Pages Navigation Menu
Submit scientific paper, scientific publications, International Research Journal | Meždunarodnyj naučno-issledovatel’skij žurnal

ISSN 2227-6017 (ONLINE), ISSN 2303-9868 (PRINT), DOI: 10.18454/IRJ.2227-6017
ПИ № ФС 77 - 51217, 16+


Download PDF ( ) Pages: 127-129 Issue: № 04 (58) Part 2 () Search in Google Scholar


Copy the reference manually or choose one of the links to import the data to Bibliography manager
Kolomeitseva N.A. et al. "BRICS: RUSSIA’S INSTITUTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXECUTING ASIA PACIFIC DIRECTION OF ITS POLICY". Meždunarodnyj naučno-issledovatel’skij žurnal (International Research Journal) № 04 (58) Part 2, (2017): 127. Wed. 22. Mar. 2017.
Kolomeitseva N. A. BRICS: RUSSIA’S INSTITUTIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXECUTING ASIA PACIFIC DIRECTION OF ITS POLICY / N. A. Kolomeitseva, Y. Y. Kolomeitsev // Mezhdunarodnyj nauchno-issledovatel'skij zhurnal. — 2017. — № 04 (58) Part 2. — С. 127—129. doi: 10.23670/IRJ.2017.58.028



Коломейцева Н.А.1, Коломейцев Ю.Ю.2

1Кандидат политических наук, заведующая кафедрой политологии Дальневосточного федерального университета, 2Директор Центра социальных инноваций «Чёрный куб»



Объявленный в 2013 году президентом России курс на развитие Дальнего Востока РФ, а также внешнеполитический разворот нашей страны на Восток в связи с современным кризисом системы международных отношений создали дополнительные предпосылки тесной интеграции Российской Федерации и ее дальневосточных субъектов со странами АТР. Автор полагает, что в концепцию современной восточной политики РФ вписывается ее деятельность в рамках международного института БРИКС, членом которого Россия является уже более десяти лет. По мнению исследователя, в условиях глобальной напряженности, институциональные возможности БРИКС будут способствовать реализации азиатско-тихоокеанского вектора российской политики.

Ключевые слова: БРИКС, АТР, Российская Федерация, Дальний Восток, КНР, Индия, международные институты, восточная политика, внешняя политика, система международных отношений, система международной безопасности.

Kolomeitseva N.A.1, Kolomeitsev Y.Y.2

1PhD in Political Sciences, Head of the Department of Political Science, Far Eastern Federal University, 2Director of the Center for Social Innovations «Black Cube»



The focus on Russian Far East development announced by Russian president in 2013 and the turnaround of Russian foreign policy towards the East due to contemporary crisis of the system of international relations have created additional prerequisites for close integration between the Russian Federation and its Far Eastern constituent entities and APR countries. The author argues that the Russian Federation’s activity within the framework of BRICS, an internal institution with Russia having been its member for more than 10 years, fits well into the concept of its contemporary eastern policy. In the author’s opinion, given global tensions, BRICS’s institutional opportunities will promote the execution of Asia Pacific direction of Russian policy.

Keywords: BRICS, APR, Russian Federation, Far East, PRC, India, international institutions, eastern policy, foreign policy, system of international relations, international security system.

Rapid deterioration of Russian-Western relations, triggered by so-called «Ukrainian crisis» of 2013-2014 marked the crisis of contemporary system of international relations. Seeming inviolability of the most recent world orders was based on international institutions established during the «cold war». Confrontation of two global systems in the second half of 20th century was very similar to the previous stages of world order development in terms of struggle for global domination providing basis for foreign-policy intensions of leading political actors. After the collapse of the Soviet Union the United States of America remained the only such actor, acting as a «global policeman» under continuous local conflicts and growing terrorist threat, which seized to be intraregional one, due to globalization processes and, mainly, liberalization of migration processes during the last two decades.

Contrary to its objectives, US foreign policy of the last 25 years not only has failed to stabilize the relevant process in Eurasia, but also has created a number of new issues the international community is currently facing. By preserving an expansionist nature of its foreign policy, the USA sought to create a system of international relations based on establishing regimes loyal to the United Stated in the states, which leaders promote abandonment of Western values and complete independence in their foreign affairs, under the pretext of the struggle for human rights.

By imposing Western political models on neighboring continents, the USA accelerated the process of political globalization, which, contrary to economic one, has a number of negative features. Apart from intensifying international connections, it leads to the marginalization of global policy, emergency of new unconventional types of international political actors in the form of transnational corporations, private financial institutions and international terrorist organizations. Given this new political reality, it is becoming obvious that «global policeman» mechanism is not capable to address contemporary global threats, since the subjects of such threats are non-state formations (notably terrorist organizations) that bear no legal responsibilities.

In our opinion, current conditions call for new global management structures based on network diplomacy principle. Due to its paradigm uniformity and failure to take into account the interests of both non-Western world and European establishment, an aggressive, one-way Western policy fails and puts the whole system of international relations at risk. Given an intensifying globalization, addressing global problems calls for multilateral dialog, which would reflect the multipolarity having established during recent years, and which is denied by only a few experts due to the gradual shift of global economy’s center of gravity to the Asia-Pacific Region and the recovery of its foreign-policy outposts in the Middle East and Central Asia by Russia.

We assume that contemporary crisis of international relations could be overcome, first, by engaging the biggest non-Western political actors, which role on the foreign-policy stage has recently grown, into global process of making political decisions, and, second, by integrating and synchronizing economic processes in the East: due to relatively weak integration connections between the APR countries, Asian economy will be no longer capable to provide political mightiness of the East.

In its contemporary foreign policy the Russian Federation as a global policy actor incrementally moves towards creating multi-faceted international space. In as early as 2006 an international organization, BRIC (lately renamed as BRICS), was created at the initiative of the Russian Federation to consolidate new growing global economies with vast demographic and resource potentials. In his Address to the Federal Assembly of 2013, Russian president, Vladimir Putin, announced the priority of Far East developing in the national strategy, designed, among other things, to ensure the performance of external integration function with the economies of the Asia-Pacific Region.

Emergence of BRICS and extension of Asian economic cooperation has occurred to creation of such international institutional platforms as Russia-ASEAN, ASEAN+3, ASEAN+6, SCO, APEC and the like. These international organizations play a significant role in creating constructive international field, which may provide basis for developing parameters of new world order system that would better fit current geopolitical balance of forces on our planet, natural gap closing between the West and the East, the North and the South, «Golden Billion» countries and other states.

BCICS’s influence on the international stage is based on growing economic power of its member states and their demographic status and important role in providing resources for humanity. In 2017 BRICS’s shares of global GDP, Earth’ land surface and global population is over 21%, 26% and 42% respectively [6, P. 307]. During the recent years BRICS economies have grown five-fold, while those of developed countries – by 61% [3, P. 2]. At the same time, Asia-Pacific Region is already home to over half of global population and includes the most populous countries and the most densely-populated regions in the world. According to forecasts, in a short term the region’s population share will have exceeded 60% by 2020 [2, P. 95], with Asian countries already contributing over 40% of global GDP [5].

BRICS can turn into an institutional platform, which has a positive effect on reinforcing integration processes in the APR, for Russia. As practice shows, it is political differences between countries in this region that impede the promotion of economic interests. That’s why the strongest integration processes are currently encountered in Southeast Asia (SEA). Countries located in this sub-region are not actors of large-scale global policy. It is plausible to say that creation of ASEAN and its integration platforms with other countries fits well into national interest of SEA countries, with their voice getting heard by international community.

In this regard BRICS is the largest global platform, within which member countries declare the unity of the interests belonging to political field and aimed against unfair financial, economic and political domination of developed countries.  According to S.V. Lavrov, ministry of foreign affairs of the Russian Federation, BRICS countries are united by their «determination to reform an obsolete global financial and economic architecture, which does not take into account increased economic influence of BRICS countries and other «new» economies. Common commitment of member countries to the principles and rules of international law and zero tolerance to power politics and infringement of sovereignty of independent countries are important too. These five member countries share a lot of common challenges and issues related to demands for economy and social life modernization. Finally, the complementarity of numerous economy sectors of our countries promotes our strategic rapprochement» [3, P. 2].

Beside Russia, BRICS include two other countries that have great political, economic and spiritual influence in Asia, China and India. PRC is the largest Eurasian economy, while India enjoys the highest index of economic development in Asia, with its annual GDP growth of about 8%. Nowadays Indian foreign policy is clearly directed to the East. This country has been executing its «Look East Policy» since 1991. Indian companies actively participate in developing continental shelfs in the South China Sea and near Sakhalin Island.  Beside BRICS, India participates in such Asian dialog formats as RIC, EAS, SCO and WPNS. There are also negotiations on adding this sixth global economy to APEC. In the meantime numerous contradictions with China, which used to openly impede east direction of Indian policy for a long time, have been overcome. Nowadays most APR countries recognize India as «Pacific power» [4, P. 43].

Thus, given common political and economic interests of non-Western community subjects, with its core located in Asian region, and also economic development tendencies of Eastern and Southern countries, it is obvious that both BRICS and Asia Pacific community have global extension prospects. The role the East and other regional powers play in establishing world order will grow accordingly. According to Carlos Pereira, a leading Brazilian political expert, Asian and Latin America countries challenge conventional world order with the West itself, which has to approach BRICS countries due to the lack of resources for maintaining its economic might [1].

As for Russia, it has long ago secured its place as BRICS’s political key-note. Nowadays our country develops international information agenda as none other in Eurasia. The focus on creating modern mixed economy in the Russian Far East through attracting Asian investments to advanced development territories and Free Port of Vladivostok, which was announced by Russian government and its president, is gaining even more support from its APR countries, which was shown by ASEAN leaders in Sochi in May, 2016; leaders of South Korea and Japan at the 2nd Eastern Economic Forum that took place in Vladivostok on September 2nd, 2016; and Chinese president, Xi Jinping, at G20 Summit in China two days later.

In our opinion, as globalization processes are expanding in developing world, which is already encounterable, a mutual influence of BRICS and leading APR economies on each other will grow. Thus, in case of maintaining the direction of Russian foreign policy and Russia’s place in BRICS institution and its organization, the role of the Russian Federation in the Asia-Pacific Region will, at least, grow in in the medium term.

Список литературы / References

  1. Карлос Перейра М. Латинская Америка: БРИКС бросает вызов старому мировому порядку [Электронный ресурс] / М. Карлос Перейра. – URL: (дата обращения: 17.11.2016).
  2. Коломейцева Н.А. Политика реализации выхода России в Азиатско-Тихоокеанский регион через аграрную отрасль юга Дальнего Востока / Н. А. Коломейцева // Вестник БИСТ. – 2016. – №3 (32). – С. 93-102.
  3. Лавров С. В. БРИКС – глобальный форум нового поколения / С. В. Лавров // Международная жизнь. – 2012. – № 3. – С. 1-6.
  4. Лебедева Н. Б. Южно-Китайское море: «окно» Индии в Азиатско-Тихоокеанский регион (интересы, цели, перспективы) / Н. Б. Лебедева // Юго-Восточная Азия: актуальные проблемы развития. – 2013. – № 20. – С. 40-68.
  5. ТОП-5 экономик Азии к 2030 году (09.07.2016) [Электронный ресурс] // Политэксперт. – URL: (дата обращения: 16.11.2016).
  6. Шатская И. И. Перспективы развития БРИКС / И. И. Шатская // Научный альманах. – 2016. – №4-1 (18). – С. 307-311.

Список литературы на английском языке / References in English

  1. Carlos M. P. Latinskaya Amerika: BRIKS brosaet vyzov staromu mirovomu poryadku [Latin Americа: BRICS challenge conventional world order] [Electronic resource]/ M. Carlos Pereira. – URL: (accessed: 17.11.2016). [in Russian]
  2. Kolomeitseva N. A. Politika realizatsii vykhoda Rossii v Aziatsko-Tikhookeanskii region cherez agrarnuyu otrasl’ yuga Dal’nego Vostoka [Policy of executing Russian access to the Asia-Pacific Region through agricultural industry of southern Far East] / N. A. Kolomeitseva // Vestnik BIST [Bulletin of Bashkir Institute of Social Technologies]. – 2016. – N 3 (32). ­ – P. 93-102. [in Russian]
  3. Lavrov S. V. BRIKS – global’nyi forum novogo pokoleniya // [BRICS as a new-generation global forum] / S. V. Lavrov // Mezhdunarodnaya Zhizn’ [International affairs]. – 2012. – N 3. – P. 1-6. [in Russian]
  4. Lebedeva N. B. Yuzhno-Kitaiskoe more: «okno» Indii v Aziatsko-Tikhookeanskii region (interesy, tseli, perspektivy) [South China Sea: India’s «window» on Asia Pacific Region (interests, goals and prospects)] / N. B. Lebedeva // Yugo-Vostochnaya Aziya: aktual’nye problemy razvitiya [Southeast Asia: Important Development Issues]. – 2013. – N 20. – P. 40-68. [in Russian]
  5. TOP-5 ekonomik Azii k 2030 godu [Top 5 Asian economies by 2030] (09.07.2016) [Electronic resource] // Politekspert [Political expert]. – URL: (accessed: 16.11.2016). [in Russian]
  6. Shatskaya I. I. Perspektivy razvitiya BRIKS [BRICS development prospects] / I. I. Shatskaya // Nauchnyi al’manakh [Scientific miscellany]. – 2016. – N 4-1 (18). – P. 307-311. [in Russian]

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Лимит времени истёк. Пожалуйста, перезагрузите CAPTCHA.