Since the BRIC grouping's first formal summit was held in Yekaterinburg, Russia, in 2009, the group, now named BRICS after the inclusion of South Africa, has made a series of achievements through cooperation in the fields of economy, finance, politics and security.

But there are still some Western scholars, particularly from the US, who argue that BRICS is merely a created concept with bleak prospects due to various internal conflicts. What makes them believe so?

In my opinion, these Western scholars have either failed to realize or are not willing to admit that the formation of BRICS is in essence a natural outcome of changes in the world economic pattern.

At the end of the 20th century, Japanese scholar Kenichi Ohmae put forward the idea that the world consisted of three economic plates, one centering around the US which included Canada and Central and South America, one taking the EU as its core which includes EU members, the Commonwealth of Independent States and Africa, and one that included China, South Korea, Southeast Asia, West Asia, Australia and New Zealand with Japan as the core.

After entering the 21st century, especially the 2008 financial crisis, big changes have taken place in the global economic pattern, leading to three new economic plates: the US and European countries, Pan-Asian countries, and energy states.

The most prominent change is the emergence of the Pan-Asian plate. The development of China and India has totally changed Japan's central role in the Asian economy. The Pan-Asian plate includes not only those higher up the value chain like Japan and South Korea, but also Southeast Asian and South Asian countries.

China and India are positioned in the middle, and China has become the center of Asian trade.

A vertical supply chain has been formed in the Pan-Asian plate, breaking the traditional pattern determined by geographical position.

Besides Asian countries, Latin American countries like Brazil and Chile and African countries like Tanzania and Gabon are also contained in the Asian economic and financial circle.

This supply chain of the Pan-Asian plate continues to expand, and the GDP of developing countries has risen to take 50 percent of the world's GDP. This will further change the structure of demand worldwide.

The appearance of the BRICS group is the best reflection of these major changes in the world economic pattern.

When Jim O'Neill came up with the BRIC concept in 2001, he saw four promising markets for investment. However, he only foresaw an economic trend but did not realize it would be also a political one. 

O'Neill later raised the concepts of Next 11 and VISTA. Countries included in these concepts are mostly a part of the Pan-Asian industrial chain. Or we can say that as long as a country is included in the Pan-Asian economic chain, its prospects will be promising.

But O'Neill opposed the inclusion of South Africa into BRIC due to its relatively small economic scale. In fact, South Africa, Africa's biggest economy, reflects the increasing trend of Africa merging into the Pan-Asian economic plate.

With the economic development of emerging countries such as China and India, the economic chain of the Pan-Asian plate will continue to expand, and the BRICS group will have more members in the future.

The growth of the Pan-Asian plate and the formation of BRICS countries are the results of globalization, pushed by market forces. They are not exclusive to the US or European countries, since transnational groups from the US and Europe served as catalysts in the process.

Globalization is a historical trend which cannot be stopped. Attempts to economically isolate countries like China and India through establishing exclusive economic zones or through trans-regional trade arrangements are impractical.

Countries should understand this trend and actively participate in the economic chain of the Pan-Asian plate for its own good. Japan joined negotiations for the TPP, which came more out of political consideration. At the same time, it also engages in negotiations for the China-Japan-South Korean Free Trade Agreement and Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, which vividly illustrates this irresistible trend.

The author is a visiting fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and a research fellow at Shanghai Institutes for International Studies. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn