such
as the Urbanisation Forum and the Partnership
City Forum.
The Chairperson noted, in his closing remarks,
that BRICS was a significant and relevant forum,
with a number of responsibilities, which not only
included trade and economic development but
also included people development. For these
reasons, BRICS needed to also take into account
social and domestic issues in its agenda.
The meeting was adjourned.
*
SAFPI acknowledges the Parliamentary
Monitoring Group for providing this summary.
SAFPI has made minor edits to the summary
posted
on
their
website
(http://www.pmg.org.za)
* Readers can access the presentations here:
10
The views expressed in news articles and research reports selected for inclusion in the various SAFPI news feeds do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Open Society Foundation for South Africa (OSF-SA) or its sponsors. OSF-SA is also not responsible for any
errors of fact contained in the articles.