Should BRICS form a military alliance like NATO?

B00Mer

B00Mer

Make Canada Great Again
Sep 6, 2008
47,123
8,142
113
Rent Free in Your Head
www.canadianforums.ca
The BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) is an association of five major emerging economies. While NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is a military alliance between North American and European countries for collective defense, the BRICS group primarily focuses on economic cooperation, political coordination, and addressing global issues.

Forming a military alliance like NATO would represent a significant shift in the objectives and dynamics of the BRICS group. There are several factors to consider when evaluating whether BRICS should form a military alliance like NATO:

  1. Diverse Objectives: The BRICS countries have diverse geopolitical interests and priorities. While they share common goals in certain areas, such as advocating for a more multipolar world order and reforming global governance structures, they may not all be aligned on the need for a military alliance.
  2. Historical Context: NATO was formed in the context of the Cold War to counter the Soviet Union. The security dynamics and threats faced by the BRICS countries are different. They may prefer to focus on economic cooperation, development initiatives, and diplomatic efforts to address security challenges.
  3. Sovereignty Concerns: Forming a military alliance involves ceding some degree of sovereignty to a collective defense framework. Some BRICS countries may be hesitant to enter into such an arrangement due to concerns about maintaining their independence and autonomy in decision-making.
  4. Regional Dynamics: The BRICS countries are located in different regions with varying security challenges. A one-size-fits-all military alliance may not be suitable for addressing the diverse security concerns of each member state.
  5. Resource Allocation: Building and maintaining a military alliance requires significant resources and commitments. The BRICS countries may prioritize other areas, such as economic development, poverty alleviation, and infrastructure investments, over investing in a military alliance.
Ultimately, the decision to form a military alliance like NATO would depend on the willingness of the BRICS countries to align their security interests, overcome differences, and commit to a common defense framework. As of my last knowledge cutoff in September 2021, there were no indications that the BRICS countries were actively considering such a move. It is advisable to consult more recent sources or expert analyses for updates on this topic.

BRICS NATIONS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Member_states_of_BRICS

OIG1 (1).jpg
 
Jinentonix

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
Wait, wait, wait. In a different thread you insisted that NATO was a "peacekeeping" organization.
And I don't really see India wanting to go that far either. 1) They'd pretty much be stuck with having to purchase shitty Russian military tech or even shittier Chinese military tech. 2) China keeps fucking with India along the mountainous border region between them. Not sure they'd want to militarily ally themselves with someone that routinely engages in border incursions against them and re-names parts of India .

China has recently renamed 30 locations in the Indian state of Arunachal Pradesh, referring to it as “Zangnan” or "South Tibet". This move is part of China’s ongoing efforts to assert its territorial claims over the region. The renamed locations include rivers, mountains, a lake, and residential areas.

The fucking CCP is going to doom BRICS before it even has a chance to get off the ground.
 
Ron in Regina

Ron in Regina

"Voice of the West" Party
Apr 9, 2008
28,105
10,507
113
Regina, Saskatchewan
B00Mer said:
Supposed to be.. a deterrent against attacking another NATO Country

Ukraine isn't part of NATO
Click to expand...
Not at this point and not while this war is going on with Russia… but afterwards it’ll be granted membership from what I understand. This keeps NATO out of the current conflict, but then after the fact, it’ll keep it from happening a second time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: petros
Jinentonix

Jinentonix

Hall of Fame Member
Sep 6, 2015
11,619
6,262
113
Olympus Mons
B00Mer said:
Supposed to be.. a deterrent against attacking another NATO Country

Ukraine isn't part of NATO
Click to expand...
Which is why NATO has no forces fighting there. Support and defend are two entirely different concepts. Also notice you ignored the actual point of my post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: petros
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom