BRICS is not an alliance system aimed against nonmembers, rather it assists in harmonizing economic interests between competing members

International politics is largely about manipulating the symmetry of economic interdependence. Under asymmetrical interdependence, in which one side is more dependent than the other, it is possible to extract political power over the more dependent one. A hegemonic state will thus seek to create excessive dependencies among others on its technologies, industries, transportation corridors, banks, payment systems, currencies, and other forms of economic connectivity. Under extreme concentration of economic power, the dominant state can use economic dependency as a weapon to coerce other states.

Preventing the diversification of economic connectivity between new centers of power is imperative to preserve a hegemonic position. Historically, the United Kingdom's and the US' strategy toward Europe has been to prevent economic connectivity between Germany and Russia. In the present era, the US has taken the hegemonic role of the UK.Washington's current successful efforts of pressuring the Europeans to cut their dependence on Russian energy and Chinese technologies are a continuation of this approach as it ensures the European Union becomes excessively dependent on the US to the extent that it puts an end to the EU's ambition for "strategic autonomy" and "European sovereignty". The allies remain obedient, and the adversaries are weakened.

As states diversify their economic connectivity, the US becomes more likely to use its economic power coercively. Yet, Washington's growing use of economic coercion to reverse its relative decline instead intensifies the need for diversification.

The economist Friedrich List suggested that replacing a confrontational hegemonic international economic system with one where economic connectivity creates stability requires more symmetry of dependence: "uniting of all nations under a common law of right, an object which is only to be attained through the greatest possible equalization of the most important nations of the earth in civilization, prosperity, industry and power".

China plays a leading role in diversifying the international economic system with industrial policies that advance alternative technological centers. The Belt and Road Initiative diversifies transport networks, while also spearheading the development of financial instruments such as new development banks, payment systems, and the use of local currencies.

Much like the decentralized ancient Silk Road that connected the world before the centralized European Trading Post empires, China's new Silk Road involves all stakeholders and embraces genuine multilateralism that subsequently creates economic development of mutual gain. The US militarized control over the world's key maritime corridors and "choke points" creates an immense dependence on the US for reliable access to trade, a key prerequisite for preserving its global hegemony and political unilateralism. In contrast, the BRI enables countries to diversify their economic connectivity by promoting infrastructure development, industrial cooperation, financial integration, and regional integration to accommodate new independent centers of power. China's advocacy of economic diversification is coupled with calls for cultural diversity as opposed to having one center of power asserting its alleged universal values and universal development model on other states.

Economic systems also influence the prospect of peace. Hegemons are inclined to pursue peacetime alliance systems and bloc politics as they limit rival economic connectivity and divide regions into dependent allies versus weakened adversaries. This has the unfortunate implication of acting as an incentive to perpetuate divisions in which security dependence can be converted into geoeconomic loyalty.

The decentralized format of the new Silk Road differs significantly from the hegemonic model. It is now evident that the diversification of economic connectivity in Eurasia creates systemic incentives for resolving disputes. As a case in point, the interest of China to increase economic ties with both Iran and Saudi Arabia, without alienating the other, created incentives to push for the Saudi-Iran reconciliation agreement.

Similarly, Western expectations that China and Russia would clash in Central Asia did not come to fruition as it was based on the flawed assumption that the two would compete for hegemony. Instead, Russia and China committed themselves to multipolarity and thus made great efforts to harmonize their economic connectivity in the region as a positive-sum game. The BRI and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union were aligned under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

The BRI connects China to the world, yet China does not sabotage alternative transportation corridors. Russia, India, Iran, the Arab states, and other actors are also pursuing similar initiatives to ensure there is no excessive dependence on any one state or region. New economic corridors such as the International North-South Transportation Corridor between Russia, Iran, and India ensure a multipolar Eurasia. China's leadership is accommodated as it does not advance hegemony and thus, unlike its US counterpart, does not seek to obstruct economic connectivity that is not China-centric.

It is within this format for economic connectivity that the Global South can prosper and reclaim its agency. BRICS is not an alliance system aligned against nonmembers, rather it assists in harmonizing economic interests between competing members such as China and India. The expansion of BRICS similarly brought rivals such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, and Egypt and Ethiopia, under the same roof of shared prosperity. While Europe is engulfed in a major war after Ukraine was forced to make a civilizational choice between "us" and "them", the Global South is entering a more benign world that rejects economic connectivity as a weapon and instead embraces the Shanghai Spirit of mutual trust, mutual benefit and equality.

The author is a professor at the Department of Business, History and Social Science at the University of South-Eastern Norway. The author contributed this article to China Watch, a think tank powered by China Daily. The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

Contact the editor at [email protected].