CCS Events
CCS Libraries
About CCS
CCS Projects
CCS Highlights

Publication Details

Bond, Patrick Translation ka-Manzi, Faith (2014) BRICS and the tendency to sub-imperialism (IBRICS ngokuba ngamazwe abusela amanye abusa ngokusabalala ezifundazweni zawo). Pambazuka : -.

Despite their anti-imperialist potential, BRICS states have promoted neo-liberal and imperialist practices that facilitate capital accumulation, resource extraction and expansion of their markets. But growing popular unrest against exploitation, ecological destruction and neoliberalism in the BRICS countries may lead to a different, anti- imperialist, course

The rise of the Brazil-Russia-India-China-South Africa (BRICS) bloc represents a potentially important geopolitical and economic force that, in early 2014, suffers a worsening schizophrenia, in terms of positioning within global political economy. The bloc’s more radical proponents argue it has ‘anti-imperialist’ potential. But there are far greater dangers of BRICS playing a ‘sub-imperialist’ role in contributing to neoliberal regime maintenance (especially in Africa), or even an inter-imperialist role as Russia appears tempted in the Ukraine/Crimea theatre. But there is potential, as well, for popular forces to unite in a role more akin to solidaristic cross-border anti-imperialism, given the extreme contradictions and intensity of social unrest in each site.

The label of ‘sub-imperialist’ states that accompany and extend imperialism was originally invoked by Ruy Mauro Marini (1965) to describe the Brazilian dictatorship’s role in the Western Hemisphere, and was then repeatedly applied during the 1970s when the Nixon Doctrine allowed Washington to outsource geopolitical policing responsibilities and accumulation opportunities to favoured regional allies, mostly pro-corporate authoritarian regimes.

Although some believe BRICS will have sufficient autonomy to become actively anti-imperialist (Desai 2013, Escobar 2013, Keet 2013, Martin 2013, Shubin 2013, Third World Network 2013), at the level of global governance this bloc has tended to reinforce not challenge prevailing power relations, except in exceptional cases such as in 2013 when Syria was threatened with bombing by Washington and in 2014 when Russia invaded Crimea after losing crucial influence in Ukraine.

Like other more isolated states in prior epochs of service to imperialism, the BRICS accumulation trajectory, global geopolitical-economic-environmental strategy, hegemony over hinterlands and internal dynamics of class formation together suggest a pattern deserving the phrase sub-imperialist (Bond and Garcia 2014).

There are at least four core relations of sub-imperialism: to imperialism, to capitalist crisis tendencies, to super-exploitative processes and to regional hegemony.

First, to define sub-imperialism properly implies a coherent definition of the systemic processes of imperialism within which it operates. There are a variety of ways to understand imperialism, but the most durable – especially for Africa – appears to be the conception which Rosa Luxemburg (1968) set out in The Accumulation of Capital in 1913, stressing the extra-economic coercion associated with exploitation between capitalist and non-capitalist spheres under conditions of capitalist crisis (in contrast to other accounts of the era which hinge more upon capital export, formal colonial relations and inter-imperial rivalries).

Second, as a result, capitalist crisis conditions become evident within the sub-imperial economies just as they are in the imperialist, even when accumulation is moving ahead at an apparently rapid clip. Overaccumulation of capital is a constant problem everywhere, often rising to crisis stage. As a result, in several sub-imperialist countries there are powerful impulses for local capital to both externalize and financialize.

Judging by David Harvey’s (2003) criteria in which sub-imperialists seek ‘spatio-temporal fixes’ to these problems, the BRICS offer some of the most extreme sites in the world today. These crisis conditions are particularly important because in the contemporary period, they have shifted what had earlier been nationalist (or even ‘state-capitalist’) power relations imposed by patronage-oriented states, towards the neoliberal public policies practiced elsewhere. They also entail intensified uneven development combined with super-exploitative (and often extra-economically coercive) systems of accumulation, as well as economic symptoms of imperialist desperation, especially financialization.

Third, sub-imperial regimes expand these same neoliberal practices for use within their regional spheres of influence, thus legitimating the Washington Consensus in ideological and concrete terms, especially by facilitating multilateral trade, investment and financing arrangements. Indeed, sub-imperial powers often promote neoliberal institutions even when complaining (sometimes bitterly) about their indifference to poorer countries, and they sometimes establish new ones that have similar functions in regional terms.

This in turn often permits the sub-imperial power to act as a regional platform for accumulation, drawing resources from the hinterland and marketing exports that typically destroy hinterland productive capacity and economic sovereignty. Usually the benefits are manifold, including trade surpluses with the hinterland (where the latter often supplies crucial raw materials on advantageous terms), the opportunity for profits to be accumulated within the sub-imperial power’s financial centres, and the expansion of influence via a strengthened economy especially where trade is conducted in the sub-imperial power’s currency.

All of this logically entails a regional gendarme role, a division of policing labour that allows the world capitalist system to continue with expansion of contracts, their enforcement and the extraction of adequate flows of materials (as well as workers) from distant sites that remain critical to the smooth functioning of the world division of labour.

Fourth, as Sam Moyo and Paris Yeros (2011, 19) put it, imperialism’s relations with sub-imperial allies always entailed ‘the super-exploitation of domestic labour. It was natural, therefore, that, as it grew, it would require external markets for the resolution of its profit realisation crisis.’ Concretely, to take BRICS as an example, super-exploitative relations are witnessed in the way that Chinese households are torn from rural land during the ongoing urbanization process, and in the broader context in which rural people require special work permits to live in cities, where they are paid much lower wages.

Such super-exploitative relations are then readily transferred to the international scale, where China’s role has been even more predatory than Western corporations, backed by its support to local dictators (e.g. the case of Zimbabwe where Chinese military and Zimbabwean generals conjoined as the Anjin Corporation in the world’s largest diamond fields, with a resulting Resource Curse as extreme as any in contemporary Africa) (Maguwu 2013).

Likewise, South Africa’s historical mode of apartheid super-exploitation – termed ‘articulations of modes of production’ by Harold Wolpe (1980) – exemplified the most extreme internal dimension of sub-imperial accumulation. Migrant male workers from rural Bantustans as well as regional hinterlands as far north as Malawi long provided ‘cheap labour’, thanks to black rural women’s unpaid reproduction of children, sick workers and retirees generally without state support.

This was not merely a matter of formal racial power. The expansion of the South African migrancy model much deeper into the Southern African region in the wake of apartheid’s early 1990s demise occurred notwithstanding tragic xenophobic reactions from the local working class. The August 2012 Marikana massacre of striking migrant platinum mineworkers at Lonmin was another example of how far the regimes’ policing function would go internally so as to defend the profitability of multinational extractive corporations (Saul and Bond 2014). But it is the inexorable regional-hinterland expansion of these processes that compels sub-imperial states to follow the logic of imperialism.

This is recognized by professional geopoliticians of capital, such as the Texas intelligence firm Stratfor (2009), in an internal memo (as revealed by WikiLeaks): ‘South Africa’s history is driven by the interplay of competition and cohabitation between domestic and foreign interests exploiting the country’s mineral resources. Despite being led by a democratically-elected government, the core imperatives of South Africa remain the maintenance of a liberal regime that permits the free flow of labor and capital to and from the southern Africa region, as well as the maintenance of a superior security capability able to project into south-central Africa.’

The ability to move up-continent was questioned in March 2013, however, in the Central African Republic capital of Bangui after authoritarian ruler Francois Bozize was ousted by guerrillas. More than a dozen South African soldiers were killed, according to interviews of surviving troops in Johannesburg’s main Sunday newspaper, while ‘protecting belongings of… businesses in Jo’burg... We were lied to straight out... We were told we were here to serve and protect, to ensure peace’ (Hosken and Mahlangu 2013). The protected Johannesburg capitalists included firms linked to the ruling party (Amabhungane 2013).

These latter relationships, in which capitalism both exploits and corrodes non-capitalist relations through extra-economic coercive techniques, were theorised originally by Luxemburg and have been revitalised as an explanatory system by Harvey under the rubric of ‘accumulation by dispossession.’ In other words, there are theoretically derived processes which explain the logic of imperialism and sub-imperialism together, even if contingencies may change the geographical place, shape and scale at which these processes unfold.

Luxemburg’s (1968, 396) Accumulation of Capital focuses on how capitalism’s extra-economic coercive capacities loot mutual aid systems and commons facilities, families (especially women’s role in social reproduction), the land, all forms of nature, and the shrinking state: ‘The relations between capitalism and the non-capitalist modes of production start making their appearance on the international stage. Its predominant methods are colonial policy, an international loan system – a policy of spheres of interest – and war. Force, fraud, oppression, looting are openly displayed without any attempt at concealment, and it requires an effort to discover within this tangle of political violence and contests of power the stern laws of the economic process.’

Thanks to a very careful examination of colonial-extractivist conditions in the then South Africa, Namibia and the DRC (Bond, Chitonge and Hopfmann 2007), her core insight (1968, 397), as distinct from framings by Lenin, Bukharin, Hilferding, Hobson and others of her era, was to show that ‘Capital cannot accumulate without the aid of non-capitalist’ relations. ‘Only the continuous and progressive disintegration of non-capitalist organization makes accumulation of capital possible.’

This process, Luxemburg argued, in which ‘capital feeds on the ruins’ of the non-capitalist relation, amounts to ‘eating it up. Historically, the accumulation of capital is a kind of metabolism between capitalist economy and those pre-capitalist methods of production without which it cannot go on and which, in this light, it corrodes and assimilates.’

This process is amplified during periods of desperation intrinsic to capitalist crisis, Luxemburg (1968, 76) observed, drawing on Marx’s classical theory about ‘perpetual overproduction,’ characterized by ‘the ceaseless flow of capital from one branch of production to another, and finally in the periodical and cyclical swings of reproduction between overproduction and crisis.’

At that point, Luxemburg (1968, 327) insists, the core countries reveal ‘the deep and fundamental antagonism between the capacity to consume and the capacity to produce in a capitalist society, a conflict resulting from the very accumulation of capital which periodically bursts out in crises and spurs capital on to a continual extension of the market.’ The current renewal of this process – crisis, extension of the market, and amplified capitalist-noncapitalist super-exploitative relations – serves as the basis for renewed imperialism.

But Harvey (2003) adds a new layer to this argument: ‘The opening up of global markets in both commodities and capital created openings for other states to insert themselves into the global economy, first as absorbers but then as producers of surplus capitals. They then became competitors on the world stage. What might be called ‘sub-imperialisms’ arose… Each developing centre of capital accumulation sought out systematic spatio-temporal fixes for its own surplus capital by defining territorial spheres of influence.’

Harvey (1992) identifies ‘a cascading and proliferating series of spatio-temporal fixes’ to persistent economic crisis, which are invoked so as to extend capitalism geographically and across time, usually facilitated by dramatic financial expansion. The role of banks in core and even sub-imperial countries is to indebt poorer countries so that they can be wedged open for the sake of liberalised trade and investment or simple resource extraction. Expansion of the credit system is also the traditional way to address overproduction of goods, as debt allows these to be mopped up in the present with a promise to extract further surpluses to pay the price in future.

According to Harvey (2003,134), these fixes do not result in crisis resolution, but instead, lead to new contradictions associated with uneven development: ‘increasingly fierce international competition as multiple dynamic centers of capital accumulation emerge to compete on the world stage in the face of strong currents of overaccumulation. Since they cannot all succeed in the long run, either the weakest succumb and fall into serious crises of devaluation, or geopolitical confrontations erupt in the form of trade wars, currency wars and even military confrontations.’

The territorially-rooted power blocs generated by internal alliances (and conflicts) within national boundaries, or occasionally across boundaries to regional scale, are the critical units of analysis when it comes to fending off the devalorization of overaccumulated capital. By uncovering these units, it is feasible to root a durable geopolitical theory appropriate for understanding contemporary imperialism. The BRICS reflect this new relationship, for as Brazilian president Lula announced in 2010, ‘A new global economic geography is born.’ However, relying upon financiers such as leading Goldman Sachs executive Jim O’Neill (originator of the ‘BRIC’ meme in 2001) to codify economic power is risky.

What appeared as a strong bloc of BRICS countries at a leadership summit in March 2013 became, within four months, the core of the ‘Fragile Five’ countries, leaving O’Neill to remark that only China deserved the ‘building-block’ BRICS designation (Magalhaes 2013). India, South Africa and Brazil lost vast amounts of their currency values and funding flows once financial capital left these markets in search of the dollar safe-haven once the US Federal Reserve’s loose monetary policy – ‘Quantitative Easing’ – began to be ‘tapered’. The same experience of massive capital outflow hit Russia in early 2014, first because of the loss of regional power signified by Ukraine’s government overthrow, and then when Moscow began a blunt takeover of Crimea, Western sanctions threats crashed its stock market.

So notwithstanding the validity of the general approach Luxemburg proposed, in which ongoing capital accumulation entails imperialism reaching into the terrain of extra-economic coercion, this is not a stable outcome. Each situation must be evaluated on its own concrete terms. Dating at least a half-century to when the idea of sub-imperialism was introduced, in Brazil, the concrete settings are vital because contingencies arise that may divert from the twin logics of capital and expanding territorial power relations.

The new concentrations of southern power began to be evident by the 1960s when new alliances strengthened in the Cold War context. In his pioneering writing about Latin American geopolitics dating to the 1960s, Marini (1974) argued that 1970s-era Brazil was ‘the best current manifestation of sub-imperialism,’ because of regional economic extraction, export of capital typically associated with imperialist politics, and internal corporate monopolization, including financialization.

There are three additional roles for these regimes, today, if they are to be considered sub-imperialist. One is ensuring regional geopolitical ‘stability’ in areas suffering severe tensions: for example, Brasilia’s army in Haiti and Pretoria’s deal-making in African hotspots like South Sudan, the Great Lakes and the Central African Republic. The Israeli and Saudi Arabian roles in the Middle East are comparable, and white-ruled South Africa was, likewise, a Western sub-imperial outpost during the Cold War, what with liberation struggles raging in surrounding countries during the 1960s-80s. Extra-economic coercion in support of raw material extraction is a common feature of this power, when in many cases the role of regional gendarme is not just ‘peace-keeping’ but transferring surpluses from the hinterland to the sub-imperialist capital city, and often from then to the imperialist headquarters, as is especially evident for contemporary South Africa (Bond 2006a, Bond 2006b).

The second is advancing the broader agenda of globalized neoliberalism, so as to legitimate deepened market access. This occurs insofar as most sub-imperial powers are enthusiastic financial backers of the main vehicles for global economic governance, especially the Bretton Woods Institutions and World Trade Organisation. For rhetorical purposes the sub-imperial powers’ foreign, trade and even finance ministries may be less than flattering about global governance, and in the case of the BRICS in 2013-14, may even launch new multilateral initiatives with the stated aim of challenging power. But standing by the IMF even in times of crisis – e.g. the institution’s recapitalization in 2009 and 2012 occurred with notable BRICS support ($75 billion in coordinated aid in the latter case) – reflects the overall role that sub-imperial regimes play: to lubricate, legitimize and extend neoliberal political economy deeper into their regional hinterlands.

The same has been true in the single most important long-term global governance challenge, climate management, where the BRICS (without Russia) lined up as critical allies within Washington’s ‘Copenhagen Accord’ strategy in 2009, both avoiding emissions cuts and promoting the further financialization of the climate strategy through extended carbon trading (Bond 2012; Böhm, Misoczky and Moog 2012). (Later, Russia cemented this function by raising its own greenhouse gas emissions dramatically and then reneging on Kyoto Protocol commitments and withdrawing from the main climate treaty.) This role of propping up global economic and environmental malgovernance often benefits home-based corporations in the sub-imperial countries, but it is also a marker of cooperation and collaboration with the imperialist projects of core countries’ multinational corporations and states.

Another example of where this was not only helpful but necessary was the World Trade Organisation, which in earlier manifestation several BRICS countries had sought to revitalize as early as the 2005 Hong Kong ministerial summit. Free-trade corporate expansion and ongoing self-interested protectionism prevail in an often uneasy mix in sub-imperial economies, but BRICS counterhegemonic activity in the WTO has occurred well within the broader agenda of neoliberalism. According to one of the coordinators of the Our World is Not for Sale civil society network (James 2013), the mid-2013 promotion of the Brazilian ambassador to the WTO – Roberto Azevêdo – to become the body’s director-general was debilitating for resistance by the South’s ‘G-110’ bloc.

The 2013 cancellation of Europe-South African Bilateral Investment Treaties by SA trade minister Rob Davies was considered to be an inspiring case of standing up to the West, but as an exception which proved the rule, and it also confirmed Pretoria’s defence of regional domination against EU intrusion into its immediate hinterland, the Southern African Customs Union. For at the end of the day, in December 2013, Azevêdo was able to arrange a WTO ministerial agreement that put the organization back on track – a notable accomplishment given the failure of his predecessor, Pascal Lamy who hailed from (and invariably supported) the European Union during prior failed efforts.

In this context, what may emerge from the networking of the sub-imperialist elites, as witnessed in the BRICS bloc in its initial formation period, 2008-14, is an agenda that more systematically confirms super-exploitative practices within their hinterlands.

Just as the political carving of Africa in Berlin at the 1884-85 conference hosted by Bismarck drew boundaries mainly benefiting extractive enterprises – mining houses and plantations as well as construction firms associated with capital accumulation in England, France, Portugal, Belgium and Germany – BRICS appears to follow colonial and neo-colonial tracks. Identifying port, bridge, road, hydropower and other infrastructure projects in the same image, the BRICS 2013 Durban summit had as its aim the continent’s economic carve-up, unburdened – now as then – by what would be derided as ‘Western’ concerns about democracy and human rights, with more than a dozen African heads of state present as collaborators. The New Partnership for Economic Development and African Peer Review Mechanism were often alleged to serve as African home-grown policing mechanisms for such infrastructure, but were generally ineffective (Bond 2005, 2009).

However, it is also critical to concede that the forms of BRICS sub-imperialism are diverse, for as Moyo and Yeros (2011,19) remark, ‘Some are driven by private blocs of capital with strong state support (Brazil, India); others, like China, include the direct participation of state-owned enterprises; while in the case of South Africa, it is increasingly difficult to speak of an autonomous domestic bourgeoisie, given the extreme degree of de-nationalisation of its economy in the post-apartheid period. The degree of participation in the Western military project is also different from one case to the next although, one might say, there is a schizophrenia to all this, typical of sub-imperialism.’

The recent period has reignited a fruitful debate about the concept of sub-imperialism and about transitions from sub- to inter-imperialism, and perhaps also one day to anti-imperialism. However, the most critical factor in making this debate real, not just a struggle over semantics between impotent leftist intellectuals, is a different process entirely, one not contingent upon rhetoric from above, but upon reality from below. Reality from below is increasingly tense in each of the main sub-imperialist powers currently seeking unity, the BRICS.

In each, a series of class, social, ecological and political battles has begun to unfold, sparked by unusual events that to the surprise of most commentators, took on national importance: public transport price increases and excesses associated with World Cup hosting in mid-2013 (Brazil); a democracy movement in late 2011, freedom of expression battle involving a risque rock band in 2012, gay rights in 2013 and anti-war protest in 2014 (Russia); a high-profile rape-murder in late 2012 and municipal electoral surprise by a left-populist political party in late 2013 (India); an ongoing wave of rural anti-displacement, local-ecology, anti-corruption and labour protests that number more than 200,000 annually (China); and a massacre of mineworkers in mid-2012 amidst a general uprising of poor people against lack of access – or overpricing – of municipal services (South Africa).

All such struggles are impulsive and impossible to predict, but much deeper class struggles against super-exploitation, ecological destruction and neoliberalism are unfolding constantly in each site. The challenge for ‘brics-from-below’ critics is to link and internationalise as quickly as possible, because their interests and campaigning analyses, strategies, tactics and alliances have many points of overlap – with each other and with the world’s progressive forces. Only then will a genuine global anti-imperialist project become possible, i.e., when anti-sub-imperialists of the world also unite.

Patrick Bond is a political economist, author, editor and lecturer at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa.

1. Amabhungane (2013) Is this what our soldiers died for?, Mail&Guardian, 28 March.
Available at

2. Böhm S, Misoczky M & Moog S (2012) ‘Greening capitalism? A Marxist critique of carbon markets’, Organization Studies, November 2012, 33, 11, p.1629.

3. Bond P (2005) Fanon’s Warning, Trenton, Africa World Press.

4. Bond P (2006a) Talk Left Walk Right. Pietermaritzburg, University of KwaZulu-Natal Press.

5. Bond P (2006b) Looting Africa. London, Zed Books.

6. Bond P (2009) Removing neocolonialism’s APRM mask: A critique of the African Peer Review Mechanism. Review of African Political Economy, 36, 122, 595-603.

7. Bond P (2012) Politics of Climate Justice, Pietermaritzburg, University of KwaZulu Natal Press.

8. Bond, P, H Chitonge and A Hopfmann (2007) The Accumulation of Capital in Southern Africa, Berlin, Rosa Luxemburg Foundation.

9. Bond, P and A Garcia (2014) A BRICS critique, Fortaleza, Tensoes Mundiais.

10. Desai, R (2013) The Brics are building a challenge to western economic supremacy,The Guardian, 2 April.

11. Escobar, P (2013), Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa: BRICS go over the Wall, Asia Times, 27 March.

12. Harvey D (1992) Limits to Capital, Chicago, Chicago University Press.

13. Harvey D (2003) The New Imperialism. Oxford, Oxford University Press.

14. Hosken G and I Mahlangu (2013) ‘We were killing kids’, Sunday Times, 31 March.

15. James D (2013) personal correspondence, 19 November.

16. Keet, D (2013), Perspectives and Proposals on the BRICS for and from popular Civil Society Organisations, Economic Justice Network, November.

17. Kuan-Hsing, C (2013) Asia as Method, Durham, Duke University Press.

18. Luxemburg, R (1968, 1913) The Accumulation of Capital, New York, Monthly Review

19. Magalhaes L (2013) China Only BRIC Country Currently Worthy of the Title -O’Neill. Wall Street Journal, 23 August. Available at

20. Maguwu, F (2013), Marange diamonds and Zimbabwe's political transition, Journal of Peacebuilding & Development, 8, 1, 74-78.

21. Marini RM (1965) Brazilian interdependence and imperialist integration. Monthly Review 17, 7.

22. Marini RM (1974) Subdesarrollo y Revolución, Mexico City, Siglo XXI Editores, translated at

23. Martin W (2013) South Africa and the ‘New Scramble for Africa’: Imperialist, Sub-imperialist, or Victim? Agrarian South: Journal of Political Economy, 2, 2, 161–188.

24. Moyo S and Yeros P (2011) Rethinking the theory of primitive accumulation. Paper presented to the 2nd IIPPE Conference, 20−22 May 2011, Istanbul.

25. Saul, J and P Bond (2014) South Africa – Present as History, Oxford, James Currey Press.

26. Shubin, V (2013) BRICS viewed from Russia, Pambazuka News, 20 March, Available at

27. Stratfor (2009), Monography for comment: South Africa, 5 May.

28. Third World Network (2013) Whither the BRICS? Third World Resurgence 274, June. Avialable at

29. Wolpe H (Ed) (1980) The Articulation of Modes of Production. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

IBRICS ngokuba ngamazwe abusela amanye abusa ngokusabalala ezifundazweni zawo
NguPatrick Bond Umhumushi nguFaith ka-Manzi

Igama eilithi ukubusa ngokusabalala ngaphandle kwezwe lakho (phecelezo sub-imperialism) lichaza ukuphelekezela kanye nokwandiswa lokhu kubuswa okwaqalwa nguRuy Mauro (ngonyaka ka1965) ukuchaza ukubusa kwezwe laseBrazil ngendlovuyangena emazweni aseNtshonalanga. Lokhukubusa ngokusabalala kwamanye amazwe futhi kwakubuye kubizwe kuchazwe ngakho uMgomo kaNixon (phecelezi Nixon’s Doctrine) ngeminyaka yawo1970 eyayivumela ukuthi iWashington ngesikhathi isiyenza izivumelwano zokusebenzisana namazwe angobhululu bayo ukuthi kube yiwo aqaphayo nokuthi futhi awanike amathuba okuthola okuthize, isikhathi esiningi kwakungamazwe ayebusa ngokubhekelela nokuxhasa izimboni. Lomqondo wokubusa ngokusabalala usubonakala sengathi usuyabuya, ngenxa yokuqalwa kweqembu elibunjwe iBrazil, neIdnai, neChina kanye neNingizimu Afrika (iBRICS) emele amandla angse aphoqe okubonakala sengathi ufuna ngokubusa ngokusabalala uma sekubhekwana nokuthi inomthelela ongakanani ekusimamisweni kwembuso wongxiwankulu emhlabeni wonke. Noma-ke abanye bekholelwa ukuthi amazwe eBRICS azoba namandla ngokwanele okuzibusa ukuthi akwazi ukumelana nokungabusi ngokusabalala ngokombono walaba abalandelayo (Desai 2013, Escobar 2013, Keet 2013, Martin 2013, Shubin 2013, Third World Network 2013), kumazinga okubusa ehlabeni leliqembu libonakala linokuqinisekisa ukungamelana nobulelwano bamandla abusayo, ngaphandle kwizimo ezingajwayelekile njengoba kwenzeka ngonyaka ka2013 lapho izwe laseRussia lihlasele iCrimea emva kokulahlekelwa ukuba nokulawula eUkraine. Njengezinye izizwe ebezikade zivalelwe ngaphandle ngezikhathi ezinzima ezikade zibhekene nazo ngesikhathi zingaphansi kukubuswa ngokusabalala, umqondo wendlela yokubuthela ndawonye weBRICS, kwezamabalwe ezihlanganisa ezombusazwe-ezomnotho kanye nezemvelo, ukuhola amazwe angasondelene nezinsiza ukuze akwazi ukuba nentuthuko kanye namazinga okuphila okuhlanganyela konke lokhu kuveza ukuthi kunomkhuba okumele usho ukuthi kubuswa ngokusabalala (ngokombono ke- kaBond kanye noGarcia 2014)

Inkulumompikiswano mayelana nokuthi ukubusa ngokusabalala ukuthi ngabe kudinga amazwe akwezinye izingxenye zamazwe azibusele ngokusabalala ngabe sekwaphela noma sekwancipha ibilokhu iqhubekile kumashumishumi eminyaka. Ngesikhathi seComintern, isisho esithi ‘abalingani abancane bokubusa ngokusabalala’ kwakuchaza ababusela amandla amakhulu kwamanye amazwe. Kusukela ngeminyaka yama1970s, ukubuselwa ngokusabalala bekuchazwa ababusi abaqhamuka ezizindeni zamandla ezifundazwe – okumbandakanya iIsrael, iTurkey, iIndonesia kanye neTaiwan – futhi abakade begcwalisa izidingo zabembutho wempi, ezokumbiwa phansi kanye nokwenza kube semthethweni izimfuno zababusa ngokusabalala. Kodwa-ke, lokhu kudingeka ukuhlala kubuyekezwa ikakhulukazi ngoba abanye abadlala lendima efanayo (ngokwesibonelo-nje iIran ngaphambi konyaka ka1979, iArgentina ngaphambi konyaka ka1982) abathola lomqondo unokuphikisana kakhulu. UFred Halliday (1979: p283) waphumela obala nalombono kulandela ukuvela kokubuselwa ngokusabalala : (a) ukuqhubeka kwendlela yokuvumela ukubuswa ngokusabalala yizwe laseMelika ngakwesinye isandla, kanye (b) ukuzibusa kwisifundazwe ngakwesinye isandla.’ Ukutengezela okubalulekile kulendima akuvezi amandla kodwa ubuthakathaka bezinhloso zeWashington, ‘umgomo oqanjwe ngendlela ezodala isizinda samandla sabazobuselwa ngokusabalala,’ njongoba kwachaza uJoseph Gerson kanye noBruce Birchard (1991).

Ukubusela ngokusabalala kubuye kweza nezinye izincazelo, okuhlanganisa ‘ukuba semaceleni’ okwaqhamuka noWallerstein (1974, 1997), okulokhu kuqhubeka kusetshenziswa yiWorld Systems Theorists. UChris Chase-Dunn (2013) waphawula wathi ‘umsebenzi ohamba phambili ekubeni khona kwezitebhisi okuphakathi nendawo ukwehlisa indlela enkulukazi okufaniswa kanye nabaphila ngamazinga aphakathi nendawo abaningi ngaphakathi esizweni.’ Noma-ke, abadlala indima yesibili ‘ngobabusa ngokusabalala’ kumazwe aseAustralia kanye naseCanada kukhombisa ubudlelwane obuhluke kakhulu ekubusweni ngokusabalala kulamazwe (njengombo woAlbo kanye noKlaasen ngonyaka ka2013). Ngawo futhi lowomoya, igama elithi ‘ukubuselwa ngabanye’ kuchaza ‘izinga eliphansi lombuso okuncike ezingeni eliphezulu ekubusweni ngokusabalala,’, ngokusho kuka Kuan-Hsing (2010, ikhasi18).

Lena imicabango ejwayele ukuxhaswa ngabagxeki bemibuso yokusabalala. Uma-ke futhi sekuphikiswana nalokhu, umqondo ‘wamandla phakathi nendawo’ awucacile futhi awusabisi ngakho-ke ukusetshenziswa kwawo ngabochwepheshe abajwayelekile bezombusazwe kuyaqhubeka kwenze ezombusazwe ngamabalazwe zingabonakali zingezombusazwe (ngokombono kaJordaan ngonyaka ka2003). Okokugcina, kwizifundiswa ngezomlando (noma ngabe eziyizizishoshovu noma ezijwayelekile), isikhathi sokubusa ngokusabalala kwakuyisikhathi sangaphambi kweMpi Yomhlaba Yokuqala, okugcwele ubudlelwane namazwe ayebusa amazwe okungewona awawo kanye nokubangwa kwezinye izingxenye zomhlaba ngaphandle kwemibuso, ikakhulukazi eAfrika, ngakho-ke umqondo wokubusela amanye amazwe ngokusabalala – ikakhulukazi ayebuswa izwe laseNgilandi eleza uzokwenza izwe laseNingizimu Afrika ngonyaka ka1910 – kuhlale kukhulunywa ngakho mayelana nalomqondo.

Ukubusa ngokusabalala, inkinga yongxiwankulu, ukuxhashazwa kakhulu kanye nokubusa ngokuzimela ezifundazweni
Ukuhluka ngamagama akubalulekile, uma kuqhathaniswa mhlawumbe nobudlelwane obune bokubuselwa ngokusabalala: ukubusa ngokusabalala, kuya kubungxiwankulu, nendlela zokuxhaphaza kakhulu kanye nokubusa ngokuzimelela ezifundazweni.

Okokuqala, ukuchaza ukubuselwa ngokusabalala kuveza kahle kahle ngokuchaza okunomqondo ophusile ngezindlela zokubuswa ngokusabalala okwenzeka kakhona. Kunezindlela ezahlukene zokuqonda ukubusa ngokusabalala, kodwa okuqondwa kakhulu kubonakala kungumqondo kaRosa Luxemborg (ngonyaka ka1968) akubhala kwi-The Accumulation of Capital ngonyaka ka1913, egcizelela ukunxenxwa ngokwedlulele okungaphezulu kwezomnotho okumbandakanywa nokuxhashazwa phakathi kongxiwankulu kanye nabangebona ongxiwankulu (uma sekuphikiswana nakwezinye izikhathi okume ekulanndweni kwezimpahla emazweni angaphandle, ubudlelwane namazwe abusa amanye amazwe kanye nokuphikisana phakathi kwamazwe abusa ngokusabalala). Lokhu, ngokukaDavid Harvey 9ngonyaka ka2003), Ukubusa Nokusabalala Okusha lapho ukuzuza kwenyuka kakhulu kume ekutheni abantu bathathelwe izimpahla zabo, futhi lapho amandla asezifundazweni zivele ziqhamuke ukuzosiza loluhlelo. Lapha-ke kufanele kubhekisiswe kahle, njengasezansi.

Okwesibili, njengomphumela, izimo zenkinga yobungxiwankulu ibonakala igqame ngaphakathi kweminotho yamazwe abusela labo ababusa ngokusabalala, noma0ke ukubutha okwabezizwe kuqhubekela phambili ngokukhulu ukushehsa. Ukubutha okungaphezulu kwemali kuyinkinga yonke indawo, okugcina kube yinkinga. Njengompumela, kumazwe ambalwa abuselwa ngamanye ngokusabalala kunokwenza ngaphandle kokucabanga kwizimali zendawo ukwenzela ngaphandle kanye nokuchasa ngezimali. Ngokuhlulela kwendlela kaHarvey yokubheka ‘ngokulingisa okwesikhashana’, iBRICS ifika nezinye izizinda zokubusela ngokusabalala emhlabeni namhlanje. Lezizimo zezinkinga zinokubaluleka ngoba esikhathini samanje, azisekho-nje emandleni obudlelwane nesizwe (noba umbuso kangxiwankulu) okulethwe izizwe ezikhongozayo, kubhekenwe nemigomo yezomphakathi yongxiwankulu okwenzeka yonke indawo. Lokhu kuhlanganisa ukuthuthukisa okujulile okungalingani kuhlanganiswe nokuxhashazwa kakhulu (kanye futhi okunendlela enendluzula engeziwe kwezomnotho) indlela yokuzuza, kanye nezimpawu zezomnotho zesidingo esikhulu kubabusi ababusa ngokusabalala, ikakhulukazi ekutshalweni kwezimali.

Okwesithathu, imibuso yamazwe abusela ezinye ngokusobalala yandisa imikhuba yongxiwankulu ukuyisebenzisa kwizifundazwe ezikwazi ukuziyalela, okwenza kube ngumthetho Isivumelwano saseWashington (phecelezi Washington Consensus) ngeniqondo yokubusa kanye nezindlela ezizimelele, ikakhulukazi ngokudala amathuba okuhwebelena, nezinhlelo zokutshala nokuxhasa ngezimali kanye. Vele phela, imibuso ebusela amanye amazwe ngokusabala isikhathi esiningi agqugquzela izikhungo zongxiwakulu noma kwesinye isikhathi isuke ikhononda (kwenye inkathi kakhulu) ngokungabi nandaba namzwe anhlwempu, futhi ngesinye isikhathi baqale ngokuqala kabusha ezinye izikhungo ezinemisebenzi eanayo ngokwezindlela zezifundazwe. Lokhu futhi kujwayele ukuvumela ukuthi ababusela amanye amazwe ngokusabalala ukuthi abe yindawo lapho kwenzelwa khona ukubutha, kuthathwe imikhiqizo yamazwe engenayo kakhulu intuthuko futhi kubhebhethekiswa ukunxenxa ukuhanjiswa kwemikhiqizo yalamazwe emazweni aphesheya ukuze kucekelwe phansi ukukwazi kokukhiqiza kwamazwe angathuthukile kanye nokuzimela kwawo kwezomnotho. Ngokujwayelekile-ke inzuzo iba ngezindlela eziningi, okuhlanganisa nemikhiqizo emingi esuke isisele ngoba isikhiqizwe kwadlulela emazweni angakathuthuki (asuke ekhiqiza imikhiqizo eseluhlaza edingeka kakhulu ngokubonelela laba ababusa ngokusabalala), amathuba okuzuza okuthola ngezizinda zezimali amandla amazwe abusela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala kanye nokwandisa ukulawula ngokuqinisa ezonomnotho ikakhulukazi lapho ukuhweba kwenziwa ngemali yesizwe esisuke subusela lesisizwe esibusa ngokusabalala. Konke lokhu kukhombisa umqondo wendima yalowo obuselwa lezizizwe ezibusa ngokusabalala, ukwahlukaniswa kwezemisebenzi ngokulawula okuvumela ukuthi inqubo yongxiwankulu yomhlaba iqhubeke nokwandisa izivumelwano, nokusimamisa kwabo kanye nokuthuthwa kwemikhiqizo embiwayo ngokwanele (kanye nabasebenzi) ukuthi kuyahamba kusuka ezindaweni ezikude ezibalulekile ekwenzeni kalula ukusebenza ngkwahlukaisa imisebenzi emhalbeni.

Okwesine, njengoba uSam Moyo benoParis Yeros (ngo2011, ikhasi19) basho, ubudlelwano kwababusa ngokusabalala kanye nobhululu babo ababbabuselayo ezifundazweni kwamanye amazwe kuhlanganisa ‘ukuxhashazwa kakhulu kwabasebenzi bakulelozwe elibuswayo. Kwakujwayelekile, ngakho-ke, ukuthi ngesikhathi kwenyuka, kwakudinga izimakethe zangaphandle kwenzelwa izinqumo zokuthola inzuzo okuyiyona nkinga’. Nokuqinisekileyo, ukwenza iBRICS isibonelo-nje, ubudlelwano obunokuxhaphaza kakhulu kuyabonakala kwimizi yaseChina enokuhlukana abasuswe emhlabeni wasemaphandleni ngesikhathi kwenziwa izinhlelo zokubahlalisa emadolobheni, kanye nalapho abantu basemaphandleni bedinga imvume yokusebenza ephuthumayo abayidingayo ukuhlala emadolobheni, lapho bekhokhelwa khona amaholo amancane kakhulu. Lobubudlelwano obuxhaphaza kakhulu ngalendlela kuyahanjiswa kusabalaliswe emhlabeni wonke, lapho indima yezwe laseChina seligcwele kakhulu kunezimboni zasemazweni aseNtshonalanga, ixhaswa ngababusa ngendlovuyangena ezindaweni zabo (isibonelo-nje, esaseZimbabwe lapho ojenene baseZimbabwe nabaseChina bezombutho wempi abahlangana njenge Anjin Corporation embonini enkulu kakhulu yedayimani, okwaba nomphumela Wokuqalekiswa Komkhiqizo(phecelezi Resource Curse) ngendlela enkulu njengoba kwenzeka eAfrika njengamanje) (Magawu 2013).

Ngokunjalo-ke, indlela yaseNingizimu Afrika yomlando wombuso wobandlululo ngokuxhashazwa kakhulu – okwakubizwa ‘ngezindlela zokukhuluma ngezindlela zokukhiqiza’ nguHarold Wolpe (ngo1980) – okwenziwa isibonelongokuzuza okukhulu ngaphakathi ngukubuselwa ngokusabalala. Abasebenzi besilisa ababesuka amaphandleni asezindaweni ezazizibusa zabamnyama (phecelezi amaBuntustans) kanye nezindawo zamazwe angathuthukile kule le enyakatho njengasemMalawi eyayikage iletha kuleli ‘abasebenzi abahola kancane kakhulu’, futhi ngalokho sibonga ukuqhubeka kwabesifazane abamnyama ukuthi bazale abasebenzi bebe bengakhokhelwa, ukunakekele abasebenzi abagulayo kanye nesebedla umhlalaphansi. Lokhu kwakungeyona-nje indlela esemthethweni yamandla obandlululo. Ukwandiswa kokulandwa kwabasebenzi ezindaweni zasemaphandleni yizwe laseNingizimu Afrika ngokujula kakhulu esifundazweni seNingizimu neAfrika ngesikhathi sokuchitheka kobandlululo ngeminyaka yama1990s kwenzeka phezukokuba kube nezimo ezimbi kakhulu zokucwaswa kwabokufika baseAfrika kuleli kwabakuleli okuvela kwabakuleli abangabasebenzi. Isibhicongo sokubhuqwabhuqwa kwabasebenzi ababetelekile absebenza embonini yomkhiqizo wokumbiwa phansi iplatinum eMarikana ngenyanga kaNcwaba ngonyaka ka2012 eLonmin kwakungesinye isibonelo sokuthi isebenza kanjani indlela yokuqapha yemibuso ngaphakathi ezweni ukuvikela inzuzo yezimboni zemikhiqizo yokumbiwa phansi (Bond noSaul ngo2014).

Lokukwandiswa okwenzeka emazweni angathuthikile okungavimbekile kwezindlela eziphoqa ukuthi imibuso ebusela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala ilandele umqondo wokubusa ngokusabalala. Lokhu kumukelwa zizifundiswa zbezobusazwe ngezombalazwe bezimali, njengemboni yezinhloli yaseTexas iStratfor (ngo2009), kumyalezo wangaphakathi embonini (njengoba kwadalula iWikileaks): ‘Umlando waseNingizimu Afrika ushayelwa ngukudlala ngaphakathi kokuncintisana kanye nokuhoshelana phakathi kwezidingo zangaphakathi kanye nezamazwe angaphandle ukuxhaphaza imikhiqizo yokumbiwa phansi yezwe. Ngaphandle-ke kokuthi lelizwe liholwa nguhulumeni okhethwe ngentando yeningi, okubalulekile okuhamba phambili eNingizimu Afrika kuhlale kungukusimamisa umbuso wongxiwankulu ovumela ukuhlale kukhona mahala amandla basebenzi kanye nemali okuya futhi okusuka esifundazweni saseningizimu neAfrika, kanye nokusimamiswa kokuba ngcono ukuthi ibukeka kahle emazweni aseningizimu kanye nenamaphakathi neAfrika.Ukukwazi ukusuka kuleli kunyukelwe nemaphakathi neAfrika kwaletha umbuzo ngenyanga kaNdasa ngonyaka ka2013, kodwa-ke, eCentral African Republic ekomkhulu lakuleli eBangui emva kokuba owayebusa ngokuqinisa umthetho uFrancois Bozize esekhishwe ngamaphekulazikhuni. Lapho-ke angaphezulu kweshumi amabuthoaseNingizimu Afrika abulawa, ngezingxoxo zamabutho ezasinda eGoli bephephandaba langesonto, ngenkathi ‘evikela izimpahla zama..banikazi bezicebi zaseGoli..Kwakuqanjwe amanga bangatshelwa iqiniso…Babetshelwe ukuthi babekuleya lizwe ukuvikela, nokuqinisekisa ukuthula’ (Hosken noMahlangu ngo2013). Ongxiwankulu ababevikelwe baseGoli babehlanganisa izimboni ezihlangane nepataniswa neqembu elibusayo (Amabhungane 2013).

Izindlela zokubusa amanye amazwe kanye nokubuselwa ngamanye amazwe ezifundazweni zawo
Lobububuhlobo bamanje, lapho ogxiwankulu bexhaphaza futhi kucekele pahnsi ubudlelwane obungbona bongxiwankulu ngokusebenzisa izindlela ezinkulu zokunxenxa zezomnotho, zaqalwa zabhalwa nguRosa Luxemburg futhi sezivuselelwe njengendlela yokuchaza nguDavid Harvey njengenqubo yenigomo yokuphuca bantu izimpahla zabo. Ngamanye amagama. kunezindlela ezibhalwe phansi ezisetshinziswayo zichaza umqondo wokubusa ngokusabalala kanye nokubuslea amaznye amazwe ngokusabalala kanye kanye, noma ngabe okulindelwe kungenzeka kushintshe ibalazwe laleyondawo, ukwakheka kwayo kanye nezinga lapho sekwenzeka lezizindlela.

Kwincwadi iAccumulation of Capital ebhalwe nguLuxemburg’s (ngo1968, ikhasi396) ukuthi Ubungxiwankulu bubhekla kanje izindlela zokunxenxa ngokwengezelel kwezomnotho zokuntshontsha izindlela, imindeni (indima yabesifazaneekukhiqizeni kwezenhlalakahle), umhlaba, kanye nezindlela zonke zemvelo, kanye nombuso olokhu uncipha:
Ubudlelwano phakathi kwezindlela zokukhiqiza zongxiwankulu kanye nabangaesibona ongxiwankulu kuqala ngokuvela emhlabeni. Izindlela ezihamba phambili yimgomo yababusi bangaphambilini baseNtshonalanga, indlela yokubolekisa esetshenziswa emhlabeni wonke – umgomo wokuzibhekelela – kanye nempi. Indluzula, ukukhwabanisa, ukucindezela, ukweba kwenzelwa konke obala ngaphandle kokuzama ukukufihla, futhi kudinga umzamo wokuthola ngaphakathi kwalesisixakxaka sodlame kwezombusazwe kanye nokuphikisana ngamandla imithetho eqinile yezindlela zomnotho.

Umbono wakhe ohamba phambili (1968, kwikhasi397), noma uhluke kakhulu kokwakukhonjiswa ngoLenin, noBukharin, noHilferding, oHobson kanye nabanye ababekhona ngesikhathi sakhe, kwakungukukhombisa ukuthi ubudlelwlane ‘Bongxiwankulu ngeke bande ngaphandle kosizo lwalabo ababebona ongxiwankulu’ nokuthi futhi ‘kungabe kuphela ukuqhubekela phambili kwentuthuko yokuhlukana kwenhlangano yalaba abangebona ongxiwankulu okungenza ukuzuza kongxiwankulu kuphumelele.’ Lendlela, lapho ‘lapho ongxiwankulu bedla lapho kunokubhidlika kakhona’ kubudlelwane balabo abangebona ongxiwankulu, kufana nokuthi badla konke. Ngokomlando, ukuzuza kongxiwankulu kuwuhlobo lokushintshashintsha okwenzeka phakathi kwezomnotho zongxiwankulu kanye nezindlela ezazisetshenziswa zokukhiqiza ngaphambi kokuthi kufike isikhathi songxiwankulu ngaphandle kwakho okungeke kuqhubeke, ngob uma sekubhekwana nalokhu, kwenza buthakathaka futhi bese kugwinya konke.

Lendlela iduma kakhulu ngezikhathi lapha ubungxiwankulu busuke bubhekene nezinkinga kakhulu, ngokubona kukaLuxemburg (1968, kwikhasi76), futhi lapho ayebheke imibhalo kaMarx edumile mayelana ‘nokukhiqiza okungalawuleki,’ okubonakala ‘ngokungenelela kwemali ehqamuka kwelinye igatsha lokukhiqiza iya kwelinye, bese kuthi ekugcineni ngezikhathi lapho ukukhiqiza kube nokuba khona kakhulu noma kancane kakhulu.’ Ngalesosokhathi, uLuxemburg (1968, kwikhasi327) ugcizelela ngokuthi, amazwe ahamba phambili aveza ‘uchuku olujulile phakathi kokukwazi ukuthenga kanye nokukwazi ukukhiqiza emiphakathini yongxiwankulu, ukuxabana okuwumphumela ngokuthola kakhulu imali okunezinkathi zokuthi kube nezinkinga bese kuphushela izimali ekwandiseni okungapheli ezimaketheni’ (bona bathini oBond, noChitonge kanye noHopfmann kokukade kwenzeka eNingizimu neAfrika ngonyaka ka2007).

Njengoba kunendlela yamanje yokwenza kabusha – izinkinga, ukwandisa kwezimakethe, kanye nokunyuka kubudlelwano phakathi kongxiwankulu nabangebona ongxiwankulu okunokuxhaphazakakhulu – okusebenza njengesizinda sokuqala kabusha ukubusa ngokusabalal kwamnye amazwe, Harvey (2003) kwandisa indlela entsha kulenkulumompikiswano:
Ukuvulwa kwezimakethe zomhlaba kokudayiswayo kanye nemali edalwe ukuvuleleka kweminye imibuso ukuthi nawo ibe namagalelo kwezomnotho zomhlaba, okukuqala njengabathathayo kodwa futhi njengabakhiqizi bokuba khona kakhulu. Ngakho-ke baba ngabancintisana emhalbeni wonke. Okungabizwa-ke ‘ngokubusela ngokusabalal manye amazwe’ kuyavela…Okunye nokunye kuqhakambisa ukutholaka kwezimpahla ezifunwa yindlela yokuhamba okuzosmelela ngezimpahla ezisuke seziningi kakhulu ngokuchaza izindawo lapho kufanele kuhwebe khona.
UHarvey (1992) ukhomba ukuthi ‘ukwehla kanye nokwenyuka kwalesisimo esijwayeleki kwinkinga yezomnotho, okuqalwa ukuze kwandiswe ubungxiwankulu emazweni amaningi futhi ngesikhathi esikhulu, isikhathi esiningi kwenziwa ukwanda kakhulu okungalindelekile kokuxhaswa ngezimali. Indamo edlalwa ngamabhange emazweni ahamba phambili kanye nalawo amazwe awabusela ngokusabalala ukuthi benze amazwe ahluphekayo ahlele ewakweleta ukuze ehlale ejeziswa ngenxa youkuthi kwenizwa ukuthi ukuhweba kwenziwa lula kanye nokutshala izimali noma-ke nje ukuthatha imikhiqizo yokumbiwa phansi. Ukwandisa isikweletu enye futhi indlela yakudala yokubhekana nemikhiqizo esuke yaba khona ngokwenzengiwe, njengoba isikweletu sivumela ukuthi lemikhiqizo esuke imingi ivumele ukthi kuthathwa kakhulu imikhiqizo yezokumbiwa phansi ukuze kukhokhelwa isikweletu ngesikhathi esizayo. Nokusho kukaHarvey-ke (200: kwikhasi 134) lokhu kukungisa kanje akuzixazululi izinkinga, kodwa esikhundleni salokho, kuholela ekungabonini ngeso elilodwa ngokuthuthuka okungalinga: kwenyusa ukuncintisana okunzima emhlabeni njengoba izizinda eziningi zothatha izimpahla zivele ziqhamuke emhlabeni kube kubhekwenwe nokuba khona ngokweqile kwemikhiqizo. Njengoba-ke bengeke baphumelele bonke ngokuhamba kwesikhathi, kuyenenzeka labo ababuthakathaka kakhulu bahluleke bese bewela esimweni senkinga yokwehla kwamnani, noma ukubhekana ngeziqu zamehlo emazweni okwenzeka ngezimpi zokuhweba, ngezezimali zamazwe kanye ngisho nangezimpi lapho kungenelela imibutho yezempi.

Amaqembu azinze ngokuqhamuka ndawonye ezizwe adalwa ubulingani (kanye nokuxabana) ngaphakathi kwemingcele yamazwe, noma ngale kwemigcele kuze kube sezifundazweni, kubalulekile uma sekuhlaziywa ukuze kubhekwane ukunciphisa izimpahla ezisuke zikhona kakhulu. Ngokuthola lokhu, kunokwenzeka ukuthi kutholakale ulwazi olungahlala isikhathi eside mayelana nezamazwe ukuze sikwazi ukuqonda ukubusa ngokusabalala kwesikhathia samanje. Izizwe ezibusela ezinye zinokubaluleka njengendlela yokusetshenziswa ukuthi izizwe ezibusa ngokusabalala zifinyelele lapho ziqonde khona, engxenye ngoba ukuvuleka kwezimakethe emhlabeni kwizimpahla kanye nemali okudalelwa ukuvulela eminye imibuso ukuthi nayo ibe namagalelo kumnotho womhlaba wonke. Kodwa-ke ababusi bamazwe ababusela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala abajwayelekile ukuzimbandakanya nezizwe zezifundazwe zabo, ngoba basuke bebhekelele ezizimali eziqondene nabo ngqo (kwenye inkathi izimali zezimboni) kwizinkulumbuso zomnotho amzwe abo, okuholela ekuthei uHarvey (2003: kwikhasi196) athi,
Ukuzuza kwalendlela, kodwa-ke, kwakugcwele kakhulu kwiizkhulu ezimbalwa zezimboni ezisabalele emazweni, abatshali bezimali, kanye nabaqashisayo. Futhi olunye uhlobo lwezinga labaphila ngobungxiwankulu emazweni luvele luqhamuke olubheke kwiWall Street kanye nezinye izizinda ezifana neLondon kanye neFrankfurt njengezindawo ezivikelekile njengengokungabekwa kuzo izimali. Lezizicebi libheka, njengejwayelo, kwizwe lasemelika ukuthi livikele inani lezimpahla zalo kanye namalungelo ezimaphla zalo kanye emhlabeni wonke. Ngesikhathi amandla ezomnotho ebonakala ezinze kakhulu eMelika, kanye ukuzinza kwamanye kwamanye amazwe ngamandla ezimali kuyenzeka futhi kuyanyuka.

IBRICS ikhombisa lobubudlelwane obusha, njengoba umongameli waseBrazil uLula amemezela ngonyak ka2010, ‘sekuzalwe ibalazwe elisha lezomnotho womhlaba.’ Kodwa-ke, kube futhi kusancikwe kubatshali bezimali abafana noJim O’Neill weGoldman Sachs’ (owaqala lokusetshenziswa igma elithi ‘BRIC’ ngonyaka ka2001) originator of the ‘BRIC’ meme in 2001) ukuhlanganisa amandla ezomnotho kunobungozi. Okubonakala sengathi kuyiqembu elinamandla lamazwe eBRICS kwingqungqthela yabaholi ngenyanga kaNdasa ngonyaka ka2013 kwaba, ezinyangeni ezine, isizinda samazwe ‘Antekenteke Ayisihlanu’, eshiya uO’Neill aphawule athi yizwe laseChina kuphela ilefanelekile ukuba ‘isitini sokwakha’ lapho iBRICS iphokophele khona (Magalhaes, ngo2013). Amzwe aseIndia, iNingizimu Afrika kanye neBrazil alahlekelwa kakhulu inani lezimali zamazwe awo kanye nokuhamba kokuxhaswa ngezimali ngezikhathi izimali zemikhiqizo akulamazwe zishiya lezizimakethe seziyofuna ukucasha lapho kunokuvikeleka khona ngokusebenzisa idola ngesikhathi lapho umgomo olula wezezimali weUS Federal Reserve – weQuantitative Easing – ‘usuqala ukwehla’. Lesisimo futhi esifanayo sokuphuma kwezimali kakhulu kwenzeka ezweni laseRussia uqala-nje unyaka ka2014, okokuqala ngenxa yokulahlekelwa kwamandla esifundazweni okwakhombisa ngokuhlasela uhulumeni waseUkraine, kanti nangesikhathi iMoscow isithatha ngesidlova izwe laseCrimea, ukusatshiswa ukunswinywa amazwe aseNtshonalanga kucekela phansi ezezimali zezwe laseRussia.

Ngakho-ke ngaphandle kokuvumela ukusebenza kwendlela uLuxemburg anxuse ukuthi isetshenziswe, lapho ukuqhubeka kokuba khona kakhulu kwezimpahla kuchaza ukufinyelela ekunxenxweni ngokwedlulele ngezomnotho, lokhu akuwona umphumela onokusimama. Inoma isimo kufanele sihlonzwe ngokuqina kwaso. Kusukela eminyakeni engamashumi ayaisihlanu ngaphambi kokuba khona kokubusa ngokusabalala, ezweni laseBrazil, izimo esisimamile zibalulekile ngoba okungase kwenzeke kusasa kungashintsha umqondo wezezimali kanye nokwanda kwamandla obudlelwaneni ezifundazweni.

Izindawo esezizimelele zokubuselwa kwamazwe abusa ngokusabalala ngamanye amazwe ezifundazweni zawo
Ukuzika kwamandla aseningizimu okusha kwaqala ukubonakala ngama1960s ngesikhathi ubulingani obusha buqiniswa ngesikhathi Sempi Ebandayo (phecelezi iCold War). Esaqala ukubhala mayelana ngezombusazwe zebalazwe laseLatin America kusukela ngama1960s, uMarini wathi (ngo1974) ngeezikhathi zeminyaka zama1970s iBrazil ‘kwakuyizwe elalikwazi ukukhombisa isibonelo sokubusela amanye amazwe ngokusabalala,’ ngenxa yezomnotho zokumbiwa phansi , ukuthuthelwa emazweni angaphandle izimpahla okuhlale kumbandakanywe nezombusazwe wokubusa ngokusabalala, kanye nokubhekelelela ngaphakathi izimboni , okuhlanganisa ezokutshala izimali.

Kunezindima ezintathu ezingaphezu kwalokhu kulemibuso, namhlanje, umangase zibonwe njengemazwe abusela amanye ngokusabalala. Okokuqala ukuqinisekisa ukuthi ‘ukusimama ngezokuvikeleka’ kwizifundazwe zamabalzwe ezombusazwe ezindaweni lapho kukhona khona iziphithiphithi khona kakhulu: ngokwesibonelo-nje njenabombutho wempi waseBrasilia oseHaiti kanye nezivumelwano ezenziwa yiPitoli emazweni anezinxushunxushu eAfrika njengaseSudan, eGreat Lakes kanye naseCentral African Republic. Izindima ezidlalwa ngamazwe akwaIsrael kanye neSaudi Arabia Maphakathi neMpumalanga (phecelezi eMiddle East) ziyafana, njengoba kwakwenzeka ngezwe laseNingizimu Afrika lisabuswa ngabamhlophe, kanjalo-ke futhi, kuyindawo yokuqoqenalela abembutho wempi ngesikhathi Sempi Ebandayo ngokubusela amazwe aseNtshonalanga ngokusabalala, kanti futhi njengoba nemizabalazo elwela inkululeko yayibhidlangile emazweni eyayekhelene nayo ngesikhathi seminyaka esukela kuma1960s kuya kuma1980s. Ukunxenxwa ngokwenzelele ngokuxhasa ezomnotho kwezokumbiwa phansi okungumchilo wesidwaba kulamandla, lapho ezimweni eziningi indima yalaba abausela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala akukhona-nje ‘ukugcina ukuthula’ kodwa ukwadlulisela okusalele kukhiqizwa emazweni angathuthukile kuya komkhulu lamadolobha lalaba abausela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala, kusukela lapho bese kuthuthelwa komkhulu lamazwe abusa ngokusabalala, futhi lokhu kugqame kakhulu eNingizimu Afrika yesikhathi samanje 9Bond ngonyaka ka2006a, Bond 2006b).

Okwesibili okwenzekayo ukuqhubela phambili umqondo ogcwele wobungxiwankulu bomhlaba, ukuze kube semthethweni ukwandisa ukungenelela kwizimakethe alamazwe angathuthukile. Lokhu kwenzeka ikakhulukazi ngenkathi amazwe abusela lawo abusa ngokusabalala engabathsali bezimali abanesasasa bendlela yenqubo yokulawula ngezomnotho emhlabeni wonke, ikakhulukazi izikhungo zezimali ezifana noBretton Woods Institutions kanye neWorld Trade Organisation. Ngokwenziwa kwezinkulumo ezihehayo ongqongqoshe bezokuhweba, bezobudlelwane anamzwe angaphandle kanye nowezezimali bamazwe abbbusela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala bona kuyenzeka benze izincomo ezingancomi kakhulu ngokulawulwa emhlabeni wonke, mayelana-ke neBRICS kusukela ngonyaka ka2013 kuya koka2014, lapho kungasungulwa izindlela ezintsha ezinomqondo wokubhekana nalamandla. Kodwa kumimwe neIMF ngisho nangezikhathi zenkinga – ngokwesibonelo-nje ukwenziwa kabusha ezezimali kwalesisikhungo ngonyaka ka2009 kanye nangonyaka ka2012 kwenzeka ngokuxhaswa okwagqama kakhulu yiBRICS (ngezigidigidi ezingu75 zamadola oxhasweni oluhlanganyelwe) – okukhombisa indima okuyiyona ehamba phambi edlal yilamazwe abusela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala ezifundazweni zawo: ukugcoba, ukwenza kube semthethweni kanye nokwndisa ezombusazwe zomnotho wongxiwankulu ukuthi ujule emzweni angathuthukile ezifundazweni zawo.

Lokhu futhi kube yiqiniso kwingqinamba ebalulekile kakhulu yokulawula ngumhlaba wonke isikhathi eside, ukuphathwa kwesimo sezulu, lapho iBRICS (ngaphandle kwezwe laseRussia) ivele yaba abalingani ababalulekile ngaphakathi kwaseWashington ngendlela ‘Yesivumelwano saseCopenhagen’ (phecelezi iCopenhagen Accord) ngonyaka ka2009, bobabili beziba ukunqanyulwa kokuphafuzwa kwezisisi ezingcolisa umoya futhi begqugquzela ukuqhubekela phambili nokuxhaswa kokuxhaswa ngezimali indlela yesimo sezulu ngokuhwebelana ngesisisi esingcolisa umoya icarbon (Bond 2012; noBöhm, noMisoczky kanye noMoog ngo2012). (Emva kwesikhathi, izwe laseRussia lasigxizelela lesisenzo ngokunyusa ukuphafuza kwaso izisisi szaso eziluhlaza ezingcolisa umoya kakhulu futhi ngokuphula isethembiso sezibophezelo zeKyoto Protocol kanye futhi nokuxebuka kwisivumelwano sesimo esiphambili ngesimo sezulu.) Lomkhuma wokuxhasa ukulawula okungenabulungiswa kwezomnotho kanye nezemvelo kuzuzisa izimboni zakulawo mazwe kumazwe abusela amannye ngokusabalala, kodwa futhi kungukwenza ukuhlanganyela kanye nokusebenzisana nezinhlelo ezibalulekile zezimboni ezisabalele emazweni kanye nezamazwe abusa ngokusabalala.

Esinye isibonelo sokuthi ikuphi lokhu okwakungenalo-nje kuphela usizo kodwa kwakubalulekile kwakuyiWorld Trade Organisation, lapho kudala kwakuyimiphumela yamazwe ambalwa eBRICS ayefuna ukuyivuselela kusaqala-nje ngesikhathi sengqungquthela yongqongqoshe ngonyaka ka2005 eHong Kong. Ukwandiswa ukuhweba mahala kwizimboni kanye nokuqhubeka kokuzivikela okuzibhekelelayo ukuthi kuhambe phambili esikhathini esiningi emnothweni engakhulekile exubenene yamazwe abusela lawa abusa ngokusabalala ezifundazweni zawo, kodwa-ke ukwenza kweBRICS ukuchitha lemibuso ebusa ngokusabalala kwiWTO kwenzeka kahle ngaphakathi kohlelo olwandile lobungxiwankulu. Ngokomunye wabaxhumanisi benhlanganisela yezinhlangano yemiphakathi Umhlaba Wethu Akuwona Owokudayiswa (James 2013), maphakathi konyaka ka2013 ukuhanjiswa kwegama lenxusa laseBrazil kwiWTO – uRoberto Azevedo – ukuthi abe ngumqondisi jikelele yayenza buthakathaka ukuphikisana okwenziwa yiqembu leSouth’s ‘G-110’. Ukuqedwa kohlelo lweEurope-South African Bilateral Investment Treaties ngungqongqosge wezohwebo uRob Davies kwabonakala kuyindlela eletha ithemba yokumelana namazwe aseNtshonalanga, kodwa okwakuyinto engavamile kokujwayeleke ukwenzeka, futhi kwagcizelela ukuthi ukuvikela kwePitoli isifundazwe ekutheni singahlaselwa yiEU kumazwe asondelene nayo angathuthukile, iSouthern African Customs Union. Ekupheleni kosuku, ngenyanga kaZibandlela ngonyaka ka2013, uAzevedo wakwazi ukwenza isivumelwano nongqongqoshe neWTO okwabeka inqembu labuyela esimweni salo. Lokhu kwaba ukwenza okwagqama okunempumelelo uma sekubhekwa ukwehluleka okwagqama kulowo owayephethe ngaphambi kwakhe, uPascal Lamy owayeqhamuka (futhi njalo owayehlala exhasa) iEuropean Union ngesikhathi semizamo yangaphambilini eyayingaphumeleli.

Mayelana naloludaba, okwavela kulokukusebenzisana kubabusi bezizwe ezibusela izizwe ezibusa ngokusabalala, njengoba kwabonakala kwiqembu leBRICS ngesikhathi lisabunjwa, kusukela ngonyaka ka2008 kuya ku2014, uhlelo olukhombisa kakhulu ukuxhasa imikhuba exhaphaza kakhulu emazweni angathuthukile ezifundazweni zawo. Njengoba nokuhlukaniswa kweAfrika yiBerlin ngengqungquthela yangoyanka ka1884 kuya ku1845 eyaysingethwe nguBismarck yadalwa imingcele lapho okwazuza khona izimboni zemikhiqizo embiwa phansi – izindlu zokumbiwa phansi kanye nezitshalo kanjalo kanye nezomboni zokwakha ezazihlangane nokutholwa kwezimpahla eNgilandi, eFrance, Eportugal, eBelgium kanye naseGermany – iBRICS ibonakala ilandela emzileni walamazwe ayebusa iAfrika aseNtshonalanga kanti asayibusa namanje. Ukubala izinhlelo zamachweba, amabriji, imigwaqo, ezokuphehla mandla kagesi kanye nezinye zezinqalasizinda isithombe esisodwa, ingqungquthela yeBRICS yango2013 eThekwin yayiphokophele ukuvula ezomnotho zezwekazi laseAfrika, kungabi namthwalo – manje njengoba kwakenzeka ngesikhathi esidlule – okwakungabizwa ngokuthi yihlazo njengengokunakekela ‘kwamazwe aseNtshonalanga’ mayelana nentando yeningi kanye namalungelo esintu, lapho abaholi abaningi bemibuso yaseAfrika njengabahlanganyeli nayo. INew Partnership for Economic Development kanye neAfrican Peer Review Mechanism kwakusolwa ukuthi izinhlelo zaseAfrika ezazicabangwe kuleli zokubhekana nezinqlasizinda, kodwa okwakungenamsebenzi walutho (Bond 2005, nango2009).

Kodwa-ke futhi, kubalulekile ukuthi sivume ukuthi iainhlobo zokubuselwa kwamazwe ngokusabalal okwenziwa iBRICS kwahlukahlukene, njengoba kwasho uMoyo beno Yeros (ngo2100: kwikhasi lika19), Abanye bangaphansi kwengcindezi afakwa yizimboni zangasese ezixhaswa kakhulu yimibuso (njengaseBrazil kanye naseIndia); amanye, njengezwe laseChina, kumbandakanya ukungenelela okuqondile kombuso kwizimboni eziphethwe ngumbuso; bese kuthi eNingizimu Afrika, kulukhuni kakhulu ukukhuluma ngabanikazi bomhlaba abazimele, ume sesibhekana nokungalawulwa kakhulu ngumbuso komnotho emva kokuguqiswa phansi kombuso wobandlululo. Izinga lokungenelela kohlelo lombutho wezempi wasemazweni aseNtshonalanga futhi kuhlukile kusukela kolunye uhlangothi kuya kolunye noma-ke, umuntu angase ahso ukuthi, ‘kunemiqondo eminingi’ kukho konke lokhu, okujwayelekile ‘kwababusela amazwe abusa ngokusabalala ezifundazweni zawo’.

Sesiphetha, lesisikhathi samanje sesiqale kabusha inkulumo mpikiswano enomthelela omuhle mayelana nomqondo wezokubusa kwalamazwe ebusela amazwe abusela lawa abusa ngokusabalala kanye nokushintsha kusukelwa ukubuseleni amazwe abusa ngokusabalala kube yiwo abusa kulamazwe abuthakathaka ngokusabalala, mhlawumbe ngelinye ilanga kuze kufikwe lapho kuyomelwana nokubuswa kanye nokubusa ngokusabalala. Kodwa-ke, okubalulekile kakhulu ekutheni lenkulumompikiswano ibe khona ngempela, hayi-nje umzabalazo mayelana nobuchwepheshe bokukhuluma phakathi kwezifundiswa eziyizishoshsovu esezingenamandla, kungukwenza okwehlukile kakhulu, hayi okungenzeka ngenkulumo eqavile eqhamuka kubabusi, kodwa eyangempela eqhamuka kubantu. Okwenzeka kubantu kunyuka kanye nobunzima kuwowonke amandla abusela manye mazwe ngokusabalala afuna ukuhlangana, iBRICS.

Lemizabalazo yasezindaweni zivele zizenzekele futhi akulula ukuthi zizokwenzeka nini, ukujula kakhulu kokuzabalaza kwamazinga okumelene nokuxhashazwa kakhulu, ukucekelwa phansi kwezemvelo kanye nobungxiwankulu okulokhu kwenzeka njalo kwneye nakwenye indawo. Ingqinamba ebhekene nabagxeki beBRICS abaqhamuka kubantu ukuhlanganisa futhi nokusabalallisa emhlabeni wonke ngokushesha okumangalisayo izidingo zabo kanye nekuhlaziya imikhankaso yabo, izindlela, namacebo kanye nobulingani okunezingxenye eziningi ezeqanayo – bendawonye kanye namaqembu athuthukayo asemhlabeni wonke. Ilapho uhlelo olumelene nokubuswa ngamanye amazwe ngokusabalala emhlabeni wonke luyokwenzeka, njengosibonelo-nje lapho bonke abamelene nokubuswa ngamanye amazwe ngokusabalala abasemhlabeni wonke sebehlangana.

On The Web 
 cast your net a little wider...
 Radical Philosophy 
 African Studies Association (USA)  
 New Dawn Engineering 
 Indymedia Radio 
 Southern Africa Report online 
 Online Anti Apartheid Periodicals, 1960 - 1994 
 Autonomy & Solidarity 
 New Formulation 
 We Write 
 International Journal of Socialist Renewal 
 Journal of African Philosophy 
 British Library for Development Studies 
 The Nordic Africa Institute Online Library 
 Political Economy Research Institute Bulletin (PERI) 
 Feminist Africa 
 Jacques Depelchin's Tribute to Harold Wolpe 
 African Studies Quarterly 
 The Industrial Workers of the World 
 Anarchist Archives 
 Wholewheat Radio 
 Transformation: Critical Perspectives on Southern Africa  
 Zanon Workers 
 Public Citizen  
 Open Directory Project 
 Big noise films 
 London Review of Books  
 New York Review of Books 
 Monthly Review 
 New Left Review 
 Bureau of Public Secrets  
 Zed Books 
 Pluto Press 
 Duke University Press  
 Abe Books 
 The Electric Book Company 
 Project Guttenberg 
 Newspeak Dictionary 
 Feral Script Kiddies 
 Go Open Source 
 Source Forge 
 Ubuntu Linux Home Page 
 Software for Apple Computers 

|  Contact Information  |  Terms of Use  |  Privacy