China Research

A discussion forum on emerging markets, mainly China – from a macro, micro, institutional and corporate angle.

SCO – another example of Chinese long-term strategy

September 3, 2025

The Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) belongs to the international conventions that are hardly known in our part of the world. Though having been founded already in 2001, not very much has been reported from the 24 Heads of State Council meetings before the 25th SCO convention that took place recently in Tinjian.  The SCO Tianjin Summit 2025 has probably been the most important of its kind so far, due to the list of prominent participants and the burning international conflicts.

Long-term aspects more important than short-term results

Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), is an intergovernmental organization that has been started in 2001 by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan aiming at peace and cooperation among its member states with the intention to promote what then was called a new fair political and economic order. Later on, also India, Pakistan and Iran joined the organization.

Totally, the SCO also includes quite a number of observer states from the Eurasian region. Around half of the global population is represented in the SCO which considers itself as an alternative to corresponding Western organizations .

According to the SCO, its main goals are defined as follows:

#  “to strengthen mutual trust, friendship and good-neighborliness between the Member States;

#  to encourage the effective cooperation between the Member States in such spheres as politics, trade, economy, science and technology, culture, education, energy, transport, tourism, environmental protection, etc;

#  to jointly ensure and maintain peace, security and stability in the region; and

# to promote a new democratic, fair and rational international political and economic international order”.

When reading these points above, one can easily observe their general and unbinding character – whatever this may mean. But now more co-operation among the member countries seems to be strived. This would allow China – the strongest member of the SCO – to pave the way for the continued development of the SCO (see https://www.chinadailyhk.com/hk/article/618965), certainly in line with its international long-term strategy. A parallel long-term strategy of this kind is also visible in other parts of the globe, for example in Africa, South America and the Pacific area. Russia’s role in the SCO seems to remain limited compared to China’s dominant position. India’s future impact on the SCO still appears unclear but closer relations to China seem to be on the cards. Trump’s tariffs could favor such a development even more than so far.    

Conclusion: China’s interest in the future of the SCO underlines again its long-term ambitions in the world – for reasons of political influence, new markets for its exports and the future supply with important commodities. By looking somewhat deeper into the SCO, we have got another example of China’s unique capacity to apply both short-term and long-term perspectives at the same time. A phenomenon that uses to come back regularly and that often is neglected in Western countries and companies..

Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University

U.S. tariff developments remain important to many emerging markets

August 21, 2025

Many emerging markets and less developed countries are closely linked to the development of the United States; according to my own definition emerging markets have taken more structural steps in a promising direction than all the clearly lagging developing countries in the world. Growth and market potential is simply more favorable in emerging economies.

This is why Western investors, financial and academic analysts often emphasize on emerging economies. I myself have been doing this for many years at Linnaeus University. Many analytical tools for the studies of emerging markets are similar to those being applied to advanced countries – but quite a number of these analytical tools are also different or have to be used additionally. For example, institutional conditions like transparency and the quality of statistics or ethics are different. But also the interpretation of widely published statistics – such as for GDP growth and inflation – differs normally between developed and less developed countries for the same statistical number.  

Examples of emerging countries are – when quoting the IMF (see https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO ) – in alphabetical order: Argentina, Brazil, Chile, China, Colombia, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Lebanon, Malaysia, Mexico, Nigeria, Peru, the Philippines, Russia, South Africa, Turkey, and the Ukraine. So much in general terms.

Strong impact of the U.S. on emerging markets’ exports    

As much as one sixth of total exports from the emerging and developing world goes these days to the U.S. Many of these countries are, particularly hit by raised U.S. tariffs – also since tariffs for many of these countries have been raised unevenly. This could mean new conditions for competition.

Emerging countries for which the U.S. is the main market for their exports are listed in the following table (https://www.cia.gov/the-world-factbook/field/exports-partners/). One could find there in 2023, for example, the U.S. as the number one export market for Mexico (76 % of total exports), Cambodia (36 %), Vietnam (28 %), Columbia (27% ), Sri Lanka (22 %), Ecuador (22 %), India (19 %), Thailand (18%), Bangladesh (16 %), Kenya (10 %) and as the number two market for Chile (16 %), Peru (14 %), The Philippines (13 %), Malaysia (12 %), Brazil (10%), Indonesia (9 %) and South Africa (8 %) among others.

Conclusion:  When looking at the tariffs that have been (preliminarily?) implemented by President Trump (see https://dimerco.com/news-press/us-tariff-update-2025/ ), one can recognize that the emerging markets quoted above (and many others) are heavily hit by the American protectionist tariffs – meaning a negative impact on the potential output of these emerging countries. Logically, the less developed countries are hoping that (more) free trade will come back not too far away – and so do many Western corporations which could benefit themselves from better export conditions of emerging countries to the U.S. Such a development would improve GDP growth in emerging countries and their future  inflow of new U.S. dollars for widened imports – and, thus, create improving Western market conditions in parts of the emerging market area as well.

Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University

BRICS countries in trouble

August 15, 2025

Originally, BRIC was started as a financial investment idea in promising emerging markets. In other words, BRIC was in the beginning a financial construction for investing in well-growing emerging markets. B stood for Brazil, R for Russia, I for India and C for China. Later, also South Africa – representing the S in BRICS – was enabled to join.

New conditions

What initially seemed to be an interesting innovation, has in the meanwhile developed into a completely different and in many (financial) aspects into a financially obsolete product.

Growth and other economic conditions have changed profoundly since the start of BRICS. Chinese growth has been slowing down considerably, Russia suffers from burdening war effects, Brazil is economically unstable though recently improving somewhat and India, on the other hand, has more strongly moved in the right direction.

In other words: We have seen that the BRIC(S) countries did not have a homogeneous development in recent years. Rather the opposite – but not as a positive contribution in a diversification sense.   

More lately, BRICS countries have also suffered from President Trump’s tariffs and increasing global uncertainty about particularly emerging markets. These tendencies should lead to the question what may happen to BRICS in the future. Will BRICS recover as an important but not very powerful group of emerging markets or move into a different direction with China as an increasingly active driving force, favoring its own political interest and influence?

Conclusion:  My own guess is that the latter alternative seems to be the most probable one since China already since a number of years ago has demonstrated an increasing strategic political interest in modernizing emerging and less developed countries. These countries may be particularly relevant when they can provide China with important commodities.

We know by now that Chinese decision makers are excellent strategist both when it comes to short-term and long-term strategies.

BRICS fits well into this specific context.

Hubert Fromlet
Affiliate Professor at the School of Business and Economics, Linnaeus University