Sunday News Breakdown | Indonesia, BRICS, & Maritime Trade

Okay. So today, I wanted to talk again about Indonesia and about BRICS and the possibility of Indonesia joining BRICS and just generally about how BRICS is developing. Indonesia was actually intended to be one of the founding members of BRICS, but they decided at that time, what they said was that they weren't politically ready to do it. And they've been rumored for quite some time to be slotted to join BRICS in the near future, which does appear to me to be the case. I think that's accurate.

News last year reported that BRICS was was supposed to actually accept Indonesia when they had the summit in South Africa in August when they admitted Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, and Iran, and Ethiopia, and so on. When they added them, it was expected that Indonesia was also gonna be added. Now, of course, that didn't happen, but president of Indonesia at the time, Jakobi, he attended the summit, but only as an observer. In my opinion, they shouldn't be understood as Indonesia no longer being interested in joining BRICS, but rather that they're just being very cautious, and I think rightly so. Indonesia was a founding country of the nonaligned movement in the nineteen sixties during the Cold War, and they still tread a very careful path of neutrality in all of their foreign relations, balancing between China and The United States.

So they don't make any move hastily in terms of their foreign policy and in terms of their alliances. So in my view, Jokawi postponed Indonesia's entry into BRICS, because at that time, there was an election coming up in Indonesia. Jokawi's term was ending, and I think he wanted a smooth transition, of administrations without any western influence. For those of you who who who who don't live in the ASEAN region, you may not know, but there was a great deal of speculation at that time just before the elections that The United States was going to try to engineer one of those so called color revolutions in Indonesia to try to install a puppet regime after the the departure of Jakawi. And this was frankly a very realistic expectation, a very realistic fear because obviously The US is very interested right now in controlling Southeast Asian countries as the The US does appear to be trying to gear up for a conflict with China over Taiwan.

So the neutrality and the bilateral ties between countries like Malaysia and Indonesia and China is unacceptable to The United States. But instead of The United States offering these countries any real tangible incentives to take America side, The US just reflexively opts to disrupt and destabilize and try to force their will. So if Indonesia had joined BRICS before the election, it is entirely plausible that The US would have, tried to stir up some sort of fake protest movement just to steer the outcome of the election, in their favor, and, Jakavi knew it. His government made a statement at that time that more or less expressed, a ventriloquist, what they understood to be the Americans' perception of bricks, I e, that it is a political alliance against the West and so on. And as such, they said that they were not keen to join such an organization, and instead they applied to join the OECD.

This, in my opinion, demonstrated masterful political strategy on the part of the Jokowi government. Rather than looking at the seeking of membership in the OECD as a substitute for joining BRICS, I think it's more to be understood as a prelude to joining BRICS, precisely so that Indonesia can maintain the perception of its neutrality. You know, you can't object to us joining BRICS. We're also seek seeking membership in the OECD. So clearly, we're not trying to, you know, align against the West or something.

That's that's the tactic. We're just exploring all potential, you know, beneficial economic relationships. So don't take it personally. I think it was a very tactical move on Jakobi's part. And after all, there was no color revolution in in in Indonesia, and the election proceeded without any interference.

So, if it was true, and I think it was true that The United States was interested in, stirring up some kind of a a fake revolution, a fake protest movement in Indonesia to try to interfere with the outcome of the election, Jakavi, very strategically, very tactfully, very cleverly sidestepped that. So here, I wanna say something about what I think this situation sort of highlights, and that is that politics is complicated. Everyone needs to remember that, you know, when they when they when they form their opinions about what any government does, especially governments in the global South and in the Muslim world. In our part of the world, our governments are painfully aware of the ever present threat that's posed by The United States. US never lets anyone forget that.

They have to navigate their political relationships, their diplomatic relationships, and so on, their policy decisions, with a tremendous amount of tact, with strategy and discretion. Think of it like planning a prison break, which is something I've done, and it's not easy. You're under the watchful eye of the guards, the prison administration, and of course, the snitches, you know, other prison inmates who will inform against you with the prison authorities just in exchange for some measly benefit. I mean, there's people that will sell you out for an extra bag chips from the commissary. So you have to take every step very carefully.

You know? You have to move very gradually towards your goal of freedom without ever alerting the authority so that you just end up getting chained in the solitary confinement cell. That's the situation of most of our countries. That's the situation of most of our governments. Just like a prison break, you also have to make sure that anyone and everyone who's on your team, if you're not if you're not trying to do it alone, which is almost, you know, next to impossible to do, then have make sure that everyone on your team is reliable and capable.

They're capable of following through on what is expected of them. And for a country, that mostly means they're regional allies. And for example, all of the members of BRICS, you have to know that they that they have your back. Indonesia needs to know that they're a reliable team. And these are legitimate questions until now.

It's not clear about what what's the status and what's the, reliability and the capabilities of BRICS. I mean, confidence is growing in that regard to some extent given the uniform stance that Brix has taken over Gaza. They've not yet proven, in my opinion, that they are actually a stable, reliable, capable, and courageous enough team to actually follow through, know, to give sufficient backup to any member state, that might make a run for it out of the prison of American hegemony. In my own, unsuccessful prison break, my team froze, And I found myself faced with a tidal wave of prison guards crashing against me like a ton of bricks. And I got six months in solitary confinement.

So Indonesia doesn't want it to go that way. They don't want things like that to happen to them. Because, yes, if you try to take your freedom and you fail, then you will end up making your situation worse. And your country will be cracked down upon with furious punishment. You have to you have to try to be outside the prison walls before anyone notices, basically.

So Indonesia is being very cautious, and I think that they should be. You know, most of us just want them to join. It's to most of us, it's like a no brainer. Of course, Indonesia should join BRICS. But we don't have to consider all of the things that the government has to consider.

We're not privy to all of the threats and all of the risks and all of the potential consequences that any decision might trigger. But having said that, I do think that Indonesia will join BRICS. And it's reported that they might even be the next country to be admitted, which in my opinion would be excellent for Indonesia, and I think it would be excellent for BRICS as a political and economic block. I think that would that would strengthen them considerably, particularly because of the Strait Of Malacca. Now let me talk about something else with regards to BRICS, and I think it's quite interesting.

When all of the discussion was going on about Indonesia and whether or not to to let them join, and it it it also comes up when they talk about whether or not they're gonna let Pakistan join. The issue is that there's not a really clear criteria for joining BRICS. There's not a clear protocol regarding the expansion of bricks. I mean, country after country is seeking to join bricks, and it said that they get applications almost every week. So this is something that they're working on.

They're trying to codify that. They're trying to codify the process. And one of the ideas that they've come up with for how to approach expansion is to come up with a sort of a subcategory or a secondary category, which would be called BRICS partners. So it's something less than actual membership. It's like partnership.

Presumably, a BRICS partner would eventually be admitted as a member, with that partnership period being something like a sort of a probationary period. To me, I think I think it's a very good idea because it will incentivize countries to try to demonstrate their alignment politically and economically with, BRICS sort of, strategies and their positions. You know, you have to prove that you're on board, with the whole project before you can join. That makes sense to me. I think we can already see it happening.

For example, Indonesia, back to South Africa's ICJ case against Israel, that's sort of a demonstration of alignment with BRICS political strategy. Because, yes, I think, my opinion, BRICS is not just an economic alliance, not by any means. They're creating a new paradigm of international relations of in of the international order. I think we're gonna see more and more countries interested in BRICS membership trying to prove themselves by understanding what BRICS is trying to do on the broader scale and the sort of grand strategy, what they're trying to do on the broader scale. And then those countries taking steps by their own initiative to try to advance those sorts of goals.

Like, you know, another example would be, Algeria, going to the UN, with their ceasefire resolution after the, after the ICJ ruling on the, emergency measures for Gaza. Algeria has applied for to join BRICS. So I think that this this this action that they took might be a sort of initiation, a kind of a demonstration, if you will, of their commitment to BRICS and their political objectives and their overall political project. You know, they were passed over in August to become members of BRICS. They were passed over in favor of Ethiopia because I think that the the BRICS members felt that Ethiopia was a more strategic asset at the time.

I mean, take note of the fact that three months before October 7, every new member of BRICS was a Middle Eastern country except for Ethiopia. But Ethiopia kind of counts in this context. It kind of counts as a Middle Eastern country because of the because of its geostrategic location and because of the Nile River. And, yes, I still suspect that BRICS, certainly Saudi Arabia, The UAE, Egypt, Russia, and China, I believe that they all had some degree of knowledge that October 7 was gonna happen. Now I've talked about this before, and I've given all my reasons, but I'm not gonna repeat them all here.

But to me, it's not implausible that Brix wanted to solidify their presence and the cohesiveness, of the region, in preparation and in advance of what's happening now. Because, honestly, if they hadn't done that, if if they hadn't sort of solidified their presence, in the Middle East, and I I think facilitated the the the sort of detente between Saudi Arabia and Iran. And if we hadn't seen you know, and if Egypt and UAE and Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia hadn't joined Rick's, then I think that right now, Gaza would already have been emptied. The the entire Gaza Strip would have already been emptied and seized by the Israelis. And probably, there would already be a region wide war with Iran and Aloha'am.

Now that brings me to the to the next thing with regards to BRICS that I wanted to talk about, specifically about how it's developing. Recently, Russia, China, and Iran conducted joint naval exercises in the Gulf Of Oman. Now, obviously, those are already three BRICS nations. But the interesting thing to me is that two other BRICS nations joined the drills as observers, India and South Africa, as well as BRICS applicants like Pakistan and Kazakhstan, as well as Azerbaijan, which though they haven't actually applied to join BRICS, there's clearly an interest there. And I've seen think tanks from Azerbaijan suggesting that they should join BRICS.

So to me, this raises some eyebrows. When you have five BRICS nations and three potential BRICS nations involved in naval exercises together, it suggests to me possibly that BRICS may be developing into not just a political and economic alliance, but into a military and defense security alliance. The Gulf Of Oman would not normally have any particular significance to South Africa except because of the current Houthi activity in the Red Sea. Given the the Houthi attacks, particularly around the Bab El Mandeb Strait, which connects to the Red Sea and to the Gulf Of Aden, South Africa, a key maritime trade and security player, would be concerned about the potential spillover effects of what the Houthis are doing. Now also bear in mind that historically, maritime trade has been more or less ruled by the Americans in terms of security, particularly in The Gulf, in the the Strait Of Hormuz, the Strait Of Malacca, and the Suez Canal.

You know, in the aftermath of World War two, the US Navy sort of strategically opted to reduce their fleet size, reducing the the number of vessels and placing others in a sort of reserve. This shift marked a sort of a departure from the previously very expansive naval presence of The United States that they used to sort of project onto the world. Over the ensuing decades, the active naval American naval fleet experienced a notable decline in their numbers, And that was a trend that continued and persisted until the late twentieth century. You know? Despite promises from the Reagan administration I remember the Reagan administration.

They said that they were gonna strengthen the navy, but they fell far short of their ambitious goals. The navy has been in decline really since World War two, and that decline has become more rapid and it has accelerated over the past two or three American presidential administrations. I mean, fast forward to the post Cold War era, the administrations of, like, George w George h w Bush, Bill Clinton, Barack Obama. They oversaw even more reductions in military spending and naval assets. The Navy's operational force reached its lowest point during the Obama administration, which I think reflects a a transition away from unilateral American dominance on the global stage.

This is sort of part of the deglobalization. During this period of sort of naval downsizing by the Americans, emerging powers like China and Russia began asserting themselves in the maritime domain, challenging long standing US hegemony. These nations heavily invested, China and Russia, in expansion and modern modernization of their naval assets with the intention of safeguarding their own interests on on you know, and and control over crucial trade routes in the oceans. As America's naval capabilities diminish, I think it creates new opportunities for increased global multipolarity. It's empowering the rising powers of the global South and the BRICS nations to exert more influence over maritime trade and security.

With The US grip on the world's oceans loosening, I think the nations that previously were sort of on the periphery of global affairs now have the chance to navigate their own paths to shape the future of maritime governance and and trade overall. This represents a shift in my opinion, inshallah towards a more balanced distribution of maritime power and heralds a departure from the era of American dominance over the over the world's oceans. As the world embraces a more multipolar landscape, I think that diverse voices and perspectives can now play a pivotal role in shaping the future of global maritime affairs, paving the way, in sha'Allah, for a more just and prosperous world for everyone. And again, like I've said many times, I think that this reflects the will of the OCGFC. Now I'll I'll I'll remind you again that I've said many times that the OCGFC isn't a monolith.

There are competing coalitions of private sector power. So not everyone is gonna be on board with that, but I think that the majority will be. And I think that the most powerful players in the OCGFC are in favor of this. And I think that this is why we're seeing what they call this trend of deglobalization and America sort of withdrawing in terms of its role as a sort of self appointed global policeman of of world trade. I mean, they used to just control the oceans.

That is globalization was based basically on America's control over the oceans, and they're acting as a security guarantor for every other country. Now other countries now countries are able to take the security of their trade in their own hands. And I think that that's sort of indicated by the fact that you have these five BRICS countries all participating together with another three potential BRICS countries involved as well in these naval drills in the Gulf Of Oman. You know, America even called out South Africa for their participation in those naval drills. They weren't happy about it.

But South Africa said it's normal. Simple. These are our friends. You know? They're not your friends, but they are they're our friends.

This is, you know, sort of echoing the same sentiments as Nelson Mandela when he was criticized. When he went to America, they criticized him for continuing to be a friend with Taddafi. He said he's maybe he's not your friend, he's our friend. He's always been friendly with us. He supported us against apartheid when you people were still supporting apartheid.

So South Africa said, it's no problem if we participate in these drills. We're friends with Russia. We're friends with Iran. We're friends with China. There's no issue.

Don't think that every cry is against you. Like I said in the in the video about the on on psychological decolonization using the Quran. America acts like every cry is against them because they they literally believe that they're supposed to control everywhere in the world. That That every ocean in the world belongs to them, and that no ship should pass anywhere except under their eyes. But those days are over.

And I think that the more that countries are able to exert their own control and their own sovereignty over their own trade and over their own territorial waters and and the the movement of their ships between countries, between friendly countries, I think that the importance of America and the ability of America to dominate will continue to decrease. And I think that that's again what the OCGFC want to see. Because after all, do you make more money? I mean, we are we've already seen like, if you're just talking about the military industrial complex, once the OC GFC have gone a national and they've gone global, which is what's happened now, once that's happened, they're not only putting all of their eggs in the basket of American industry. So does it make more sense to support multiple navies in multiple countries and multiple spending or military spending in multiple countries for them to secure their own sea lanes or just to have America do it.

It makes much more sense. If you're not as concerned this is this is another indication that the OCGFC are not that concerned anymore about American prosperity or Western prosperity, and they're seeing that the future of the global economy is in the global South. And I think that this this what we what we see in the Gulf Of Oman with this drill is an indication of that. And I think that you can also, maybe to some extent, see that, as I said, this this partnering system that they're creating for BRICS where you're not necessarily a member, but you're a partner. I think that you can kind of into it when you see when you see any news story that involves a BRICS nation and it involves another nation that's not a BRICS nation, but that kind of make sense that it could be or should be a BRICS nation, like Kazakhstan or Pakistan or even Oman or Algeria and so on and so on.

When you see that these countries are doing things together, it may well indicate that those countries have already gained a sort of an informal status as a BRICS partner nation, and they're probably on their way to becoming a member. Okay. So that's gonna be it for today. I know it's not a typical news breakdown. It's not I'm not going off of any particular recent news or headlines.

But I think that it's interesting to me, and I hope that you found it informative and beneficial for you, Insha'Allah. So I'll be back on Wednesday for another news breakdown, and I'll probably make that more headline head headline based, InshaAllah.