In the world of 2025, the Global South is rising, and new ideas expressed by its nations are becoming widely heard. BRICS countries contribute more than 35.6% of the world GDP, and their share of the world’s GDP has exceeded the G7’s in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). In addition, BRICS comprises 45% of world’s population, accounting for 3.6 billion people, a third of the earth’s dry land, 40% all oil production, and about a quarter of the world’s exports of goods, and it extends from Asia to Europe, the Americas, and Africa, giving it a truly global flavor. With that, there is a need for redefining some terminologies that have prevailed for decades. Globalization is a misleading term that suggests that the globe has one culture and values that all nations share, while the truth is that this culture and values are mainly Western ones, which makes it “westernization,” not “globalization,” and there is nothing wrong about it; all victorious nations attempted to spread their culture and values, from the ancient Egyptians, whose monuments are still vivid in the corners of the ancient world, to the Islamic and British empires. We recognize that the “westernization” scale is much larger than its previous counterparts, but that is not because of its nature itself; rather, it is because of the influence of modern technology with the inventions of airplanes, the internet, and communications, which contributed rapidly to the spread of Western culture and values around the world. This suggests that the same elements that led to the process of the speedy spread of westernization, making it look as “global,” would also have the same effect on the coming new rising actors whose cultures and values will spread the same way and probably in a shorter period of time, due to the speedy development of technology and AI, making it look “global” too. A hundred years before Friedman, Ibn Khaldun, as previously explained, discussed the issue of globalization through defining the relationship between the Ghaleb (winner) and Maghloub (loser), where the second follows the values and culture of the first. Globalization has benefited the world through the integration of markets and economies; however, it has had its side effects too on the “other” nations. Some nations found themselves obliged, and even forced, to open their markets wide to the industrial products of the advanced industrial powers, those that would be defined as core states according to the dependency theory, while those “other” nations that would be defined as periphery states are not having the same privilege of undisturbed access for their agricultural products to the markets of the core states. Such a rule of the so-called “globalization” order created a structure of superior–inferior/Ghaleb–Maghloub relationship. In the New International Order, not a single culture would prevail; the “other” nations will not be obliged to follow the culture of values and rules of others. Through the last conflict of struggle to break free from the chains of slavery and subjugation, nations will be able to achieve their true independence. This conflict will not be between civilizations or ideologies but between the subjugated and the subjugating. BRICS would be a force behind an inclusive globalization that takes into consideration different nations’ cultures and needs and allows everyone to be on board, and that is due to the rise of the Global South itself. The difference between the Global South during the Cold War and its NAM and today’s Global South with its BRICS is that it moved from the position of being dependent on others, being on the side of one camp or the other or even neutral and passive, to a new active position of being an independent and influential actor itself. BRICS countries do not have to choose between China, Russia, or the United States, and even with China and Russia as members of BRICS, that does not make the other BRICS members followers or dependent on them.

The Rise of the Global South and Shift in the Structure of the International Order

章节
发表日期：

2025年

查看全文

Amr Mohieeldin

摘要

In the world of 2025, the Global South is rising, and new ideas expressed by its nations are becoming widely heard. BRICS countries contribute more than 35.6% of the world GDP, and their share of the world’s GDP has exceeded the G7’s in terms of purchasing power parity (PPP). In addition, BRICS comprises 45% of world’s population, accounting for 3.6 billion people, a third of the earth’s dry land, 40% all oil production, and about a quarter of the world’s exports of goods, and it extends from Asia to Europe, the Americas, and Africa, giving it a truly global flavor. With that, there is a need for redefining some terminologies that have prevailed for decades. Globalization is a misleading term that suggests that the globe has one culture and values that all nations share, while the truth is that this culture and values are mainly Western ones, which makes it “westernization,” not “globalization,” and there is nothing wrong about it; all victorious nations attempted to spread their culture and values, from the ancient Egyptians, whose monuments are still vivid in the corners of the ancient world, to the Islamic and British empires. We recognize that the “westernization” scale is much larger than its previous counterparts, but that is not because of its nature itself; rather, it is because of the influence of modern technology with the inventions of airplanes, the internet, and communications, which contributed rapidly to the spread of Western culture and values around the world. This suggests that the same elements that led to the process of the speedy spread of westernization, making it look as “global,” would also have the same effect on the coming new rising actors whose cultures and values will spread the same way and probably in a shorter period of time, due to the speedy development of technology and AI, making it look “global” too. A hundred years before Friedman, Ibn Khaldun, as previously explained, discussed the issue of globalization through defining the relationship between the Ghaleb (winner) and Maghloub (loser), where the second follows the values and culture of the first. Globalization has benefited the world through the integration of markets and economies; however, it has had its side effects too on the “other” nations. Some nations found themselves obliged, and even forced, to open their markets wide to the industrial products of the advanced industrial powers, those that would be defined as core states according to the dependency theory, while those “other” nations that would be defined as periphery states are not having the same privilege of undisturbed access for their agricultural products to the markets of the core states. Such a rule of the so-called “globalization” order created a structure of superior–inferior/Ghaleb–Maghloub relationship. In the New International Order, not a single culture would prevail; the “other” nations will not be obliged to follow the culture of values and rules of others. Through the last conflict of struggle to break free from the chains of slavery and subjugation, nations will be able to achieve their true independence. This conflict will not be between civilizations or ideologies but between the subjugated and the subjugating. BRICS would be a force behind an inclusive globalization that takes into consideration different nations’ cultures and needs and allows everyone to be on board, and that is due to the rise of the Global South itself. The difference between the Global South during the Cold War and its NAM and today’s Global South with its BRICS is that it moved from the position of being dependent on others, being on the side of one camp or the other or even neutral and passive, to a new active position of being an independent and influential actor itself. BRICS countries do not have to choose between China, Russia, or the United States, and even with China and Russia as members of BRICS, that does not make the other BRICS members followers or dependent on them.