Can the BRICS re-open the “gateway to Africa”? South Africa’s contradictory facilitation of divergent Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese interests

Patrick Bond

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-62590-4_18

Can the BRICS re-open the “gateway to Africa”? South Africa’s contradictory facilitation of divergent Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese interests

Patrick Bond

University of the Witwatersrand

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

Abstract

Claims that the BRICS network has been presented as an “alternative” to exploitative global multilateralism, whereas Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are in fact junior partners in perpetuating the under-development of Africa. According to the author, the BRICS stand accused of under-developing Africa in several respects, a process amplified by roller-coaster commodity price changes. Nonetheless, the author notes that some scholars think the BRICS have to a greater extent impacted the global order by driving some change in the procedural values of multilateralism.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Africa and the World
Subtitle of host publication	Bilateral and Multilateral International Diplomacy
Publisher	Springer International Publishing
Pages	403-431
Number of pages	29
ISBN (Electronic)	9783319625904
ISBN (Print)	9783319625898
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62590-4_18
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2017
Externally published	Yes

ASJC Scopus subject areas

General Social Sciences

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

Access to Document

10.1007/978-3-319-62590-4_18

Cite this

@inbook{17efc94f1ad5439b994a29b72ef9747a,

title = "Can the BRICS re-open the “gateway to Africa”? South Africa{\textquoteright}s contradictory facilitation of divergent Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese interests",

abstract = "Claims that the BRICS network has been presented as an “alternative” to exploitative global multilateralism, whereas Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are in fact junior partners in perpetuating the under-development of Africa. According to the author, the BRICS stand accused of under-developing Africa in several respects, a process amplified by roller-coaster commodity price changes. Nonetheless, the author notes that some scholars think the BRICS have to a greater extent impacted the global order by driving some change in the procedural values of multilateralism.",

author = "Patrick Bond",

note = "Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} The Author(s) 2018.",

year = "2017",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-62590-4_18",

language = "English",

isbn = "9783319625898",

pages = "403--431",

booktitle = "Africa and the World",

publisher = "Springer International Publishing",

}

Can the BRICS re-open the “gateway to Africa”? South Africa’s contradictory facilitation of divergent Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese interests. / Bond, Patrick.
Africa and the World: Bilateral and Multilateral International Diplomacy. Springer International Publishing, 2017. p. 403-431.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

TY - CHAP

T1 - Can the BRICS re-open the “gateway to Africa”? South Africa’s contradictory facilitation of divergent Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese interests

AU - Bond, Patrick

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - Claims that the BRICS network has been presented as an “alternative” to exploitative global multilateralism, whereas Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are in fact junior partners in perpetuating the under-development of Africa. According to the author, the BRICS stand accused of under-developing Africa in several respects, a process amplified by roller-coaster commodity price changes. Nonetheless, the author notes that some scholars think the BRICS have to a greater extent impacted the global order by driving some change in the procedural values of multilateralism.

AB - Claims that the BRICS network has been presented as an “alternative” to exploitative global multilateralism, whereas Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa are in fact junior partners in perpetuating the under-development of Africa. According to the author, the BRICS stand accused of under-developing Africa in several respects, a process amplified by roller-coaster commodity price changes. Nonetheless, the author notes that some scholars think the BRICS have to a greater extent impacted the global order by driving some change in the procedural values of multilateralism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85042630205&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-62590-4_18

DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-62590-4_18

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:85042630205

SN - 9783319625898

SP - 403

EP - 431

BT - Africa and the World

PB - Springer International Publishing

ER -

Can the BRICS re-open the “gateway to Africa”? South Africa’s contradictory facilitation of divergent Brazilian, Russian, Indian and Chinese interests

Abstract

ASJC Scopus subject areas

UN SDGs

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this