Category: Multipolarity

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation prepares for Tianjin Summit

The Foreign Ministers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) met in the Chinese city of Tianjin on July 15 to make preparations for the SCO Summit, which will be held in the same city on August 31-September 1, immediately prior to China’s celebration of the 80th anniversary of victory in the war of resistance against Japanese aggression and the global anti-fascist war, scheduled for September 3.

As China currently holds the rotating presidency of the SCO, the meeting was chaired by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and was attended by:

  • Belarusian Foreign Minister Maxim Ryzhenkov
  • Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar
  • Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi
  • Kazakh Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Murat Nurtleu
  • Kyrgyz Minister of Foreign Affairs Jeenbek Kulubaev
  • Pakistani Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Mohammad Ishaq Dar
  • Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov
  • Tajik Foreign Minister Sirojiddin Muhriddin
  • Uzbek Foreign Minister Bakhtiyor Saidov
  • SCO Secretary-General Nurlan Yermekbayev; and
  • Director of the Executive Committee of the SCO Regional Anti-Terrorist Structure Ularbek Sharsheev

Wang Yi said that over the past 24 years since its founding, under the strategic guidance of the leaders of member states, the SCO has maintained steady and positive growth, continuously expanded cooperation areas, consistently enhanced its international prestige, and increasingly highlighted its strategic value, becoming a reliable anchor for member states to maintain regional stability and achieve common development.

He noted that at present, profound changes unseen in a century unfold at a faster pace, with intertwined and overlapped turbulence and transformation. While a multipolar world and economic globalisation continue to deepen and the Global South stands out with a strong momentum, at the same time, hegemonism and power politics run counter to the tide of progress, the counter-current of protectionism surges, and regional conflicts keep flaring up. Under the new circumstances, member states need to adopt a responsible attitude toward history and the future and reach further consensus on strengthening the SCO.

Wang Yi put forward five proposals for the SCO’s future development:

  • Stay true to its founding mission and carry forward the Shanghai Spirit. Mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality, consultation, respect for diversity of civilisations and pursuit of common development illustrate what a new type of international relations should be.
  • Share weal and woe and consolidate the foundation of security. China is deeply concerned about the situation in the Middle East. The use of force against Iran’s sovereignty and security is a clear violation of international law and undermines the international nuclear non-proliferation regime. Afghanistan is an important member of the SCO family. Efforts should be made to support Afghanistan’s reconstruction and development, and address both symptoms and root causes to realise lasting peace and stability.
  • Pursue mutual benefit and win-win results to drive the engine of development. Development is of paramount importance and holds the master key to all problems.
  • Champion good-neighbourliness and jointly build a beautiful home. Helping one’s neighbours is helping oneself.
  • Uphold the right path and defend fairness and justice. A certain country puts its own interests over the international public good, undermining the common interests of the international community. The SCO should take the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations (UN) as an opportunity to champion the common values of humanity, safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of member states, and work for a more just and equitable global governance system.

At a later press conference, Wang Yi announced that leaders from more than 20 countries and heads of 10 international organisations will attend the August 31-September 1 summit and related events. He added that the meeting made comprehensive preparations for the Tianjin Summit and signed multiple resolutions, including the draft Tianjin Declaration of the Council of Heads of State and the draft SCO Development Strategy for the Next Decade.

In the morning of July 15, prior to the Tianjin meeting, Chinese President Xi Jinping had a group meeting with the foreign ministers and heads of permanent bodies of the SCO at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing.

Continue reading Shanghai Cooperation Organisation prepares for Tianjin Summit

As Trump threatens BRICS, it grows stronger, resisting US dollar and Western imperialism

In the following article, which was originally published on his Geopolitical Economy website, Beijing-based US journalist and political analyst, Ben Norton assesses the impact and significance of the 17th BRICS Summit, which was held July 6-7 in the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro.

Ben notes that, among his daily plethora of crude threats to sovereign nations, US President Donald Trump had recently threatened to impose 100% tariffs on the members of BRICS and then claimed that the Global South economic cooperation mechanism was “dead” as a result.  However, it is growing, currently with 10 members and 10 partners, as well as a number of observers participating in the summit, where measured steps towards a process of ‘dedollarisation’ ranked high on the agenda.  

The Rio Summit was historic not least in the participation of socialist Vietnam and Cuba among the new category of formal partner countries. Ben observes: “This was symbolic, given that Cuba has suffered under illegal US sanctions and a devastating blockade for more than 60 years.”

He adds that, despite the country’s proximity to, and economic integration with, the United States: “Mexico’s progressive President Claudia Sheinbaum sent Foreign Secretary Juan Ramón de la Fuente to Brazil to participate, even though Mexico is not…  a member or partner of BRICS.”

The steady progress of BRICS (to paraphrase the US writer Mark Twain reports of its death were clearly exaggerated) again riled the short-fused US President, who threatened its members with an additional 10% in tariffs – for Trump watchers evidently something of a climbdown from the previously threatened 100%.

This new threat brought a stinging rebuke from Brazil’s President Lula: “The world has changed. We don’t want an emperor.”

Trump also bizarrely cited Spain as a “BRICS nation”, which, in this case, he threatened with 100% tariffs. Spain is neither a member nor a partner of BRICS, which is exclusively made up of members of the Global South. Indeed, it is a NATO ally of the United States. Its social democratic government has, however, enraged Trump by condemning the Israeli genocide in Gaza, being the sole NATO member to outright refuse Trump’s demand to increase defence spending to 5% of GDP and insisting on maintaining positive relations with China.

In the following days, Trump further escalated his feud with Brazil by leaping to the defence of his fascist friend, former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing trial on charges of attempting a coup following his 2022 election defeat, a case with certain echoes of the violent attempt to overturn the result of the 2020 presidential election in the United States.

Lula reacted furiously to Trump’s attempt to help his fellow putschist by threatening Brazil with additional tariffs at 50%. The financial news service Bloomberg reported:

“President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva insisted Brazil can survive without trade with the US and will look to other partners to replace it, a sharp response to Donald Trump after the American leader threatened 50% tariffs against the nation.

“‘We’re going to have to look for other partners to buy our products. Brazil’s trade with the US represents 1.7% of its GDP,’ Lula said in a broadcast interview with Record TV… ‘It’s not like we can’t survive without the US.’

“The Brazilian also said countries like his are not obliged to continue using the dollar to trade, reiterating remarks he made at last weekend’s BRICS summit in Rio de Janeiro that he acknowledged ‘likely worried Trump.’

“‘We are interested in creating a trade currency among other countries,’ Lula said in the Record interview. ‘I’m not obligated to buy dollars to conduct trade with Venezuela, Bolivia, Chile, Sweden, the European Union, or China. We can trade in our own currencies.’”

Continue reading As Trump threatens BRICS, it grows stronger, resisting US dollar and Western imperialism

China is a force for peace and progress, that’s why the world needs China

Friends of Socialist China was among the organisers of a hybrid event in Portland, Oregon (US), held on 22 June 2025, discussing Kyle Ferrana’s important book Why the World Needs China.

In his speech (delivered via Zoom), Carlos Martinez endorsed the central thesis of the book, arguing that China represents a global vision centred around peace, progress and sustainable development; whereas the US and its allies represent a global vision centred around imperialism, hegemony, war, ecocide and chaos.

Discussing recent developments in West Asia, in particular the US-Israeli criminal attacks on Iran and the ongoing genocide in Gaza, Carlos highlighted China’s constructive role in the region, including its mediation between Iran and Saudi Arabia and its support for Palestinian unity. He linked the attacks on Iran with the West’s continuing efforts to destabilise China and broader imperialist resistance against a rising multipolar world.

Emphasising the need for global solidarity, Carlos called for building “a global united front composed of the socialist countries, the national liberation movements, the anti-imperialist forces of the Global South, and the progressive forces in the advanced capitalist countries”, for supporting the forces of liberation worldwide, and for supporting the socialist countries – “and particularly China, as the largest and most advanced socialist country, as the country which is at the core of the emerging multipolar system”.

The video of the speech is embedded below, followed by the text.

“Why the World Needs China” is the somewhat provocative title of Kyle’s book.

But in my view the essential correctness of this title is becoming clearer and clearer with every passing day, and specifically with every despicable act of aggression carried out by the United States and its Israeli proxy against the people of Palestine, of Iran, of Yemen and of Lebanon.

As you all know, last night the US military openly joined Israel’s criminal war against Iran, bombing three nuclear facilities. I say “openly joined the war”, because the fact is that the US and its allies been providing weapons, intelligence, logistical support, war propaganda and diplomatic cover from the very beginning – both for this war on Iran and for the genocidal assault on Gaza.

The whole world can increasingly see what the United States and its allies represent, and increasingly the whole world can see what China represents. And these are two vastly different visions of the future of the world, one put forward by the capitalist class in the United States, one put forward by the working class in China.

The US is proposing a Project for a New American Century. This neoconservative notion – originally associated with notorious hawks such as Paul Wolfowitz, Donald Rumsfeld and Dick Cheney – has become a consensus position in mainstream US politics, adhered to by all administrations, Republican and Democrat alike. It’s a fundamentally hegemonist, imperialist proposal; a proposal for spreading death and destruction for the sake of projecting the US’s domination of the 20th century into the 21st century.

Continue reading China is a force for peace and progress, that’s why the world needs China

China will continue to be a stabilising force for peace and progress

From May 13-14, the Chinese People’s Association for Peace and Disarmament (CPAPD), which works under the direction of the International Department of the Communist Party of China Central Committee (IDCPC) hosted the Fourth Wanshou Dialogue on Global Security, themed as “Universal Security in a Turbulent World: The Responsibility of Major Countries”. Liu Jianchao, Minister of the IDCPC, attended the event and delivered a keynote speech.

More than 50 international security experts from over 30 countries, including Pino Arlacchi, former Under-Secretary-General of the United Nations, Andrey Kortunov, former director general of the Russian International Affairs Council, Benny Octaviar, former head of the Indonesian Military Research Centre, Douglas Bandow, a special assistant to former US president Ronald Reagan and a senior research fellow at the Cato Institute, and Zizi Kodwa, a member of the National Executive Committee of the African National Congress (ANC) and former Minister of Sports, Arts and Culture of South Africa, attended the event.

The participants held in-depth discussions around four topics, namely Pressing Issues of Global Security, The Responsibility of Major Countries Amidst Once in a Century Transformations, Major Country Relations and Security in the Asia Pacific and Pathways to Universal Security.

Friends of Socialist China was invited to participate in the dialogue and we were ably represented by Dr. Jenny Clegg, a Member of our Advisory Group, who is the author of ‘China’s Global Strategy: Towards a Multipolar World’, a Vice President of the Society for Anglo-Chinese Understanding (SACU) and a leading member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) and the Stop the War Coalition.

We reproduce below Jenny’s report of the event as well as the text of her speech, which was delivered to the panel session on Major Country Relations and Security in the Asia Pacific.

We also reprint the report of the opening session which was originally carried on the IDCPC website.

The CPAPD website carried a brief report on the event as well as a meeting with Peng Qinghua, Vice-Chairman of the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (NPC).

Labour Outlook also carried an article, based in part on Jenny’s speech.

Continue reading China will continue to be a stabilising force for peace and progress

Wang Yi: The BRICS family stands at the forefront of the Global South

Following his visit to Kazakhstan, where he attended the Foreign Ministers meeting of China and Central Asian countries, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi travelled on to Brazil to attend meetings of the BRICS cooperation mechanism preparatory to its summit meeting later this year. Brazil is this year’s revolving Chair of BRICS.

On April 28, Wang Yi attended Session I of the Meeting of BRICS Ministers of Foreign Affairs in Rio de Janeiro. Brazilian Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira chaired the event.

Wang Yi said that this year marks the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. The founding of the United Nations opened a brand-new chapter for all countries to jointly build peace and seek development and has promoted remarkable progress in human civilisation. Today, 80 years later, the international landscape has undergone profound changes, the world has entered a period of turbulence and transformation, and the cause of peace and development is facing new and severe challenges. The basic concepts of international cooperation have been eroded, the foundation for the development of international relations has been continuously challenged, and the international environment for peace and development is under assault. At a critical juncture in history, whether countries can make the right choices is crucial to the future of humanity. As positive constructive forces for good on the international stage, BRICS countries should take the lead in being the mainstay of the cause of peace and development.

To this end, Wang Yi made four calls:

  • To pursue universal security.
  • To actively promote peace talks.
  • To consolidate the foundation for development.
  • To strengthen practical cooperation.

All parties welcomed Indonesia’s first attendance as a full member at the Meeting of BRICS Ministers of Foreign Affairs and stressed that efforts should be made to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of BRICS countries and the common interests of the Global South, to promote the establishment of a more just and equitable international order, and to facilitate open, inclusive and sustainable development.

On April 29, the session for Ministers of Foreign Affairs / International Relations from BRICS members and partner countries was held in Rio de Janeiro. The session was chaired by Brazilian Foreign Minister Mauro Vieira. Foreign ministers and senior representatives from 19 countries discussed ways to strengthen cooperation in the Global South and uphold multilateralism.

Addressing the meeting, Wang Yi said that, today, the BRICS family, with a total population of over half of the world’s population and an economic output accounting for nearly 30 percent of the global total, stands at the forefront of the Global South.

He stressed that faced with hegemonism, BRICS countries must uphold principles and serve as the main force in defending fairness and justice. In the face of unilateralism, BRICS countries must stand at the forefront and be the backbone in promoting solidarity and cooperation.

He made three calls in this regard:

  • To defend the core position of the United Nations.
  • To promote the peaceful settlement of disputes.
  • To foster an open and cooperative international environment.

Wang Yi stated that BRICS members should keep their doors wide open and embrace partner countries to help them deeply integrate into BRICS and fully participate in cooperation, so as to ensure the vibrant development of the mechanism. Continuous efforts should be made to expand the “BRICS Plus” model and bring together more like-minded countries to pool forces for peace and development.

He added that the solution to the world’s problems lies in upholding and practicing multilateralism. The expanded Greater BRICS should continue to advocate for extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits, uphold the basic principles of international relations, defend the multilateral trading system, and build a more just and equitable global governance system.

Wang Yi said that in the face of the United States wielding the tariff stick globally, all countries must make the choices: Should the world return to the law of the jungle where the strong prey on the weak? Can the selfish interests of one country override the common interests of all nations? Should international rules be ignored or even abandoned? Do compromise and retreat ensure that one stays out of trouble? The ultimate question is whether to accept a unipolar hegemony dominated by one country or embrace an equal and orderly multipolar world.

Continue reading Wang Yi: The BRICS family stands at the forefront of the Global South

Xi Jinping: Learning from history to build together a brighter future

On May 7, Chinese President Xi Jinping began a state visit to Russia where he will also attend the celebrations marking the 80th anniversary of the Victory in the Great Patriotic War of the Soviet Union at the invitation of his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin.

Ahead of his arrival, the Chinese leader published an article in the government newspaper Rossiyskaya Gazeta (Russian Gazette).

In his article President Xi recalled that: “Ten years ago around this time, I came to Russia to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the victory. During that visit, I made a special arrangement to meet with 18 representatives of Russian veterans who endured the blood and fire of battlefields during the Soviet Union’s Great Patriotic War and the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression. Their unyielding resolve and indomitable bearing left an indelible impression on me. In the past few years, General M. Gareyev, Major General T. Shchudlo and other veterans passed away. I pay my deepest tribute to them and to all veterans – from generals to the rank and file-for their extraordinary service and heroic feats in securing the victory over fascists around the world. We will never forget them.”

Xi noted that: “During the World Anti-Fascist War, the Chinese and Russian peoples fought shoulder to shoulder and supported each other. In the darkest hours of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the Soviet Volunteer Group, which was part of the Soviet Air Force, came to Nanjing, Wuhan and Chongqing to fight alongside the Chinese people, bravely engaging Japanese invaders in aerial combat – many sacrificing their precious lives.”

He added that: “At the critical juncture of the Soviet Union’s Great Patriotic War, Yan Baohang, a legendary intelligence agent of the Communist Party of China (CPC) who was hailed as the ‘Richard Sorge of the East,’ provided the Soviet Union with primary-source intelligence.”

[Yan Baohang (1895-1968) was an intelligence agent of the CPC and the Communist International, entrusted by later Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai. Based behind enemy lines in Chongqing, in May 1941 the one-time student at Edinburgh University was able to discover the exact date – June 22 – of the planned German attack on the Soviet Union. He managed to get the information to the communist base area in Yan’an by June 6, where Mao Zedong ordered it to be conveyed to Moscow and where it reached Stalin, enabling important preparations to be made in time. On June 30, eight days after the German attack, Stalin telegraphed Yan’an, to thank Yan “for his accurate information that prompted us to prepare for what’s to come.”

[Richard Sorge (1895-1944) was one of the most brilliant intelligence officers of the Communist International and the Soviet Red Army’s Fourth Department, later known as the GRU or military intelligence. Known particularly for his work in Shanghai and then in Tokyo, he was eventually arrested by the Japanese authorities in October 1941 and hanged in Tokyo on November 7, 1944, the fascists having deliberately chosen to execute this outstanding and courageous internationalist fighter for communism on the anniversary of the October Socialist Revolution. He was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of the Soviet Union.]

Drawing attention to the contemporary significance of the 80th anniversary, Xi wrote: “Eighty years ago, the forces of justice around the world, including China and the Soviet Union, united in courageous battles against their common foes and defeated the overbearing fascist powers. Eighty years later today, however, unilateralism, hegemonism, bullying, and coercive practices are severely undermining our world. Again, humankind has come to a crossroads of unity or division, dialogue or confrontation, win-win cooperation or zero-sum games… We must learn from history, especially the hard lessons of the Second World War. We must draw wisdom and strength from the great victory of the World Anti-Fascist War and resolutely resist all forms of hegemonism and power politics. We must work together to build a brighter future for humanity.”

Continue reading Xi Jinping: Learning from history to build together a brighter future

From Bandung to BRICS: the inexorable rise of the Global South

The following is the text of the speech given by our co-editor Keith Bennett to the webinar jointly organised by Friends of Socialist China and the International Manifesto Group on Sunday 27 April, 2025, marking the 70th anniversary of the historic Africa Asia Conference held in the Indonesian city of Bandung.

In his speech, Keith outlined the historic significance of the Bandung Conference, linking it both to its antecedents as well as to the later institutions of the Global South that it inspired, such as the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the BRICS cooperation mechanism.

He pays particular attention to the key role played by Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai at the conference and cites Malcolm X, who highlighted the broad unity that Bandung embodied.

We called this meeting to celebrate the 70th anniversary of the Bandung Conference and to affirm its continued relevance.

What do I mean by that?

It was a key moment in the evolution and development of the international situation post-World War 2.

It came at the cusp of the anti-imperialist national liberation movement:

  • Just after the liberation of China, itself preceded by the independence of India, Pakistan, Ceylon (now Sri Lanka) and Burma (now Myanmar).
  • When Korea and Indochina were at the forefront of the global diplomatic agenda – this being the year after the 1954 Geneva Conference.
  • Just prior to the great wave of decolonisation in Africa, to begin with the independence of Ghana from British colonial rule, under the leadership of Osagyefo Dr. Kwame Nkrumah in March 1957, followed by the independence of Guinea from French colonial rule, under the leadership of Ahmed Sekou Toure, in October 1958.
  • And with the world waking up to the full iniquity of the apartheid regime being progressively consolidated – with newly independent India having been the first country to raise the question at the United Nations.

It was against this backdrop that Bandung established a distinct and common Africa Asia identity as a political concept and geopolitical reality.

Of course, there were antecedents, to a great extent related to the international communist movement and to actually existing socialism:

  • The Communist International had convened the Baku Congress of the Peoples of the East in September 1920.
  • In 1927, again at the instigation of the Communist International, delegates including Jawaharlal Nehru of India, Song Qingling (Mme. Sun Yat-Sen) from China, and indeed Fenner Brockway from Britain’s Independent Labour Party, had gathered in Brussels to found the League Against Imperialism.
  • And in 1945, Manchester hosted the fifth Pan African Congress, attended by three future African heads of state – Kwame Nkrumah, Jomo Kenyatta of Kenya and Hastings Banda of Malawi – along with the African-American scholar and revolutionary Dr. WEB Du Bois, who had attended the first congress in Paris in 1919, and Amy Ashwood Garvey, the widow of Marcus Garvey.

But Bandung occurred at a qualitatively different historical moment in that it was an initiative of independent sovereign states – and in the main of newly independent sovereign states that had just set out on the road of building a new society. They therefore represented what both Indonesian President Sukarno, the host of the conference, and Korean leader Kim Il Sung referred to as the new emerging forces.

Continue reading From Bandung to BRICS: the inexorable rise of the Global South

Webinar marks 70th anniversary of the Bandung Conference

Seventy years ago, the Bandung Conference brought together 29 Asian and African countries to discuss the common challenges facing the Third World. The conference was a milestone in the global struggle against colonialism and imperialism, and laid the foundations for the Non-Aligned Movement.

Friends of Socialist China and the International Manifesto Group co-organised a webinar on Sunday 27 April 2025 to address the legacy of Bandung and its relevance to the contemporary world. Speakers at the event were:

  • Radhika Desai (Convenor, International Manifesto Group)
  • Ben Norton (Founder and editor, Geopolitical Economy Report)
  • Tings Chak (Asia Coordinator, Tricontinental Institute)
  • Jenny Clegg (Author, China’s Global Strategy: Towards a Multipolar World)
  • Isaac Saney (Cuba and Black studies specialist, Dalhousie University)
  • Keith Bennett (Co-editor, Friends of Socialist China)
  • Mushahid Hussain (Pakistani senator, Chairman of the China-Pakistan Institute)

The presentations were followed by a lively and interesting discussion. The video of the webinar is embedded below.

Trump versus the rising Global South

We are pleased to republish the below article by Dr. Kate Hudson, Vice-President of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), which is the gist of her speech given at the ‘Socialism or Barbarism’ Arise Festival Day School, held in London on March 29.

Setting out the need for solidarity with the Global South in the face of US President Donald Trump’s international agenda, Kate points out that US foreign policy goal for the last thirty odd years [that is since the collapse of the Soviet Union] has been to maintain its position of sole superpower status. This means ensuring that no other state should accumulate enough economic and strategic weight to rival it – or to create a new multipolarity that acts against US interests. In the current context, this means the rise of China and the Global South, of which it is part. This trend has been recognised since at least the 1990s, as the success of China’s economic reforms became apparent.

Kate explains that Obama’s ‘pivot to Asia’ was the first really serious attempt to address this, but US policy in this regard does not have merely a military component but also a major economic one. However, the figures are not in the US’s favour:

“In 1993, the G7 countries accounted for 45.4% of the global economy. The most significant economies of the Global South, or BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), made up only 16.7%. Thirty years later, BRICS accounted for 31.5% of the global economy, surpassing the G7 on 30.3%. In August 2023, BRICS added five more countries, adding an extra 4% to BRICS’s share of world GDP.”

Referring to China’s lead in electric vehicles (EVs), Kate notes: “The Financial Times commented on this recently, with the headline ‘Trump’s auto tariffs help Chinese EVs to race ahead’, describing the Chinese sector as the centre of innovation, years ahead of western rivals. Interestingly they say that ‘Beijing’s state-led industrial policy has built a formidable manufacturing base.’ High praise from the FT!”

Meanwhile, south-south trade is increasing. China is Africa’s largest trading partner and creditor; 20% of the continent’s exports go to China, and 16% of its imports come from China.

She concludes: “Through increased political and economic coordination, the Global South will continue to rise: Trump’s policies will not be able to reverse that situation. The danger is the damage he will do on the way, whether politically, economically, or militarily…  Our solidarity, our work for peace, is crucial, and we must do everything we can to build links with organisations in and from the Global South. And we must pursue our own campaigning which rejects the right-wing narrative about global threats, whether they come from Trump or Starmer.”

The article was originally published by Labour Outlook.

The US foreign policy goal for the last thirty odd years has been to maintain its position of sole superpower status. This means ensuring that no other state should accumulate enough economic and strategic weight to rival it – or to create a new multipolarity that acts against US interests. In the current context, this means the rise of China and the Global South, of which it is part.

This trend has been recognised since at least the 1990s, as the success of China’s economic reforms became apparent. 

Obama’s pivot to Asia was the first really serious attempt to address this, and it clearly had military elements – switching the US submarine force from the Atlantic to the Pacific, for example. Since then, the military orientation has increased, including numerous bilateral cooperation agreements in the East Asian region, the AUKUS pact with Australia, pushing Australia from its pretty positive relationship with China, into the US military and political framework.

But although the US has overwhelming military dominance – as we know from the Vietnam war, it doesn’t mean they would win any conflict, and its recent track record is pretty much all failure. Currently the most interesting and important developments are in the economic sphere, and as far as Trump is concerned, that is the terrain on which he is primarily trying to intervene, with China and the wider Global South.

So first of all, we can see that the figures are against him.

In 1993, the G7 countries accounted for 45.4% of the global economy. The most significant economies of the Global South, or BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), made up only 16.7%. Thirty years later, BRICS accounted for 31.5% of the global economy, surpassing the G7 on 30.3%. In August 2023, BRICS added five more countries, adding an extra 4% to BRICS’s share of world GDP.

So that was the big trend wake up call. One of the crucial factors in this change is the nature of the productive base. Traditionally the Global South, including China, was seen as a source of poor quality consumer goods, textiles, clothes and shoes being examples, but that has changed. The Global South is now home to the majority share of industrial production. Indeed the Global South is capturing significant market share in the high technology sector and this looks set to continue. 

Trump is trying to push back against this, notably through his tariffs. One example is the auto industry. His planned 25 per cent tariffs on imported cars and key auto parts are meant to force manufacturers to relocate production to the US and create jobs. But US costs will rise, reducing sales, and so US carmakers’ shares have dropped. It looks like his plan is backfiring. The Financial Times commented on this recently, with the headline Trump’s auto tariffs help Chinese EVs to race ahead, describing the Chinese sector as the centre of innovation, years ahead of western rivals. Interestingly they say that “Beijing’s state-led industrial policy has built a formidable manufacturing base.” High praise from the FT!

Recently the Guardian reported on the Bao economic Forum in China, noting that China wants to protect against the volatility of Trump’s tariffs, and now has more than a dozen free trade agreements with Global South countries. One of the Indian participants pointed out, “The US is never on the side of the Global South,” saying that countries like India should look “within the Global South” for economic support. Indeed the Indian government is said to be in discussions about relaxing restrictions on Chinese trade and investment, which were put in place five years ago after clashes at their common border.

There is no doubt that south-south trade is increasing. China is Africa’s largest trading partner and creditor; 20% of the continent’s exports go to China, and 16% of its imports come from China. China’s foreign direct investment engages strategically with the development of the region, with a portion going towards transportation, mining, energy and infrastructure. But this isn’t just a development triggered by the Trump era. It has been under way particularly since the global financial crisis, with the creation of a more integrated and mutually dependent world south of the equator and east of the Atlantic. In fact Trump’s initiatives to brutally reassert the US economically are actually damaging the US economy. 

But while Trump cannot roll back the economic reality, his policies will cause significant hardship and suffering. For example, the impacts of tariffs on other northern countries will damage Global South economies where they have component inputs into northern production. 

And the sheer racism of the Trump administration is destroying the lives and livelihoods of millions of migrants, from Latin America and elsewhere. He backs the genocide in Gaza, pushing ethnic cleansing, treating Palestinian lands as a real-estate opportunity. He’s heading for war with Iran. His disgraceful treatment of South Africa, on the basis of supposed racial discrimination against white South Africans, is just absurd. Yet South Africa is a global political leader: its support for Gaza and its legal challenge has been inspirational.

Through increased political and economic coordination, the Global South will continue to rise: Trump’s policies will not be able to reverse that situation. The danger is the damage he will do on the way, whether politically, economically, or militarily. 

That’s where we have to do what we can, on the right side of history. Our solidarity, our work for peace, is crucial, and we must do everything we can to build links with organisations in and from the Global South. And we must pursue our own campaigning which rejects the right-wing narrative about global threats, whether they come from Trump or Starmer.

Webinar: The Bandung spirit lives on! Unity against imperialism, and the struggle for a multipolar world

📆 Sunday 27 April 2025, 4pm Britain, 11am US Eastern, 8am US Pacific

Register on Eventbrite

Seventy years ago, the Bandung Conference brought together 29 Asian and African countries to discuss the common challenges facing the Third World. The conference was a milestone in the global struggle against colonialism and imperialism, and laid the foundations for the Non-Aligned Movement. This webinar will address the legacy of Bandung, and its relevance to the contemporary world. It will seek to find answers to questions such as:

  • Are the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, adopted at Bandung, still relevant today?
  • How can the Bandung spirit help us to build a global united front against imperialism?
  • What international organisations and movements are carrying forward the Bandung spirit?
  • Are the US and its allies still trying to divide the Global South, as they did during the Cold War?
  • How does China’s rise affect humanity’s trajectory towards multipolarity, sovereignty and socialism?

Confirmed speakers

  • Ben Norton (Founder and editor, Geopolitical Economy Report)
  • Mushahid Hussain (Pakistani senator, Chairman of the China-Pakistan Institute)
  • Tings Chak (Asia Coordinator, Tricontinental Institute)
  • Professor Isaac Saney (Cuba and Black studies specialist, Dalhousie University)
  • Dr Jenny Clegg (Author, China’s Global Strategy: Towards a Multipolar World)
  • Moderator: Professor Radhika Desai (Convenor, International Manifesto Group)

Organisers

This webinar is organised jointly by the International Manifesto Group and Friends of Socialist China.

Register on Eventbrite

Cold Peace with Russia / Cold War with China: Trump’s foreign policy agenda

The following article by C.J. Atkins, published first in People’s World, analyses the apparently drastic differences between the Trump and Biden administrations’ foreign policy agendas, explaining the underlying strategic and ideological agenda behind Trump’s pivot on Ukraine, and debunking the assorted “simplistic hot takes centered on Trump’s admiration for strongmen or conspiratorial allegations that hinge on Russian blackmail and compromising material”.

Atkins gets to the heart of the issue by pointing out that the differences between Republicans and Democrats over Ukraine are “evidence of a split within the US ruling class which has exploded into the open. At the heart of that split are differences over how to resolve the long-term crisis of US capitalism and confront China’s rise to prominence in the world economy.” He explains that the Washington foreign policy establishment has spent years attempting to weaken Russia, seeing “the further extension of US power in Europe as an important milestone along the road to dealing with China”. Trump on the other hand aims to “take confrontation with Russia off the table”, considering it an “expensive distraction”.

The author further opines that Trump’s tariffs and coercive measures against Canada, Mexico, and Latin America are aimed at bringing those parts of the world “into a tighter embrace with the US economy”, consolidating a trade bloc that excludes and attempts to isolate China. That is, they extend the “decoupling” agenda pursued during Trump 1.0 as well as by the Biden administration.

With US monopoly capital increasingly feeling the competition from China, “the foreign policy being pursued by the Trump administration is an expression of the fears of a large section of the capitalist class, and those fears are why we have witnessed a rush toward the Trump camp by industrial sectors which had previously been skeptical of or neutral toward him.”

If the war in Ukraine can be swiftly ended, this is undoubtedly positive. But people should not think Trump’s overtures to Russia reflect some overarching orientation towards peace. Aggression against Russia is set to be replaced with “a new Cold War against China, the carving up of the world into blocs on behalf of big corporations, more destruction in the Middle East, and the ditching of democracy at home—along with all the things that entails, like labor laws, women’s rights, racial equality, and more.”

Trump labeled President Volodymyr Zelensky a “dictator” and called him out for not holding elections earlier this week. He said the Ukrainian leader only wants to “keep the gravy train” of U.S. money rolling in, and blamed him for starting the war with Russia.

Vladimir Putin, meanwhile, was said to be committed to “common sense.” The White House declared him to be someone Trump can “work together” with “very closely.”

What a world of difference from just a few months ago when a different U.S. president called Zelensky a “courageous and determined” defender of democracy and denounced Putin as a “war criminal.”

This dramatic turnaround is just the latest example of the about-face that’s happened in U.S. foreign policy over the last several weeks—a change that’s sparked confusion and bewilderment as 80 years of U.S. imperial strategy is seemingly being thrown overboard.

In Europe, Vice President J.D. Vance recently trashed political leaders there for not working together with fascists and initiated what one commentator called “the opening salvo in a trans-Atlantic divorce proceeding.” Snubbing German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, Trump’s V.P. met with Alice Weidel, leader of the neo-Nazi Alternative for Germany party, instead.

Continue reading Cold Peace with Russia / Cold War with China: Trump’s foreign policy agenda

Wang Yi: The Global South should remain at the forefront of improving the global governance system

Following his visit to Ireland, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi proceeded to New York, where, on February 18, on the initiative of China, which holds the rotating Chair of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) for February, the UNSC held a high-level meeting on the theme, ‘Practicing Multilateralism, Reforming and Improving Global Governance’. The meeting was chaired by Wang Yi and representatives from over 100 countries participated.

In his address to the meeting Wang Yi noted:

The year 2025 marks the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. Eighty years ago, our forefathers, with strenuous struggle and tremendous sacrifice, won the great victory of the Anti-Fascist war; the international community drew painful lessons from the scourge of two world wars; and the United Nations was founded. Multilateralism gradually became the main trend of the times…

The past 80 years is a period of accelerated advancement in world multipolarity and economic globalisation, a period that has witnessed people across the world forging ahead and meeting challenges together, and also a period during which the Global South has been rising and growing in strength. Meanwhile, although human society has emerged from the shadows of the Cold War and moved beyond the bipolar standoff, comprehensive peace and shared prosperity remain elusive. In the third decade of the 21st century, peace and development remains a long-term, arduous task… In the face of the profoundly changing international landscape, the Global South should not only achieve the historic feat of moving toward modernisation together but also remain at the forefront of improving the global governance system.

To this end, he made four proposals:

  • Upholding sovereign equality. All countries are equal, regardless of size or strength. This is the foremost principle in the UN Charter. In advancing global governance, all countries have the right to participate as equals, make decisions as equals, and benefit as equals. We must respect the development paths chosen independently by people of all countries, uphold the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, and not impose one’s will upon others.
  • Upholding fairness and justice. Since the end of World War II, a large number of countries in the Global South have emerged on the world stage, which has revealed growing incompatibility and irrationality in the global governance structure. Under the new circumstances, international affairs should no longer be monopolised by a small number of countries. Countries in the Global South have the right to speak up for and defend their legitimate rights and interests. The fruits of development should no longer be taken by just a few countries. People of all countries have the right to a happy life.
  • Upholding solidarity and coordination. The Security Council must rise above narrow-minded geopolitical considerations, champion the spirit of solidarity and cooperation, fulfil its duties conferred by the UN Charter, and effectually play its role for the maintenance of international peace and security.
  • Upholding an action-oriented approach.  In the face of protracted wars, loss of innocent lives, and challenges brought by new technologies, UN agencies should seek solutions rather than chant slogans. Gaza and the West Bank are the homeland of the Palestinian people, not a bargaining chip in political trade-offs. The Palestinians governing Palestine is an important principle that must be followed in the post-conflict governance of Gaza.

Following the meeting, Wang Yi answered questions from the media. On the issue of Gaza, he said that it is important to recognise that the world is facing more than just the Ukraine crisis. Other hotspots, including the Gaza conflict, also require the international community’s attention and should not be marginalised.

Behind the Gaza conflict lies the unresolved Palestinian question. More than 70 years have passed since the UN adopted the resolution to establish two States, Palestine and Israel, but the two-state solution has only been partially implemented. The State of Israel was established long ago, but the Palestinian people still do not have their own country. Many are displaced, becoming refugees. The Palestinian question remains at the core of the Middle East issue. Palestinian factions should truly implement the Beijing Declaration and achieve unity and self-strength. All parties in the Middle East should transcend their differences and support Palestine’s statehood. The United Nations should take action to admit Palestine as a full member.

The following articles were originally published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Remarks by H.E. Wang Yi at the United Nations Security Council High-Level Meeting “Practicing Multilateralism, Reforming and Improving Global Governance”

Feb. 19 (MFA) — Your Excellency Secretary General António Guterres,
Colleagues,

I would like to thank Secretary General Guterres for attending this meeting and for his briefing.

The year 2025 marks the 80th anniversary of the founding of the United Nations. Eighty years ago, our forefathers, with strenuous struggle and tremendous sacrifice, won the great victory of the Anti-Fascist war; the international community drew painful lessons from the scourge of two world wars; and the United Nations was founded. Multilateralism gradually became the main trend of the times. New historical chapters were opened in global governance.

The past 80 years is a period of accelerated advancement in world multipolarity and economic globalization, a period that has witnessed people across the world forging ahead and meeting challenges together, and also a period during which the Global South has been rising and growing in strength. Meanwhile, although human society has emerged from the shadows of the Cold War and moved beyond the bipolar standoff, comprehensive peace and shared prosperity remain elusive. In the third decade of the 21st century, peace and development remains a long-term, arduous task.

The 80 years of history is enlightenment enough: In the face of the turbulent and changing international landscape, the U.N.-centered international system provides important safeguards for the cause of human progress, and the vision of multilateralism with coordination and cooperation as its cornerstone is the best solution to global issues. In the face of the historical trend of shared future, no country can prosper alone; mutually beneficial cooperation is the right choice. In the face of the profoundly changing international landscape, the Global South should not only achieve the historic feat of moving toward modernization together, but also remain at the forefront of improving the global governance system.

Mr. Secretary General,
Colleagues,

To chart our course for the future, we should not forget why we started out in the beginning. Today, transformation not seen in a century is accelerating across the world, geopolitical conflicts keep escalating, multiple crises are emerging, and instability and uncertainty are increasingly prominent. In a time of intensifying turbulence and transformation, we need, more than ever, to remind ourselves of the founding mission of the U.N., reinvigorate true multilateralism, and speed up the efforts to build a more just and equitable global governance system. In this connection, China proposes the following:

First, upholding sovereign equality. All countries are equal, regardless of size or strength. This is the foremost principle in the U.N. Charter. In advancing global governance, all countries have the right to participate as equals, make decisions as equals, and benefit as equals. We must respect the development paths chosen independently by people of all countries, uphold the principle of non-interference in internal affairs, and not impose one’s will upon others. We must practice international rule of law, ensure the effective implementation of international law, and reject double standards and selective application. Resolutions of the Security Council are binding, and should be observed by all countries. The Security Council is entrusted with authority, and such authority should be upheld by all countries. Any act of bullying, trickery or extortion is a flagrant violation of the basic norms of international relations. Any unilateral sanction that circumvents Security Council authorization lacks legal basis, defies justification and contradicts common sense.

Second, upholding fairness and justice. A critical part of global governance is to ensure that justice prevails. Since the end of World War II, a large number of countries in the Global South have emerged on the world stage, which has revealed growing incompatibility and irrationality in the global governance structure. Under the new circumstances, international affairs should no longer be monopolized by a small number of countries. Countries in the Global South have the right to speak up for and defend their legitimate rights and interests. The fruits of development should no longer be taken by just a few countries. People of all countries have the right to a happy life. The reform of the Security Council should continue to emphasize democratic consultation, increase the representation and say of developing countries, especially African countries, and effectively redress historical injustice.

Third, upholding solidarity and coordination. Promoting international cooperation is an important purpose of the U.N. Charter, and a sure path toward improving global governance. Countries should commit to the principle of extensive consultation and joint contribution for shared benefit, replace confrontation with coordination, prevent lose-lose through win-win cooperation, and break down small circles with greater solidarity. Members cannot just sit by and watch multilateral institutions become dysfunctional and ineffective due to their own failure to cooperate. The Security Council must rise above narrow-minded geopolitical considerations, champion the spirit of solidarity and cooperation, fulfill its duties conferred by the U.N. Charter, and effectually play its role for the maintenance of international peace and security.

Continue reading Wang Yi: The Global South should remain at the forefront of improving the global governance system

China advocates equality among all countries regardless of size

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi has outlined his country’s view of multipolarisation in his address, delivered on February 14, to the 61st Munich Security Conference.

In four succinct points, without mentioning any country by name, but clearly drawing firm and definite lines of demarcation with the bullying and hegemonic practices of the United States in particular, Wang sets out China’s building blocks for an equal and orderly multipolar world:

  • It is important to advocate equal treatment. Rivalry between big powers had brought disaster to humanity, as evidenced by the lessons of the two world wars in the not-so-distant past. Whether it is the colonial system or the core-periphery structure, unequal orders are bound to meet their demise. Independence and autonomy are sought across the world, and greater democracy in international relations is unstoppable. It is in this principle that China advocates equality among all countries regardless of size and calls for increasing the representation and say of developing countries in the international system.
  • It is important to respect international rule of law.  The world today is witnessing incessant chaos and confusion, and one important reason is that some countries believe might makes right and have opened a Pandora’s box marked the law of the jungle. In reality, all countries, regardless of size or strength, are stakeholders in international rule of law. Without norms and standards, one may be at the table yesterday but end up on the menu tomorrow. Major countries must take the lead in honouring their words and upholding rule of law, and must not say one thing but do another, or engage in zero-sum game.
  • It is important to practice multilateralism. In the face of emerging global challenges, no country can stay unaffected, and the “we first” approach in international relations only leads to a lose-lose result.
  • It is important to pursue openness and mutual benefit. The multipolar world should be one where all countries develop together. Protectionism offers no way out, and arbitrary tariffs produce no winners. Decoupling deprives one of opportunities, and a “small yard with high fences” only ends up constraining oneself.

We reprint the full text of the speech below. It was originally published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.

Keynote Speech by H.E. Wang Yi
At the 61st Munich Security Conference
Conversation with China

Munich, February 14, 2025

Your Excellency Chairman Christoph Heusgen,
Dear Friends,
Colleagues,

The world we live in is an increasing mix of turbulence and transformation. Many people are asking the same question: Where is it headed? If I may borrow the theme of this year’s Munich Security Report, it is headed toward multipolarization. When the United Nations was founded 80 years ago, it had only 51 member states; today, 193 countries ride in the same big boat. A multipolar world is not only a historical inevitability; it is also becoming a reality.

Will multipolarity bring chaos, conflict and confrontation? Does it mean domination by major countries and the strong bullying the weak? China’s answer is, we should work for an equal and orderly multipolar world. This is another major proposition put forward by President Xi Jinping, and it represents our sincere expectation for a multipolar world. China will surely be a factor of certainty in this multipolar system, and strive to be a steadfast constructive force in a changing world.

Here, I want to make four points. 

First, it is important to advocate equal treatment. Rivalry between big powers had brought disaster to humanity, as evidenced by the lessons of the two world wars in the not-so-distant past. Whether it is the colonial system or the core-periphery structure, unequal orders are bound to meet their demise. Independence and autonomy is sought across the world, and greater democracy in international relations is unstoppable. Equal rights, equal opportunities and equal rules should become the basic principles of a multipolar world.

Continue reading China advocates equality among all countries regardless of size

A new multipolar world or a new cold war? Latin America, China and the rising global South

In the following article, Ben Chacko, Editor of the Morning Star, analyses the position of Latin America as a frontline in the struggle for multipolarity, a struggle which is heavily impacted by the rise of China.

Ben notes that: “Many of the Latin American revolutionary projects that inspire us… are independence struggles as well as class struggles. The two are bound together… Decolonisation remained partial if it was not accompanied by social revolution because formal independence did not necessarily give a country control of its own resources if private property relations, maintaining ultimate Western ownership in many cases, stayed in place… This explains the close association between communist and decolonisation movements through the 20th century.”

The confrontation between the Global North and the Global South runs through the class struggle in country after country in Latin America, reflected not least through the prism of race – the struggle in Venezuela, Peru, Bolivia and other countries of the Afro-descendant and Indigenous oppressed against white supremacism – as well as being key to the continent’s relationship with the United States.

Therefore, Ben argues, “Building a multipolar world is a decolonisation process: one in which countries prevented till now from exercising full sovereignty because their resources are controlled by others are able to ‘stand up,’ as Chairman Mao put it in 1949. They are able to do so because China’s peaceful rise has created an economic counterweight to the West and the network of financial institutions and treaties that maintain Western hegemony.”

The article was originally published in the Morning Star and is based on a talk given by Ben at London’s Latin America Conference held on February 8.  The panel, on ‘A new multipolar world or a new Cold War? Latin America, China and the rising Global South’ was also addressed by Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez and Isaac Saney, Associate Professor and Coordinator of Black and African Diaspora Studies at Canada’s Dalhousie University, and author of  ‘Cuba, Africa, and Apartheid’s End: Africa’s Children Return!’

During the student-led protests that shook Chile a few years ago, a prominent rallying cry was “neoliberalism was born in Chile and will die in Chile.”

It points to the front-line place Latin America has had when it comes to clashes between economic systems and between imperialism and decolonisation. Many of the Latin American revolutionary projects that inspire us, that lots of us come to Adelante! to hear more about, are independence struggles as well as class struggles.

The two are bound together. The poverty and underdevelopment of much of the Third World is down to the domination of economies by Western corporations controlling their natural resources.

Continue reading A new multipolar world or a new cold war? Latin America, China and the rising global South

A multipolar world or a New Cold War?

The following text is based on a presentation given by Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez at the Latin America Conference held in London on 8 February 2025. The panel also included Morning Star editor Ben Chacko and Canadian author and academic Isaac Saney; it was chaired by Carole Regan of the Cuba Solidarity Campaign.

The text attempts to clarify what multipolarity is, as well as addressing the role of China and the rising threat of military confrontation between the US and China.

What is multipolarity?

‘Multipolarity’ is a word that is heard increasingly often, but its meaning is not well or widely understood, including on the left.

There are many people who think that multipolarity simply means a return to the era of intense inter-imperialist rivalry that characterised the period leading up to World War 1. In the early 20th century, the situation was ‘multipolar’ in the sense that there was more than one imperialist country; Britain, the US, Germany, France, Russia and Japan all represented poles of power and were competing fiercely among themselves for control of the world’s land, resources, labour and markets. Needless to say, there was nothing progressive or peaceful about this conjuncture.

However, multipolarity as defined in the modern era does not refer simply to a geopolitical situation with more than one major power; it is more than a shift away from the US-dominated unipolarity of the 1990s. Multipolarity includes the rise of the Global South; it insists on the principle of equality between nations; and it envisions an end to the system of hegemony and domination, whereby one country (or group of countries) can impose its will on others.

In this sense, we could say that the situation in 1914 was actually unipolar: it was a world system where power was concentrated among a small handful of imperialist countries, albeit with significant contradictions and rivalry between them.

Multipolarity sees Latin America as a centre of power. It sees Africa, West Asia, South Asia, Central Asia, East Asia, the Caribbean and the Pacific as centres of power. Its multilateral organisations include not just the G7, NATO and EU, but also BRICS, the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), the African Union (AU), the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), the G77, and so on.

This geopolitical shift reflects a rapidly-changing global economic landscape. For example, BRICS countries now have a larger share of the world’s GDP than the G7 countries when measured by purchasing power parity (PPP). This is a dramatic transformation compared to the beginning of the 21st century, when G7 countries made up 43 percent of global GDP by PPP, compared to the BRICS countries’ 21 percent.

So when we talk about multipolarity, we’re not talking simply about a change of cast in the imperialist world system, such as Spanish/Portuguese colonialism giving way to Dutch colonialism, or Dutch colonialism giving way to British colonialism, or British colonialism giving way to US imperialism. Rather, multipolarity represents an end to the whole system of domination and hegemony; an end to the 500-year-old division of the world into oppressor and oppressed nations. It means undermining imperialism and depriving the imperialist countries of their power to determine the fate of the rest of the world.

Continue reading A multipolar world or a New Cold War?

Understanding the role of BRICS+ in global progress

In the following important article, Dr. Jenny Clegg sets out and responds to eight key criticisms and questions concerning the BRICS+ cooperation mechanism – its nature, significance and role -and argues that, in representing a significant challenge to US hegemony, it contributes to the movement towards a multipolar world.

Noting that, the rise of the BRICS+ has divided left opinion, Jenny writes that: “Critics see, at best, a collection of disorderly capitalist states which, tied to the dollar and lacking political coherence, are in no position to form a real alternative to the existing global order and, in fact, do not even aspire to do so.” She acknowledges that: “The significance of BRICS+ should not be exaggerated: they are in no position to serve as a counterweight to the advanced capitalist states.”

However, “BRICS+ is, in fact, the driver of global growth. In the last 10 years, China and India alone comprised 47 per cent of world growth; now, according to the IMF, the average growth of the BRICS+ this year will be close to 4 per cent while the sluggish G7 barely makes 1 per cent.”

And whilst “talk of dedollarisation has indeed been overhyped… the group is developing a sanctions-proof cross-border payments system and has seen a notable increase in intra-BRICS trading in local currencies, greatly reducing losses in exchange rate charges and currency fluctuations. With BRICS+ partners now added to the scheme, potentially 30-plus per cent of global trade could begin to transition away from using the dollar.”

Turning to the accusation that “the larger BRICS+ members are just pursuing sub-imperialist and neo-imperialist agendas,” whilst acknowledging that “ambitions of national aggrandisement are at play among some of the more powerful BRICS members”, she argues that, “BRICS+ has emerged amidst a rise in diplomatic activity within the developing regions and should not be divorced from this wider momentum in the Global South. To assume that smaller developing countries are passively succumbing to subordinate positions under regional hegemons is frankly patronising.

“From the proposals of Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley on tackling debt to the former colonised states’ demands for reparations at the recent Commonwealth Summit to the Caribbean Islands’ proposals for a fund to cover the damage caused by extreme climate events, to name but a few, smaller developing countries are asserting their own agency.”

Jenny also argues that the BRICS+ approach is dual: developing cooperative economic arrangements step by step directed at strengthening the development of member states, so shifting the overall material economic and political balance to build pressure on the World Bank, IMF and WTO to become more inclusive.

“To dismiss this incremental approach as global social democracy, diluting true socialist opposition to imperialism, is to fail to come to terms with the reality of unequal world power so as to develop a concrete strategy for change.”

Taking issue with those who assail BRICS+ for a supposed lack of sufficient anti-imperialist rigour, Jenny responds that:

“It is in its resistance to taking sides in the US’s new cold war that BRICS+ is of such immense significance – a brake on the US-led path of war. Each member brings its own perspective – non-aligned, multi-aligned, anti-imperialist — to the organisation, but no matter how cautious and tentative their individual foreign policies may be, these are all to be valued as ways of exercising independence against the US new cold war.

“It is in the diversity of the BRICS+ that its strength lies. This is not about pro- and anti-Western blocs –  the real choice is between peaceful coexistence and the road to a third world war.”

Answering those who say that BRICS+ is too riven by disputes among its members to build a peaceful world, she draws attention to the recent agreement, on the eve of the BRICS+ summit in Kazan, between key members China and India on the management of their border dispute.

She concludes, in words that have only acquired even more cogency and urgency with US President-elect Donald Trump’s threat to impose 100% tariff rates on the BRICS+ nations should they attempt to develop alternatives to dollar hegemony:

Measuring BRICS+ against preconceived notions of socialism or even anti-imperialism is abstract and utopian, absent of any strategy to end US hegemony and Western dominance. It is in removing these obstacles that the door to socialist advance can be opened.

Taking BRICS+ out of context to knock them down is to wave a false red flag in the face of the very real dangers of war. Now, as Donald Trump brings new international challenges, and with liberal internationalism beyond resuscitation, it is imperative for the left to look South, not least to BRICS+ with its offer of a viable progressive project.

Jenny is an anti-war activist and China specialist. The author of ‘China’s Global Strategy: Towards a multipolar world’ (published by Pluto Press), she is also a member of our advisory group. Her article was first published by the Morning Star.

THE Brics+ Kazan summit in Russia stood out as a pillar of stability in an increasingly volatile and dangerous world. With wars raging in Ukraine and the Middle East, pushing the UN system to breakdown, it kept the spirit of multilateralism alive.

Gathering leaders and representatives from 36 countries, the meeting was the first for the enlarged grouping, which last year added UAE, Ethiopia, Egypt and Iran to the existing Russia, China, India, Brazil and South Africa.

The rise of the Brics+ has divided left opinion. Supporters claim it to be transformative, tipping the global balance against the G7 and spelling the end of US hegemony as bearers of a new international financial order and a more peaceful world.

Critics see, at best, a collection of disorderly capitalist states which, tied to the dollar and lacking political coherence, are in no position to form a real alternative to the existing global order and, in fact, do not even aspire to do so.

The significance of Brics+ should not be exaggerated: they are in no position to serve as a counterweight to the advanced capitalist states.

Brics+ comprises 33 per cent of world GDP (purchasing power parity), overtaking the G7 at 29 per cent. Nevertheless, given their members’ much lower per capita income and technological advancement, they remain far weaker.

What should not be missed here, though, is that Brics+ is, in fact, the driver of global growth. In the last 10 years, China and India alone comprised 47 per cent of world growth; now, according to the IMF, the average growth of the Brics+ this year will be close to 4 per cent while the sluggish G7 barely makes 1 per cent.

The adoption of partnerships for countries at Kazan as a stage to full membership also considerably amplifies Brics+ influence. The as-yet unconfirmed list of 13 partners includes Nigeria and Algeria, making all five of Africa’s largest economies part of the Brics+ zone while bringing in Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia and Vietnam, as well as Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan to extend Brics+ influence across the whole of Asia, a continent containing the world’s fastest-growing regions.

The Brics+ real significance lies in the future: in 10 to 15 years, China may become the leading world economic power; India, number three; new partner Indonesia, number five; with other new partners Malaysia, Nigeria and Thailand moving up the top 20.

Right now, with its reach into the different developing continents opening up new corridors of trade and communication, Brics+ is well placed to shape the multipolar future.

Predictions of Brics+ replacing the dollar-based global financial system are no more than a pipe dream.

Brics came together originally for economic reasons: to share opportunities for development, trade and investment, their large populations offering great mutual potential. Following the West’s freeze on Russian assets after its invasion of Ukraine, concerns about reducing reliance on the US dollar also became a priority.

Talk of dedollarisation has indeed been overhyped. The Brics+ aim as a collective is to end dollar hegemony — not to replace the dollar system but to reduce dependence on it. To this end, the group is developing a sanctions-proof cross-border payments system and has seen a notable increase in intra-Brics trading in local currencies, greatly reducing losses in exchange rate charges and currency fluctuations.

With Brics+ partners now added to the scheme, potentially 30-plus per cent of global trade could begin to transition away from using the dollar. Such a shift could spark the sell-off of US dollars on a large scale.

The fact is that much of world’s future development will not take place under US economic hegemony. Put another way, the Brics+ trajectory is towards gradually breaking the US monopoly of financial power.

Continue reading Understanding the role of BRICS+ in global progress

China and Brazil working to shape a just, multipolar world order

In the following article, published in China Daily on 19 November 2024, Efe Can Gürcan describes the history of the G20 and argues that Brazil’s presidency of the organisation – and its leadership of the G20 summit that took place this week – “could produce a pivotal transformation in the G20, placing stronger emphasis on Global South perspectives”.

Efe notes the complemenarities of Brazil and China’s development strategies. For example: “Brazil’s Ecological Transition Plan, which has garnered global attention for its ambitious goals and strongly resonates with China’s shared vision of an ecological civilization.” Meanwhile, China is Brazil’s largest trading partner, and Brazil is China’s principal source of agricultural imports.

On foreign policy issues, “both countries, as BRICS members, share similar positions … including on the Palestine and the Ukraine crises, and both advocate for a multipolar world based on fairness and justice.” As such, “by engaging more closely with China, Brazil could amplify its role in shaping a just, multipolar world order and in bringing the Global South’s voice to the forefront”.

The results of the G20 summit and the bilateral meetings between Presidents Xi Jinping and Lula da Silva certainly support the vision Efe outlines. Xi and Lula announced on Wednesday the elevation of their countries’ bilateral ties to a “community with a shared future for a more just world and a more sustainable planet”, and committed to deepening coordination between the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and Brazil’s development strategies.

The two “agreed that the relationship is at its best period in history, is growing stronger in global, strategic and long-term significance, and has become an exemplar of common progress, solidarity and cooperation between major developing countries” and that “China and Brazil should also step forward to their historic missions of leading efforts to safeguard the common interests of Global South countries and making the international order more just and equitable”, as reported by China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

China and Brazil’s blossoming relationship is based on mutual respect, friendship and solidarity, and a shared determination to struggle against poverty, against war, for sustainable development, and for a multipolar world. This is a relationship that is not only of great benefit to the two countries, but to the world as a whole.

Dr Efe Can Gürcan is currently a Visiting Scholar at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) and is a member of the Friends of Socialist China Britain Committee.

With the theme “Building a Just World and a Sustainable Planet”, Brazil’s G20 presidency provides a unique chance to shape the global agenda at a pivotal time. This role is far from ceremonial — unlike organizations with a permanent secretariat or founding charter, the G20 relies on the country holding the presidency to set priorities, coordinate initiatives, and drive forward discussions. This time, Brazil’s leadership will steer this global forum, which represents over 85 percent of the world’s GDP, three-quarters of international trade, and two-thirds of the global population.

The G20’s history is rooted in responses to the crises of Western-led global capitalism. It emerged initially as a meeting of finance ministers in 1999. The G20 was a response to the devastating 1998 Asian financial crisis, which underscored how global economic turbulence could cascade across borders — especially impacting the developing world. Although the concept of a forum like the G20 emerged within Western circles, G7 leaders initially resisted it, preferring smaller, more private summits to maintain focus and control. Yet, the global call for a more inclusive cooperation mechanism grew louder in 2008, when the US-triggered global financial crisis exposed the limits of Western countries’ ability to stabilize markets and respond to crises alone. Holding its first summit of heads of state in 2008, the G20 ultimately evolved into a “crisis steering group”, which convenes the world’s largest economies, including emerging players that can no longer be sidelined in addressing global problems. As such, the G20’s purpose has expanded beyond finance to encompass pressing global issues such as climate change, economic inequality and sustainable development. Brazil, a key actor in Latin America’s historic “Pink Tide”, a leader in South-South cooperation and champion of multipolarity, is positioned to make the G20 more inclusive and effective in addressing these global challenges.

While the G7 — a smaller, more exclusive club of the wealthiest Western nations — was originally conceived to steer global governance, its legitimacy has waned over time. Its elitist composition, reflective of narrow Western interests, has led to criticism that it excludes key emerging economies. The G7’s exclusive nature was further cemented when it expelled Russia following the 2014 Ukraine crisis, reinforcing its status as a Western bloc rather than a truly global coalition aligned with the common destiny of humanity. The G20, on the other hand, includes a broader array of voices, providing a necessary balance and inclusivity in tackling today’s complex, borderless challenges, such as climate change and inequality.

Brazil’s leadership could produce a pivotal transformation in the G20, placing stronger emphasis on Global South perspectives and potentially transforming it from a North-South platform into a more democratic South-North forum. Brazil’s commitment to inclusive, sustainable development has been formalized in Brazil’s Ecological Transition Plan, which has garnered global attention for its ambitious goals and strongly resonates with China’s shared vision of an ecological civilization. In 2023, Brazil generated an impressive 91 percent of its electricity from clean sources, far surpassing global averages and even its own target of 84 percent by 2030. It also reduced Amazon deforestation to a six-year low, making strides in preserving the planet’s largest rainforest.

Beyond environmental leadership, Brazil is advocating for progressive reforms to reduce inequality and increase global governance inclusivity. Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva has proposed a 2-percent billionaire tax to combat global inequality and will likely renew his call for reforms to the United Nations, pushing for a more effective and representative Security Council, especially in light of recent failures to address urgent global crises, such as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The proposals exhibit a striking synergy with China’s Global Development Initiative and Global Security Initiative.

Meanwhile, Brazil’s continued economic stability and leadership status are closely tied to its relationship with China. China is Brazil’s largest export destination, and from 2007 to 2023, Chinese foreign direct investment in Brazil totaled $73.3 billion, with significant investment in Brazil’s electricity sector, which is crucial given Brazil’s recent energy challenges. China is also one of Brazil’s top agricultural export destinations, vital for an agribusiness sector that makes up almost 25 percent of Brazil’s GDP. President Xi Jinping’s upcoming visit to Brazil during the G20 summit is an opportune moment to further enhance these economic ties and potentially encourage Brazil’s participation in the Belt and Road Initiative. Indeed, recent developments ahead of President Xi’s visit, such as Brazil’s offer to allow Shanghai-based satellite manufacturer SpaceSail access to a space base in the northeast of the country, hint at Brazil’s increasing openness to closer cooperation with China. Despite Brazil’s new tariffs imposed on Asian imports of iron, steel and fiber optic cable in October, this gesture toward collaboration shows Brazil’s recognition of China’s strategic importance.

The collaboration potential of the two countries strongly resonates in broader Latin America, where inadequate infrastructure and weak connectivity remain significant obstacles to regional development. The infrastructure gap in Latin America is vast, requiring an estimated $250 billion in investment annually. Brazil, as Latin America’s largest economy, has historically led efforts to promote infrastructure connectivity through the now-defunct Initiative for the Integration of the Regional Infrastructure of South America within the Union of South American Nations. However, sustaining Brazil’s own growth and supporting regional development will require more resources than Brazil currently has due to economic and political challenges that have affected its capacity since the mid-2010s. Chinese cooperation through the BRI could be key in meeting these infrastructure needs. Brazil’s hesitance to formally join the BRI risks stalling not only its infrastructure progress but also its role as a regional leader and its economy’s competitiveness on the global stage.

One cannot but notice a strong synergy between Brazil and China’s foreign policy objectives. Both countries, as BRICS members, share similar positions on major international issues, including the Palestine and the Ukraine crises, and both advocate for a multipolar world based on fairness and justice. This alignment complements Brazil’s G20 agenda, reinforcing its commitment to South-South cooperation and to building a community with a shared future for mankind. By engaging more closely with China, Brazil could amplify its role in shaping a just, multipolar world order and in bringing the Global South’s voice to the forefront.

The Global South, with China in the forefront, is the key driver towards true multilateralism

The China Institute of International Studies (CIIS), a specialised research institution directly under China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and the Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Studies Centre of CIIS, hosted a launch on November 11 of their latest report, entitled ‘True Multilateralism: Conceptual Development, Core Essence and China’s Practice’.

Held at Beijing’s Diaoyutai State Guest House, the meeting was attended by more than 220 people from around 70 countries, including diplomats from 66 embassies in Beijing and representatives from three international organisations. 18 embassies were represented by their Ambassador or Head of Mission. They were joined by Chinese officials, scholars, researchers and students, along with foreign students studying in China.

Friends of Socialist China Co-Editor Keith Bennett attended and spoke at the conference, representing the Institute of Independence Studies and its Xi Jinping Thought Study Group.

Speakers at the event were:

  • Chen Bo: Secretary General, Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Studies Centre; and President, China Institute of International Studies (CIIS)
  • Miao Deyu: Assistant Minister, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, China
  • Mauricio Hurtado: Ambassador of Chile to China
  • Ahmed Mustafa Fahmy:  Head, League of Arab States’ China Representative Office
  • Oleg Kopylov: Deputy Secretary General, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO)
  • Ren Hongyan: Special Research Fellow, Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy Studies Centre
  • Chhem Kieth Rethy: Senior Minister, Royal Government of Cambodia; Chairman, Economic, Social and Cultural Council, Cambodia
  • Wu Zhicheng: President, Institute of International Strategy, Party School of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China (National Academy of Governance)
  • Keith Bennett: Xi Jinping Thought Study Group, Institute for Independence Studies, UK
  • Wang Lei: Deputy Director, Institute of World Economics and Politics, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences
  • Gafar Kara Ahmed: Researcher, China-Arab Research Centre on Reform and Development, Shanghai International Studies University; former Sudanese Ambassador to China; and
  • Jia Lieying: Dean, School of International Relations & Director, UN Research Centre, Beijing Language and Culture University.

The full text of the Report may be found here.

The following is the text of Keith’s remarks to the meeting.

I welcome the release of your report today. Long ago, Engels, in his preface to ‘The Peasant War in Germany’, stressed the need to constantly “keep in mind that socialism, having become a science, demands the same treatment as every other science – it must be studied.”

This is why the foreign policy of a major socialist country like China, whilst naturally deciding each issue on its merits and specific characteristics, cannot be approached and determined in an ad hoc or impressionistic way but rather on the basis of the most advanced theory, itself based on the summation of long years of practice, which at the present time means the study and application of Xi Jinping Thought on Diplomacy.

President Xi Jinping always reminds us that we are witnessing and experiencing changes unseen in a century. We can see the veracity and profundity of his observation by looking at practically any field of human exploration and endeavour, most recently, for example, the immense opportunities and challenges presented by AI.

But most fundamentally, I believe that the significance of viewing things from this century-long paradigm is that it is just a little over 100 years since socialism graduated from being an ideal to becoming a modern programme of nation building. The concept of changes unseen in a century addresses above all the global ramifications of that historical turning point.

This year we have observed the 70th anniversary of the proclamation of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, which may be taken as the building blocks and guarantor of true multilateralism and a most fundamental reform of a global governance system hitherto dominated by a handful of oppressor nations, almost exclusively in Western Europe and North America.

The creation of the Soviet state meant that there were now countries in the world with fundamentally different political and social systems. The question therefore arose as to what type of relations should exist between those states and how should the relationship between them be handled. Faced with this question, Lenin formulated the policy of peaceful coexistence.

Some three-and-a-half decades later, it was clear that the existence of states with different social systems was no mere transient phenomenon but rather a long-term historical reality. It therefore fell to the Chinese communists to raise the issue beyond a tactical policy or temporary necessity, but rather to place it on a firm theoretical foundation, to elevate it to the level of science.

Today, in the new era, this issue, while losing none of its original cogency and vitality, has to be approached on a new basis and on a new level. If, seventy years ago, the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence gave the socialist countries, and the newly independent countries just embarking on the road of building a new society, freedom to breathe and room to manoeuvre, today we face a qualitatively different situation.

Continue reading The Global South, with China in the forefront, is the key driver towards true multilateralism

Donald Trump and the drive to war against China

In the following article, which first appeared in slightly shorter form in Labour Outlook, Carlos Martinez assesses the prospects for the US-led New Cold War against China under a second Trump presidency, and the possibility of military conflict between the world’s two largest economies.

The article begins by noting that US policy towards China has been relatively consistent for over a decade, starting with the Obama-Clinton ‘Pivot to Asia’ in 2011, followed by the Trump administration’s trade war, and then the Biden administration’s sanctions, tariffs, semiconductor war, military provocations and the creation of AUKUS.

What will change under Trump? Carlos notes that “a deepening of economic confrontation seems more than likely”, given Trump’s repeated promises to impose unprecedented tariffs on Chinese goods. And while Trump made noises during his election campaign about wanting to end the US’s “forever wars”, “the appointment of inveterate China hawks Marco Rubio and Michael Waltz as secretary of state and national security adviser sends a clear signal that Trump is planning to escalate hostilities”.

Marco Rubio is an anti-China fanatic, who stands for more tariffs, more sanctions, more slander, more support for Taiwanese separatism, more provocations in the South China Sea, and more destabilisation in Hong Kong and Xinjiang. Mike Waltz has long pushed for closer military cooperation with India, Japan, Australia and other countries in the region in preparation for war against China.

The article notes that China’s consistent offer to the West is based on working together “to tackle the urgent issues facing humanity, including climate change, pandemics, peace, nuclear proliferation, food security and development”. However, it is clear that only mass movements will force Western governments to take up such an offer.

Although the Pivot to Asia was initiated by the Obama administration – when then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was tasked with developing a strategy for “America’s Pacific Century” – it was the Trump presidency from 2017-21 that really turned up the dial in terms of US anti-China hostility.

Donald Trump campaigned in 2016 on a promise to protect jobs by addressing the US’s trade deficit with China: “We can’t continue to allow China to rape our country and that’s what they’re doing. It’s the greatest theft in the history of the world.”

In power, the Trump administration launched a full-scale trade war, imposing enormous tariffs on hundreds of billions of dollars of Chinese imports. This was combined with a systematic attack on Chinese technology companies, removing Huawei from US telecoms infrastructure and attempting to prevent TikTok and WeChat from operating in the US.

Militarily, Trump ramped up the US’s presence in the South China Sea and sought to revitalise the Quad group (US, Japan, India and Australia), working towards a broad regional alliance against China.

The State Department oversaw a crackdown on Chinese students and researchers, and, with the arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic, Trump resorted to flagrant racism, talking repeatedly about the “kung flu” and the “China virus” – all of which fed in to a horrifying rise in hate crimes against people of East Asian descent.

As such, many breathed a sigh of relief when Joe Biden was elected four years ago. Unfortunately, however, Biden has essentially maintained the anti-China strategic orientation of his predecessor, albeit without the crassly confrontational rhetoric and overt racism. Biden in many ways has been more systematic in pursuit of military and economic containment of China, particularly when it comes to building an international coalition around US strategic interests.

In September 2021, the US, Britain and Australia announced the launch of AUKUS – a nuclear pact, manifestly contravening the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and evidently designed to counter China.

Biden has hosted numerous Quad summit meetings, at which the member states have reiterated their “steadfast commitment to a free and open Indo-Pacific” – that is, to preserving a status quo in which the US maintains over 300 military bases in the region, along with tens of thousands of troops, nuclear-enabled warplanes, aircraft carriers, and missile defence systems aimed at establishing nuclear first-strike capability.

The combination of the Quad and AUKUS looks suspiciously like an attempt to create an Asian NATO. Meanwhile Nancy Pelosi’s 2022 trip to Taiwan Province was the highest-level US visit to the island in quarter of a century. In 2023, Biden signed off on direct US military aid to Taiwan for the first time; a BBC headline from November 2023 noted that “the US is quietly arming Taiwan to the teeth”. This undermines the Three Joint Communiqués – which form the bedrock for US-China diplomatic relations – and is clearly aimed at inflaming tensions across the Taiwan Strait and setting up a potential hot war with China over Taiwan. A recently-leaked memo from four-star general Mike Minihan predicted war over Taiwan in 2025: “My gut tells me we will fight in 2025”.

The Biden administration has expanded Trump-era restrictions against China’s technology industry, in particular by launching a ‘chip war’ to slow down China’s progress in semiconductor production, artificial intelligence, mobile phones and more. And while the US government under Biden has set several ambitious climate goals, it has also introduced sweeping sanctions on Chinese solar materials and imposed huge tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles.

The unfortunate truth is that there is a consensus among Democrats and Republicans. In Biden’s words, “we’re in a competition with China to win the 21st century” – and the US must win this competition at all costs.

To what extent can we expect the situation to change under a second Trump presidency?

Continue reading Donald Trump and the drive to war against China

China, multipolarity and the rise of the Global South

We are pleased to publish below an article by Francisco Domínguez, secretary of the Venezuela Solidarity Campaign (Britain) and Friends of Socialist China advisory group member, based on a speech he delivered to our September 28 conference celebrating the 75th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China.

The article begins by highlighting some of the parallels between the Chinese Revolution and the 20th century revolutionary movement in Latin America, particularly with regard to the role of the peasantry and the relative weight of the struggle against colonialism and imperialism. Francisco draws in particular on the work of Peruvian Marxist, José Carlos Mariátegui, in the 1920s.

Francisco goes on to outline the impact of Hugo Chávez’s strategy of regional integration and its complementarity with the global strategy of multipolarity – in which China plays a key role – as well as the blossoming economic and diplomatic relationship between Latin America and the People’s Republic of China.

The article concludes: “The rise of Latin America with the Pink Tide as a dynamic and active component of the Global South is a clear manifestation both of multipolarity and the region’s desire to play an leading role in building a Global Community of Shared Future.”

Introduction

The Chinese Revolution has reached 75 years and its extraordinary economic development has turned into the second largest economy in the world on the basis of impressive technological advances and becoming a highly beneficial hub to the Global South, which is the current manifestation of multipolarity. We examine how Latin America embarked on a process of progressive transformation and regional integration (known as the Pink Tide) leading, since about 1999, to enter into a growing collaborative and multifaceted relationship with the People’s Republic of China.

Significance of the Chinese Revolution

In 1957 Mao Zedong identified three key forces on a world scale: US imperialism engaged in policies and wars of aggression; other developed capitalist countries; and countries fighting for national independence and national liberation movements in Asia, Africa and Latin America. […] As for the oppressed nations’ liberation movements and countries fighting to gain national independence, the Party advocated giving them active support and developing extensive friendly relations with them. Regarding capitalist countries other than the U.S., the Party’s view was that China should also win them over and develop friendly relations with them. As to the United States, the Party advocated determined opposition to U.S. armed aggression and threats to China, on the one hand, while still striving for peaceful co-existence with the it and settling disputes between the two countries through peaceful consultation, on the other.[1]

The novelty of the Chinese Revolution, already a feature of the Russian Revolution, was an immense peasant base in a country where in 1949 there was hardly a working class. Well over 85% of the country was made of peasants and where the working-class movement had been destroyed by a combination of the Kuomintang’s brutal repression in 1925-1927, followed by the Japanese invasion (1931-1949). The proletariat had almost disappeared.

Thus, the Chinese Communist Party mobilised the peasantry endowing that mobilization with proletariat leadership and revolutionary dynamic, which, by demolishing its feudal structures, would lead to the accomplishment of the democratic tasks of the revolution. However, its consolidation required to move simultaneously to the undertaking of the socialist tasks by primarily start the construction of a proletarian state that rested on the power of the People’s Liberation Army under the leadership of the CCP. The latter gave the revolution its socialist character.

In this regard in 1959, Lui Shaoqi, a leader of the Revolution said, the Chinese revolution exerts a formidable “attraction for the peoples of backward countries that have suffered, or are suffering imperialist oppression. They feel that they should also be able to do what the Chinese have done.”[2]

A similar strategy had been put forward in Latin America by Peruvian Marxist, José Carlos Mariátegui as early as 1928.[3] He argued that due to its backward nature, the nations in Latin America had a weak, small and dependent bourgeoisie, subordinated to the landed oligarchy and imperialism, therefore, unable and unwilling to undertake the carrying out of the national democratic tasks to modernise society to fully develop capitalism. Thus, the only way to carry through the national democratic tasks was by a socialist revolution led by the proletariat enjoying hegemony over the majority peasantry for land reform as the sine qua non condition of its success.

Continue reading China, multipolarity and the rise of the Global South