The 21st century has witnessed many events, from the emergence of new and formidable powers to the COVID-19 pandemic and the rise of new economies to the shift in the global order. The hallmark of this century is that it has slowly yet steadily kept in check the unilateral and self-proclaimed American ambition of global domination. For far too long, America considered its problems to be the concern of the entire world and its priorities to be for the welfare of the very Utopian world it envisioned. However, the 21st century gave rise to several international platforms of cooperation that kept this Utopian idea in check, one such international forum being BRICS+, encompassing some of the biggest powers and economies of the world today. Originally founded with four members, it has expanded geographically and economically beyond measure in a short time and is now aiming to navigate against the high tide of the dollar-centric world amidst the shifting power dynamics across the globe.

For far too long, the dollarised world, the World Bank, and the IMF virtually controlled trade, commerce, and lending and caused a noticeable disadvantage to developing nations by depriving them of much-needed aid for their development and growth. This phenomenon gradually resulted in anguish against the status quo, naturally calling for an alternative. BRICS was founded to counter the Western-dominated financial system, which disadvantaged developing economies, and to create a forum to strengthen the voice of the rising economies on the global stage.

To fulfil this ambitious yet achievable objective, financial institutions like the New Development Bank (NDB) were set up under the aegis of BRICS in 2015 to serve as a multinational bank aimed at mobilising resources for infrastructure and sustainable development projects in emerging markets and developing countries (EMDCs). The NDB was envisioned to provide an alternative to the IMF and the World Bank, which were virtually controlled by Western powers and often neglected developing economies or placed unreasonable conditions in exchange for aid or monetary support. The aim of this new multinational bank, backed by strong economies and emerging powers, was to fundamentally finance projects and innovate solutions to help build a more inclusive, resilient, and sustainable future by playing the role of a catalyst and bridging the gap between the availability of resources and the growing needs of the founding members and the EMDCs. The core focus areas of the NDB are:

1. Clean Energy and Energy Efficiency. Leveraging proven and emerging transformative technologies, it aims at projects that deploy clean and renewable energy at scale and enhance the efficiency of power transmission, distribution, and storage. In line with its commitment to sustainability and climate goals, the NDB does not consider financing any new coal-fired capacity for power generation.
2. Transport Infrastructure. A sustainable, reliable transport infrastructure fosters economic growth, unlocks job opportunities, and improves lives. The NDB supports the development of inter-city and intra-city transport networks and infrastructure that promote regional connectivity and facilitate the movement of people, goods, and services. With a focus on sustainable infrastructure, special attention is paid to safety features and socially inclusive amenities during project preparation and implementation. The NDB also prioritises smart transport and logistics projects that use technology to improve efficiency and reduce GHG emissions.
3. Environmental Protection. The NDB recognises that sustainable development involves decoupling economic growth from environmental degradation and pollution. It supports projects that conserve and restore key ecosystems, promotes nature-based solutions and better management of natural resources, contributes to pollution prevention and abatement, and aims to reverse or reduce the negative environmental impact of socioeconomic activities.
4. Social Infrastructure. Social infrastructure has a value that goes beyond its economic benefits. The NDB supports the building and modernising of social infrastructure, such as schools, hospitals, affordable housing, cultural heritage sites, and other long-term physical assets that facilitate social services, support human development, and improve quality of life and living standards.
5. Digital Infrastructure. With the growing dependence on digital infrastructure and the massive need to bridge the gap between demand and availability, the NDB finances projects that empower the expansion and modernisation of national and international backbone digital infrastructure. Investing in these back-end digital infrastructure projects, particularly those extending connectivity to underserved areas, aims to support the efforts of member countries to achieve universal and affordable access.

Another important financial arrangement within BRICS is the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), signed in 2014 by member states as part of the Fortaleza Declaration at the Sixth BRICS Summit in response to the growing instances of global financial crises. The CRA was formally founded in 2015 at the Seventh BRICS Summit as a competitor to the IMF and presented the geopolitical idea of increasing South-South cooperation in the world order. The BRICS CRA proposes to provide short-term liquidity support to the members through currency swaps to help mitigate balance of payment (BOP) crises if such a situation arises.

The CRA also extends help to India and other signatory countries to forestall short-term liquidity pressures, provide mutual support, and further strengthen financial stability. It is a framework that aims to provide support through additional liquidity and other means to BRICS countries during economic crises. It also seeks to strengthen the global financial safety net and complement existing international arrangements (from the IMF) as an additional line of defence, if not wholly serve as an alternative in the future. With an initial combined contribution of $100 billion from member states, the CRA is a critical component of BRICS+ today and, from an Indian perspective, serves as an additional safety net and, from a Global South perspective, serves as a living testimony to growing South-South cooperation.

However, the financial institutions and arrangements at BRICS have consistently lagged behind those of the Western world, implicating a lack of effort and a clear vision within the forum. Many of these issues can also be attributed to internal fissures, disagreements within the forum over the years, and a lack of strong leadership to drive the bloc to greater heights. However, many of these issues have been addressed and subdued in the recent past with stronger leaders at the helm of affairs, such as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who remains bullish on the idea of BRICS+ countering undue Western domination in the sectors concerned and promoting cooperation, growth, and sustainable development within member countries and beyond, thus extending support to smaller and developing economies and broadening the base, resulting in more significant influence for the forum on the global stage.

For far too long, the institutions mentioned above have served as mere paper tigers. Well—framed structures and policies are in place, but due to a lack of effective implementation, they have not been able to counter Western influence in the domain. However, some recent notable developments will be discussed to shed light on the current scenario and the road ahead for BRICS+ and global society.

Alternative Payments System – The Ambition, the Struggle, and the Road Ahead

Calls for an alternative and independent payment system have been echoed for over a decade and have only strengthened with time. Given the US domination over trade and its unilateral use of sanction policies against BRICS+ members like Russia and China over the years, this cause has gained pace recently. One such call for an alternate system to de-dollarise the world was echoed by the Kremlin when Vladimir Putin called the sanction on Russia’s $300 billion reserve “theft.”

In its role as BRICS chair for 2024, Russia announced plans ahead of the Kazan Summit for the creation of an independent Cross-Border Payment Initiative (BCBPI) and the development of an alternative to SWIFT for use by BRICS’ expanding group of member states. The new payment messaging system was slated to provide genuine alternatives to the US dollar—which remains dominant in international trade—in favour of the bloc’s currencies. This would curtail the US’s economic influence and limit its ability to use the dollar “as a weapon,” in Putin’s words, against the bloc’s member states.

In the Kazan Declaration, BRICS nations agreed “to discuss and study the feasibility of establishing an independent cross-border settlement and depository infrastructure, BRICS Clear, an initiative to complement the existing financial market infrastructure,” with participation in the scheme being ” voluntary.”

The move towards an alternative international payments infrastructure comes amid a ratcheting up of de-dollarisation rhetoric, particularly by Russia and China. After being slapped with sanctions and locked out of SWIFT following its invasion of Ukraine, Russia has turned to the renminbi, regularly settling a third of its foreign trade by the end of 2023. The road ahead seems rocky at first glance, but sustained cooperation on this front may yield results soon.

The M-Bridge Project and BIS Exit

The ambitious M-Bridge Project was being carried out with the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) to provide an alternative to the Western-backed payments system and SWIFT. However, the recent exit of BIS from the BRICS-backed M-Bridge project and its launch of an independent blockchain-driven payments system hurt cooperation between the two. Nevertheless, this is still a step in line with the aims of the bloc—to counter SWIFT and Western influence in global finance. Regardless, the M-Bridge project is sure to change the global financial landscape.

The Need for an Alternative to SWIFT

Given the frequent misuse of sanctions and tariffs on economies by the United States of America, it may be sensible for the group to have a dollar-free, independent global payments system as an alternative to SWIFT. This would cater to the needs of BRICS+ member states and eventually transition into an alternative international system, offering better choices and preventing economic coercion. A concerted effort must be made to ensure this dream becomes reality through more robust cooperation across the BRICS+ group.

BRICS Currency

Earlier this year, the plan for a joint BRICS-led currency became a hot topic of discussion and debate within geopolitical circles. It was viewed as an attempt to de-dollarise global trade and encourage using a shared currency for exchanges between major economies. On the one hand, some considered it a tough road to navigate, while others saw it as the way forward, citing the growing power and influence of BRICS nations and the declining clout of the Western superpower.

In fact, towards the end of 2024, Vladimir Putin released a symbolic banknote in Kazan, signalling a plan to challenge the dollar and promote local currency trade. The banknote was seen as a symbol of increasing cooperation among member states and as a precursor to a potential joint currency. Additionally, the Indian Prime Minister indicated a push for financial integration among the BRICS members. However, Vladimir Putin clarified that BRICS was not aiming to create a new currency or replace the SWIFT system anytime soon. This duality in messaging caused some uproar and debate among various factions.

Geopolitics, however, is as volatile as helium and as fluid as water. Every minor change on the global stage demands a shift in approach. With the conclusion of the U.S. presidential elections and the reemergence of Donald Trump as President-elect, it was clear that many things would change globally, especially for countries like India. This situation would undoubtedly test India’s political astuteness and diplomatic wisdom.

Within weeks of the election results, Donald Trump announced that any attempt at de-dollarisation would face severe consequences. He threatened countries with 100% tariffs, with the U.S. again leveraging its economic sanctions and tariffs trump card. In a post on X, the President-elect remarked that any country supporting a currency aiming to challenge the dollar would have to “say goodbye” to America. This was a direct threat to BRICS+, the only major alliance that does not, and will never, include the U.S. Within hours of this statement, BRICS+ member states began to backtrack, clarifying that no efforts were being made to undermine the dollar.

In an interview, India’s External Affairs Minister, S. Jaishankar, stated that India has no interest in weakening the dollar and emphasised that there is no proposal for a BRICS currency. This response came shortly after Trump’s tariff threat and was seen as a counterbalance to his comments.

This effectively ends the ongoing debate about a BRICS+ joint currency, which now seems like little more than a paper tiger with little chance of becoming a reality in the near future.

Strengthening NDB

The New Development Bank (NDB) has been in the making for over a decade, with little substantial progress. It was founded to compete with the IMF and the World Bank and become an alternative lender and leader. The NDB’s expansion, in terms of reach and influence, is crucial for any true shift in global power dynamics.

Some priorities for the NDB include:

1. Becoming a generous lender to developing economies and those struggling with economic crises. This aligns with a statement made by the President of Brazil last year: “The NDB must work to save developing economies, unlike the IMF, which contributes to sinking them.”
2. Expanding its reach in terms of both sectors and geographic coverage.
3. Envisioning and fostering greater cooperation among member states and ensuring they contribute generously to propel the NDB’s growth.

Local Currency Trade

One key goal in recent years has been to settle trade payments in local currencies, reducing reliance on foreign currencies. Member states within BRICS are already practising this; for example, over 90% of trade between India and Russia is now conducted in local currencies. This not only eases trade by eliminating foreign intermediaries but also promotes the use of local currencies in global trade.

While some work remains to make local currency trade a standard procedure among all member states, it would significantly strengthen the group’s financial position. Given the current circumstances, this seems more feasible than a joint currency.

The Indian Perspective

Since 2014, India’s global positioning has strengthened in every sense. Under Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Indian government has worked to forge new ties while maintaining old relationships with key partners. India has emerged as a significant voice for the Global South while maintaining a strategic partnership with the USA. This diplomatic maturity will be crucial as India navigates relations with partners who are at odds—namely, the United States and Russia. Furthermore, India must leverage its influence to monitor China’s expansionist tactics.

As it stands, India does not support a joint BRICS+ currency or an alternative payment system to replace SWIFT. This was made clear at the Kazan summit, where it was emphasised that India has no interest in de-dollarisation but is committed to expanding the NDB and contributing to greater cooperation and consensus among BRICS+ members. However, in doing so, India will exercise caution to avoid upsetting the U.S., especially with Trump’s presidency on the horizon—a time that, if things progress favourably, could mark the peak of India-U.S. cooperation.

The Road Ahead

Overall, BRICS+ must focus on the following key aspects:

1. Strengthening the NDB – to become a generous global lender and aid for the voiceless.
2. Expanding BRICS+ membership – to create a larger and more influential forum with a significant global footprint.
3. Enriching the CRA – enhancing the Contingent Reserve Arrangement.
4. Promoting intra-BRICS trade, commerce, and investment.
5. Creating dedicated BRICS special economic zones.

If these goals are achieved in a timely manner, the member states may then explore the possibility of a Unified Payment System to deepen cooperation and exchange without relying on external factors.

To conclude, BRICS, especially Russia, must remember the words of the 4th U.S. President, James Madison: “He who holds the purse, holds the power.”

Author Brief Bio:Mr. Nakshatra Jagannath, an alumnus of St. George’s College, Mussoorie, and St. Xavier’s College, Kolkata, has an impressive trajectory in the public policy domain. Before transitioning to a successful corporate career, he contributed to national and international think tanks, including the Council for Strategic Affairs, USA. He has authored over a dozen articles for newspapers, magazines, think tank reports, and media outlets on international strategic affairs. As a youth leader, Nakshatra was invited by the WYF Directorate, Federal Agency of Youth Affairs of the Russian Federation, to represent India at the World Youth Festival 2024 in Sochi. The conference hosted delegations from 180 countries, including heads of state from several nations. Nakshatra has led impactful social campaigns, including the Shaheed Shradhanjali plantation drive with ISKCON Vrindavan, which earned appreciation from the Chief of Defence Staff, Sectt. Featured in leading Indian newspaper, Nakshatra was also part of a Forbes India web series. Nakshatra aspires to contribute to the world of public policy and polity.          

References:

New Development Bank. (2023, February 16). About NDB – New Development Bank. https://www.ndb.int/about-ndb/

Muhammad Zubair Ashraf, Wei Wei, Muhammad Usman, Shahid Mushtaq,How can natural resource dependence, environmental-related technologies and digital trade protect the environment: Redesigning SDGs policies for sustainable environment?, Resources Policy,Volume 88,2024,104456,ISSN 0301-4207,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2023.104456

Hawser, J. E. a. A. (2024, October 25). Explainer: Putin’s Swift rival a bridge too far for Brics. The Banker. https://www.thebanker.com/Explainer-Putin-s-Swift-rival-a-bridge-too-far-for-Brics-1729858688

Peter, V. a. P. B. A. (2024, October 29). HISTORIC MEETING OF BRICS NATIONS IN KAZAN, RUSSIA – UN Secretary General attends – A BRICS Clear Depository: Financial System Proposal announced at Kazan – [10-29-24]. The Burning Platform. https://www.theburningplatform.com/2024/10/29/historic-meeting-of-brics-nations-in-kazan-russia-un-secretary-general-attends-a-brics-clear-depository-financial-system-proposal-announced-at-kazan-10-29-24

Hamid, A. K. (2024, December 9). BRICS, Blockchain & Global South – Level up Coding. Medium. https://levelup.gitconnected.com/brics-blockchain-global-south-87e14105768e

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.

As the world navigates post-pandemic recovery, grapples with geopolitical challenges, and observes the ascent of emerging markets, the outcomes of the 16th BRICS Summit in 2024 offer valuable perspectives on how these nations intend to shape global trade and the economy. This summit, held in Kazan under the theme, “Strengthening Multilateralism for Fair Global Development and Security,” was considered a diplomatic triumph for Russia, as it allowed President Putin to showcase Russia’s global engagement despite perceptions of isolation.¹ It was the first summit-level gathering of the expanded BRICS+, featuring the participation of leaders from the newly included member countries: Egypt, Ethiopia, the UAE, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Key leaders at the summit included Xi Jinping of China, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi of Egypt, Abiy Ahmed of Ethiopia, Narendra Modi of India, Masoud Pezeshkian of Iran, and Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa. Brazilian President Lula da Silva participated virtually due to travel constraints. Guests such as Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and UN Secretary-General António Guterres attended the meeting. A significant outcome of Russia’s BRICS presidency was the organisation’s outreach to the Global South, with the summit declaration emphasising cooperation with emerging markets and developing nations from Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East. Antonio Gramsci has well said about this rise of BRICS+, “The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born.”²

For the U.S. and other Western nations, BRICS+ serves as a wake-up call, highlighting the risks of neglecting the legitimate aspirations of countries and communities worldwide for more significant influence, power, and agency in the structures of global governance that shape their destinies. To some in the West, BRICS+ signals a more troubling trend—a world splintering into rival blocs, driven by intensifying geopolitical tensions between East and West and deepening divides between the Global North and South. At the same time, it offers a coalition of emerging and middle powers a means to advance their sometimes-convergent interests and a platform to experiment or ‘bricoleur’ with the rules and frameworks of the multilateral system. These countries highlight a growing emphasis on multilateralism, trade diversification, and achieving greater financial autonomy from traditional Western-dominated systems.

The BRICS nations, with a population of around 3.3 billion, represent more than 40% of the global population. Economically, according to the International Monetary Fund, these countries account for about 37.3% of the global GDP in purchasing power parity, with China contributing 19.05% and India contributing 8.23%. The United States and the European Union each makeup approximately 14.5% of the global GDP. The BRICS bloc is also gaining strength in the international commodities market, particularly in oil. With the inclusion of Iran and the UAE, as well as the potential inclusion of Saudi Arabia, BRICS could control almost half of the world’s oil production and makeup around 35% of global oil consumption, as per an analysis by S&P Global.

The addition of Saudi Arabia would make BRICS a significant commodity powerhouse. Furthermore, the BRICS nations benefit from a large consumer base and labour force due to their substantial populations. In 2024, the labour force participation rate in BRICS countries is 60.6%, totalling 1.5 billion people, according to the International Labour Organization. However, there is a noticeable gender gap, with male participation at 73.9% and female participation at 47.4%. Additionally, informal work is typical in these countries, with approximately 934.4 million people in the informal economy, most of whom are in India. A 2023 report from the International Labour Organization highlighted that improving formal employment and working conditions could boost productivity in BRICS nations. As of this year, the unemployment rate within the bloc stands at 5.3%, affecting around 84.7 million people.³

The BRICS countries, reaffirming the 2023 Johannesburg II Declaration, emphasise the importance of multilateral cooperation to address geopolitical and geo-economic fragmentation risks. They are committed to intensifying efforts in key areas such as trade, poverty reduction, sustainable development (including access to energy, water, and food), climate change adaptation, education, and health, focusing on pandemic prevention and response. BRICS stresses the full implementation of the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and advocates for the active participation of developing countries in the upcoming 2025 Financing for Development conference in Spain.⁴ The bloc calls on developed nations to honour their commitments to financing development and enhance cooperation in areas such as taxation, debt management, trade, official development assistance, technology transfer, and the reform of international financial institutions. They recognise the significant contribution of multilateral development banks and national development institutions in scaling up blended finance to support the Sustainable Development Goals. In this context, BRICS appreciates the efforts of the BRICS Public-Private Partnership and Infrastructure Task Force and endorses its Technical Report on Blended Finance for Infrastructure Projects.

Strengthening Trade Relations Within BRICS

Despite accounting for over 40% of the world’s population and a significant share of global GDP, intra-BRICS trade remains underutilised. The summit outlined efforts to eliminate tariffs, streamline customs procedures, and address non-tariff barriers, making cross-border business operations more efficient and cost-effective. A key focus was the diversification of trade routes, with a push to reduce reliance on Western-centric markets. BRICS nations are exploring regional trade agreements and new logistics networks to enhance trade efficiency. Additionally, the summit emphasised promoting digital trade, including e-commerce advancements, reducing barriers to digital trade, and improving e-payment systems to strengthen competitiveness in a digital global economy.

Security and economic cooperation were also central topics, addressing counterterrorism, cybersecurity, and regional stability. The BRICS bloc’s increasing diversity, with new members from various regions, may complicate unified policy positions in forums like the G20. The summit discussed the bloc’s growing influence in energy, OPEC+ will continue to oversee the global oil market, and the expanded energy profile of BRICS could have a long-term impact on the sector. The inclusion of the UAE and Iran strengthens BRICS’ energy influence, and if Saudi Arabia joins the bloc, BRICS will control 42% of the global oil supply.⁵ The presence of major oil exporters, alongside key importers like China and India—both of which opposed Western sanctions on Russia—underscores BRICS’ potential to create alternative trade mechanisms that reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar and challenge the financial power of the Group of Seven (G7). Discussions also covered global challenges, such as supply chain issues, conflicts in the Middle East and Africa, and the need to reform international financial institutions. The focus was on pragmatic, structural changes rather than contentious geopolitical issues like Ukraine.

This summit emphasised the importance of enhancing the New Development Bank (NDB), focusing on increasing loans in local currencies. The bank aims to allocate 30% of its financing in the local currencies of its borrowing members, offering flexibility beyond the restrictive terms often associated with traditional financial institutions.⁶ This initiative is set to provide critical funding for projects across various sectors, meeting the growing demand for investment in infrastructure and development amidst global challenges. The NDB prioritises financing large-scale infrastructure projects, particularly in energy, transportation, and technology. Reflecting global sustainability goals, this summit emphasised the importance of green infrastructure, including renewable energy projects, sustainable urban planning, and climate-resilient investments. These initiatives aim to address the impacts of climate change while fostering environmentally sustainable development across BRICS nations and beyond. Beyond infrastructure, the NDB has strengthened financial partnerships with local institutions in BRICS countries.⁷ By aligning projects more closely with local priorities and needs, this approach seeks to ensure that NDB-funded initiatives contribute meaningfully to long-term economic growth and directly benefit local populations.

Another key initiative at this summit was the BRICS Cross-Border Payment System, designed to facilitate trade in local currencies. This development stems partly from concerns over the risks associated with the U.S. dollar. However, the shift toward local currencies is more than just about de-dollarisation; it is also about enabling cheaper and more efficient transactions. This system represents a financial lifeline for Russia, which has been excluded from the SWIFT system.⁸ Egypt views it as a way to alleviate pressure on its foreign reserves, while South Africa, Brazil, and India prefer a measured approach, cautiously diversifying without moving away from the dollar. The BRICS summit marked a pivotal moment in the global financial landscape, with de-dollarisation emerging as a prominent theme. The bloc outlined strategies to reduce dependence on the dollar in international trade and finance, which were motivated by a desire for greater financial autonomy and dissatisfaction with overreliance on the US dollar. These efforts are driven by economic sanctions, inflationary pressures, and a growing desire among BRICS nations for greater control over their financial systems.

Trade in local currencies was also advocated at this summit. Countries like China and Russia are already engaging in trade agreements using currencies, such as the yuan and rubble, to bypass the dollar in specific sectors. Another significant development was the continued exploration of a BRICS Reserve Currency.⁹ Though still in the conceptual phase, this initiative seeks to create an international currency based on a basket of BRICS currencies, potentially backed by commodities like gold. Such a currency would provide a more stable and diversified financial tool for nations seeking alternatives to the dollar, offering enhanced stability and credibility in global markets. The summit also highlighted efforts to expand the role of China’s renminbi (yuan) in international trade, which is seen as a viable alternative to the dollar. These efforts reflect the bloc’s aim to challenge the dollar’s dominance and advance a more multipolar global financial system.

The BRICS members pledged to prioritise investments in renewable energy, electric vehicles, and climate adaptation technologies. Efforts will focus on creating sustainable supply chains, reducing carbon emissions, and supporting eco-friendly innovations. Initiatives include building green infrastructure like electric transport systems and smart grids and exploring a joint carbon trading platform to promote cleaner industrial practices and reduce greenhouse gas emissions across the bloc. These commitments reflect BRICS’ collective aim to drive sustainable economic growth while addressing climate challenges. In addressing sustainability, BRICS reiterated its commitment to equitable energy transitions, considering national circumstances and the need for a diverse energy mix, including renewables, biofuels, and nuclear power. The bloc rejected unilateral climate measures such as carbon border adjustment mechanisms (CBAMs) and underscored the importance of international cooperation in biodiversity conservation and climate adaptation. Efforts to strengthen the BRICS Energy Research Cooperation Platform and develop carbon markets reflect a shared commitment to balanced environmental stewardship.¹⁰

BRICS nations view Special Economic Zones (SEZs) as vital tools for economic growth, trade, and industrialisation. These zones offer regulatory benefits, fiscal incentives, and infrastructure to attract investments in high-tech industries like IT and tourism.¹¹ They foster innovation, job creation, and exports by simplifying administrative processes and reducing entry barriers. A BRICS cooperation forum facilitates sharing best practices in policy, infrastructure, and sustainable SEZ management while promoting these zones to global investors. SEZs are central to BRICS’ strategy for economic diversification, international competitiveness, and sustainable industrial development.

BRICS nations are enhancing tax and customs administration cooperation to streamline processes and bolster economic integration. A significant milestone in this effort is the adoption of the BRICS Heads of Tax Authorities Governance Framework.¹² This framework institutionalises collaboration among the tax authorities of member countries, aiming to foster transparency, efficiency, and the harmonisation of tax policies. By creating a structured mechanism for dialogue and shared practices, the framework ensures better alignment on issues such as tax evasion, avoidance, and digital economy taxation, which are increasingly critical in the globalised economic environment. Additionally, BRICS has supported the mutual recognition of Authorized Economic Operators (AEOs).¹³ This initiative simplifies customs procedures and enhances trade facilitation by establishing trust among customs authorities and businesses. Through AEO recognition, compliant companies benefit from reduced inspections, priority clearance, and smoother cross-border trade operations. These measures collectively aim to lower trade costs, boost efficiency, and encourage more significant economic activity within the BRICS bloc, contributing to the group’s broader economic cooperation and resilience agenda.

Financial System Reforms

BRICS countries reaffirmed their commitment to a rules-based, transparent, and inclusive multilateral trading system, with the World Trade Organization (WTO) at its core. They called for the reform of the WTO to enhance its developmental dimension and to reinstate a fully functional dispute settlement system by 2024. They rejected unilateral trade restrictive measures inconsistent with WTO rules, emphasising fair treatment for developing and least-developed countries. The leaders noted the need for a more equitable global system by calling for reforms to the United Nations Security Council and the Bretton Woods institutions, ensuring that the representation of emerging markets and developing countries (EMDCs) aligns with their growing economic contributions.¹⁴ They advocated for a multipolar world order and reaffirmed their commitment to multilateralism and international law as foundations for addressing global challenges. The BRICS nations also denounced unilateral coercive measures and called for peaceful conflict resolution based on mutual respect and adherence to the UN Charter. Reforming global financial governance also took centre stage as leaders pushed to address international debt challenges, particularly for low- and middle-income countries, through mechanisms like the G20 Common Framework for Debt Treatment. Furthermore, there was strong support for improving the resilience of supply chains, particularly in agriculture and energy, while opposing protectionist trade practices that disrupt global systems. Digital transformation and innovation emerged as focal points, with BRICS nations committing to collaborative efforts in artificial intelligence (AI), cybersecurity, and e-commerce. The bloc highlighted the importance of fair and inclusive data governance to enable equitable participation in the digital economy and foster innovation-driven growth. Initiatives under the BRICS Partnership for the New Industrial Revolution (PartNIR) and proposals such as BRICS Clear—a cross-border financial settlement infrastructure—aim to enhance trade efficiency and technological collaboration.¹⁵

The BRICS Countries reiterated their commitment to strengthen the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), which acts as a mechanism for mitigating the effects of a crisis, and to complement the existing international financial and monetary system, strengthening the global financial safety net. The leaders noted that “an unbalanced recovery” from the shock and hardship of the pandemic is aggravating inequality worldwide.¹⁶ They acknowledged high global debt levels exacerbated by economic shocks, advocating for predictable and orderly implementation of the G20 Common Framework for Debt Treatment. They called for fair burden-sharing mechanisms involving official creditors, private creditors, and multilateral development banks.¹⁷ The leaders stressed the need to address debt vulnerabilities in low- and middle-income countries to support economic recovery and sustainable development. The leaders also advocated for encouraging international organisations and multilateral financial institutions to play a constructive role in building global consensus on economic policies and preventing risks of financial fragmentation and economic disruption. They favoured the idea that multilateral development banks should increase lending capacities while safeguarding long-term financial stability, preferred creditor status, and robust creditor rating.

Blended finance combines public funds, private investments, and international support to mobilise resources for large-scale projects, especially in high-risk, long-term sectors like sustainable energy, transportation, and urban development. Multilateral and national development banks play a key role in the BRICS framework by offering expertise, risk mitigation, and financial guarantees, making these initiatives more accessible to the private sector.¹⁸ This approach aligns with BRICS’ commitment to fostering economic resilience, green growth, and sustainable development while addressing economic disparities among member nations.

As digital markets expand, member countries have committed to strengthening consumer protection frameworks, ensuring secure and transparent online transactions. Building trust in digital platforms is essential to fostering a robust e-commerce ecosystem that benefits consumers and businesses. In parallel, BRICS has emphasised the critical role of Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in economic development, focusing on their integration into global value chains.¹⁹ Special attention is given to innovation-driven startups and technology-oriented enterprises, poised to contribute significantly to industrial modernisation and competitiveness. The bloc supports initiatives providing MSMEs access to digital tools, financial resources, and international markets, helping them leverage e-commerce opportunities and scale their operations effectively.

The summit also endorsed initiatives like the BRICS Grain Exchange, designed to strengthen food security by promoting trade in agricultural commodities to tackle food supply challenges.²⁰ Urgent reforms to improve cross-border financial practices to ensure greater inclusivity and fairness were also emphasised. Recognising that BRICS countries produce one-third of the world’s food, they committed themselves to minimising disruptions in agricultural trade by opposing restrictive measures affecting food and fertiliser supplies and supporting smallholder farmers and low-income food-importing nations through resilient agricultural practices and trade facilitation​.  They called for agricultural reforms in accordance with the mandate in Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture while recognising the importance of respecting the mandates regarding a Permanent Solution on Public Stockholding (PSH) for food security and Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) for developing countries, including LDCs, in their respective negotiating contexts.²¹

Conclusion

The summit reinforced BRICS’ commitment to amplifying the Global South’s voice in global trade, calling for reforms in international trade and financial institutions, including the WTO, to address power imbalances favouring advanced economies. BRICS+ reflects the bloc’s commitment to diversifying the global order and providing alternatives to Western-dominated institutions. The inclusion of these partner countries aims to enhance political and economic cooperation, offering a platform for nations seeking to engage beyond U.S. and EU frameworks. BRICS’ is committed to developing alternative payment systems for trade among BRICS nations.

The BRICS Summit 2024 provided India with a platform to enhance its diplomatic influence, advocating for greater cooperation in information and communication technologies, border security, and counterterrorism while also managing challenges posed by China. As a bridge between Western powers and emerging economies, India aims to balance its strategic interests within the bloc without allowing Sino-Russian dominance to strain its Western relationships. India reaffirmed its dedication to fostering a balanced multipolar world and promoting a reformed global order, emphasising the importance of resolving conflicts diplomatically. Talks with Russia focused on the Ukraine crisis, with India stressing the need for diplomatic solutions and offering support for the safe evacuation of Indian citizens. Since President Masoud Pezeshkian took office, the first high-level talks with Iran focused on promoting regional stability and boosting trade through the Chabahar Port.²³ At the same time, the India-China meeting signalled warm relations between them, with both countries agreeing to restart border patrols in Ladakh.

The BRICS bloc faces challenges, including internal disagreements and practical obstacles, which may slow down the realisation of a unified currency or cohesive economic strategy. Critics see BRICS lacking substance, describing it as a “paper tiger.”²⁴ They caution that incorporating nations with diverse political, economic, and social systems could exacerbate internal divisions, undermining the group’s ability to agree on critical issues. While the declaration acknowledges the advantages of cross-border payment mechanisms that are faster, cost-effective, transparent, secure, and inclusive, it does so in broad terms. The lack of detailed commitments is notable, particularly given Brazil’s and India’s limited enthusiasm for efforts to “de-dollarize” the global economy.²⁵ In defiance of these challenges, the expansion signifies a growing interest among developing countries in seeking alternatives to the current international order, highlighting a shift towards multipolarity and re-evaluating global governance structures. As it grows and expands its influence, BRICS is poised to play an even more critical role in the evolving global economy. All eyes are on BRICS, on how it would unfold its economic significance and its abilities to position itself as a powerful force in shaping the future global economy and global order.

Author Brief Bio:Dr. Mahendra Kumar Singh is an accomplished academician and media professional with extensive experience in political journalism, teaching & research, and public relations. Currently, he serves as an Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science at DDU Gorakhpur University (since July 2018). Dr. Singh is also the Director of the Centre for Information, Publication and Public Relations (March 2024-till date) at the same university, having previously held the position of Media & Public Relations Officer (July 2020–March 2024).His research papers are published in Peer Reviewed & UGC Care-listed journals.Dr. Singh’s professional journey includes over a decade-long tenure as Senior Assistant Editor with The Times of India (June 2005–June 2018), where he covered Parliament, national political parties, Niti Aayog, and key legislative developments. His in-depth reporting on proceedings of Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha reflects his deep understanding of parliamentary processes.Dr. Singh is a prolific columnist, contributing to Deccan Herald, Navbharat Times and other national publications, and appears as a TV panelist on leading news channels like Zee News, News 24 and Republic Bharat.

References

1. European Parliamentary Research Service. (2024, November 8). Outcome of the 16th BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia. European Parliament Think Tank. https://epthinktank.eu/2024/11/08/outcome-of-the-16th-brics-summit-in-kazan-russia
2. Stewart (2024, October 9). BRICS Expansion, the G20, and the Future of World Order. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/10/brics-summit-emerging-middle-powers-g7-g20?lang=en
3. Outcome of the 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia | Think Tank | European Parliament. (n.d.). https://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document/EPRS_ATA(2024)766243
4. BRICS: Here’s what to know about the international bloc. (2024, November 27). World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2024/11/brics-summit-geopolitics-bloc-international/
5. Leaders of BRICS countries. (2024). Final XVI BRICS Summit Kazan Declaration. In Kazan, Russian Federation. https://sabtt.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Kazan-Declaration.pdf
6. The BRICS Summit 2024: An Expanding Alternative. (n.d.). Council of Councils. https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/brics-summit-2024-expanding-alternative
7. Barua, K. (2024, October 25). BRICS Summit 2024: 16th Edition Key Highlights, Major Outcomes and Relevance. Jagranjosh.com. https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/brics-summit-2024-16th-edition-key-highlights-major-outcomes-and-relevance-1729858323-1
8. The BRICS Summit 2024: An Expanding Alternative. (n.d.-b). Council of Councils. https://www.cfr.org/councilofcouncils/global-memos/brics-summit-2024-expanding-alternative
9. BRICS Summit 2024: everything, everywhere, all at once? | ISS Africa. (n.d.). ISS Africa. https://issafrica.org/iss-today/brics-summit-2024-everything-everywhere-all-at-once
10. Barua, K. (2024b, October 25). BRICS Summit 2024: 16th Edition Key Highlights, Major Outcomes and Relevance. Jagranjosh.com. https://www.jagranjosh.com/general-knowledge/brics-summit-2024-16th-edition-key-highlights-major-outcomes-and-relevance-1729858323-1
11. BRICS expansion to widen renewable energy gap with the G7. (2023, September 25). Rystad Energy. https://www.rystadenergy.com/news/brics-expansion-to-widen-the-renewable-energy-gap
12. Asia, R. P. T. (2024, October 24). BRICS 2024 Heads of State ‘Kazan Summit Declaration’ – Contents & Analysis. RUSSIA’S PIVOT TO ASIA. https://russiaspivottoasia.com/brics-2024-heads-of-state-kazan-summit-declaration-contents-analysis/
13. Singh, Bawa. (2024, October 27). Geopolitical Expansion In BRICS Summit 2024: A Strategic Strength For Russia Amidst Ukraine Conflict – Analysis. Eurasia Review. https://www.eurasiareview.com/27102024-geopolitical-expansion-in-brics-summit-2024-a-strategic-strength-for-russia-amidst-ukraine-conflict-analysis/
14. Kazan Declaration: “‘Strengthening Multilateralism For Just Global Development And Security.’” (n.d.). Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. https://www.mea.gov.in/bilateral-documents.htm?dtl/38450/Kazan_Declaration_
15. Brics calls for nations to work together on post pandemic economic recovery. (2024, December 5). Business Standard. https://www.business-standard.com/world-news/brics-calls-for-nations-to-work-together-on-post-pandemic-economic-recovery-123082401174_1.html
16. Blended finance: How to accelerate sustainable development. (2024, September 10). World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/stories/2023/04/blended-finance-financial-intermediation-can-accelerate-sustainable-development
17. BRICS financial track priorities for 2024 identified. (2024, February 8). Bank of Russia. https://cbr.ru/eng/press/pr/?file=638430134826667432ic.htm
18. Prime Minister participates in the 16th BRICS Summit. (n.d.). Ministry of External Affairs, Government of India. https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/38455/Prime_Minister_participates_in_the_16th_BRICS_Summit
19. BRICS Enlargement – What Are the Geoeconomic Implications? | Publication | Econpol Europe. (2024). https://www.econpol.eu/publications/forum-2024-1/brics-enlargement-geoeconomic-implications
20. BRICS Summit Declaration: new platforms and priorities – BRICS+ Analytics. (2024, October 23). https://brics-plus-analytics.org/brics-summit-declaration-new-platforms-and-priorities/
21. BRICS Deputy Finance Ministers and Central Bank Heads to Hold Video Conference. (2024, February 5). https://brics-russia2024.ru/en/news/vstrecha-zamestiteley-ministrov-finansov-i-upravlyayushchikh-tsentralnymi-bankami-stran-briks/’
22. (2024, October 23). XVI BRICS Summit Kazan Declaration: Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrKDuS6kVJnLAIAsIy7HAx.;_ylu=Y29sbwNzZzMEcG9zAzEEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1734674106/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fcdn.brics-russia2024.ru%2fupload%2fdocs%2fKazan_Declaration_FINAL.pdf%3f1729693488349783/RK=2/RS=WkhLdlEbI1VgGWG6ylCUaM2JcRw-
23. Yeo, A., Stent, A., Aydıntaşbaş, A., Rediker, D. A., Feltman, J., Kuok, L., Madan, T., Varma, T., Wirtschafter, V., & Sun, Y. (2024, October 21). What can we expect from the 2024 BRICS summit? Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-can-we-expect-from-the-2024-brics-summit/
24. (2024, October 23). XVI BRICS Summit Kazan Declaration: Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security. https://r.search.yahoo.com/_ylt=AwrKDuS6kVJnLAIAsIy7HAx.;_ylu=Y29sbwNzZzMEcG9zAzEEdnRpZAMEc2VjA3Ny/RV=2/RE=1734674106/RO=10/RU=https%3a%2f%2fcdn.brics-russia2024.ru%2fupload%2fdocs%2fKazan_Declaration_FINAL.pdf%3f1729693488349783/RK=2/RS=WkhLdlEbI1VgGWG6ylCUaM2JcRw-
25. Brookings Institution. (2024, October 15). What can we expect from the 2024 BRICS summit? Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/what-can-we-expect-from-the-2024-brics-summit/

The BRICS economies now surpass the G7 in output, redefining global power dynamics. Nations no longer look solely to Washington or London for development deals; they weigh offers from Beijing, New Delhi, and Sao Paulo. This marks a decisive shift in global influence.

Richard D. Wolff, an economist and Professor Emeritus, made the above observation while discussing the growing influence of BRICS in global economics and its surpassing of the G7 in output. In 2009, amidst the fallout of the global financial crisis, BRIC convened its inaugural summit in Yekaterinburg, Russia. The timing was symbolic—Western financial dominance had faltered, and the stage was set for emerging economies to assert themselves. South Africa joined the coalition a year later, transforming BRIC into BRICS.

From the outset, BRICS aimed to counterbalance Western dominance, mirroring the creation of the G7 decades earlier. The latter emerged in 1975 as a response to economic upheavals, evolving into a forum for global macroeconomic policy. The G7 later expanded into the G8 with Russia’s inclusion, though this union soured due to Moscow’s authoritarian pivot. Meanwhile, the global financial crisis of 2007–2008 marked a pivotal moment: a problem born in the West required global participation to resolve. This necessity elevated the G20—previously a coalition of finance officials—to a leader-level summit in 2008, cementing its role as a forum encompassing 80% of global trade and GDP.

The G20 shone during the crisis, injecting liquidity, revamping financial institutions, and stabilising the global economy. At the Pittsburgh Summit in 2009, it was declared the “premier forum for international economic cooperation.” Yet, as the G20’s influence ebbed and flowed, the BRICS sought to carve its niche by advocating for global governance reform, creating parallel institutions, and challenging the dollar’s dominance. These efforts, while ambitious, often proved more symbolic than substantive.

In 2015, BRICS launched the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) to rival the World Bank and IMF. However, their impact has been limited. The NDB remains underfunded, with disbursements lagging far behind those of its Western counterparts. Despite rhetoric emphasising equality, its weighted voting structure mirrors the institutions it seeks to supplant. The CRA, a mechanism for short-term liquidity support, has yet to make a significant mark. Efforts to reduce dollar dependency have also stumbled. Despite discussions on a common BRICS currency, obstacles like entrenched dollar hegemony, inadequate financial infrastructure, and China’s currency convertibility issues persist. Instead, BRICS has focused on local currency trade and reserve diversification. Another avenue of resistance has been circumventing U.S.-dominated financial systems. BRICS nations have developed alternatives to the SWIFT payment network, yet ambitious projects like a global BRICS undersea cable network still need to materialise. While BRICS has pursued energy, health, and sustainable development initiatives, internal divisions dilute its coherence and influence.

The coalition’s heterogeneity is striking. BRICS includes democracies like Brazil, India, and South Africa alongside authoritarian giants China and Russia. Diverging political systems and priorities— from India’s strategic autonomy to China’s assertive global stance—challenge cohesion. For instance, while all members support UN Security Council reform, disagreements over specifics highlight their underlying rivalries.

China’s dominance within BRICS adds another layer of complexity. Responsible for 70% of the group’s GDP, it often overshadows its partners. This dynamic played out at the 2023 Durban summit, where China’s push for BRICS expansion overruled caution from Brazil, India, and South Africa, spotlighting tensions beneath the surface.  When rats and cats share a kitchen, it’s not love – it’s probably because there’s a bear at the door. History repeatedly demonstrates how geopolitical threats can transform bitter rivals into reluctant allies. Consider how Britain and France, despite centuries of warfare, united against Nazi Germany. Today, we see this dynamic between India and China in the BRICS alliance. After their long border tango in Ladakh, China’s backstep isn’t just India’s diplomatic victory dance; it’s also China’s business brain.

Similarly, Iran and Saudi Arabia, long-standing sectarian rivals, recently mended fences under Chinese mediation, primarily motivated by their shared desire to counter Western influence in the Middle East. Like the proverbial cats and rats uniting against a bear, nations often discover that survival trumps old grudges. BRICS countries are bound by shared goals but separated by distinct geopolitical realities. A closer examination of these differences reveals the complexity of aligning their foreign policy agendas. For India, BRICS represents an avenue to assert leadership in the Global South while counterbalancing China’s dominance. The bloc is a platform for China to promote its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and project global influence. Despite these divergent agendas, both nations recognise the strategic importance of BRICS as a counterweight to Western-led institutions.

Awkward Encounters and Internal Tensions

The much-touted unity of BRICS often cracks during summit meetings, revealing underlying tensions through diplomatic faux pas and awkward encounters. During the 2016 Goa Summit, Prime Minister Modi’s characterisation of Pakistan as a “mothership of terrorism” created visible discomfort for President Xi Jinping, highlighting the delicate balance between national interests and bloc solidarity. The Chinese state media’s subsequent criticism of Modi’s remarks as an attempt to “spoil” the BRICS atmosphere further underscored these tensions.

The 2017 Xiamen Summit provided another revealing moment when Modi and Xi met for the first time after the Doklam standoff. Their interaction was notably stiff, with photographers capturing what media described as a “forced” and “mechanical” handshake. The two leaders were observed deliberately avoiding eye contact despite standing beside each other, which visually represented their strained relationship. Brazil’s changing stance within BRICS has also produced memorable moments of discord. During the 2018 Johannesburg Summit, then-President Temer’s apparent isolation during the traditional group photo became a metaphor for Brazil’s uncertain position within the bloc. The incident, which saw Temer awkwardly attempting to position himself while other leaders engaged in conversation, highlighted the power dynamics at play within BRICS. More recent tensions emerged during Jair Bolsonaro’s presidency, particularly at the 2019 Brasília Summit. His previous criticism of China’s “predatory” economic practices led to noticeably uncomfortable interactions with Xi Jinping, including a moment when Xi appeared to turn away from Bolsonaro’s attempted conversation during the formal handshake. The transition to virtual summits during and after the pandemic era has not diminished these moments of tension. During the 2023 Virtual Summit, an incident where Xi Jinping appeared to interrupt President Lula da Silva’s speech raised eyebrows. While officially attributed to technical issues, some analysts interpreted the moment as a subtle demonstration of China’s dominant position within BRICS.

These diplomatic incidents sometimes appear trivial but serve as windows into the more profound challenges facing the BRICS. Traditional summit photos, carefully analysed by diplomatic observers, often reveal body language and spatial arrangements reflecting ongoing bilateral tensions and power dynamics within the group.

Diplomatic Strategies for Managing Internal Differences

While the BRICS bloc showcases remarkable potential, it faces several challenges threatening its unity and influence. Despite its economic and geopolitical clout, disparities among its members loom large. China’s GDP vastly overshadows that of other members, creating imbalances that may undermine equitable decision-making. For smaller members like South Africa, asserting their voice amidst China’s dominance can be a struggle.

Geopolitical rivalries within the group, such as the longstanding India-China tensions, add another layer of complexity. These disputes risk overshadowing the BRICS’s shared objectives, creating friction that weakens the bloc’s cohesive strategy. Moreover, the diversity in political systems—from democratic models in India and Brazil to centralised governance in China—reflects ideological divergences that occasionally clash on global platforms, particularly on human rights and governance issues.

Moreover, BRICS members differ in their engagement with Western powers. While Russia and China often stand as counterweights to the West, India, Brazil, and South Africa maintain relatively cooperative relations, leading to divergent views on international issues. If not managed carefully, these variations risk diluting the collective impact of BRICS on the global stage. Navigating the internal divergences within BRICS requires a combination of diplomacy, pragmatism, and strategic alignment. Several strategies have enabled the bloc to maintain cohesion despite its differences. Russia’s war against Ukraine has put a lot of pressure on BRICS. Putin has shown the resilience to go down despite the Biden administration’s calculated manoeuvres—deploying NATO assets, orchestrating sanctions, and even allegedly sabotaging the Nord Stream pipelines. The anticipated collapse of Russia’s economic and military capabilities has not materialised, leaving a profound geopolitical landscape that challenges conventional Western narratives.

The BRICS summit in Kazan became a subtle demonstration of Putin’s diplomatic jujitsu. While the United States hoped to isolate Russia, Putin expanded the bloc, welcoming new members and signalling a significant shift in global power dynamics. The addition of countries like Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE wasn’t just a membership expansion but a strategic reconfiguration of global allegiances.

Most critically, India and China have emerged as Putin’s geopolitical lifelines. Their strategic cooperation has provided Russia with crucial economic buffers against Western sanctions, demonstrating a pragmatic approach prioritising national interests over ideological alignments. The energy markets, particularly oil and gas trades conducted in non-dollar currencies, have allowed Russia to circumvent traditional financial pressures.

Surprisingly, the anticipated domestic and international backlash against Putin has been muted. The expected implosion of Russian society and economy has not occurred. Instead, Putin has managed to navigate through what he acknowledged as the most challenging period of his political career, maintaining internal control and external diplomatic manoeuvrability.

The U.S. presidential election discourse, which should have been dominated by discussions of America’s geopolitical overreach and the limitations of its global influence, has been conspicuously silent. Putin’s strategic resilience has quietly but firmly challenged the narrative of unquestioned American dominance. While Putin has undoubtedly faced significant setbacks—particularly in the Ukraine conflict—he has demonstrated an uncanny ability to adapt, survive, and even expand Russia’s global footprint. The BRICS summit was less a moment of vulnerability and more a statement of continuing relevance.

The geopolitical chessboard remains complex, and Putin has proven that reports of Russia’s diplomatic and economic death have been greatly exaggerated. The world watches as traditional power structures are redefined, and Putin plays a pivotal role in this ongoing transformation. BRICS has adopted an issue-based approach, focusing on areas of common interest while sidestepping contentious issues. This strategy allows members to collaborate on shared goals such as economic development, climate change, and digital innovation, even as they disagree on geopolitical matters.

Establishing institutional mechanisms like the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement has strengthened BRICS’ ability to deliver tangible outcomes. These initiatives enhance the bloc’s credibility and provide a platform for deepening cooperation. BRICS often employs strategic ambiguity to accommodate differing perspectives. For example, the bloc’s statements on global conflicts, such as the Russia-Ukraine war, are carefully worded to balance the interests of all members. Leadership within BRICS plays a crucial role in managing differences. India and South Africa, in particular, have positioned themselves as mediators, leveraging their non-aligned traditions to bridge divides within the bloc.

When nations shake off the chains of poverty and dependence, sovereignty comes strutting in like a long-lost cousin at a family reunion—bold, overdue, and unapologetic. After all, a full belly doesn’t just dream of food; it craves freedom, pride, and a seat at the big table. The global landscape in which BRICS operates is undergoing profound changes. The rise of new powers, the intensification of great power competition, and the growing importance of transnational challenges such as climate change and digital governance have created both opportunities and challenges for the bloc.

BRICS has sought to expand its influence by engaging with other emerging economies and forming partnerships with regional organisations. Initiatives like the BRICS Outreach and Plus formats aim to build a broader coalition for global reform. Global conflicts, such as the Russia-Ukraine war, have tested BRICS’ ability to navigate complex geopolitical landscapes. While these conflicts expose internal divisions, they also highlight the bloc’s potential as a platform for dialogue and diplomacy.The COVID-19 pandemic and the digital revolution have underscored the need for BRICS to adapt to new challenges. Collaborative efforts in vaccine production, digital innovation, and sustainable development demonstrate the bloc’s capacity for collective action.

Balancing Act and Future Prospects

Despite these moments of discord, BRICS leaders have generally managed to maintain a facade of unity through institutional frameworks and shared economic interests. The establishment of the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement demonstrates their ability to cooperate on concrete initiatives despite personal and political differences.

However, these awkward encounters and diplomatic missteps suggest that BRICS’ internal cohesion remains fragile. As the bloc continues to evolve and potentially expand, managing these personal dynamics and national differences while maintaining collective effectiveness will remain a crucial challenge for its future development. Initially envisioned as an economic bloc in 2001, BRICS emerged as a symbol of the shifting global economic centre from the West to the Global South. The addition of South Africa in 2010 expanded the group’s geopolitical significance, integrating Africa into its ambit. Over time, BRICS has evolved beyond its economic roots, taking on a political role by advocating for a multipolar world order, reforming global institutions such as the United Nations and International Monetary Fund, and countering Western hegemony.

Shared experiences of marginalisation in global governance structures have driven this evolution. BRICS countries have often been excluded from key decision-making processes, prompting them to push for greater representation and influence. However, as the bloc has sought to assert itself as a unified voice for the Global South, internal differences have frequently complicated its trajectory. In a bold display of diplomatic assertiveness, India stood firm against US pressure to cut oil imports from Iran. When Nikki Haley, then-US Ambassador to the UN, attempted to dictate India’s energy policy, New Delhi’s response was unequivocal. India made it crystal clear that external demands would not compromise its national interests. The strategic resilience showcased by Indian diplomats sent a powerful message: India chooses its path. With India’s unwavering stance, the United States was forced to moderate its tone, recognising that emerging powers like India would not be bullied into submission. This moment epitomised India’s growing confidence on the global stage.

Building on India’s diplomatic assertiveness, Trump’s trade war against China inadvertently catalysed a profound transformation within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). The result was not a weakening but a reinforced commitment to their developmental paths, largely independent of Western prescriptions. This strategic recalibration was most evident in the CCP’s dramatic crackdown on tech billionaires, symbolising the party’s determination to reassert control over economic elites. By curtailing the autonomy of tech moguls like Jack Ma, the CCP sent a clear message: national interest supersedes individual corporate ambitions.

The episode underscored a critical geopolitical dynamic in the Global South: the continuous process of nation-building. Unlike established Western democracies, emerging powers must actively cultivate national identity and loyalty. For countries in BRICS and beyond, this means constantly negotiating between diverse internal constituencies and projecting a unified national narrative. What’s happening here is more significant than just economic growth—it’s about rethinking how countries in the Global South interact with the world. And that’s where Karl Polanyi, the economist, really gets it. He had this idea that might sound simple but is profound: “It’s not just about the money, honey.”

He meant that capitalism isn’t something you can study in a vacuum, like analysing a fish, but ignoring the water it swims in. To truly understand capitalism, you need to look at the whole picture—the state, society, and all those quirky little details, like the plastic castle in the corner of the fish tank. And at its core, this became the game of “us versus them.” Communities weren’t just asking for a fair share of resources—they wanted their share and didn’t want anyone else getting in on the action. It’s like setting up a VIP list at a club where everyone used to dance together, but now only a select few are allowed in.

While the West has been busy forecasting the downfall of BRICS economies, these nations were quietly building shopping malls and expanding their middle class faster than anyone could have imagined. Sure, poverty didn’t disappear overnight, but try telling today’s BRICS teens that their grandparents would have considered a bicycle a luxury. They’d probably pause their Instagram scroll long enough to reply, “Got it, thanks for the history lesson.” Despite some of the most palpable differences, BRICS countries are united by a shared vision of a more equitable global order. Three core principles underpin their cooperation. First is multipolarity; the bloc champions a multipolar world where power is distributed more equitably among nations. This vision challenges the unipolar dominance of the United States and the West, advocating for a system that reflects the diversity of global perspectives. Second is Sovereignty, as the bloc emphasises the importance of national sovereignty and non-interference in domestic affairs. This principle resonates strongly with BRICS members, who have often been subjected to Western criticism or intervention in their internal matters. The third is Global Governance Reform, a cornerstone of the BRICS agenda. The bloc has called for greater representation of developing countries in bodies like the United Nations Security Council and the International Monetary Fund. Initiatives such as the New Development Bank (NDB) exemplify BRICS’ commitment to creating alternatives to Western-dominated institutions. Nevertheless, BRICS has demonstrated remarkable resilience and adaptability, underscoring the importance of diplomacy and strategic alignment in navigating its complex internal landscape.

The Art of Collective Evolution

As BRICS charts its course in the evolving global landscape, the alliance stands at a critical juncture, balancing remarkable potential with complex challenges. The bloc’s future hinges on its ability to transform internal diversity into collective strength, navigating a path that demands nuanced diplomacy, strategic vision, and a commitment to reimagining global cooperation.

The core imperative is to transform their differences into a collective advantage. This means managing internal tensions and actively turning them into a source of dynamism. Strengthening cohesion isn’t about creating uniformity but building a resilient framework that can accommodate diverse national interests while maintaining a unified strategic vision. The expansion of membership must be carefully curated—not as a numbers game but as a strategic integration of economies and perspectives that genuinely align with the bloc’s core principles.

The global governance landscape offers BRICS a unique opportunity to reshape international institutions. The alliance can challenge the existing Western-centric models by advocating for reforms that reflect the economic and political realities of the 21st century. This isn’t about creating rival institutions but about making global platforms more representative and responsive to the needs of emerging economies.

The global power landscape is shifting, and the BRICS nations are the architects of this transformation. While they share a fundamental goal of reshaping the international order, each country brings its unique vision. China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative, India’s fierce pursuit of strategic autonomy, and Brazil’s regional leadership aspirations aren’t just policies but statements of intent.

When India’s foreign minister, S. Jaishankar, bluntly told a conference moderator, “Europe must get out of the mindset that Europe’s problems are the world’s problems,” it was more than a diplomatic rebuke. It was a mic-drop moment that exposed the long-simmering frustrations of the Global South. What had been whispered in diplomatic corridors was now boldly proclaimed on international platforms.

The internal dynamics of BRICS are beautifully complex—like a high-stakes family reunion where everyone has a different agenda but a shared underlying mission. Imagine coordinating a group selfie where each participant pulls in a slightly different direction. There are tensions, historical baggage, and competing national interests. Yet beneath the surface, there’s a profound, unifying desire to break free from outdated global paradigms.

This isn’t about creating a perfect, harmonious alternative to Western-dominated institutions. It’s about finding a new rhythm, a more inclusive global conversation. The BRICS nations are essentially saying: We’re rewriting the rules, not to antagonise, but to create a more balanced world order. The group isn’t seeking to destroy existing structures but to expand them to make them more representative. It’s a delicate, sometimes messy process of negotiation, but one driven by a collective vision of a more equitable global system. Despite its aspirations, BRICS remains a work in progress. Its vision of a multipolar world order is compelling but hindered by internal divisions and external constraints.

For now, it serves as a reminder of the evolving contest between established and emerging powers, where ambitions often outpace achievements. As one can sum up, “The West’s thundering monologue in global affairs has inadvertently become the most effective recruitment tool for blocs like BRICS. Every dismissive Western decree, every unilateral action, adds another brick to the foundation of alternative alliances. It’s perhaps history’s greatest irony – the harder the established order tries to maintain its exclusive orchestra, the more compelling the call for a new global concert.”

Author Brief Bio: Mr. Anurag Punetha is Controller (Media Center), Indira Gandhi National Center for Arts, New Delhi.

In July 1944, 730 delegates from 44 countries gathered in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, USA, to regulate a new post-World War II monetary and financial order. At that time, due to the ongoing Second World War, much of Europe, Asia, and Africa lay in ruins, and massive reconstruction was needed. The conference discussed bringing Europe and Asia back into the international economy, with the primary objective of promoting faster growth through increased integration of the world economy. It also discussed the importance of trade liberalisation, open payment systems, and institutional oversight. This led to the establishment of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to facilitate international commercial and financial relations.

The IMF, formed on 27 December 1945, was tasked with overseeing international monetary arrangements. Guidelines and rules for trade were provided by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), concluded in Geneva in 1947[i]. GATT set the rules for international trade for nearly 50 years until it was replaced by the World Trade Organisation (WTO) in 1995.

The Bretton Woods Conference paved the way for currency convertibility and a more open trading system, which stimulated economic growth, increased economic interdependence among nations, and underscored the benefits of international cooperation on economic issues. The institutions, founded to promote faster growth through improved integration of the world economy, achieved their objective to a remarkable extent, and the fifty years (1950-2000) saw more rapid growth than the previous fifty years (1900-1950). The Economic Recovery Act, passed by the US Congress in 1948 and signed by President Truman to become law, became known as the Marshal Plan. It provided USD 13.3 billion over the next four years to aid Western Europe in rebuilding their economies. Thisaid was conditional on recipients’ agreeing to a timetable for liberalising their trading relations. It provided markets for American goods, created reliable trading partners, and supported the development of stable democratic governments in Western Europe.^[ii]

Except for Western Europe and a few other countries, a significant part of the world did not benefit from the fruits of economic development in the same measure. This was partly because many countries were under colonial rule and only now were emerging as free nations. The European colonisation of the world, which started sometime in the sixteenth century, had colonised many regions of Africa, Asia, and the Americas by the nineteenth century. During this period, the Western colonialists imposed a Eurocentric worldview on the colonised cultures.^[iii] When World War II ended, the colonial edifice built by the Western colonial powers began to crumble in the face of freedom movements across the globe. Within a few decades, all the colonised countries achieved freedom. However, the economic recovery that Western Europe experienced as a result of the initiatives taken at the Bretton Woods Conference did not spread to the former colonies because the initiatives taken for economic rejuvenation were designed for Western Europe. Hence, the recovery was primarily restricted to the Western democracies. While colonialism was a thing of the past, in terms of global economic policies, it was the US which called the shots. It was a US-led world order, which could be called a Bretton Woods world order. The economic policies formulated for the world primarily reflected the Western worldview and were designed to serve Western interests.

The G7

In 1973, the foreign ministers of four of the world’s wealthiest countries—the US, Germany, France, and the United Kingdom—met informally to discuss trade and financial matters. Later, this group was enlarged to include Japan and Italy to form the Group of Six (G6). The first summit meeting of the G6 was held in 1975 in France to address pressing economic concerns, which included inflation and a recession caused by the oil embargo placed by the Organisation of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). In 1976, Canada joined the group to form the Group of Seven (G7).^[iv] From 1998 to 2014, the Group became G8 with the entry of Russia, but Moscow’s annexation of Crimea in March 2014 resulted in its indefinite suspension, and the group is now G7.

While the G7 is an informal bloc, its leaders meet annually to discuss global economic governance, international security, and other issues such as climate change and AI. The EU Commission President and European Council President also attend the annual G7 Summit. In addition, high-ranking G7 and EU officials meet throughout the year. All the participants are wealthy democracies, and the forum’s small and relatively homogenous membership promotes collective decision-making. The GDP of the member countries (excluding the EU) is a substantial 43 per cent of the global GDP. They have about 10 per cent of the worldwide population but hold about 50 per cent of its wealth. While lacking a legal or institutional basis, the G7 continue to wield significant international influence. However, with the rise of other economies, the share of the G7 is showing a declining trend. It has fallen to its present level from its earlier 70 per cent three decades ago and will fall further as other economies, such as India, rise. With a changing world order, the Bretton Woods system is increasingly being challenged by other groupings, such as BRICS, to reflect the changing geo-economic realities.

The Dollar Hegemony

With the Bretton Woods system and its institutions, such as the World Bank and the IMF, in place, global economic transactions were linked to the US dollar, which in turn was linked to the value of gold. This US commitment laid the foundation of the international monetary system. In August 1971, US President Richard Nixon ended the dollar convertibility to gold, and major currencies began to float against each other. The oil shocks of the 1970s and the decision to delink the US dollar from gold profoundly impacted the US and the global economies. Against this backdrop, the Nixon administration cemented a deal with Saudi Arabia. The US dollar would be the medium of sale for all Saudi oil sales in return for Washington’s commitment to supply military equipment to Saudi Arabia and protect its national security. Money from the sale of oil would be funnelled back into the United States in treasury bond markets. This kept the dollar stable and promoted its use in oil and commodity trading, giving rise to the term petrodollar and strengthening its position as the world’s key reserve, financing and transactional currency.^[v] However, bilateral transactions are increasingly taking place using local currencies, which has caused questions to be raised about the dollar’s decline.

BRICS

The acronym BRICs came to be used in economic writings to refer to Brazil, Russia, India, and China, the four countries that had formed an intergovernmental organisation which held its first summit in 2009. When South Africa joined the organisation in 2010, it became known as BRICS. In 2024, the BRICS was expanded to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. Two other countries were also invited to join: Argentina and Saudi Arabia. Argentina later declined the invitation, and Saudi Arabia has yet to accept formally. The expanded group is referred to as the ‘BRICS+’. The Kazan Summit of 2024, hosted by Russia, reportedly agreed to create a new category of BRICS countries. As per media reports, Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan and Vietnam were offered membership, but no further details are available.^[vi]

When BRICS was founded in 2009, the underlying idea was that as an informal grouping of emerging economies, it could influence the policies initiated by international institutions that were overly dominated by Western powers whose interests they served to the detriment of developing countries. They sought an alternative to what was perceived as the dominance of the Western viewpoint in major multilateral groupings, such as the World Bank, the Group of Seven (G7), and the UN Security Council. Thus, the thrust was coordinating its members’ economic and diplomatic policies, creating new financial institutions, and reducing dependence on the U.S. dollar. However, this approach had inherent contradictions. The countries have diverse interests and independent foreign policies that reflect on their policies while dealing with the United States and the stand they take on issues such as the Russia-Ukraine war, the Israel-Hamas war and other conflicts. Their shared interests include increasing economic development, focusing on multilateralism, opposing non-UN sanctions, and advocating for global governance reforms.^[vii] Recently, emphasis has also been laid on creating alternate global finance systems to reduce dependency on the US dollar.^[viii]

A significant achievement of the BRICS is the founding of the New Development Bank (NDB) in 2014. The NDB provides development funds to countries as an alternative to the World Bank and the IMF. The group’s expansion in 2024 indicates growing economic and demographic heft, enabling it to exert more significant influence on global financial systems and issues such as climate change and clean energy.

Along with the founding of the NDB, the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) was also agreed upon. A treaty to that effect was signed in July 2014 and ratified by the BRICS countries at the Summit held in July 2015. The CRA protects member countries against global liquidity pressures. It is a framework for providing support through liquidity and precautionary instruments in response to actual or potential short-term balance of payments pressures.

The NDB and the CRA were designed as alternatives to the Bretton Woods arrangement because it was perceived that institutions like the World Bank and the IMF were failing to meet the needs of poorer nations. Commenting on the Bretton Woods system, UN Secretary-General António Guterres pithily remarked: “Rich countries created this system to benefit rich countries.” While the NDB provides easier access to funds than the World Bank, it is restricted to its members. Its lending focuses on clean energy, transportation, sanitation, and social development. Since its operations began in 2016, the NDB has approved over $32 billion for ninety-six projects. While this sum is not insignificant, the World Bank lends far more. In fiscal 2023 itself, the World Bank lending was USD 72.8 billion.^[ix] In terms of its sheer scale of operations, the NDB cannot replace the World Bank. Also, its ambitions to redesign the global financial system have fallen short, as it maintains many of its competitors’ practices. The NDB and CRA are meant to mimic the World Bank and IMF, respectively, so that, through alternative lending institutions, South-South cooperation could be reinvigorated, and dependence on the World Bank and IMF could be reduced. That has not happened.

BRICS+ is also not a homogenous bloc. Significant tensions exist among the original members, India and China, and between newer members, such as Egypt-Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia-UAE (should the former accept the invite to join the bloc). This makes coordinated action on global issues, such as the Russia-Ukraine war, and reforming existing institutions, such as expanding the UN Security Council, challenging. Economic and political instability in member countries also impacts BRICS cohesiveness. China is experiencing an economic slump, while Brazil and South Africa have experienced collapsing state capacity, yearslong recessions, chronic corruption, and crumbling infrastructure in the past decade. The push to enlarge the bloc is also fraught with challenges. Russia and China favour expansion, while India and Brazil are more hesitant, considering their warm relationship with the US and fearing a dilution in their influence in the bloc. While Russia may desire BRICS to head in a more strongly anti-West direction, there will be resistance from India, UAE, Brazil and Saudi Arabia as and when it joins the bloc. As Boris Bondarev, former Russian diplomat to the United Nations, told the Washington Post in 2023: “Nobody in this bloc is willing to put themselves in the position that Russia is currently in, as an open adversary of the West and the United States, risking armed confrontation.”^[x]

However, the BRICS will continue to expand. Many analysts believe that a growing BRICS+ could undermine the Western-led international order. Others believe that the BRICS’s ambition to create its currency and develop a workable alternative to existing institutions faces insurmountable challenges. The jury is still out. One thing, though, is certain: The group will also face pushback from developed nations. How it navigates the headwinds it will encounter will determine its heft in the coming years.

The Dollar Question

The BRICS countries have serious concerns about the US dollar’s primacy in international trade, which exposes them to Western sanctions. They advocate de-dollarization and increased trade in local currencies or a potential common BRICS currency. A BRICS currency is unlikely for the present, as it would require significant political compromises, including a banking union, a fiscal union, and general macroeconomic convergence. The dollar is still used in over 80% of global trade and is favoured as a stable currency. It would be difficult for the BRICS countries to develop an alternative that could have the world’s trust.

The Biden administration has downplayed talk of de-dollarization. National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that Washington doesn’t see BRICS as a geopolitical rival, while Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has largely dismissed efforts to move away from the dollar. The general view in Western capitals is that the BRICS countries’ ambitions are exaggerated, and internal challenges within the grouping hamper any real threat to Western economic health.^[xi]

However, doubts and concerns persist, with some Western analysts stating that anti-West sentiment is increasing and that the West needs to reform financial institutions. Some scholars also opine that the BRICS de-dollarization efforts could eventually undermine the dollar’s strength and, thus, the health of the U.S. economy. The prevailing sentiment is that “Ignoring BRICS as a major policy force—something the U.S. has been prone to do in the past—is no longer an option. “^[xii]

President-elect Donald Trump also expressed that concern on his social media, TruthSocial, on 30 November. “The idea that the BRICS Countries are trying to move away from the Dollar while we standby and watch is OVER. We require a commitment from these Countries that they will neither create a new BRICS currency nor back any other currency to replace the mighty US Dollar, or they will face 100% tariffs and should expect to say goodbye to selling into the wonderful US Economy.”^[xiii] This threat will undoubtedly put a hold on any immediate plans to replace the US dollar, but the fact that Mr Trump was compelled to make it indicates high levels of concern in the US about the possibility of the US dollar being replaced.

Since the end of the Second World War, the US dollar has been the world’s most used currency. It is the currency of choice for international trade, especially for major commodities such as oil. Higher dollar demand enables the US to borrow money at a lower cost and helps keep its huge external debt down[xiv]. While the rise of other currencies, such as the Euro, has eroded the US advantage somewhat, the dollar remains central to the global payments system. It increases the power of US financial sanctions.

But the pushback against the dollar has started. Today, India buys oil from Russia without using the dollar. So does China. However, developing a BRICS currency is far from the horizon. The dollar is unlikely to be overtaken as the world’s leading reserve currency anytime soon, but it will slowly come to share influence with other currencies. This trend will be aggressively resisted by the US. Some analysts believe that what we are witnessing today is the first sign of the end of the American empire. That remains to be seen. However, in the final analysis, BRICS will prioritise its efforts to achieve greater financial inclusivity in the world order. The coming decade will be interesting to watch.

Author Brief Bio:Maj. Gen. Dhruv C. Katoch is Editor, India Foundation Journal and Director, India Foundation.

References:

[i]Bayoumi, Tamim. “The Postwar Economic Achievement.” IMF eLibrary, Jan. 1995, https://doi.org/10.5089/9781451952643.022.A013.

^[ii] Tamim Bayoumi, The Postwar Economic Achievement, available at https://www.scribd.com/document/760037343/022-article-A013-en

^[iii] Rajiv Malhotra and Aravindan Neelakandan, Breaking India: Western Interventions in Dravidian and Dalit Faultlines, Amaryllis, 2011, p8.

^[iv]CFR.org Editors. “What does the G7 do?” Council on Foreign Relations, 24 June 2024, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-does-g7-do.

^[v]Achhangani. “Is The End of the Petrodollar Near?  – Atlantic Council.” Atlantic Council, 21 June 2024, www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/econographics/is-the-end-of-the-petrodollar-near.

^[vi]Curtis, John. “The BRICS Group: Overview and Recent Expansion.” House of Commons Library, 11 Nov. 2024, commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-10136/.

^[vii]Ferragamo, Mariel. “What Is the BRICS Group and Why Is It Expanding?” Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, 18 Oct. 2024, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brics-group-and-why-it-expanding.

^[viii] Ibid. 4

^[ix]World Bank. “World Bank Annual Report 2023.” World Bank Lending, 2023, thedocs.worldbank.org/en/doc/a60d0e2b975a3b94bc5cfbaa8e1cb269-0090012023/related/WBAR23-App-FY23-Lending-Presentation.pdf.

^[x] Ferragamo, Mariel. “What Is the BRICS Group and Why Is It Expanding?” Council on Foreign Relations, Council on Foreign Relations, 18 Oct. 2024, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brics-group-and-why-it-expanding.

^[xi] Ibid.

^[xii] Ibid.

^[xiii]Honderich, Holly. “Trump Threatens 100% Tariff on Bric Nations.” BBC, 1 Dec. 2024, www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgrwj0p2dd9o.

[xiv]Siripurapu, Anshu. “The Dollar: The World’s Reserve Currency.” Council on Foreign Relations, 19 July 2023, www.cfr.org/backgrounder/dollar-worlds-reserve-currency.