南非金磚大使蘇克拉爾：歐盟做得　非盟也就做得

9月9日，2023年G20峰會在印度召開，非盟成為二十國集團永久成員。此前的8月24日，金磚國家領導人第十五次會晤召開特別記者會，宣佈金磚國家擴員，阿根廷、埃及、埃塞俄比亞、伊朗、沙特阿拉伯、阿聯酋獲邀加入金磚國家合作機制，六國將於2024年1月1日正式加入。

作者：南非亞洲及金磚事務特使、外交部副總司長蘇克拉爾（Anil Sooklal）

下個月，第三屆一帶一路峰會將在北京召開。可以看到，全球南方國家的議程和發展中國家的利益成為全球關注的焦點。

近日，南非亞洲及金磚事務特使、外交部副總司長蘇克拉爾（Anil Sooklal）接受觀察者網專訪，解讀擴員的意義、分享未來將如何持續擴員、推動本幣化以及確保金磚不是「有名無實」的組織等各界關注的問題。

以下為採訪實錄：

觀察者網：金磚國家峰會最受關注的成果之一是其擴員，有六個新成員將于2024年1月1日正式加入。您認為這些新成員給金磚帶來了什麼？

蘇克拉爾：大家還記得，去年在中國主持召開的虛擬峰會上，與會領導人就決定研究擴員問題，從那個時候開始我們就已經在為這件事情做準備了。

考慮擴員前，我們必須首先確定各國領導人賦予金磚事務特使的職權，他們要求我們制定擴員的指導原則、標準和程式。這份檔通過協商得到一致支持，並提交給各國外長，然後外長們可以研究具體接納哪些國家的問題。有22個國家正式提出希望成為金磚成員，8月20日晚，在約翰尼斯堡舉行的金磚國家務虛會上，與會領導人對此進行了長達數小時的深入討論。

值得注意的是，這六個國家地域分佈很廣。隨着阿根廷的加入，我們有了兩個拉丁美洲的地區領導者。有兩個非洲國家，其中埃及雖然是一個阿拉伯國家，但非洲認為，作為非洲聯盟的成員，它首先是一個非洲國家。當然還有埃塞俄比亞，它是一個重要的國家，因為它是唯一一個沒有被殖民的非洲國家，也是非洲聯盟的所在地，本身是一個文明古國。

有三個西亞國家申請加入，即沙特阿拉伯、阿聯酋和伊朗。沙特阿拉伯、伊朗是該地區非常重要的國家，沙特阿拉伯約有3800萬人口，伊朗有8000多萬人口。阿聯酋也許是一個小國，但卻是西亞一個非常重要的國家，從70年代的一個普通漁村發展成為今天最具活力的國家之一，在海灣國家中國內生產總值位居第二，僅次於沙特阿拉伯，也是該地區最國際化的國家之一。

我認為這是一個很好的平衡，因為我們已經有來自南亞的印度，來自東北亞的中國。新成員的加入，讓我們未來的地域分佈也很均衡，包括世界上幾乎所有與發展中世界有關的地區。因此，我認為這是金磚國家大家庭在地域平衡方面的一個重要補充。在集體分量上，我們將由此前全球人口的42%升至46%，名義GDP將佔全球的29%。

這些國家中的每一個都為豐富金磚五國帶來了額外的價值，不僅是貿易、國內生產總值、技術，還有人民、文化多樣性、文明以及他們為金磚五國大家庭帶來的豐富性。此外，三個西亞國家在化石燃料方面都非常豐富，特別是石油和天然氣。加上埃及、俄羅斯和巴西，金磚國家將佔全球化石燃料儲量的40%以上，這也是非常重要的。

觀察者網：這次擴員包含了四個中東國家，您認為這僅僅是地區多元化和經濟實力增強的體現，還是另有原因？過去幾個月，多方提到美國在該地區影響力下降，尤其是在中國促成沙特和伊朗和解之後，這一地區的戰略價值越來越凸顯。

蘇克拉爾：我認為，西亞一直是世界上一個非常重要的戰略地區，因為其蘊藏著豐富的石油和天然氣，這就是為什麼尤其是西方國家對這一地區給予了高度關注。但這些國家也希望實現多樣化，並與全球南方建立更牢固的關係。我認為，今年早些時候中國促成了沙特阿拉伯和伊朗之間的和解，是該地區的一個重大進展，也會對該地區國家關係正常化產生連鎖反應。

我認為這是一個非常積極的發展，不僅對這兩個國家，對整個地區都是如此。在這個充滿重大挑戰的地區實現和平，對於全球地緣政治和地緣安全形勢而言，也是一件好事。我們一直認為，伊朗和沙特阿拉伯是該地區和平的關鍵，如果他們互不溝通、關係緊張，整個地區就會受到影響。

隨着兩國關係的緩和，各國現在開始互派高級代表團，開設大使館，關係正常化，給該地區和平與發展帶來更大的機會。現在兩國成為金磚大家庭的成員，將為兩國提供更多的機會、更多的平台來定期互動。金磚邀請西亞三國是認識到這一地區的戰略意義，而這三個國家都申請成為金磚國家成員，也是因為看到了與金磚國家合作的價值，看到了自己的未來與金磚國家的未來發展息息相關，他們可以為金磚國家的未來發展做出重大貢獻。

觀察者網：您認為未來幾年金磚國家將如何繼續引入新成員國？一些媒體報導稱，印度或巴西希望在接納新成員方面制定更嚴格的標準，而中國和俄羅斯則更明確地支持接納新成員。您對此有何瞭解？

蘇克拉爾：我從一開始就全面參與了這一進程，並擔任金磚事務特使小組主席。印度和巴西反對擴建的說法並不屬實，我認為這是誤報導，所有金磚國家都同意擴建。

在一開始確實存在准入標準上的意見分歧，經歷了激烈的協商過程。眾所周知，擴員進程始於去年中國擔任主席國期間。當時就此舉行了兩次會議，可惜進展甚微。但今年南非接任主席國後，我們至少舉行了六次金磚事務特使之間的會議。所有國家都致力於擴員，因為五國領導人去年都同意啟動擴員進程。

在任何像金磚國家這樣的多邊組織中，所有國家都希望確保自己的立場得到反映。最終，通過一致協商，我們確認了有關准入標準的文件。這使得擴員成為可能，各國外長就可以研究我們制定的標準，並運用這些標準向各國領導人提出具體擴員建議。所有領導人就擴員六國達成共識，這次是金磚非常實質性的擴大。

眾所周知，金磚國家上一次擴員是在2011年三亞峰會上，在中國的主持下，南非被接納為正式成員。在此後的12年間，我們沒有進一步擴員。2018年南非擔任主席國時確實考慮擴員，將此作為一個議程項目，但當時各國領導人認為，在擴員之前，我們需要進一步鞏固五國之間的合作。

2022年，在中國的主持下，擴員再次被提上議程，我們作為一個集體開展了工作，並就此取得了巨大成功。

擴員是一個持續的過程。縱觀任何多邊組織，歐盟從1957年的6個成員起步，今天有27個成員國，經歷了不同階段的擴張。東盟也是如此，1967年開始時只有5個成員，今天有10個成員國，有可能增加到11個。上合組織最初也是5個成員，現在有9個成員國。擴員在任何進步和包容的組織中都是正常的，未來大家將繼續看到更多國家申請加入金磚。

這次申請的22個國家中，我們只接納了6個國家。正如南非拉馬福薩總統在峰會上宣佈的那樣，這是擴員的第一階段，並沒有說擴員已經結束。約翰尼斯堡宣言第92條提出，各國領導人已責成外長們研究拓展夥伴國家合作模式的問題，並將在明年俄羅斯峰會時做報告。全球南方國家對加入金磚大家庭有着濃厚的興趣，未來將會有更多國家成為金磚組織的正式成員，各國領導人必須為此付出努力。

觀察者網：簡要地說，就接納標準達成的共識是什麼？在16個未被接納的國家中，你們優先考慮哪個國家？

蘇克拉爾：准入標準、準則和指導方針的檔是內部機密的，現在將首先與6個新加入的成員國分享。如你所知，峰會上已經口頭發出了正式邀請，但拉馬福薩總統正在致函六國元首，正式邀請他們成為正式成員，並附上他們必須遵守的文件標準。

我可以非常籠統地說，選擇這六個成員國時，我們非常謹慎，確保他們也贊同金磚五國所代表的願景和原則：創造一個更加公平的世界，支持全球治理架構、政治安全、金融、經濟等方面改革，致力於維護多邊主義、反對單邊主義，並致力於維護國際法。這些都是金磚國家自成立以來所秉承的一些重要原則，新成員也要符合這一指導金磚國家合作的精神。

我不認為他們在支援金磚國家的價值觀和原則方面會有困難，他們也是這些價值觀和原則的積極宣導者。

他們還必須在各自地區具有良好的聲譽，發揮重要作用，在國際上也通過全球多邊體系發揮重要作用。我們還努力考慮地域代表性，確保金磚五國代表全球南方各地域。當然，另一個非常重要的標準是，你必須是全球南方國家，因為金磚國家是關於發展中國家的。以上就是有關指導原則和標準的文件中所包含的一些重要原則。

從現在到明年夏天，不會再有任何擴員。我們將等待部長磋商的結果，為夥伴國家制定合作模式。但與此同時，我們建議也應該有另一種模式，考慮那些非常希望與金磚國家建立聯繫，但可能不想成為正式成員的夥伴國家，已經有國家提出這樣的意願了。這是金磚各國部長們明年的一大工作，將在明年的俄羅斯峰會上向領導人提出建議。

觀察者網：新成員的加入會對「金磚」的英語縮寫產生什麼影響（BRICS的B代表巴西Brazil、R代表俄羅斯Russia、I代表印度India、C代表中國China、S代表南非South Africa）？

蘇克拉爾：我認為這個縮寫不會被改變，因為「金磚」在某種意義上已經成為一個全球品牌。金磚現在象徵着其宣導的價值觀和原則，這些不是金磚五國所獨有的。事實上，在「金磚+」和非洲會議上，有61個國家出席了會議，他們都認同金磚國家的主張。

因此，今天的金磚國家不僅僅是五個國家。當你使用「金磚」這個詞時，它並不是專門指這五個國家的。金磚國家的發展已經超越了自己，發展成為一個品牌，代表了全球南方國家的願景，以及我們希望看到的全球架構改革，使之更加多極化、多文明和多文化，從而更好代表全球社會的本質。

全球社會不是同質的，是高度多元的，這也是金磚國家的性質。金磚經常遭到非議，說我們的治理體系、政治制度、人民和文化等方面存在巨大差異。但這正是金磚的豐富性所在，也是我們運轉良好的原因。我們不想把每個國家都套上統一的行為準則或試圖說教他們如何處理國內事務。我們尊重主權、尊重各國的治理體系和政治制度，珍視各國豐富的傳統、人民、文化、文明、美食、服飾和語言。這才是世界的本質，世界之所以豐富多彩，是因為我們擁有如此豐富的多樣性。

全球社會不是同質化的，那麼金磚國家為什麼要因為沒有統一的治理體系而受到批評呢？金磚國家的力量在於我們每個國家帶來的多樣性、獨特豐富的傳統和治理體系。

觀察者網：確實有擔心認為金磚內部差異可能會帶來問題，特別是內部運作方面的問題。一些金磚國家存在一定的利益分歧，比如印度和中國，伊朗和沙特阿拉伯；同時，其他國家的政治變化，比如巴西前總統博爾索納羅的上台，阿根廷也可能將選出一個主張「全面美元化」的極右翼總統，從而影響其參與金磚的程度。您對這些擔憂有何看法，金磚國家如何應對這些潛在問題？

蘇克拉爾：金磚國家不是一個讓各國來解決分歧的平台。它是提供讓各國來討論分歧的平台，看看能否找到解決分歧的方法和途徑。

金磚國家是一個基於共識的組織。是的，國與國之間存在差異乃至緊張關係，這很正常，不是金磚五國大家庭獨有的現象，許多多邊或地區組織中都有這種情況。例如，歐盟在俄羅斯烏克蘭衝突問題上就存在分歧，東盟在緬甸問題上也面臨同樣的挑戰。

但多邊組織提供了一個平台，讓國家可以相互交流。我認為這一點很重要，各國可能會有分歧，但他們仍然能夠從大局角度進行對話，暫時拋開分歧。作為一個集體，作為地區和全球性大國，如何能夠為建立一個更加公平的全球秩序而共同努力，並專注於對全球社會有益的事情，這就是金磚國家的意義所在。

這些緊張局勢都將通過雙邊方式解決，並不妨礙他們在其他重大全球性問題上開展合作，比如全球多邊體系改革、應對氣候變化、應對疫情、糧食安全和能源安全等影響所有人的關鍵挑戰，這些需要我們集思廣益，共同努力，以積極的方式應對。

觀察者網: 您提到了歐盟，它可能代表了不同國家合作程度的上限。您也提到了歐盟面臨的問題，尤其就俄烏衝突的意見分歧導致他們未能實施多項制裁計畫，在國際上造成了一定聲譽損失。那金磚的作用是否也是有限的，雖然它確實能促進對話，但在其他領域可能較難取得實質性成果？

蘇克拉爾：金磚內部有20個部長級溝通軌道，這個數字還在增加。在南非完成本次輪值主席國前，我們將主辦近200次會議。當然，衡量我們合作成功與否的標準不是主辦會議的次數，而是實質性成果。

主要溝通軌道都有實質性成果，在科學、技術和創新方面，我們的科學家、學者和學生目前正在開展200多個聯合研究專案。這是為金磚國家的利益而開展的實質性合作，金磚國家的成功必須以其為我們人民的生活帶來的實際福祉來衡量。它必須能夠解決貧困、欠發達、糧食安全和債務減免等問題，這些都是金磚領導人談到過的問題。

還有一個議題是本幣化，宣言的第45條寫道，領導人責成財政部門或央行行長研究本幣支付工具和平臺的問題，並將在下一次峰會上做報告。我們正在研究在全球舞台上開展業務、貿易和金融互動的多樣化方式，而不是依賴一種或兩種貨幣，這不利於我們。

在這些重大問題上，金磚五國起到了催化的作用。中國創建了自己的支付平臺，印度和俄羅斯也做到了，全球南方國家都對單邊制裁和資金凍結感到非常焦慮，俄羅斯和伊朗就無法使用自己的資金。我們正在尋求變得更加獨立，而不是被一兩個實施單邊制裁的國家所挾持。這些制裁不被任何一個金磚國家所承認，也不被聯合國所承認。目前聯合國安理會是唯一負責國際制裁的機構，因此，金磚國家能夠做一些實事。

這已超越了金磚本身，包括非洲在內的許多國家都在考慮深化本幣貿易和借貸。眾所周知，新開發銀行已經決定在2026年將本幣貸款從目前的20%提高到30%。他們在成員國中發行了第二筆本幣債券，此前已在人民幣市場上發行了幾筆債券。8月，他們又在南非蘭特市場上發行了債券，獲得了超額認購，原設定的10億蘭特（約4.1億港元）上限被提高到了15億蘭特（約6.17億港元）。

市場可以看到，鑒於新開發銀行的優良記錄，這些債券前景很好。這對南非來說是個好消息，因為我們可以開始以蘭特為單位借貸，在美元波動和兌換成本等方面節省大量資金。非洲聯盟已經做出決定，為促進自由貿易協定，各國應深化本幣貿易，這也是非洲銀行推出泛非支付結算系統的原因。約有10家中央銀行和20多家商業銀行已經認購了這一工具，預計每年將為非洲節省超過50億美元（約392億港元）的貿易成本。

這只是金磚發揮作用的一個例子。在深化當地貨幣貿易和不依賴美元方面，還包括我們的支付系統，我們不將徹底依賴於環球銀行間金融電信協會（SWIFT）系統。正如我所說的，所有主要的金磚國家現在都在創建自己的支付平台。

觀察者網：您8月接受彭博社採訪時曾說「有一種很不幸的說法是，金磚國家集團是反西方的，金磚國家集團的成立是為了與七國集團（G7）或『全球北方』競爭，這是不正確的」。你認為所有金磚國家成員都贊同你的觀點嗎？例如，伊朗表示，加入金磚國家意味著越來越反對美國的單邊主義，俄羅斯也曾提到金磚國家是推動反美議程的平台。

蘇克拉爾：五國一致認為，金磚國家不是一個反西方的組織。金磚首先關注自己，其次關注全球南方，再然後參與集體應對全球挑戰，並與所有尋求與我們合作、認同我們價值觀、贊同我們在應對全球挑戰方面願景的國家合作。這就是為什麼聯合國秘書長古特雷斯也在金磚國家首腦會議上給予支持。他指出，全球北方國家必須加大努力應對全球南方的不滿，佔全球人口85%以上的全球南方仍然被邊緣化，在全球重大決策中仍然是異類。

金磚五國都是G20成員，新加入的六個國家又有兩個G20成員。因此，G20有7個金磚成員國，與G7集團數量相當，G7集團和金磚共佔G20集團中19個國家中的14個，歐盟是第20個成員。憑什麼只有歐盟成為G20集團的正式成員？非洲聯盟的規模更大，有55個國家，14億人口，而歐盟只有27個國家，不到6億人口，但因為它代表發達的西方國家，所以歐盟在G20中獲得席位，而不是非洲。

正是金磚國家在推動非洲聯盟成為G20正式成員，這也是南非一直在呼籲的。幸運的是，現在全球北方國家也終於在支援這一進程。因此，我們將與擁有相同願景和價值觀的全球北方國家合作，共同創造一個更加公平的世界，而不是由少數國家繼續作為霸主主導全球議程，決定其他國家應如何運作。

正如我所說的那樣，我們今天在人口方面佔多數，就全球國內生產總值而言，一些增長最快的經濟體都在全球南方，印度和中國正在以每年5%到6%的速度增長，一些非洲國家也在加速增長。美國的增長率約為1.6%，大多數歐洲國家的增長率低於1%，有些國家甚至出現了負增長。因此，我們是全球經濟增長的引擎，所以金磚國家表示，我們將是塑造新的全球架構的先鋒。我們將與各方合作，包括北方和南方國家，實現共同願景，創造一個更加公平的世界。

觀察者網：您是印度裔南非人，儘管南非有超過一百萬的印度裔南非人，但這個群體經常遭到忽視。許多人認為印度裔南非人「處境尷尬」，而一些政治領導人稱南非的政治主要由黑人控制，而經濟則主要由少數白人控制。南非如何才能充分發揮其作為「彩虹之國」的潛力？

蘇克拉爾：在種族隔離時期，所有非白人都被歸類為黑人，包括我和所謂的印度裔南非人。我們作為非洲人參加了解放鬥爭，因為我首先是南非人，我是第三代南非人，不是印度人，南非的政府也將我視為南非人。

我們擁有豐富的種族、文化、民族和語言多樣性，共有11種官方語言，各社群都有平等的發言權，並通過我們國家的憲法得到平等的尊重。我認為這是南非的魅力和優勢所在，也是曼德拉總統將南非描述為「彩虹之國」的原因，因為我們是整個非洲最國際化、人口最多樣化的國家。

我認為這也是我們在種族隔離後開展民族和解的原因。種族隔離制度下存在的默認界限是基於種族來確定南非人的身份，這違背了南非民主所代表的根本結構，也違背了我們憲法所描述的，即每個公民都是南非平等的一部分，我們都是南非人。

觀察者網：南非的經歷似乎非常適合推動全球南方的議程。

蘇克拉爾：的確如此。南非是一個擺脫了殖民主義、種族隔離和帝國主義的國家。我們和全球南方的許多國家面臨着同樣的困難，理解其中的痛苦。因此，我們必須在全球舞台上捍衛正義、公平、平等和平等代表權。

我總是把當前的地緣政治結構比作種族隔離期間的南非，當時少數人決定着多數人的命運。今天的全球南方就是這樣。我們是多數，但不到十億人的少數卻在決定我們應如何運作，決定什麼符合我們的利益。

我們宣佈，全球南方已經崛起。今天，中國是全球第二大經濟體，據預測在十年左右的時間裡可能會成為全球最大的經濟體；印度是全球第五大經濟體，在十年左右的時間裡，它將成為全球第三大經濟體；巴西是全球GDP排名前十的主要經濟體。因此，全球南方已經發生了翻天覆地的變化，就經濟、生活水準、技術、新科技、創新、領導力而言，全球南方的許多國家都超過了G7集團。因此，全球南方再也不是「窮鄉僻壤」了。這也是金磚存在的原因，宣導變革，不將任何群體邊緣化。

無論是全球北方還是南方，我們都需要共存和合作。這就是為什麼習近平主席談到人類命運共同體。這正是金磚的原則，一個共同的命運，所有人都能平等參與塑造的未來，決定我們如何和平、和諧地毗鄰共處，為共同富裕而一同努力的未來。

以下為英文原文：

Guancha: One of the most widely reported results of the BRICS summit was its expansion, with six new members joining. What do you think these new members bring to the table?

Sooklal: Well, firstly, BRICS expansion was one of the key outcomes of the 15 BRICS summits in Johannesburg, as you recall that last year at the virtual summit held under China's chairship, there was a decision by leaders to look into a question of expansion. And of course, it was expected that this summit would respond to the leader's call to the issue of expansion, and the leaders did take a decision in this regard. Now, of course, in order for us to have considered expansion, we had to first finalize the mandate given to Sherpas by the leaders at last year's summit, where they tasked help us to work out guiding principles, standard criteria and procedure for expansion. So this document was adopted by consensus and referred to the foreign ministers who then could look into the question of which countries, as you know, there were 22 countries that formally approach BRICS member states to become members. Now, the leaders applied themselves to this and had an in depth discussion that lasted several hours at the BRICS Retreat on the evening of 20th of August in Johannesburg.

I think it's important to note that of the six countries, there is an important geographical spread. We have an additional country from Latin America and the form of Argentina. We have two African countries, Egypt. As far as Africa is concerned, it is an Arab country but it's an African country in the first instance, as a member of the African Union. And of course Ethiopia. Then we have three countries from West Asia, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Iran. I think this is a good balance given that we have a country from South Asia and the form of India and China from Northeast Asia. So you have an excellent spread, geographical spread from nearly all of the regions of the world pertaining to the developing world. So I think this is an important addition in terms of geographical balance to the BRICS family.

Now if you look at the collective weight of these countries collectively, we will now account for 46% of the global population as against the 42% that we were, we will account for 29% of global nominal GDP. With the entry of Argentina, we have two of the regional leader in Latin America. Ethiopia is an important country in terms of being the only African country that was not colonized. Secondly, it is a seat of the African Union. But in its own right, Ethiopia is an ancient culture, ancient civilization. So it brings all of that into the BRICS family.

Now if you look at Western Asia, all three countries are important. Saudi Arabia, Iran, very important countries in the region. They are the regional leaders, the largest nations, Saudi Arabia, about 38 million, and Iran over 80 million people. Likewise, the UAE, maybe a small country, but it is a very pivotal country in Western Asia. In fact, it is a one of the remarkable countries that have progressed from being just a mere fishing village in the 70s, today becoming one of the most dynamic countries. It has the second largest GDP among Gulf countries, second to Saudi Arabia, and one of the most cosmopolitan countries in the region.

Each of these countries bring in an additional dimension in enriching BRICS, not just in terms of trade, in terms of GDP, in terms of technologies, in terms of the peoples, the diversity of the cultures, the civilizations and the richness they bring into the BRICS family. So from a multi-dimensional point of view you have greater diversity, greater weightage and of course all three West Asian countries are very rich in terms of fossil fuels, especially oil and gas. And in addition to Egypt as well and Russia and Brazil, BRICS will account for over 40% of global fossil fuel reserves. And this is also highly significant.

Guancha: On the Middle East in particular, do you view this just in terms of regional diversification and their greater economic weight, or is there another dimension to the focus on the Middle East of this year's expansion. Over the past few months, there's been a lot of discussion about reduced US influence in the region, especially after China brokered the Saudi Arabia and Iran rapprochement.

Sooklal: I think Western Asia has always been a very important strategic region in the world, given its geopolitical location in terms of its rich deposits of oil and gas. That is why you have had a deep focus on this region, especially from Western countries. But these countries also want to diversify and have stronger relations with the Global South. And I think the intervention of China earlier this year in bringing rapprochement between Saudi Arabia and Iran was a major development in the region. And that rapprochement has had a ripple effect in terms of normalizing relations between countries of the region, we have seen normalization of relations amongst the Gulf countries with the Iran. Just this week, Iran and Saudi Arabia exchange ambassadors. And I think that's a very positive development, not just for the two countries, but for the region as a whole. And I think also for the global geopolitical and geo-security situation, this is a positive development where you can have peace in a region that has been the fraught with major difficulties. We've always maintained that Iran and Saudi Arabia hold the key to peace in the region. And as long as they were not speaking to each other and there were tensions between them, the region as a whole suffered.

So you can see that with their rapprochement, countries are now starting to exchange high level delegations, embassies are being opened, normalization of relations and there's greater opportunity for peace and development in the region. So I think this has been a very positive development. Now, having both of them as part of the BRICS family is also a positive development because it will give them a further opportunity, a further platform to interact with each other on a regular basis being part of the BRICS family. So I think it was indeed a very positive development for the BRICS leaders to invite both these countries together with the UAE, recognizing the strategic significance of this region and also remember all three of these countries applied to become BRICS members. So they saw the value in associating with BRICS and they see that their future is tied with the future development of BRICS and they can contribute significantly to the future development of breaks.

Guancha: How do you think the introduction of new members into BRICS will be continued in the coming years? Some media reports had claimed that India or Brazil wanted to set stricter standards on the admission of new members, while China and Russia were more unequivocally supportive of admitting new members. What have you heard, and how this dynamic affected the statement they released?

Sooklal: I have been integrally involved in this process from its outset and being chair of the Sherpas Group. There is no truth to the fact that India and Brazil were opposed to expansion. I think this is misinformation. And I want to correct that. All of the BRICS countries had agreed on expansion. Where there were differences of opinion initially was the criteria that we need to develop. And this was an intense process.

As you know, the process started on the China's chairship last year. There were two meetings then, but very little progress was made. But when South Africa took over the Chirship this year, we had at least six meetings at the level of Sherpa to Sherpa, was a very intense process. All countries were committed to expansion because that was the decision of all of the five leaders last year to start the expansion process. So there were no country opposed to expansion.

In any multilateral organization like BRICS, all countries would want to ensure that their positions are reflected. And eventually, through consensus, we were able to confirm the document that pertains to criteria and standards and so forth. And this made possible the movement in regard to progress on expansion so that our foreign ministers could look at what we had set down as criteria and apply themselves and make recommendations to our leaders. And I think the fact that we had consensus from all of the leaders on the six countries, this is a substantial expansion of BRICS. As you know, the last time BRICS was expanded was in 2011 under China's chairship at the sunny summit when South Africa was admitted as a full member. So for the past 12 years, we have not expanded. We did try to look at expansion in 2018 on the South Africa's chairship. We put that as an agenda item, but leaders felt at that stage we needed to consolidate further the cooperation between, between the five of us before we embark on expansion. So expansion was put again on the table under China's chairship, and we worked as a collective. And I believe there was a very positive outcome in terms of us being able to announce the new members. And expansion is an ongoing process.

If you look at any multilateral organization, the EU started with six members in 1957. Today they are 27 members. They have gone through various phases of expansion. The same with ASEAN that started it 1967 with five members. Today, ASEAN is ten and there's a possibility they'll move to 11 members. This Shanghai Corporation organization started at five members and today they're about nine members. So this is normal in any organization that is progressive and also inclusive. And I think you will continue to see many countries will continue to knock on the door of BRICS to say they want to become full members. And we are mindful of this fact that out of the 22 countries, we were only able to admit six.

And as President Ramaphosa announced at the summit, this is the first phase of expansion. He didn't say that expansion is closed. And if you look at Article 92 of the Johannesburg 2 Declaration, the leaders have tasked foreign ministers to look at the issue of developing, modalities for partner countries and to report to the summit next year when the leaders meet in Russia for the 16 BRICS summit. So I think you were continuing seeing countries wanting to become full members and I'm sure that expansion will be considered again going forward, the leaders will have to apply themselves to this because there's a high level of interest from countries from the Global South that would want, to become part of this family.

Guancha: Briefly, what is the consensus on admission criteria that were agreed upon, and also what country are you prioritizing out of the 16 that weren't admitted? Also, why expand now, after over a decade?

Sooklal: The documents that outlines the criteria, standards and guidelines, is internal and confidential, that will now be shared firstly with the six countries. As you know, there was a formal invitation that was made verbally at the summit, but President Ramaphosa is in the process of writing to each of the six heads of state, formally inviting them to become full members and attaching the document criteria which they will have to subscribe to.

Now I can very broadly say that in choosing the six members, we were careful to make sure that they also subscribe to the vision and principles that BRICS stand for: creating a more equitable world, supporting reform of the global governance architecture, political security, financial, economic, the commitment to upholding multilateralism, rejecting unilateralism and of course commitment to a to upholding international law. And of course these are some of the very key tenants that BRICS have subscribed to since its inception. So it's important that the new members also fit into this ethos that governs and guides BRICS cooperation. So these were key principles and of course these countries fully understand that what BRICS stands for, and therefore they apply to become BRICS members. I don't think they'll have difficulty in supporting the values and principles to which BRICS subscribe to and to which they are also keen advocates, often creating a more inclusive world in addressing some of the major fault lines that still exist in the current global governance architecture.

And of course, as I've indicated, they had to be of good standing in the respective regions, countries that playing an important role in their respective region, and of course internationally through the global multilateral system. And as I've also indicated, we also try to look at geographical representation so that BRICS has a good representation from across the region of the Global South. And of course, another very important criteria is that you had to be by a member of the Global South, because BRICS is about developing countries. So these are some of the key principles contained in the document pertaining to the Guiding Principles and criteria.

Between now and the next summer, there'll be no more expansion. We will await the outcome of the minister's consultation in terms of developing modalities for partner countries. Because when we met as Sherpas, we had proposed a modality that first looked at countries becoming full members, like the six now that have been invited, will become full members with equal standing as the existing five members of BRICS. But at the same time, we propose that we should also have a modality looking at partner countries that are very keen to have an association with BRICS, but may not want to be full members. And we have instances of that, where countries have stated that they would like to be associated with BRICS, but have not applied for full membership. So that's the process that our ministers will be busy with over the next year, and come up with recommendations to the leaders at the summit in Russia next year.

Guancha: How would the addition of new members affect the acronym BRICS?

Sooklal: I don't think the acronym will be altered or affected because when you speak of BRICS today, BRICS has become a global brand in a sense. BRICS now signifies certain values and principles that has been championed by BRICS, but not just exclusive to BRICS. The fact that we had at the BRICS Plus and the Africa Outreach, 61 countries in attendance, they all identify with what BRICS stand for.

So BRICS today is not just about five countries. When you use the term BRICS, it's not specifically about these five countries. It's grown beyond that. It's grown, as I've said, into a brand that represents the aspirations of the Global South and what we would like to see in changing the current global architecture, to be more multipolar, to be multi civilizational and multicultural in terms of being representative of the nature of the global community. The global community is not homogeneous. It's highly heterogeneous. And that's the nature of BRICS.

Very often BRICS is criticized in terms of being so heterogeneous, so different in terms of our systems of governance, in terms of our political systems, in terms of our peoples, our cultures and so forth. But this is the richness of BRICS. This is why BRICS function so well. We don't seat to straight jacket everyone into a uniform code of behavior or how they should conduct the internal domestic affairs. We respect the sovereignty. We respect the systems of governance and the political systems of every country. And we value the richness of the traditions of each country, its people's, its culture, its civilization, its cuisine, its modes of dress, its languages. This is the richness of BRICS. And that's the nature of the world. The world is rich because we have such diversity in it. The world is not a uniform society, so why should BRICS be criticized by not having a uniform system of governance between all of us? The strength of BRICS is each one of us bring to the table that diversity and the richness of our traditions and of our systems of governance.

Guancha: Regarding the issue of differences, there has been some concern that these differences might cause issues going forward especially in terms of internal functioning, because some countries within it have somewhat divergent interests, like India and China, and Irana and Saudi Arabia; at the same time, political changes in other countries, like Brazil, and potentially Argentina, where a far-right advocate of “full dollarization” may be elected, leading to fluctuations in their level of engagement. Do you think these concerns are misplaced, and how might BRICS deal with these issues?

Sooklal: BRICS is not a platform for countries to come and settle their differences. It's to provide the platform where they can come and discuss the differences and see if they can find ways and means of addressing these. BRICS is a consensus based organization.

Yes, there are differences between countries. There are tensions between countries. This is normal. It's not unique to the BRICS family. You find this in a large number of multilateral or and regional organizations. The European Union have its own challenges in terms of differences with regard to the Russia Ukraine conflict, for example, and the way some of the Eastern European countries relate to it as against Western European countries. The same with ASEAN in terms of the challenges around Myanmar, you have divergent opinions amongst ASEAN members on this. Likewise, you find this in all regional and multilateral organizations. But it provides a platform where these countries can come and talk to each other. And I think that is important, having a platform where countries may have differences, but they are still able to dialogue on the larger picture and concentrate on what is good for the global community. And bracket for a moment the differences they may have, but look at what as a collective, as important countries of their respective region, as important global powers, how they can work collectively for the good of creating a more equitable global order. And that is what BRICS is about.

The tensions that are there between India and, and China that will be addressed bilaterally. The tensions between Iran and Saudi will be addressed bilaterally. But that doesn't prevent these countries from cooperating on other major global issues, like reform of the global multilateral system, like addressing issues of climate change, like addressing the current challenges we face in terms of the pandemic, the challenges we face in terms of food security, in terms of energy security. And these are key challenges that impacts on all of us. And this is the areas where we apply our minds as a collective and work collectively to address this in a positive manner.

Guancha: You mentioned the European Union, which probably represents the upper limit of how different countries can cooperate. And you see some issues, especially with regard to the Russia Ukraine war, as you just mentioned, where differences of opinion led to them, for example, failing to implement several sanctions packages to considerable international embarrassment. So does this mean that there's a limit to how effective BRICS can be, that while it can be effective in terms of fostering dialogue, it might be less effective in achieving tangible results in other fields?

Sooklal: Well, I think if you look at the areas of cooperation, firstly, within BRICS, we have 20 ministerial tracks and this is increasing. We, as I've said, we, by the time we complete our chairship, we would have hosted close to 200 meetings. Now, the measure of success of our cooperation is not in terms of the number of meetings we host, but the substantive outcome of these meetings. If you look at all of these major tracks, there are substantive outcomes. If you look at science, technology and innovation track, there is over 200 joint research projects that is currently undertaken by our scientists, by our academics and also students. There’s substantive cooperation for the benefit of the BRICS countries.

So I think that's the value that BRICS brings. The success of BRICS must be measured on the practical value it brings to the lives of our people. It must be able to address issues of poverty and underdevelopment. It must address issues of food insecurity, debt relief. These are all issues that have been spoken about by our leaders.

There was a big issue in terms of local currency. And that's why if you look at Article 45 of the declaration, the leaders task finance measures or central bank governors to look at the issue of local currency payment instruments and platform, and to report at the next summit because we are looking at diverse ways of how we conduct our business, our trade and our financial interaction on the global stage and not being dependent on one or two currencies to our disadvantage.

Now, these are major issues and BRICS has been a catalyst. China has created its own payment platform. India has done the same. Russia has done the same because all of the countries of the global south are very anxious because of unilateral sanctions, where funds are frozen. They don't have access to their money as is the case with Russia and Iran. And we are looking at becoming more independent and not being held hostage by one or two countries that apply unilateral sanctions, not recognized by any of the BRICS countries, sanctions not recognized by the United Nations as being the only body that has the task of looking at international sanctions, The Security Council. Therefore, BRICS are able to do practical things. And today the use of local currencies has gone beyond BRICS.

A large number of countries, Africa included, are looking at deepening trade in local currency, borrowing in local currency. The New Development Bank, as you know, has taken a decision that it will increase lending from its current 20% to 30% by 2026 in local currency. They floated the second bond in local currency amongst member states, having floated several bonds on the Chinese Yuan market. They've done so now last month on the South African Rand market. And that bond was oversubscribed. That set a ceiling of 1 billion Rand, but they increase it to 1.5 billion because of the intake by people buying these bonds. And they can see that these are bonds that would grow positively given the track record of the New Development Bank. And this is good news for South Africa because we can start borrowing in Rand terms and save a lot of funds in terms of dollar fluctuation and conversion cost and so forth. And the African Union has taken a decision that in order to facilitate the free trade agreement, countries should deepen trade in local currency and that's why the African Bank has floated the Pan African payment and settlement system. About 10 central banks and over 20 commercial banks have subscribed to this instrument, which is expected to save Africa over $5 billion annually in terms of trade costs. So you can see that BRICS is a catalyst for change on the global front on a number of areas. And this is just one example I'm sharing with you. The repercussions in terms of deepening trade in local currencies and not being dependent on the dollar, the only and including our payment systems that we are not just dependent on the SWIFT system. As I've said, all of the major BRICS countries are now creating their own payment platforms.

Guancha: In the recent interview with Bloomberg, you said that “there’s an unfortunate narrative being developed that BRICS is anti-West, that BRICS was created as competition to the G7 or the Global North, and that is incorrect”. Do you think that your view is shared by all BRICS members? For example, Iran said that it joining BRICS signifies growing opposition to US unilateralism. And Russia has also up made some references to BRICS as a platform for an anti-US agenda.

Sooklal: All 5 of us are unanimous that BRICS is not an anti-West organization. BRICS is an entity that focuses on ourselves, firstly, and secondly on the Global South. And thirdly, in terms of collectively addressing the global challenges and working in partnership with all those that seek to work with us, that share our values, that share our vision in terms of what we would like to see in addressing the global challenges. And that is why you had the Secretary General Antonio Guterres also addressing the BRICS Summit. And he stated that the Global North must do more to address the frustrations of the Global South, the Global South that forms 85% plus of the global population are still being marginalized, are still outliers in terms of major global decision making.

For BRICS, we're five partners and with the addition of the six, there are two additional G20 members. So we would be seven G20 members in the G20; just as you have G7 as seven G20 members. So between G7 and BRICS, we would be fourteen of the 19 countries that make up the G20, the EU being the 20th and hopefully after the summer this weekend in India, the African Union will become a full BRICS member. And I think that's also would be a major boost for the Global South. Because in this day and age, why just the European Union as a full member of the G20? The African Union is bigger, 55 countries, 1.4 billion as against less than 600 million people in the European Union and 27 countries. But because it's a develop western country, you're then given prime place in the G20 and not Africa. And that's why we're saying that BRICS is about championing the cause of Africa. And it is BRICS countries that are pushing for the African Union to become a full member.

We've started this process. South Africa has been calling for this and BRICS countries have been supporting this. Fortunately now the countries of the Global North also supporting this. So we will work with the Global North who share our vision and values to create a more equitable world and not to continue as hegemons dominating the global agenda and determining how the rest of the world should function and what is in our best interest.

We are today collectively as I've said population-wise the majority, and in terms of global GDP, some of your fastest growing economies are still on the Global South. India and China are growing at 5 to 6 percent, several of the African countries are growing at an accelerated pace. The USA is growing at about 1.6%. Most of the European countries are growing under 1%, some even into negative growth. So we are the engine of growth and therefore BRICS is saying we will be at the forefront in shaping the new global architecture. And we will work with all parties, the north and the south, but those that share our vision and aspire to create a more equitable.

Guancha: You are an Indian-South African, a group that is frequently overlooked by international observers of South Africa, despite numbering over one million. Many have described your community as fitting "awkwardly” into modern day South Africa, where a number of political leaders have described politics as being controlled mostly by blacks and the economy controlled by a mostly white minority. Is this somewhat similar to the Chinese community there? How can South Africa fully live up to its potential as the “rainbow nation”?

Sooklal: During apartheid, all those that were not white were categorized as blacks, including myself and so called Indian South Africans. We were all regarded as blacks. We fought in the liberation struggle as Africans. Because I'm first and foremost a South African. I'm third generation South African. I'm not Indian. I'm South African. My identity is South African. I'm born and raised in South Africa. And I do not see myself anything else but a South African national. That's how I'm categorize even in my official documents. My government sees me as a South African. I mean, when I function as the Sherpa of South Africa, I'm not seen as an Indian South African. I'm seen as a South African like any other person that I work with.

And that's the beauty of South Africa. We have this rich diversity of races, of cultures and of peoples and languages. That's why we have 11 official languages and all of the various communities have an equal say and are equally respected through the Constitution of our country. And I think that's the strength of South Africa and that's why President Mandela describes South Africa as a rainbow nation, because we are the most cosmopolitan, most diverse population in the whole of Africa. That's the strength of South Africa.

And I believe that is why we have a program post-apartheid period of national reconciliation. The default lines that existed under the apartheid regime were based on identifying South Africans on the basis of race. This was against the very fabric of what South Africa's democracy stands for and what our constitution describes, where each and every citizen is equally part of South Africa and we are all South Africa.

Guancha: Certainly this makes South Africa seemingly well placed to promote the agenda of the Global South.

Sooklal: It is. South Africa is a country that has come out of colonialism, of apartheid, of imperialism. We have faced all of these difficulties like many of the countries of the Global South. And we understand the pain and discomfort. So therefore, having come from this background, it is important for us to champion for justice, for fairness and for equality and equal representation on the global stage.

I always compare current geopolitical architecture to Apartheid South Africa, where you had a minority determining the fate of majority. And that's what the Global South today is. We are the majority, but a minority, less than a billion people, determines how we function and what is in our best interest. And we are saying that the Global South has risen. Today, China is the second largest global economy and it's predicted within a decade or so, it may become the largest global economy. India is the first largest global economy today, and within a decade or so, it will become the third largest or so. Brazil is a major economy in the top ten of global GDP. So the Global South has changed. Many countries of the Global South are bigger than the G7 today in terms of the economies, in terms of the GDP, in terms of the standard of living, in terms of technology, new science, technology, innovation, leaders in terms of this. So you can't speak of the Global South as being poor and marginalized anymore. And that is why BRICS is there, to champion change for the better, not relegating any community to the margins.

Both north and south, we need to coexist and work together. And that's why President Xi speaks of a community of shared future for mankind. It's precisely the same principle that we have, a shared future, a future where all of us must have equal stake in determining how this future is shaped and how we live side by side in peace and harmony, working collectively for prosperity for all.

本文獲《觀察者網》授權轉載。