Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates have joined the BRICS as new members in 2024. Before evaluating how this will benefit or challenge the forum, it is crucial to consider these countries’ geographical, political, and economic positions.
Egypt: A Geopolitical Powerhouse
One must focus on its strategic location rather than its size to assess Egypt’s geographical strength. Egypt serves as a global crossroads, with its control over the Suez Canal being of particular importance. In addition to its resources, tourism can also play a significant role in the country’s economy if it remains politically stable. When evaluating Egypt’s economic and geographical power, its strategic connectivity must undoubtedly be taken into account.
Ethiopia: The Promising but Challenged African Giant
Ethiopia, the second-largest country in Africa after Nigeria, boasts a favourable GDP growth rate. However, poverty and underdeveloped infrastructure continue to be significant challenges. Economic difficulties are not permanent and certainly not permanent for a large country with vast geographical space. Additionally, Africa’s vast and often unexplored resources present Ethiopia with a significant opportunity. Therefore, Ethiopia’s future should be judged by its undiscovered resources and geographical potential.
Iran: A Prosperous Nation Amidst Political Isolation
Iran’s political ideology has led to its lack of favour with many global powers. However, it is undeniable that Iran is an advanced and prosperous country with a wealth of resources and robust infrastructure. Even those who have imposed sanctions on Iran cannot disregard these factors. Furthermore, the three core BRICS members—China, India, and Russia—are friendly nations to Iran, making its membership in BRICS appear both natural and necessary.
Shortly after Iran entered into BRICS, the world witnessed a shift in political dynamics, marked by Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. elections. Analysing Trump’s political philosophy suggests that he may be reluctant to impose heavy sanctions on Iran, given the challenges facing the U.S. economy. Therefore, when Iran begins its work as a BRICS member, it would not be surprising to see interactions between Iran’s leadership and the U.S. administration.
United Arab Emirates: A Rising Economic and Geopolitical Hub
The United Arab Emirates (UAE) is poised to enhance its geographical and economic influence as it strengthens its naval and air connectivity. As it continues to develop into an economic hub and remains politically inclusive, the UAE is positioned to increase its influence in the future.
Saudi Arabia: Emerging as a New Power
Saudi Arabia holds a strategic geographical advantage in the Arabian Peninsula, alongside significant resources. Additionally, the country is undergoing a significant social and political “open-up” that could establish it as a new force in global politics. If this process is successful, Saudi Arabia could emerge as a different kind of power in the future. While Saudi Arabia has not joined the BRICS grouping, it could do so in the future.
Expanding BRICS Membership
If we assess the geographical, political, and economic strength and potential of the new BRICS member states positively, it is clear that their inclusion offers many opportunities for the forum. However, the question arises: when do challenges emerge in relation to these opportunities? Challenges arise when opportunities are not adequately recognised, analysed, or utilised effectively.
In any organisation, the root cause of challenges is often the failure to measure progress and the inability to allow its diversity to expand appropriately. Among the founding BRICS members—China, India, and Russia—these countries are influential but have different political and social characteristics. India, in particular, is the most open in terms of its society and political system. This openness is part of India’s heritage, encapsulated in the saying, “Different people, different views.” Traditionally, Indian society encourages the free expression of ideas. Politics in any society is shaped by the character of that society. If India seeks to export its open democratic political model through BRICS to China and Russia, this could create tension among the core members. This is because, after World War II, it became evident that no political ideology or system can be universally implemented across different countries.
The two superpowers that emerged from World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union, attempted to export and implement their respective political ideologies—American democracy and Soviet socialism. However, looking back at history, it is clear that these efforts were often carried out through force. The countries that tried to implement these ideologies saw adverse outcomes, including bloodshed and the collapse of societal structures. After the fall of the socialist world, the United States, as the dominant global power, attempted to implement democracy and human rights according to its model. Ironically, today, many in the United States have voted for President Donald Trump and believe that each country should focus primarily on its economy and security, both internally and externally.
The reality that the world has come to accept over the past eight decades is one that any country or international organisation must acknowledge: the countries within any union or organisation should be limited to mutual economic interests, security concerns, and public connectivity. A country’s social norms, behaviours, or political ideals should not be imposed on others. Each country will build its political structure based on its traditions and society. If this truth is recognised, any organisation will respect its members’ social and political diversity, which is ultimately its greatest strength.
However, creating and expanding such an organisation will always present challenges. The first challenge arises when the organisation’s members are not equally prepared politically, economically, and socially. Some members will be more advanced, while others may lag in various areas.
For example, the economic paths of the founding BRICS members—China, India, and Russia—are not the same. Therefore, the newly joined countries will have even more divergent paths. While it is expected that Iran will eventually be accepted by the Western world, this will be a gradual process. Similarly, countries like Argentina and Ethiopia, which are currently facing economic crises, will face unique challenges. The expansion of BRICS will inevitably bring new challenges to the organisation. This raises the question of whether adequate preparation has been made before this enlargement.
An important question is whether it is better to join an organisation and prepare within it or to be fully prepared before joining. Not long after the formation of the European Union, Singapore’s then-Prime Minister Lee Kuan Yew remarked that the EU member states were joining the union before adequately preparing themselves. This, he argued, would prevent them from achieving their desired results and could ultimately lead to disintegration.
Lee Kuan Yew’s prediction has largely proven to be true.
The Expansion of BRICS: Challenges and Opportunities
The European Union (EU) and BRICS are distinct in several key ways. While the EU is geographically integrated and has mechanisms such as a common currency and free trade agreements, BRICS does not directly incorporate these features. As a result, the preparation required for the EU is not the same as that needed for the expansion of BRICS.
However, if BRICS is to sustain its expansion and include more countries, it will need to learn valuable lessons from the European Union, albeit indirectly.
Britain’s Exit from the EU and BRICS’ Approach
Britain’s decision to exit the European Union was driven by three primary reasons: free movement of people, free trade, and the common currency system. In BRICS, the first two issues have not yet arisen. There are no conditions in place for free movement among BRICS member countries, nor are there any free trade agreements currently in effect. However, within BRICS, there have been discussions about establishing the BRICS Bank and creating a monetary system that, while not intended to replace the U.S. dollar, could work towards reducing the dominance of the dollar.
The BRICS Bank, in particular, has the potential to grow into a large-scale international development bank akin to the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), or the Asian Development Bank. However, this should not be rushed. Building such an institution must be a long-term process, as rushing it could lead to significant issues for many member states, which rely heavily on established international institutions like the World Bank and IMF. These institutions have spent decades building their frameworks, and while the BRICS Bank may not take as long, it will still require sufficient time to establish itself properly.
The Challenges of Creating an Alternative Currency System
The idea of creating an alternative to the U.S. dollar is flawed. A currency system cannot be created collectively in haste—it evolves, driven by economic necessity and pace. Looking at the progress of BRICS, it seems that some member countries are attempting to establish a currency system to challenge the dollar or to create a counterforce to the West. However, BRICS is inherently more inclusive, much like the economic alliances of ASEAN or Pacific countries.
India and China, two of BRICS’ most influential powers, have strong economic ties with the U.S. and Europe. The same can be said for the new BRICS members, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and others. This further emphasises the importance of taking a gradual approach to economic and currency changes within BRICS.
The Natural Process of Expansion
With the expansion of the BRICS, it is crucial that the forum does not attempt to position itself as an anti-Western bloc. A hasty shift towards adopting an alternative currency system would be a mistake. Instead, the BRICS should allow its larger economies to gradually increase the strength of their currencies and promote mutual exchange. If this approach is followed, expanding the BRICS will become a natural and organic process, with adding new members simply being a logical step in its evolution.
The Realities of Global Alliances
One truth that must be accepted is that no economic or security alliance in the world is 100% successful. Even within the most established organisations, not all countries will always agree. Each country prioritises its interests, which can create challenges within any union or bloc. Success in any organisation or alliance requires a long-term commitment. Moreover, the expansion of BRICS presents challenges and opportunities for both new and core members. Diplomacy will be key in navigating these relationships’ complexities, ensuring that benefits and challenges are considered as the organisation grows.
Author Brief Bio: Mr. Swadesh Roy is a National award-winning journalist, Editor of Sarakhon and The Present World, and Chairman of the Dhaka-based think tank Look Asia.
