In an interview given by Russian Deputy Chief of Staff Yuri Ushakov in early September, we were informed that Turkey is a candidate for BRICS+ membership. Turkish representatives have occasionally participated in BRICS meetings as observers, but this time, Turkey has submitted an official membership application. Turkey’s BRICS+ membership is expected to be discussed and voted on at the summit to be held in Kazan in October 2024.
What is BRICS+? What is Its Potential?
BRICS was formed in 2006 by Brazil, Russia, India, and China, aiming to foster economic cooperation among these nations. In 2010, South Africa joined, giving the group its current name. At the 2023 BRICS Summit, hosted by South Africa, member leaders decided to expand the group. As of January 1, 2024, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates officially joined BRICS. A big number of countries have expressed interest in joining BRICS, while reports say that 20 have officially applied to join (including Pakistan, Algeria, Venezuela, Nigeria and others).
Currently, BRICS nations represent approximately 45% of the world’s population. With the inclusion of new members, BRICS+ will encompass around 50% of the global population and account for 40% of the world’s GDP. Moreover, it will include two of the world’s top three oil producers, and some of the most powerful countries in the Gulf, Latin America, and Africa. This expansion is causing concern among Western imperialist powers, as BRICS+—though still a loose formation—could grow stronger.
BRICS was initially dismissed by the West and even mocked. While China and India’s economies grew rapidly, their power was not reflected on international relations. Forums like the G7 and G20 were promoted as the only suitable platforms for discussing global issues. BRICS seemed to lack a clear purpose. However, with growing tensions between the West and China, the inclusion of new countries like Iran, the UAE, and Saudi Arabia, and the ongoing Ukraine war, BRICS+ has gained new significance.
As we noted in the geopolitical text of ISp’s Second Conference, there are, of course, very important differences between BRICS+ countries. Many members maintain strong ties with the West and continue to have significant economic relations. Therefore, not all BRICS+ countries can be seen as part of a conscious anti-Western alliance.
Whether the anti-Western bloc, primarily represented by China and Russia, can consolidate BRICS+—which is becoming increasingly heterogeneous as it expands—remains to be seen. The Economist suggests that the Kazan summit, the first meeting after the expansion decision, will be a key moment in demonstrating whether the diverse Global South can present a viable political alternative to Western dominance. From China’s perspective, BRICS+ is envisioned as an alternative to the G7. While some analyses argue that the lack of a common currency or free trade zones makes BRICS+ seem like a distant dream, it is important not to underestimate the potential power BRICS+ may wield against Western imperialism. This power lies with the indisputable fact that Western imperialist powers are losing ground in the competition with new emerging imperialist powers, especially China.
The New Development Bank (NDB), established by BRICS in 2014, is creating a system that allows member countries to lend to each other in their own currencies. Trade and investment volumes among BRICS+ countries are already substantial. For example, the trade volume between China and Russia stands at $190 billion, followed by China-Brazil at $157.5 billion (statista). After the Ukraine war and the sanctions of the West against Russia, a big chunk of these transactions are not made in dollars but in local currencies.
Additionally, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has been developing since 2013, aims to expand infrastructure networks across Asia and Africa, including Russia and Iran. Considering all these factors together, we can argue that China is engaged in a race where it is either bound to win or, at the very least, change the rules of the game. This global power struggle will shape current developments and bring economic and geopolitical instability to global capitalism.
What Does Turkey’s Membership Mean?
Turkey’s potential BRICS+ membership can be seen as part of the country’s search for a new economic and political balance. Since World War II, Turkey has been deeply integrated into Western alliance systems, particularly NATO, and has been pursuing EU candidacy. However, steps such as BRICS+ membership signal Turkey’s attempt to pursue a multi-dimensional foreign policy and seek new economic resources, trade routes, and support.
Since 2018, Turkey has been in the midst of a severe economic crisis, which some describe as a distribution crisis characterized by increasing income inequality, the allocation of resources to specific groups, and the rapid rise in the cost of living for large segments of the population. This crisis has driven Turkey to seek alternative economic partnerships. Joining BRICS+ offers Turkey potential new financial opportunities, alternative trade routes, and different forms for addressing its economic challenges. Turkish officials frame BRICS+ membership not as a departure from the West, but as a complementary policy. They view BRICS+ as a way for Turkey to increase its economic independence and gain more options on the global stage. However, such a move could also create new tensions in Turkey’s relations with the West. Maintaining strong economic and military ties with the U.S. and the European Union while building closer relationships with an alternative bloc like BRICS+ may lead to a delicate balancing act that could even become impossible to maintain.
In any case though, BRICS membership will not solve any of the problems of Turkish capitalism.
Will Turkey Become a Member of BRICS+ at the October Summit in Kazan?
First and foremost, BRICS+ requires a unanimous vote from all current members to accept new members. Russia and China’s relations with Turkey are expected to play a key role in this decision. China’s investments in Turkey and strategic partnerships may be seen as positive signals for Turkey’s membership. For example, Chinese electric vehicle manufacturer BYD has taken significant steps in Turkey, seeing it as a strategic market. In 2023, BYD began collaborations in Turkey to sell electric vehicles, positioning Turkey as an important market. However, despite these developments, trade between Turkey and China does not occupy a significant place in either country’s economy, and there is no strong evidence that this will change soon. Additionally, military and diplomatic tensions between Turkey and China, particularly regarding the Uyghur issue, show that the two countries do not fully trust each other.
Russia’s expectations play a key role in Turkey’s BRICS+ membership process. It is clear that Russia expects Turkey to shift its stance on Ukraine. Since the beginning of the war, Turkey has maintained a balancing policy, supporting Ukraine while preserving its economic ties with Russia. However, Russia seems to find this stance insufficient and expects Turkey to reconsider its position on Ukraine in strategic processes like BRICS+ membership. As noted by Ryabkov, (Foreign Vice Minister of Russia) “Russia hopes that in processes like BRICS+, Turkey will adopt a more pro-Moscow stance regarding its position on Ukraine.” This expectation could become a bargaining chip that influences the outcome of Turkey’s membership bid.
If Turkey reduces its support for Ukraine or undergoes a political shift, it could strengthen its relations with Russia. However, such a move would likely create significant discomfort in the West and damage Turkey’s strategic ties with NATO.
For Marxists, formations like BRICS+ are a reflection of the imperialist conflicts and blocs created by the capitalist system. The consolidation of these blocs further intensifies competition and conflicts of interest among capitalist countries. The workers movement, while revealing these contradictions, should put forward an independent working class position, not siding with one capitalist bloc against the other.
