Dozens of nations are vying to join the exclusive five-nation club known as BRICS – Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. As these giant economies with even larger populations gather for their annual summit, the world watches closely. The question looming over the meeting is whether BRICS can challenge the long-standing US-led global hierarchy and pave the way for a new world order. But amidst their collective ambitions, BRICS must first address internal fissures and divergent priorities.
The fifteenth BRICS meeting went further than any other in recent memory in modernizing and galvanizing the grouping. It has sent a strong signal that the post-World War II order must tolerate multipolarity and adapt to changing circumstances.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s absence at the summit due to an International Criminal Court (ICC) warrant related to Moscow’s actions in Ukraine underscores the geopolitical tensions between the US and China, setting the stage for BRICS to assert itself as a formidable force challenging the established world order.
The BRICS’ enlargement to a BRICS+ format, as well as the adoption of guiding principles, norms, and processes, have the potential to make the BRICS a more appealing institution for consensus-building and dialogue in the developing world. Even the new members’ profiles show that the system is moving beyond what the West considers to be “acceptable” partners. The presence of Iran, in particular, and the reactions to it in the following days will be fascinating to see.
The expansion of BRICS has garnered substantial interest, with around 40 countries seeking to join the group. Central to this attraction is their rising economic influence. Collectively, the BRICS nations boast a GDP larger than the G7 in terms of purchasing power parity, responsible for 26% of the global GDP in nominal terms. Despite this economic might, they hold only 15% of the voting power at the International Monetary Fund (IMF). This disparity, coupled with concerns about the US weaponizing the dollar through sanctions, has driven BRICS nations to reduce their reliance on the US currency and promote bilateral trade in their own currencies.
However, agreeing on the need for change is easier than defining a common path forward. The tense border standoff between India and China since May 2020 and the varying foreign policy aspirations of India, South Africa, and Brazil complicate their collective agenda. Can BRICS transcend these differences and emerge as a genuine alternative to the US-led global order? Or will internal conflicts limit their potential?
The short answer, according to analysts, is that while BRICS is likely to increase its influence, it will provide piecemeal economic and diplomatic alternatives to the existing world order rather than a complete replacement. This could lead to heightened tensions with the West as BRICS nations assert their independence in an evolving global landscape. However, effectively managing the diverse priorities of member nations remains a daunting challenge.
Indian Foreign Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar aptly described the current global economic power concentration as leaving too many nations at the mercy of too few. The UN Security Council’s veto-holding power, established in 1945, continues to be limited to five nations, a relic of the post-World War II era. Recent years have witnessed growing cracks in the US-led global order. China’s economic and military prowess has tested Washington’s influence, while surprising diplomatic moves, such as Iran’s foreign minister visiting Saudi Arabia, brokered by China, challenge traditional power dynamics. Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and its subsequent strengthening of ties with Beijing have further accelerated the shift. Meanwhile, India, Brazil, and South Africa seek to balance relations with both the West and China and Russia.
According to Narayanappa Janardhan, an Abu Dhabi-based professor with the Anwar Gargash Diplomatic Academy, “the multipolar world we knew has now shifted.” It is no longer conditioned solely by superpowers. It’s just as possible that it’s influenced by middle and minor nations that desire multi-alignment.”
As Western influence recedes across the globe, countries in Africa, Latin America, and emerging Asian powers like India are increasingly calling for a reevaluation of the post-Cold War unipolar system. Russia and China have positioned themselves as champions of this transition away from a US-led order, which, according to the Global South, Washington often disregards. The convergence of two factors – the Global South finding its voice and Russia and China’s growing discord with the West – has created an opportunity to carve out a new world order. However, it’s important to note that these factors don’t entirely align, even if they serve similar interests at this moment.
India, for instance, doesn’t view China as a representative of the Global South. Instead, it perceives China as a developed country attempting to influence the Global South’s narrative.
Moreover, Russia’s war in Ukraine has disrupted energy and food supplies, leading to skyrocketing inflation in the developing world. Yet, the West’s response to the war, including severe sanctions on Russia, has alarmed emerging economies, highlighting the potential threat of the US weaponizing the dollar.
One of the key attractions of BRICS is the promise of an alternative financial system. The New Development Bank (NDB), established in 2015 with headquarters in Shanghai, was created to give BRICS members more control over development financing and offer an alternative to US-led institutions like the IMF and the World Bank. BRICS nations have also been developing “BRICS pay,” a payment system for transactions among BRICS nations that avoids the need to convert local currencies into dollars.
Talk of a BRICS currency has gained momentum recently, aimed at facilitating bilateral trade in local currencies and reducing dependence on the dollar. This move not only mitigates the threat of US sanctions but also increases the leverage of developing nations in decisions related to development financing and international institutions.
Several countries, including Algeria, Egypt, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, and Nigeria, have expressed interest in joining BRICS. China and Russia have shown willingness to explore this possibility, but concerns about diluting the group’s influence persist.
Brazil and India, in particular, are cautious about expansion, fearing a loss of influence. India suggests developing clear rules and criteria for new members, emphasizing the need for BRICS to address internal challenges before expanding further. The relationship between China and India, the two largest economies in BRICS, will play a pivotal role in determining the group’s future. While BRICS aims to offer parallel economic and diplomatic options to nations, it doesn’t seek to actively dismantle the US-led model. Instead, it provides a diverse set of opportunities that align with individual countries’ interests.
In the end, BRICS represents a growing global sentiment: the desire for a more inclusive and multipolar world order. While it may not entirely replace the existing order, it offers a platform for emerging economies to have their voices heard and their interests considered on the global stage. It’s time for the world to acknowledge that others want a seat at the table too.
