Global trade relationships and agreements are moving in very different directions.

The public relations press releases hide the undercurrents that are driving the formations of alternative economic alliances. While the G 20, markets its all inclusive umbrella policy forums, the mere formation of a BRICS counterweight forecasts deep and fundamental differences.

So what is really behind the creation of a different approach to the post WWII dominate U.S. lead model? A clue can be found in an attempt to modify the operations

and direction of IMF functions.

Announced in the Russian press, BRICS to propose IMF reform at G20 summit, is a pressure attempt to move the center of power away from current synergism.

"At the G20 summit in the Australian city of Brisbane on November 15-16, Russia and other BRICS countries (Brazil, India, China and South Africa) will propose alternative

solutions concerning the reform of the International Monetary Fund,

involving, in particular, gradual implementation of reforms, Russian G20 Sherpa Svetlana Lukash told reporters.

"The most important thing for us is

the still unresolved G20 problem of

the IMF reform," Lukash said.

She recalled the U.S. Congress has yet to ratify the 2010 resolution.

"Not only does it thwart the process of renewing the IMF in accordance

with the current reality where we see a big rise in the role of emerging economies.

It also prevents the decisions to double the IMF capital from coming into force," she said.

The appearance of maintaining a working relationship among opposing interests may present an assuring PR message,

but who really believes that the path to a new cold war is paved with mutual cooperation?

Impetus for a parallel financial system is certainly based more on political objective than commerce or economic benefits.

IIIIIIIIII

Long way to go until we're dealing with the big banks? One wonders