I am a Westerner with my Western thoughts and ideals; thus, I see the world through the lens of my experienced Western reality. If I had a hand in designing a new world, a lot of what you see would be very familiar. However, I became a little confused with my enthusiasm lately when listening to a speech made in Kyiv, Ukraine, by Lloyd Austin, the United States Secretary of Defence.

Here he was arguing for and promoting the glories of democracy and fighting for freedom against the tyranny of an oppressor. Then he spoke about the promotion of democracy and respect for rules and international order. He made this speech in Ukraine after hundreds of billions of US treasury dollars were spent and more than a million lives lost because Russia invaded the sovereignty of a country that is set on breaking away entirely by joining the European Union and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation.

I could not agree with Mr Austin more about the right to pursue self-determination, but with the same person speaking, there is no parity in his comments. We have two scenarios treated oppositely, where the Secretary of Defence is guilty of perpetuating the very thing in Gaza that he claims to abhor in Ukraine.

The true dream of Gaza and all those who are in the war against occupation is to have a democracy where everyone is equal — although this idea may be articulated in terms that would seem simply as reactionary to the imperialist arm of the West and the Zionist exceptionalism. I know from deep experience that once the Arab bias and Islamophobia are removed, the underlying message is and has been, as far as can be remembered, for one nation with multiple people sharing one law equally.

A Zionist state is antithetical to the idea of a pluralist democracy that embraces all faiths and ethnicities. A call to end Zionist Israel is not a call to end Jewish occupation or their right to live freely and with peace and security. On the contrary, it is the only road map for peace and security for Jews.

I think many will remember there was a time when South Africa also claimed to be a democracy. It, too, claimed to be a shining light of civilisation and democracy amid savagery while surrounded by people who were considered terrorists and uncivilised. Yet 25 years later, despite its challenges, no one in South Africa is yearning for the apartheid era.

For the past few decades, we have increasingly heard the term “the new world order”. The term was often thought to signal the arrival of a unipolar world of clandestine oligarchs and monetarists ruling all life on the planet. While that may indeed be a threat, what is at our doorstep instead is the emergence of a multipolar world enshrined with the original aims of the United Nations.

The complexities of this new emergence led by the Brics nations — Brazil, Russia, India and China are the original members, with South Africa joining in 2010 — have not been fully realised, nor has the impact of the adjustment from the Western-led economies been examined in any great detail. What has been conceived at this point is the alignment of the largest consortium of nations representing nearly 75 per cent of the world's population. Also, unlike the G7 headed by the US with its highest growth in gross domestic product of 2.8 per cent and some nations with zero, the Brics nations have a higher GDP growth, led by China at 4.8 per cent. The Brics trade network is now the largest consumer and commodity network in the world, and offers to trade within local currencies.

The next steps for Brics will have to be action that brings a shared commitment between members based on equality. Nations whose platforms are based on ethnic supremacy or inequality of any kind will be locked out of this new world of participation because of its principle of equality. This new development is not like a new Nato; if anything, it is more like the 1944 Bretton Woods system that provided the economic basis for the world to rebuild after the ravages of the Second World War.

At the moment, Bermuda can enjoy only a vicarious relationship with the development of Brics because our Western alliance prevents full membership. The best we can do is augur for a peaceful transition and adoption. However, as an Atlantic outpost of Europe and Britain, we enjoy an enviable position being next to the largest commercial jurisdiction in the world.

The world around us is in reality getting closer and at some stage in the near future, we may be able to leverage or integrate into the useful link in the equation between the Brics nations and the West.