Eduard Abrahamyan, a specialist in international relations, doctoral student and lecturer at the British University of Leicester, wrote on his Facebook page:
"Without exaggeration, the BRICS Kazan summit can be considered one of the main geopolitical successes of Vladimir Putin in the last ten years. I don't think of any event of such a scale that would gather in Russia representatives of more than 36 countries and more than 22 leaders from different continents of the planet around non-Western and inherently anti-Western agendas. The Kazan summit of BRICS is an indicator that the opposing club of the Big Seven (the civilized West) with its clear global system-changing goals has finally formed. As of now, it has formed: - A principled united position against all kinds of sanctions (coming from the West). One of the priorities of BRICS, this civilizational alliance, is to oppose, in particular, the rules of institutional and value system sanctions applied by the West, which, according to BRICS members, are applied when the country does not meet the standards of the West's value system, geopolitical and management model. particularly against US financial-economic supremacy and influence through the creation of a separate international payment Bridge system from the West. One of the main goals of this civilizational difference is to put an end to the economic and political dominance of the West and the US dollar being the main currency in the international trade system. on non-interference by the West in the internal affairs of the countries that have chosen an autocratic model. - A principled united position on the restructuring and "inclusiveness" of the structure of the UN Security Council and its lower levels. When talking about BRICS, my colleagues often emphasize that the union has 45% of the world's population and 35% of the economy. However, the phenomenon of this civilizational alliance is a result of the institutionalization of global dynamics and trends. In the last four Armenian years, Western countries have always been leading and progressive in all aspects, starting with productive potential, coordinated state, public and political efficiency, ending with technological innovation and global progress in dictating moral norms and rules of the civil-value system game. Over the past twenty years, however, the West's four-hundred-year comprehensive leadership has begun to give way significantly to the rapidly developing and closing global non-West. For the first time in at least four decades, the West has begun to fall behind its global anti-Sun (not free) opponents, which are developing faster than the Western world. For the first time in four hundred years, the productive potential of non-Western countries seems to have begun to exceed the productive potential of the Western world. One of the vivid examples is the scale of the quantitative and qualitative production of weapons and ammunition in the developing anti-war multipolar world. North Korea, with all its isolation, produces and supplies more missile-artillery weapons to Russia than, for example, two and a half years after the start of the Russian-Ukrainian war, the economies of France, Great Britain and Germany can produce and supply to Ukraine together. The BRICS phenomenon is also a geopolitical conflict. is the result of striving for revisionism. According to the perception of the Putin elite, the global beginning of the Russian revenge against the victory of the civilizational and institutional West in the Cold War through BRICS can be considered a success. And this becomes possible as a result of the West's negligence and misunderstanding the situation, inadequately predicting the future dynamics, as well as not imagining collective and individual tasks in the West in the new-cold-war paradigm. The West, with its division and fundamental uncertainty, is "helping" the consolidation and strengthening of the imaginary BRICS and dictating the rules of a new global non-free and hierarchical game to the world. And most importantly, Russia's BRICS success is also an indicator that it behaves in accordance with aggressive realism in geopolitics. either mental or institutional or resource and psychological advantages over defensive realism. The West is deeply seated in the ideological and logical "trap" of defensive realism, from which, alas, it does not want to get out in any case.
