There have been humorous historical episodes where some of the smaller Balkan countries felt that the moment had come for them to join the big world game because it would demonstrate their claim that they were at the heart of the global agenda rather than on its periphery. When Russia and Japan went to war over Manchuria and Korea in 1904, the little Montenegrin kingdom of Nikola Petrović did not think twice and promptly declared war on the Japanese Empire. Even though the Russia-Japan conflict only lasted a year and a half, they knew enough about it to formally end the war after more than 100 years.

It was equally bizarre when, amid the bombing in 1999, Milošević and his wife thought that the entry of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia into an alliance with Russia and Belarus would reverse the tragic fate since great Russia would then enter into a war with NATO. And defeat it, of course, which would mark the dawn of a new world and Serbia among its leaders.


There is now a proposal for Serbia to join BRICS - a bizarre, nonsensical, and humorous proposition if it were not dirty, malicious and dangerous. It even entered the parliamentary procedure, not as a thought-out foreign policy decision, but a hastily drafted paper comprised of phrases from press headlines in Serbia.

The principal issue regarding this proposal and the preceding suggestion to join BRICS is actually the same issue that King Nikola had in 1904 and Slobodan Milošević and Mira Marković a hundred years later. It starts with the premise that there could be a quick fix or a world shift to cure every issue, and then “our time would come.” Even an insignificant portion of the spoils that fall off the large table is anticipated with little effort and bound to the big powers and their interests.

BRICS has existed for 14 years. It was formalized at the summit in Russia (even though then it had one less letter in its name). In the same year (2009), the European Union abolished visas for Serbian citizens, and since then, they travel, study and work in Europe almost without restrictions.


For 14 years, no one was particularly interested in what BRICS is, what it does, what its goals are, and who meets there. That is how it should be because Serbia's interests do not intersect with those of BRICS or any of its members specifically.

Serbia has, for a long time, participated in another project, in which it also has its own interests: a better economy, a higher standard of living, and an orderly democracy. This is a project within the framework of which Serbia earned visa-free travel 14 years ago when BRICS was being founded.

Given that we shared nothing from the start and moved further away and closer to the European Union in the previous years, where did the idea of turning towards BRICS come from?

One factor is Serbia's megalomania, meaning that it should be a part of any global change because, for the love of God, it would not be possible without Serbia. Our customary indifference to learning more about what BRICS is, if it functions at all, whether it has accomplished anything, and what the aims of the nations it is composed of are is much more severe than this folklore motif.


If things were any different, those pushing for Serbia's membership in this alliance would be aware that, even after 14 years, BRICS has not accomplished anything its founders had hoped for. Despite considering it their primary objective from the first summit in Yekaterinburg to the final, 15th consecutive meeting in Johannesburg, they did not eliminate the dollar from international trade. Today, between 80 and 90 percent of global business is settled in dollars, with just around 5 percent in Chinese yuan. Countries keep 60 percent of the world's foreign exchange reserves in dollars.

They established the bank eight years ago, probably in an effort to compete with the current inefficient and unfair system of foreign funding. The BRICS bank has invested around $30 billion throughout those eight years, as much as the World Bank in four months.

What is the problem then? How has this great idea not moved from the initial romantic idea of creating a new, just world in 14 years? Perhaps the countries that lead it, above all Russia and China, are profoundly unfree, manipulative, and evil, first for their own people and then for everyone around them.

What human value has BRICS been advancing, with China serving as the unofficial leader? Total state and party control of everything   from walking down the street to running a business and leaving the country. Are these the ideals Russia promotes while it engages in violent attacks and crimes against sovereign governments, commits massive war crimes, detains opponents at home, and occasionally carries out assassinations?


Some new BRICS members, like Iran, which has executed around 500 political opponents in the past year, more than twice its previous record, fully align with these principles. Or Saudi Arabia, with its deeply entrenched gender segregation modeled after the Middle Ages?

Everyone who wants Serbia to join BRICS needs to provide answers to these questions. Do you want to make Serbia one of its dictatorial members and adopt their way of life? If so, it is also a respectable adult political decision. But such a choice comes with consequences.

The departure of companies and technologies that Serbia had worked hard to integrate into, trading practically all of its output with the EU. Let them start fresh supply chains and joint ventures with new BRICS members like Iran and Ethiopia. Or consider Russia, which is now isolated and extremely poor as no country in history after being expelled from the global payment system.

It is impossible to make a proposal with a valid explanation of why BRICS is a better option for Serbia than the European Union. Both are impossible. Creating a new, just, honest, and peaceful world alongside China, Russia, Iran, Ethiopia, and Saudi Arabia is a poor slogan of hardened dictatorships that do not want to change. After all, let's ask their people how they live. And why are they migrating in great numbers to the West rather than supporting BRICS objectives?

To suggest a correction or clarification, write to us here
You can also highlight the text and press Ctrl + Enter

Comments (8)
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

You should at least read the Wikipedia page of BRICS, to get some knowledge before writing an article. I'm sure BRICS could achieve more than UKRAINE could in this war.
Mickey Cashen
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

Just in case, like me you can't remember all the countries in BRICS, which this article doesn't bother to mention, it's Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa.
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

The writer makes good points, but I hope he isn't going out on a limb too far. He pulls no punches on his home country where the byline says he still resides. Brave man.
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

The writer forgot to mention the name Marshall Tito who joined up with Nasser, Nehru and Sukarno to start up the non aligned movement in 1955. At its prime 120 countries signed up for joining NAM. Sure it lost its purpose a bit after the fall of soviet union, but given the history of cold war, NAM’s contribution to give the global South a voice cannot be minimized.
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

And Serbia is good for what?
Marke T. Wiz
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

This article does not meet the bare minimum of having some journalistic value to be considered for publication. Prior to this tragedy in Ukraine, I had never heard of your publication. However since the start of the war, I have come to appreciate the journalism that comes from KyivPost. Notwithstanding the occasional article penned by an emotional writer with no regards to meeting the minimum standards of acceptable journalism, loaded with personal opinion and overtly biased editorials that cross over into the land of prejudice, I came to rely upon your publication for news from the front line. And I would occasionally find some articles that did not relate to the war but were nonetheless informative and a pleasant read. And then this article about BRICS. THIS BEGS THE QUESTION: DO YOU HAVE EDITORIAL REVIEW ON THESE NONSENSICAL WASTE OF PRINT GARBAGE? This author is either drunk and completely relying on generative a.i., or he could probably be the worst writer that has ever produced copy for your publication or any publication in the history of journalism.

What is the point of this article at all I mean have you even read it? IT was a catchy title but then it was full of garbage and historical references that don't even make sense! It's a shame I just started to really think that there was actual journalism from KYIVPOST, but it appears you will publish anything by anyone.
Coach John
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

Outside of a collection of Neo-Nazi ultranationalist misfits, virtually everyone in Serbia under the age of 30 are completely against any move toward BRICS. Once again, it is the wooly-headed old people in Serbia who can't quit their obsession with being aligned with their Slavic brothers in Russia.
The young generations need to tell their grandparents that if Serbia needs to be aligned with the Slavic populations around the world, why not align with the U.S.A., which has three times as many people with Slavic blood in their veins than all of Serbia? How about Ukraine, with six times as many as Serbia? Young Serbia needs to get a handle on old Serbia.
This comment contains spoilers. Click here if you want to read.

Please explain to me how west has pushed for human rights

Your article obviously targeting the young and the stupid

Add Ukrainian president to the likes 👍 f Iranian Shah and Sadam Hussen

Hired by west and promised sweet nothing

Get a spin and tell the truth