兵者，诡道也。故能而示之不能，用而示之不用，近而示之远，远而示之近。不战而胜善之上善。 孙子兵法
金砖国家组织是一个与西方主导的国际货币基金组织、世界银行、七国集团和二十国集团竞争的经济、政治和发展集团，关注金砖国家进展的观察家可能会好奇，为何至今没有多少关于10月22日至24日在俄罗斯喀山举行的金砖国家峰会报导。
这可能是因为这次的第16次峰会是由普京总统领导的俄罗斯主持，西方认为俄罗斯是世界和平与安全的最大威胁。因此，西方媒体不愿提供可能对普京和俄罗斯产生正面关注的报导。
另一个因素是因为西方媒体是当前世界秩序的得益者和支持者，这种秩序是建立在美国主导地位（有些人将其视为霸权）的基础上，并在美国日益减少的盟友支持下，建构起来的。
美国有线电视新闻网络、英国广播公司、《纽约时报》、《日经亚洲》、《经济学人》和彭博社希望他们的读者认为金砖国家组织在全球政治和经济中无关紧要且无足轻重。
因此，西方媒体对金砖国家的报导不是不屑一顾，就是保持沉默。预计这种情况也会延续到即将举行的峰会上。
去美元化：慢动作还是更快崩溃
峰会期间，去美元化话题将被广泛讨论。金砖国家长期以来的关注就是美元的主导地位导致发展中国家面临美元波动的风险，进而对其贸易、经济和发展产生负面影响。
第二次世界大战后的格局以及美国崛起为全球超级大国的地位现正受到质疑，部分原因是美国主导的对莫斯科前所未有的制裁，迫使俄罗斯和其他与其进行贸易的国家探索如何在不使用美元的情况下进行贸易和国际支付，因为美元在过去80年中获得很高的价格——可能占了这些外币交易价值的1%。
目前，我们看到在这个问题上出现的意见分歧，两个主要金砖国家成员——印度和俄罗斯——立场截然相反。根据西方和印度媒体关注的新闻报道，印度外长苏杰生10月1日指出，美国的政策常常使与某些国家的贸易复杂化，但印度在不弃用美元的政策下寻求“变通办法”，而不像一些国家。
“我们从未主动追求去美元化。这不是我们经济、政治或战略政策的一部分。但其他国家可能这样做。”同时，苏杰生指出，多极世界最终将反映在“货币和经济交易”中。
与印度发出支持美元的信号相反，俄罗斯财政部长安东西卢安诺夫表达了更强硬的立场。显然是为了回应印度，10月11日，他提出金砖国家迫切需要建立自己的国际支付系统。
他表示，利用西方基础设施运作的平台正变得“日益政治化”。
他呼吁建立基于本国货币和新技术的新跨境支付基础设施，以实现更快、更便宜且不受外部干扰的外贸交易。
“考虑到……主要是西方的政治影响，我们的任务是创建自己的独立体系。”在谈到金砖国家财政部和央行所做的工作时，他表示，“金砖国家……超越政治，超越任何压力和限制。其目标是刺激经济成长并增加人民的收入。”
金砖国家去美元化过程最终可能产生的不仅仅是一种竞争性的支付机制。这将对国际金融、货币政策、全球供应链和石油贸易产生连锁反应，其中金砖国家成员国已占全球石油产量的40% 以上，并可控制全球50%以上的石油产量。整体影响将不可避免地导致全球经济力量的变化。所以，目前世界上的政治和金融机构以及主导国家希望看到金砖国家失败，这并不奇怪。
同时，地缘政治力量平衡变化也是另一个关键指标，尤其过去两年金砖国家成员数量迅速成长。非中政策咨询中心执行主任保罗弗林蓬表示，“金砖国家组织吸引了多元化的潜在成员，因为其共同愿望是创造一个更加公平的全球环境，改变许多国家所认为的当下充满偏差格局。”
已正式申请或表明要加入金砖国家，并出席即将举行峰会者，包括阿塞拜疆、阿尔及利亚、越南、印尼、巴基斯坦、尼日利亚、委内瑞拉、哈萨克、巴勒斯坦、刚果民主共和国、加蓬、孟加拉、巴林、科威特、塞内加尔和玻利维亚。在22个国家正式表明申请加入金砖国家组织之际，另有26个国家也表态有意加入。
这些潜在成员国中最突出的是土耳其，自1952年以来一直是北约成员国；泰国，美国的长期盟友；塞尔维亚一个热望且仍在等待加入欧盟候选国，如今将金砖国家视为加入布鲁塞尔的更好替代方案；古巴则可能成为第一个加入的北美国家；马来西亚首相安华最近也证实了其申请加入的意愿。
一些观察全球经济和政治发展的西方进步智库，建议美国和西方盟国避免对金砖国家的最新发展感到惊慌不安和产生对抗心态，反之应解决金砖国家成员国提出的合理抱怨。
然而，这些观点只占少数。我们可以预见的是，金砖国家的反对者会寻找机会利用其弱点，并透过一切可能的手段，包括透过隐藏和不正当的策略和活动来破坏它。
林德宜《金砖国家峰会与孙子兵法》原文：BRICS Summit and the Art of War
All warfare is based on deception. Hence, when we are able to attack, we must seem unable; when using our forces, we must appear inactive; when we are near, we must make the enemy believe we are far away; when far away, we must make him believe we are near. The greatest victory is that which requires no battle.
Sun Tsu, Art of War
Observers following the progress of BRICS - a rival economic, political and developmental grouping to the western dominated International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank (WB), G7 and G20 - will be wondering why there has been little coverage of the event taking place in Kazan from 22-24 October.
It is possible that this is because the 16th summit meeting is being chaired by Russia under the leadership of President Vladimir Putin which the West has identified as the biggest threat to world peace and security. Hence, the unwillingness of western media to provide coverage that may provide positive attention to Putin and Russia.
Another factor is because western media are shareholders and cheerleaders of the present world order based on US dominance - some see it as hegemony - with support from its diminishing coterie of allies.
CNN, BBC, New York Times, Nikkei Asia,The Economist and Bloomberg want their readers to see the grouping as irrelevant and an insignificant player in global politics and economics.
Hence the dismissive reportage or silence from western media channels on BRICS. This can be expected to continue with the reporting on the coming summit.
De-dollarization: Slow Motion or Quicker Crash
During the summit, the subject of de-dollarization will be widely discussed. A longstanding concern of BRICS member countries is the dominance of the US dollar which has resulted in the exposure of developing countries to dollar fluctuation with negative impact on their trade, economies and development.
This legacy from the aftermath of World War 2 and the ascendency of the US as a global superpower is now being contested in part as a result of the unprecedented US led sanctions against Moscow that has forced Russia and other countries trading with it to explore ways to pursue trade and international payments without resorting to use of the dollar which has extracted a high price - possibly one per cent of the value of their foreign currency transactions for the past 80 years.
For now, we are seeing a difference of opinion possibly emerging on this issue with two leading BRICS members - India and Russia - having contrasting positions. According to a news report given attention by western and Indian media, India’s External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar, on 1 October, noted that US policies often complicate trade with certain countries, and that India was seeking “workarounds” without intending to move away from using the dollar, unlike some other nations.
“We have never actively targeted the dollar. That’s not part of our economic, political, or strategic policy. Some others may have done so.” At the same time, Jaishankar noted that a multipolar world will eventually be reflected in “currencies and economic dealings”.
In contrast to India's pro-dollar signalling, a stronger position was expressed by Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov. Apparently in response to India’s stand, on 11 October, he argued on the urgent need for BRICS to create its own international payments system.
According to him, platforms which operate using Western infrastructure are becoming “increasingly politicised”.
He called for a new cross-border payment infrastructure to be based on national currencies and new technologies to enable faster and cheaper foreign trade transactions that are free from external interference.
“Our task is to create our own independent system, given the… largely political decisions of the West.” Referring to the work undertaken by BRICS finance ministries and central banks, he stated that ”BRICS…is beyond politics, beyond any pressures and restrictions. Its aim is to stimulate economic growth and boost the income of our citizens.”
What may finally emerge from the de-dollarization process undertaken by BRICS is not simply a rival payment mechanism. It is one that will have ripple effects on international finance, monetary policies, global supply chains and oil trading in which BRICS member countries, already accounting for over 40% production, would potentially control over 50% of global petroleum production. The overall impact will inevitably lead to changes in global economic power. It is not surprising that the present political and financial institutions and dominant countries want to see BRICS fail.
Meanwhile, another key indicator of the changing geo-political balance of power is BRICS membership count which has burgeoned during the past 2 years. According to Paul Frimpong, executive director of Africa-China Policy and Advocacy, “BRICS alliance attracts a diverse group of potential members because of its primary-driven shared desire to create a more level global landscape that many countries believe is currently biased against them”.
(https://watcher.guru/news/47-countries-ready-to-join-the-brics-alliance#google_vignette)
Among countries identified as officially applying or expressing their intention to join BRICS in the coming summit are Azerbaijan, Algeria, Vietnam, Indonesia, Pakistan, Nigeria, Venezuela, Kazakhstan, Palestine, DR Congo, Gabon, Bangladesh, Bahrain, Kuwait, Senegal, and Bolivia. Unofficial counts have placed the number of countries that have applied for membership at 26 with another 22 that have expressed interest in joining.
Prominent among potential members are Turkey, NATO member since 1952; Thailand, a longtime US ally; Serbia, an aspiring and still awaiting European Union candidate that now sees BRICS as a better alternative to Brussels; Cuba, likely to become the first North American country to join; and Malaysia, whose intention to apply was recently confirmed by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
A few progressive western think tanks monitoring global economics and politics have advised the US and western allies to avoid alarm and confrontation with the latest BRICS developments and to address the legitimate complaints of BRICS member countries.
However these views are of a small minority. What we can expect is for opponents of BRICS to look for openings to exploit its frailties as well as to undermine it through all possible means, including through covert and underhand strategies and activities.
