[ethbr1]

BRICS is Russia wishing that China (much less Brazil, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates) were aligned to its interests.

A more accurate description of the way the world is trending:

US / UK / Europe / Japan / South Korea (still tied by defense, if push really comes to shove) vs Russia vs China vs Non-Aligned Nations (India, Indonesia, Egypt, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Ethiopia, Nigeria, etc.)

And historically (1960s), in a multi-polar world, middle powers are best served by being ambiguously aligned to force advantageous courting by major powers.

[plaidfuji]

If this spreads into a broader conflict, it remains to be seen whether Europe sticks tightly with that block. They certainly won’t align with Russia, but they may be tied so closely to China economically that they can’t afford to be dragged into a direct conflict with them. I could see a situation where they try to remain non—aligned.

[jopsen]

Given that we now that to deploy troops to prevent the US from invading Greenland.

I'd agree, it's not a given that the US can count on Europe in a conflict with China.

But probably Europe wouldn't be trading with China or anything.

It's just given the treatment of the US administration, the US probably can't build a volunteer coalition like I Iraq - unless there is an attack on US mainland.

[AnimalMuppet]

Well, China, Russia, Iran, and North Korea seem to have a (fairly loose) "alliance of convenience" at the moment. "The enemy of my enemy", more or less.

[alex43578]

Bartering some e-scooters for oil is hardly an alliance. Other than China, you just have a list of outcast countries on America, Europe, or the Middle East's sh*t list.

[jopsen]

Hmm, I'm not sure trading is an alliance.

I doubt NK sent anything to Russia without payment in hard currency (gold).

[petre]

NK was getting some reactor hardware from Russia. 'Unfortunately' the ship that was deliveing it, Ursa Major, went under in the Mediteranean.

[xg15]

Then have a look who is supporting whom with weapons, which militaries are running maneuvers together, who is cooperating - or not cooperating - economically, who is visiting each others' summits, etc.

It's true that many countries are trying to have relationship with both sides or are trying to keep all options open - which is the most reasonable strategy, I think - but there are still two power centers emerging between which those countries are aligning themselves.

[marcosdumay]

> but there are still two power centers emerging

Yes. There is US and Israel in one side, and countries trying to maintain relationships with everybody on the other.

The most ridiculous thing about people claiming that BRICS is a military pole is that it has both India and China right there in the name. I don't know if you noticed, but those two almost got in an open war just in the last 6 months.

[Rapzid]

It's the West vs China with Russia as an also-ran with nukes now unfortunately.

Otherwise you've got some regional issues which is where Iran falls. None of the major players in the region like them, even if they would prefer not to have a conflict they'd be pretty stoked if the volatile regime was gone.

Most of those non-aligned nations are pretty much aligned with the west. Indonesia is absolutely aligned with the USA and the USA it. They are the "Indo" in Indo-Pacific Strategy!

[marcosdumay]

What is the "west"?

Anyway, here's a reminder that two weeks ago the big war on everybody's head was USA against NATO.

[Rapzid]

Western liberal democracies and those closely aligned with them is colloquially "the west" now when talking geopolitics.

Obviously it's not geographic as Australia and New Zealand are in the Eastern Hemisphere but would always be assumed to be part of the "west" when discussing geopolitics.