2050년,

BRICs(브라질·러시아·인도·중국)를 주목하라

골드만 삭스의 전문가들이 최근 펴낸 ‘BRICs의 꿈 : 2050년을 향한 길’    (Adobe® Acrobat® Reader®)이라는 연구 보고서는 흥미를 끈다. BRICs란 브라질, 러시아, 인도, 중국을 통틀어 일컫는 새 약어(略語)다. 이 나라들은 영토가 넓고 자원과 인구가 많으며, 경제도 상승 국면에 있다.

이들 나라의 인구와 자원, 투자자들에 대한 매력 등을 감안할 때 골드만 삭스는 브라질이 향후 50년 동안 연평균 3.6%씩 성장하고 1인당 국민소득은 50년 안에 5배 이상으로 늘어날 것으로 전망했다. 중국, 인도, 러시아에 대한 전망은 더욱 밝다. 러시아는 한동안 브라질보다 더 빠른 속도로 성장하다가, 세기 중반쯤에는 그 속도가 둔화될 것이다.

연 8% 수준인 중국의 성장률은 5% 선까지 둔화되더라도, 이는 다른 나라들은 간절히 바라 마지않을 수치다. 인도는 네 국가 중 가장 놀랍다. 매년 5~6%의 평균 성장률이 향후 50년간 둔화되지 않고 지속되리라는 것이다. 그렇게 되면 1인당 소득은 지금의 35배로 늘어난다. 엄청나다.

골드만 삭스의 BRICs 보고서를 읽는 사람이라면 이율이 낮은 뮤추얼 펀드에 넣어둔 돈을 빼내 델리나 리오로 옮기고 싶어 할지도 모른다. 이는 곧 2050년의 세계는 3개의 진짜 강대국들이 있고, 일본 독일 영국 프랑스 이탈리아 등과 같은 중규모 강국들은 밀려나기 시작하게 된다는 뜻이다.

이 보고서는 이런 변화가 세계의 세력 균형에 던질 의미에 대해서도 주목하고 있다. 이 전망이 맞는다면 브라질은 2025년까지 이탈리아 경제를 추월할 것이고, 2031년까지 프랑스를 앞지를 것이다. 러시아는 2027년에 영국, 2028년에 독일을 추월한다. 현재 6대 경제대국으로 꼽히는 나라 중 금세기 중반까지 그 반열에 남아 있을 나라는 미국과 일본밖에 없게 된다.

하지만 미국은 세계 최대 경제국가의 지위를 중국(35조~45조달러)에 넘겨 주게 될 것이고, 그 바로 아래 인도(27조 달러)가 바짝 추격할 것이다. 미국인들은 평균적으로 중국이나 인도의 국민들보다 더 많은 소득을 누리겠지만, 격차는 상당히 줄어들게 될 것이다. 이를 레닌의 관점으로 보면 중국과 인도라는 아시아의 양대 강국들은 작심만 한다면 군사비 지출에 있어서도 미국과 맞먹을 수 있게 된다. 50년 뒤 인도양이나 서태평양은 더 이상 ‘미국의 호수’가 아닐 것이다.

이 같은 시나리오의 실현 가능성은 어떨까. BRICs 보고서는 자신들의 장기 전망에 대해 상당한 자신을 갖고 있다. 물론 이들 4개국의 미래에 영향을 미칠 정치적 요인들에 대해서도 충분한 주의가 기울여졌는지 의문을 가져볼 필요가 있다.

인도의 그 많은 인구가 지금보다 35배나 큰 소득과 소비 수준을 갖게 된다면 생태계 파괴는 어떻게 막을 수 있겠는가. 브라질은 민중 봉기나 환경파괴를 피할 수 있을 것인가. 중국은 과연 지금의 통일을 유지할 수 있겠는가. 러시아는 해마다 인구가 75만명이나 감소하는데 정말 경제성장을 이룩할 수 있을 것인가. 국가는 내부적 격변이나 좌절 없이 성장과 변화를 하기란 대단히 어렵다.

따라서 아직은 당신의 돈을 몽땅 BRICs에 투자할 시점은 아닐지 모른다. 하지만 이 보고서는 당신의 재산 중 일부를 미래의 강대국에 투자하면 그리 나쁘지는 않을 것임을 시사한다. 지금의 세계 질서가 금세기 내내 지속되리라고 생각하는 서방 정치인들이 있다면, 진지하게 재고(再考)해야 할 것이다.

(폴 케네디 Paul Kennedy 미국 예일대 교수·역사학)

[Paul Kennedy]

WATCH OUT FOR THE BRICS

Lenin was referring to a common feature of international relations: that is, the law of uneven development. Just as some human beings grow faster and larger than others, so do some countries - and with much the same results. If you are powerful and muscular and stand around two meters tall, you can usually get your way against a smaller, weaker being. If you are a great power or, better still, the world's greatest power, the smaller countries have little influence over you. This has been true throughout history, going back at least to the Melian dialogues in the 5th century B.C., where (according to Thucydides) the Athenians bluntly told their weaker neighbors that they must bend before the strong. Lenin would surely have agreed.

Economic might and military power therefore go hand in hand, and a tilting of the balance will, sooner or later, lead to a shift in the relative influence of nations. Seen in that light, you will be interested in a new study by a team of economists and planners at Goldman Sachs, called "Dreaming with BRICs: The Path to 2050." The BRICs - a new acronym in world affairs jargon - refers to Brazil, Russia, India and China. They are large in territory and resources, they are populous, and, says the Goldman Sachs team, they are on their way up economically.

Now the middle of the 21st century is a long way off, and, as the old English proverb goes, there is many a slip twixt cup and lip. Things can go badly wrong, and make long-term projections look foolish. Who now remembers the "Japan as Number One" forecasts of the 1980s? But the economists at Goldman Sachs are aware of these pitfalls and seek to take account of them. Their language is cautious, and conditional: "Assuming India's rate of growth continues at X percent a year, then the following is likely. ..." They are right to be prudent. All of this depends on Brazil, Russia, India and China successfully pursuing growth-enhancing policies: rooting out corruption, encouraging capital investment, improving infrastructure, enhancing education and becoming platforms of political stability and transparency.

Still, with that assumed, the rough conclusions made about the future of the BRICs are breathtaking and deserve attention. Given the population forecasts for all four countries, their material resources and appeal to emerging-market investors, the Goldman Sachs team believes, for example, that Brazil can grow at a rate of 3.6 percent annually over the next 50 years; if you can do compound interest and know the demographic forecast for Brazil, you will quickly see that such a growth rate means that its per capita income will be over five times larger within half a century.

The forecasts for China, India and Russia are even more glowing. Russia will grow at a faster pace than Brazil, but will taper off by mid-century. China's year-on-year increase in gross national product of around 8 percent will slowly ease to 5 percent, a figure most other countries would die for. And the forecast for India is the most striking of all: a 5 percent to 6 percent annual growth rate that will not fall away in the next 50 years, leading to a 35-fold increase in its per capita income. Whew.

The Goldman Sachs team is most interested in the implications of all this for global capital flows, investment opportunities and the enormous rise in the currencies of those states. And, indeed, those reading the BRICs report might be tempted to withdraw those low-yield pension monies from their mutual funds and send them to Delhi and Rio.

But the report is also fascinating because of its implications for the world's power balances. If this projection holds, Brazil will have overtaken Italy's economy by 2025, and France's by 2031. Russia will pass the UK in 2027, and Germany in 2028. In fact, the report suggests that by mid-century only the United States and Japan will rank among the world's top six economies (G6).

What this implies is a world in 2050 of three really big powers and a cluster of medium-sized ones, like Japan, Germany and Britain, with France and Italy (because of population decline and slow growth) beginning to fall off the map. This is not good news for Europe, and perhaps the best ever argument for real unification.

But it is also not good news for our current hyper-power, the United States, to be overtaken by China as the world's largest economy ($45-$35 trillion), and closely pressed by India ($27trillion). To be sure, the average American will still enjoy a larger income than the inhabitants of China and India, but the gap will have narrowed significantly and - and this returns us to Lenin's point - those two Asian powers will be able, if they so choose, to match U.S. defense spending. The full implications of such developments cause one's head to spin, but one thing seems clear: Neither the Indian Ocean nor the Western Pacific will be "an American lake" in 50 years' time.

What are the prospects for these scenarios? Despite the cautious language of the BRICs report, its authors are reasonably confident that their long-term economic projections are sound. One must wonder, however, whether sufficient attention has been paid to the political factors that could affect the futures of these four large nations. What will happen to India's economy if Pakistan explodes into strife that spills across the border? How can an India of 1.5 million people with income and, therefore, consumption levels 35 times higher than they have today, prevent complete ecocide? Can Brazil avoid civil uprisings and the destruction of its environment? Can China, ridden with internal problems, hold together? Can Russia really grow economically when it is losing 750,000 people a year to death or migration? It is very hard for countries to grow and change so fast without major convulsions and setbacks, as both Russia and China demonstrated last century.

Now may not be the time to place all your pension funds in the BRICs, therefore; but this remarkable report suggests that shifting a share of your portfolio to the four coming giants might not be a bad idea. More important still, it suggests that Western politicians who think the current world order will last through this century need to do some serious rethinking. It is not too early to start.

by Paul Kennedy

(ITALIC) Paul Kennedy is the Dilworth Professor of History at Yale University, and the author or editor of some 16 books, including "The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers." (END ITALIC) (c) 2003, Tribune Media Services International. For immediate release.