A few days before the U.S. elections, the polls are out of control. The pollsters, who have not been very successful in recent elections, are even more confused this time. 7 days apart, they are polling black voters. Support for Harris is up 15 points. In 7 days there were no incidents, no fights, no brawls… How is this possible?

The incompetence of some polling companies, the fear of some “not to be embarrassed like in 2016”, and the deliberate manipulation of others have thrown the polling issue into chaos. But October seems to have favoured Trump in every way. The vast majority of polls show Trump either ahead or neck and neck. To understand the significance of this, we need to look at previous elections. In the 2016 election, which Trump won, there was a difference of 8-10 points in many states, and up to 15 points in 2020. In 2016, Trump managed to close this gap and take the lead, and in 2020, despite losing, there was no serious difference.

So there’s only one perception in everyone’s mind;

‘If the polls say it’s neck-and-neck, then Trump has definitely got the job!’

Yes, that seems to be the case if we look at the electoral record since Trump became a political figure. But the pastor does not always eat rice. Will the pollsters underestimate Trump’s vote for the third time in a row? One argument is that the companies add a few points to the existing polls by taking into account the ‘hidden’ Trump votes. Many believe that there are a significant number of ‘hidden’ Trump voters in the country. They are either apolitical or pretend to be Democrats in public for fear of social pressure, but vote for Trump at the ballot box. I have even had the opportunity to meet some of them. They only show their colours when they feel comfortable.

Another argument is that pollsters have completely changed their research methods to reach rural voters more easily. Online surveys are being replaced by telephone or face-to-face interviews. There are even rumours that these systems will be used in the 2022 mid-term elections. In 2022, on the other hand, the Republican vote was exaggerated in the polls. The expected red wave in the election results did not materialise. Of course, the name on the ballot was not Donald Trump.

What if the polls are right?

The pollsters are still playing it close to the vest. The latest polls in the swing states show Trump ahead by 1 or 2 points. For example, according to the latest Atlas poll, Trump wins in 6 of the 7 swing states except North Carolina. But always by 1 to 3 points. A difference that can be included in the margin of error. They probably observe a trend against Trump in public opinion, but leave the difference within the margin of error so as not to be embarrassed.

Of course, there is also the possibility that Trump is making a serious difference. After Biden’s withdrawal, the donation money waiting in the wings and the excitement of finally having a young candidate created the Kamala Harris storm. With the effect of the 2020 primary debates, she also charmed her audience, who were expecting a poor debate performance from her, against Trump, adding to the storm. By October, however, Harris’s appeal began to wane. Harris had not won a single primary. In the polls taken when the nominee was still undecided, her public support seemed low. She summed up the image she had painted during the two-month campaign:

‘If I were president, I wouldn’t do anything different from Biden’.

That was the problem anyway! The American people have not had a good four years. The immigration crisis is out of control, inflation has exploded, purchasing power has fallen, the world is marching step by step towards the apocalypse… There is a nostalgia for the pre-Trump economy. In such a situation, voters are asking Harris: “Where have you been for 4 years?

In Pennsylvania, the most critical state in the election, there was a poll that was better than a straight election poll. The question was: ‘What was it like under Trump and what is it like now?’

54 percent of respondents said things were good under Trump. But only 27 per cent said things were good now. This is the most dangerous situation for Kamala. He is presenting himself as a continuation of the current government and people are unhappy with the status quo.

Another Trump

Going into the 2020 election, the political landscape was very different. There was a Trump who was fighting with someone almost every day and who was alone even in his own party. Many US structures, including the intelligence services, were directly and openly campaigning against him. Celebrities, rich people, CEOs of technology giants declared their support for Biden one after the other. In such a scene, it was inconceivable that Trump could win. How could he win with so many enemies? He couldn’t win anyway.

This year, however, the environment is a little different. He managed to bring together Peter Thiel, one of the shareholders of Open AI, with whom Vice President J.D. Vance is close, Elon Musk, the owner of X, and former Democrats Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard. In addition, for the first time in many years, major media organisations such as the Washington Post, LA Times and USA Today say they will not announce their support for the Democratic candidate. When you say the Washington Post, you are actually talking about Jeff Bezos, the owner of Amazon.

In other words, Trump is no longer alone and has managed to dismantle the huge bloc against him. In response, the ‘Cheney’ move came from Kamala. Former Republican Dick Cheney, the architect of the Iraq war, and his daughter Liz Cheney are backing Kamala. Liz Cheney is even running from rally to rally with Kamala. Kamala even said so proudly in the debate. Of course, it is debatable how much the Cheneys still mean to US society.

The only mistake that will make Trump lose

Many things have gone wrong since 2020. But Trump is only responsible for one of them: the abortion ban. The three Supreme Court justices Trump appointed before leaving office tipped the balance, and with their majority, abortion ceased to be a federal right. Although the decision was made in 2022 under the Biden administration, it is known that Trump is responsible. For 4 years, this is the only event that will reduce Trump’s vote. If Trump loses the election, it will be because women will flee to the Democrats because of the abortion decision.

Kamala also knows that this is her strongest area. The ads are largely based on this issue. No matter how much Trump says ‘I’m not against abortion’, this is the area where he has suffered the most damage in this election cycle. He alienated the suburban women who had previously carried him to success. Of course, it didn’t help that he said he hated Taylor Swift.

Anyway… The Atlas polling company I mentioned above is the one that has been closest to reality in recent election cycles. It was off by only 0.3 in 2020 and 0.2 in the 2022 midterms. Trump won by 2.7 points, according to Atlas’ last total vote survey before the election. The generic ballot question is important because for the Democrats to win, they definitely need to outperform Trump on the generic ballot and gain 2-3 points. The last Republican to win the election by beating his opponent in the popular vote was George W. Bush. Given that Trump has been holding rallies outside the swing states in recent weeks, and recently held a huge rally in New York, his goal will be not only to win the election, but also to prove his legitimacy by winning the popular vote.

Based on the information available so far, the interest in the early votes in the polls and the impression I got from the street, I see Trump one finger ahead. Things may change between now and the election. But what is clear is that the danger bells are ringing for the Democrats.

Yi Shaoxuan
Research Assistant of Center for Turkish Studies at Shanghai University

On October 22-24, 2024, the 16th BRICS leaders’ meeting was held in Kazan, the capital of the Republic of Tatarstan. Russia hosted leaders or representatives of more than 30 countries and six international organizations, including United Nations Secretary-General Guterres. The meeting adopted the Kazan Declaration, whose 134-long entries assess and look forward to the world in the areas of politics and security, economy and finance, culture and humanistic exchanges. South African President Ramaphosa praised the BRICS countries, saying that their historic expansion is a beacon of hope for the Global South. From “beacon of freedom and democracy” to “beacon of hope”, the world landscape has quietly changed.

What makes this BRICS Summit so attractive and appealing?

The Kazan Summit has three special backgrounds. From the perspective of the world pattern, the old order has been shaken, and the world system is in urgent need of a redistribution of institutional power. This is manifested in the following aspects: politically, the old “center-periphery” international order formed after World War II has put the countries of the Global South in an unfavorable position. In terms of security, the Russia-Ukraine war and the Middle East chaos have become a knot that is hard to untie, while small-scale terrorist attacks occur from time to time. Economically, the United States and the West are engaged in the tactics of “Decoupling” and “friendshoring”, wielding the big stick of tariffs and sanctions to force countries around the world to “pick a side”. The stress of deglobalization has hindered the smooth flow of the global supply chain. When it comes to scientific and cultural communication, the maneuver of “small yards, high fence” has blocked the path of scientific and technological upward mobility of developing countries such as China. In essence, as Deng Xiaoping, China’s second-generation leader, pointed out, peace and development remain the world’s two main themes, but none of the problems have been solved.

From the perspective of the BRICS countries themselves, starting in 2024, the “Brick” have had a “heavier weight” and “higher purity”. This summit is the first summit after the expansion of the BRICS, in the “Grand BRICS year”. In January this year, Egypt, the United Arab Emirates, Iran, Ethiopia officially participated in the BRICS cooperation, the number of BRICS member countries continue to expand. The total population of the expanded BRICS group is about 3.5 billion, accounting for 45% of the world’s population. After the expansion, the share of BRICS in the global economy rose to about 37%, surpassing the G7 and the European Union (14.5%). According to the BRICS Wealth Report released in January of this year, the BRICS group now holds a total of $45 trillion in investable wealth and currently produces about 44% of the world’s crude oil.

From the perspective of the host country, Russia has been at the center of a noisy dispute since the beginning of the Russia-Ukraine conflict in 2022. This is the first time Russia has hosted a global summit since then. The tremendous scale of the summit manifested that the Russia side had put great emphasis on this event. Against the backdrop of President Putin’s clear statement that he will not attend other important forums and events such as the G20 summit in Brazil, the summit in Kazan is undoubtedly an excellent opportunity to understand and explore Russia’s current strategic considerations and priorities. According to Russian presidential assistant Ushakov, the summit is divided into a large-scale meeting and a small-scale meeting. In the former one, leaders will assess cooperation in the economic and trade spheres and summarize the results of collaboration in culture and humanities; while in the latter one, delegations will study the most pressing issues on the global agenda and exchange views on the topic of BRICS cooperation in the international arena. This includes discussion of a range of acute regional conflicts, including, of course, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. China, India and Brazil have called for the resolution of the Ukrainian conflict through dialog, while the Kremlin has said that it accepts mediation by the three aforementioned countries. In addition, as is the tradition at BRICS summits, each summit is also heavily colored by the host country. The summits have a “BRICS Outreach” program, where the BRICS presidency invites its neighbors to participate in BRICS activities. South Africa invited all African leaders last year, and Russia invited CIS (Commonwealth of Independent States) countries this year. This is a good reference for Russia’s regionalism policy.

What are the noteworthy highlights of the Kazan summit?

The Global South’s attempts to establish a new economic order. With the weaponization of the dollar payment system, the countries of the Global South have suffered from sanctions and differentiated treatment by unfair rules. The established New Development Bank (NDB) is what BRICS offers current and future member countries to make up for the shortcomings of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. It also achieves that the founders remain equal shareholders and have an equal voice. Host Russia values the launch of the BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative (BCBPI), which is not controlled by the United States and is settled in national or neutral currencies, as an alternative to the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) financial settlement system. Such move is to safeguard its own financial sovereignty and financial security. In fact, Russia and Iran have already developed and connected similar systems for handling financial messaging. Currently more than 60% of trade between Russia and Iran is conducted in their own currencies. By the end of 2023, Russia’s share of local currency settlements with the BRICS countries jumped to 85% from 26% two years ago. The declaration also proposes to discuss and study the feasibility of establishing a BRICS Clear (BRICS Securities Depository and Clearing Infrastructure) on the basis of voluntary participation by all parties to complement the existing financial market infrastructure. This would pose a constraint on the use of the dollar as a weapon.

The rise of non-Western centers of power. We note the emergence of new centres of power, policy decision-making and economic growth, which can pave the way for a more equitable, just, democratic and balanced multi-polar world order. Chinese President Xi Jinping pointed out at the BRICS+ Leaders Dialogue on 24^th  that the rise of the “Global South” as a group is a distinctive symbol of the world’s great changes. “The common march of the Global South towards modernization is a major event in world history and unprecedented in the course of human civilization.” In fact, the members of BRICS have repeatedly criticized, openly or subtly, the hegemony and power politics of the United States and the West, and have spoken many times of “systemic discrimination”. They want to emphasize their own values rather than be forced to accept the ideas of others; they want to be participants and  makers of rule of justices. Some 30 countries in the Global South have expressed interest in joining the BRICS mechanism. If all these countries were able to participate in BRICS cooperation in some way , the population of the BRICS countries would probably account for more than 65% of the world’s total population. In that case, the BRICS’ international influence would be significantly increased, the realizing of a new, just, rational, and egalitarian international political order will be highly probable.

China-Russia cooperation. China took over the presidency after the SCO summit in July this year and will host the summit next year. Russia, on the other hand, will take over the chairmanship of the SCO Heads of Government (Prime Ministers) Council in Islamabad. In the past two years, China and Russia take turns to hold the  rotating presidency to in important groups in the Global South, such as the BRICS and the SCO. This situation is of great significance to the construction of a new world order. China and Russia are permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The two, if they can form a synergy, will open a breakthrough for the world system change. Russian President Vladimir Putin said in a meeting with media leaders of the BRICS countries on the 18th that “Russia-China cooperation is one of the key factors of world stability” and that the two countries “have established a unique relationship”, which is rich in content and trustworthy. In the changes unseen in a century, the further cooperation between China and Russia and their impact on the world system is worth paying attention to.

What is the future direction of BRICS after the Kazan summit?

The BRICS will make it a priority to realize the economic development that the countries of the Global South so desperately need. According to a Russian political scientist quoted by Reference News in China, “the West confuses politics with economics, while in the BRICS cooperation mechanism, people do not discuss the domestic politics of a country.” This is in line with the idea of the Global Development Initiative (GDI) put forward by President Xi Jinping in his address to the 76th United Nations General Assembly in 2021—Staying committed to development as a priority. The right to development is a human right that cannot be ignored. Development is the simplest aspiration and the rightful entitlement of the peoples of the Global South. It should never be realized solely on the premise of the solving of some political problem. Development should come with no political conditions attached.

BRICS is essentially an economic organization, which is what makes it attractive to most countries in the world. The Russian Foreign Ministry said on December 12 that “BRICS has never been a military alliance and will not become one in the future.” ; “It is absurd to compare the BRICS even theoretically with the aggressive military bloc NATO. NATO has done nothing but invasions and destruction of security around the world during the decades of its existence.” According to Dmitry Yegorchenkov, Director of the Institute of Strategic Studies and Forecasts of RUDN University, the BRICS countries do not need a NATO-style alliance. They cooperate in the field of fighting terrorism, drug trafficking and crime. And in the field of security, the interests within the BRICS countries are diverse among themselves and do not always coincide.

BRICS will expand rationally. Although the BRICS countries still welcome new partners on the basis of ensuring the effectiveness of the mechanism, the decision to expand will be made more cautiously after the new “Grand BRICS” situation in January this year. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov revealed in June this year, the BRICS countries, with an “overwhelming majority” voted to temporarily suspend the expansion of members, in order to ‘digest’ new members.

The 2024 BRICS summit in Kazan has come to an end, signaling new shifts and dynamics. How BRICS can ensure a steady course with the effective functioning of the mechanism is a question worth pondering. However, there is no doubt that the summit is destined to be an important meeting in the development process of the BRICS organization. In particular, the great unity and cooperation of the Global South will certainly have an important and far-reaching historical impact.

Anil Sooklal, South Africa’s BRICS Sherpa, told a leading Chinese media Guancha.cn that the expanded BRICS is stronger because its share of global GDP in terms of PPP is much bigger than the G7 (about 35.4% vs 29.6%). “Our share of global manufacturing and global trade is over 25%. That’s highly significant for a small group of countries.”

“Population wise, we account for almost 45% of the global population that’s close to half of the global community.”

Well, it seems that the West has reasons to worry.

The rise of the BRICS nations is often seen as a potential threat to the Western-dominated global order. However, this view is both right and wrong.

BRICS is not a cohesive military or economic bloc, and it is far away from a “Global South” equivalent of NATO or the G7. Instead, without positioning itself as a beacon for the world, BRICS operates as a loose coalition with minor influence on global economic policy compared to the G7 .

Militarily, the cooperation among BRICS is minimal. Put aside Russia’s formidable nuclear arsenal, although Russia, China, and India possess aircraft carriers and nuclear submarines, they remain primarily regional powers with limited blue-water capabilities compared to the United States.

Internal divisions of BRICS are also notable. While India and China have recently reduced border tensions, genuine mutual trust remains elusive.

Russia is particularly eager for BRICS to help it circumvent Western sanctions, including through a shared payment system. Yet China and the other BRICS members do not share this level of urgency. And only under the geopolitical pressures of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Russia raised its willingness to align more closely with China in Central Asia and the Far East.

Countries like Brazil, South Africa, and other new BRICS members are comparatively weaker in terms of national power, particularly in heavy industry, and show no inclination to confront the West.

The West perceives BRICS as a “revisionist force” that seeks to reshape the global order. However, the advocacy for a multipolar world is not an attempt to dismantle the existing system but rather to reform it, aiming for a larger voice in international affairs.

Still, there is some validity to Western concerns.

Today’s international system retains remnants of colonialism, and the West continues to benefit from these “colonial dividends.” Historically, civilizations have risen and fallen in cycles at the regional level, yet Western civilization’s recent ascent coincided with technological advances that enabled global colonization and lasting benefits—“colonial dividends”—that, at one time, appeared to be endless.

Most BRICS countries suffered under colonialism, with Russia as the only exception. Although Russia was a colonial power itself, it ultimately found common ground with developing nations due to longstanding antagonism on racial, cultural, and ideological fronts from the West.

The rise of developing nations has shown that Western people are not inherently superior or more industrious; indeed, all of humanity has the capacity to achieve industrial success.

From a global perspective, the rise of developing nations isn’t a zero-sum game. But for the West, it does mean a loss of relative advantage, eroding the economic structure that has sustained high incomes and potentially leading to an absolute decline in living standards.

For the West, the real issue is that the development of BRICS is a natural outcome—there is little they can do to halt developing nations’ technological progress, aside from causing minor disruptions.

Western criticism of BRICS nations’ political systems, economic models, and human rights practices has achieved little and has only fostered resentment among BRICS elites and citizens. Recognizing BRICS’ unique contributions to global economic recovery and poverty alleviation could offer a more constructive approach.

Because BRICS’ development largely follows a natural course, the West may actually benefit by adopting a more hands-off approach. Distrust and confrontation risk losing cooperative opportunities and breeding greater discontent.

The West should feel fortunate that, despite the scars of colonialism, most patriotic political elites of the developing countries remain rational, seeking to reform the international system rather than demand retribution.

Ultimately, the most wise approach of the West could be accepting its relative decline, as no empire lasts forever. Resisting these historical shifts, they would only find that “the more they do, the more mistakes they make.”