A question of interest to scholars of International Politics concerns the manner in which weaker states attempt to influence stronger ones. This article offers a case study of one recent exercise in coalition-building among southern powers as a vehicle for change in international relations. It analyzes the global interests, strategies and values of India-Brazil-South Africa (IBSA) and the impact of the IBSA Dialogue Forum on the global order. Five major points are outlined. First, common ideas and values shape the global discourse of the emerging coalition. Second, soft balancing based on a value-driven middle power discourse is a suitable concept to explain IBSA’s strategy in global institutions. Third, institutional foreign policy instruments such as agenda-setting and coalition-building are pivotal elements of IBSA’s soft balancing approach. Fourth, the trilateral coalition suffers from considerable divergence of interest in global governance issues and limited potential gains of its sectoral cooperation, particularly in trade, due to a lack of complementarities of the participating economies. Finally, despite these obstacles the IBSA Forum has impacted the global order in recent years as a powerful driver for change. India, Brazil and South Africa have contributed to an incremental global power shift in their favour. The southern coalition also induced a change in the character of multilateralism and, in particular, its procedural values.
Alden, Chris and Marco Antonio Vieira. 2005. ‘The New Diplomacy of the South: South Africa, Brazil, India and Trilateralism’, Third World Quarterly, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1077–95.
2.
Bonn International Center For Conversion (BICC). 2008. Conversion Survey 2008: Global Disarmament, Demilitarization, and Demobilization. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
3.
Brooks, Stephen G. and William C. Wohlforth. 2005. ‘Hard Times for Soft Balancing’, International Security, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 72–108.
4.
Bueno, Adriana. 2009. ‘The Role of HIV/AIDS in the India-Brazil-South Africa Partnership (IBSA)’. Paper presented at the International Seminar on ‘New Directions in the South? Addressing the Importance and Consequences of the IBSA Dialogue Forum to International Relations’, IUPERJ, June, Rio de Janeiro.
5.
Buzan, Barry and Ole Waever. 2003. Regions and Power: The Structure of International Security. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6.
Cooper, Andrew F. and Agata Antkeiwicz, eds. 2008. Emerging Powers and Global Governance. Waterloo: Wilfried Laurier University Press.
7.
Cooper, Andrew F., Richard A. Higgott and Kim R. Nossal. 1993. Relocating Middle Powers: Australia and Canada in a Changing World Order. Vancouver: UBC Press.
8.
Cox, Michael. 2007. ‘Is the United States in Decline—Again?’, International Affairs, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 643–53.
9.
Duchêne, Francois. 1973. ‘The European Community and the Uncertainties of Inter-dependence’, in Max Kohnstamm and Wolfgang Hager, eds, A Nation Writ Large? Foreign Policy Problems before the European Community. London: Macmillan.
10.
Dupas, Gilberto. 2006. 'South Africa, Brazil and India: Divergence, Convergence and Alliance Perspectives', in Fábio Villares, ed., India, Brazil and South Africa—Perspectives and Alliances. Sao Paulo: Institute for the Study of International Economics.
11.
Flemes, Daniel. 2006a. ‘Brazil’s Cooperative Leadership in Southern Latin America’s Security Policies’, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Hamburg, http://www.dissertation.de/englisch/index.php3?active_document=buch.php3&sprache=2&buch=4580. Accessed on 15 March 2010.
12.
Flemes, Daniel. 2006b. ‘Brazil’s Nuclear Policy: From Technological Dependence to Civil Nuclear Power’. GIGA Working Paper No. 23. Hamburg: German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
13.
Flemes, Daniel. 2008. ‘Brazil’s Strategic Options in a Multiregional World Order’. Paper presented at the 1st Regional Powers Network (RPN) Conference on ‘Ideas, Interests, Resources and Strategies of Regional Powers—Analytical Concepts in Comparative Perspective’, September, German Institute of Global and Area Studies, Hamburg.
14.
Flemes, Daniel. 2009. ‘Brazilian Foreign Policy in the Changing World Order’, South African Journal of International Affairs, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 161–82.
15.
Flemes, Daniel and Detlef Nolte. 2010. ‘Alianzas externas en armamento y defensa. Una nueva dimensión en la agenda de seguridad Latinoamericana’, Foreign Affairs Latinoamérica, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 1–13.
16.
Friedberg, Aaron L.1994. ‘Ripe for Rivalry: Prospects for Peace in a Multipolar Asia’, International Security, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 5–33.
17.
Goldman Sachs. 2007. BRICs and Beyond. London: Goldman Sachs.
18.
Greenfield Partem, Michael. 1983. ‘The Buffer System in International Relations’, The Journal of Conflict Resolution, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 3–26.
19.
Haass, Richard N.2008. ‘The Age of Nonpolarity: What will Follow U.S. Dominance?’ Foreign Affairs, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 44–56.
20.
Heine, Jorge. 2006. ‘On the Manner of Practicing the New Diplomacy’. CIGI Working Paper No. 11. Waterloo: CIGI.
21.
Humphrey, John and Dirk Messner. 2006. ‘Instabile Multipolarität: Indien und China verändern die Weltpolitik’. Die Analysen und Stellungnahmen No. 1. Bonn: Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik.
Hurrell, Andrew. 2000. ‘Some Reflections on the Role of Intermediate Powers in Inter-national Institutions’. Working Paper No. 244. Paths to Power: Foreign Policy Strategies of Intermediate States. Washington, D.C.: Latin American Program, Woodrow Wilson International Center.
24.
Hurrell, Andrew. 2006. ‘Hegemony, Liberalism and Global Order: What Space for Would-be Great Powers?’ International Affairs, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 1–19.
25.
Hurrell, Andrew. 2007. On Global Order: Power, Values and the Constitution of International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
26.
Ikenberry, G. John. 2003. ‘Strategic Reactions to American Pre-eminence: Great Power Politics in the Age of Unipolarity’, http://www.odci.gov/nic/confreports_stratreact.html. Accessed on 15 March.
27.
Ikenberry, G. John. 2008. ‘The Rise of China and the Future of the West’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 87, no. 1, pp. 22–37.
28.
Ikenberry, G. John and Thomas Wright. 2008. Rising Powers and Global Institutions. New York: The Century Foundation.
29.
Kagan, Robert. 2008. The Return of History and the End of Dreams. London: Atlantic Press.
30.
Kumar, Nagesh. 2006. ‘Sectoral Cooperation within IBSA: Some Explorations in South-South Cooperation’, Synopsis, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 18–21.
31.
Lake, David A. and Patrick M. Morgan. 1997. ‘The New Regionalism in Security Affairs’, in David A. Lake and Patrick M. Morgan, eds, Regional Orders—Building Security in a New World. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
32.
Las Casas Campos, Taiane. 2009. ‘Brazil and India: Interests and Strategies in G-20 Process’. Paper presented at the International Seminar on ‘New Directions in the South? Addressing the Importance and Consequences of the IBSA Dialogue Forum to International Relations’, IUPERJ, June, Rio de Janeiro.
33.
Lemke, Douglas. 2002. Regions of War and Peace. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
34.
Mahbubani, Kishore. 2008. The New Asian Hemisphere: The Irresistible Shift of Global Power to the East. New York: Public Affairs.
35.
Maull, Hanns. 1990. ‘Germany and Japan: The New Civilian Powers’, Foreign Affairs, vol. 69, no. 5, pp. 67–88.
36.
Mearsheimer, John J.2001. The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.
37.
Mildner, Stormy Annika and JöRg Husar. 2009. ‘Indien, Brasilien und Südafrika in der Doha-Runde: Handelspolitische Interessen und Entscheidungsstrukturen’, Aussenwirtschaft, vol. 63, pp. 69–98.
38.
Miller, Darlene. 2005. ‘South Africa and the IBSA Initiative: Constraints and Challenges’, Africa Insight, vol. 35, pp. 52–7.
39.
Nolte, Detlef. 2008. ‘Ideas, Interests, Resources and Strategies of Regional Powers’. Paper presented at the 1st Regional Powers Network (RPN) Conference on ‘Ideas, Interests, Resources and Strategies of Regional Powers—Analytical Concepts in Comparative Perspective’, German Institute of Global and Area Studies, September, Hamburg.
40.
Nye, Joseph S.2004. Soft Power. The Means to Success in World Politics. New York: Public Affairs.
41.
Pape, Robert A.2005. ‘Soft Balancing Against the United States’, International Security, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 7–45.
42.
Paul, T.V.2005. ‘Soft Balancing in the Age of U.S. Primacy’, International Security, vol. 30, no. 1, pp. 46–71.
43.
Ray, Amit Shovon. 2006. ‘Going Global: India’s Economic Aspirations and Apprehensions in the New Millennium’, in Fábio Villares, ed., India, Brazil and South Africa—Perspectives and Alliances. Sao Paulo: Institute for the Study of International Economics.
44.
Sahni, Varun. 2006. ‘Drag Anchor or Launching Pad? Regional Dynamics of Emerging Powers’. Unpublished Manuscript, New Delhi.
45.
Schoeman, Maxi. 2003. ‘South Africa as an Emerging Middle Power: 1994–2003’, in John Daniel, Adam Habib and Roger Southall, eds, State of the Nation: South Africa 2003–2004. Cape Town: HSRC Press.
46.
SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute). 2008. SIPRI Yearbook 2008: Armaments, Disarmament, and International Security. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
47.
Stern, Matthew and Christopher Stevens. 2000. ‘FTAS with India and Brazil: An Initial Analysis’. Working Paper No. 10. Johannesburg: Trade and Industrial Policy Secretariat.
48.
Wohlforth, William C.1999. ‘The Stability of a Unipolar World’, International Security, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 5–41.
49.
Wolfers, Arnold. 1962. Discord and Collaboration: Essays on International Politics. Baltimore, MD.: The Johns Hopkins Press.
