Instituonal capacity and motivation: A comparative study of BRICS and MIKTA clubs

This thesis is a comparative study of two informal intergovernmental organizations. BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) was chosen as the sample because it represents the rising powers group and MIKTA (Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey, Australia) represents the middle powers group. This study deals with the reasons for the integration of BRICS and MIKTA clubs, the priority topics they deal with as a group, and the bilateral relations of the member countries of the groups. During the study, the findings were obtained by descriptive and analytical research methods. Representing the rising powers, the BRICS club first came together with economic goals. As a result of these goals, the BRICS group has a bank and fund that supports developing countries. However, the changing global challenges in the 21st century have led the BRICS group to cooperate in political and social fields as well. Among the topics addressed by the BRICS leaders' summits, it has been seen that there are various topics such as increasing cooperation in international organizations such as the G20 and the UN, strengthening economic cooperation, making global economic organizations more fair and transparent, security-related topics, sustainable development, and combating the Covid-19 crisis. BRICS is not only an economic cooperation group, but also aims to support a strengthening Global South against the West. The MIKTA group, on the other hand, does not have a single and specific goal. It is seen that they aim to be a group of international cooperation, consultation and dialogue as a group of medium powerful states. There are seven topics that the MIKTA group primarily addresses. BRICS and MIKTA groups have also established subgroups to increase their academic, commercial and diplomatic cooperation. There are some conflicts of interest among the members of the BRICS group. It has been determined that the regional tensions between China and India, Russia's exposure to international sanctions and India's foreign policy close to the United States have increased the fragility of the group. On the other hand, China is dominant economically and politically in the group, and this dominant situation negatively affects the balances in the group. While there were more balanced relations in the MIKTA group, it was seen that the economic recession of the group members after the Covid-19 crisis may negatively affect their focus on the internal dynamics of the group. The BRICS and MIKTA groups do not aim to change the global order, but aim to exist in global governance by increasing cooperation among themselves. Key Words: Informal intergovernmental organizations, BRICS, MIKTA, global governance