The expansion of BRICS with the potential addition of Argentina, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates is a momentous geopolitical event. It is a testament to the increasing power of the Global South and marks a movement towards a multipolar world order. However, in the absence of strategic unity, rather than enabling effective global governance, this expansion may lead to further fragmentation amongst its members. In order for BRICS to be a serious alternative to Western institutions, it has to adopt practical and inclusive policies that balance diverging interests while enabling economic and political cooperation.
Essentially, BRICS is a coalition of opposites. It is comprised of both democracies and autocracies, oil importers and oil exporters, and emerging and failing economies. The central challenge is discovering areas of consensus. China and India, for instance, are regional rivals with differing strategic interests, and Iran and Saudi Arabia bear a history of geopolitical competition. Given that there is no formal procedure to address and manage such divergences, BRICS is susceptible to internal fragmentation that would limit its global role.
A primary objective of BRICS is reducing reliance on Western banks, particularly U.S. dollar hegemony in global trade. Even though Russia and China spearhead the de-dollarization movement, the rest of the members and potential new candidates are still strongly tied with the West and its economy. The BRICS New Development Bank (NDB) is a promising alternative, but it is still far from catching up with the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in terms of clout. In order to reshape global finance, BRICS would need to go beyond rhetoric and set up practical financial instruments that support trade in local currencies. For instance, creating a BRICS-backed digital currency or a larger regional payment platform would secure financial autonomy without risking the possibility that one dominant member, such as China, would dictate economic policies.
Nonetheless, such a diverse membership is prone to lead to strife. Rather than avoiding internal conflicts, BRICS should actively establish a formal conflict mediation process. The longstanding rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran, for example, can easily be extrapolated to BRICS negotiations, undermining the unity of the organization. A special diplomatic council in BRICS would be a platform for conflict resolution, intra-bloc stability, and conflict escalation avoidance in the form of full-blown geopolitical crises.
Even as BRICS is positioning itself as a counterweight against institutions dominated by the West, it would be counterproductive for it to adopt a confrontational approach against the Western World. Rather than isolating itself, BRICS should aim to collaborate and engage with current global institutions such as the G20 and the UN. By collaborating with these institutions on key global challenges such as climate change, technological innovation, and pandemic preparedness, BRICS would increase its credibility and influence on the global stage. The aim, therefore, should not be to attempt to replace current institutions but instead to complement and challenge them in a constructive manner.
The expansion of BRICS is an opportunity to redefine global governance, but it is subject to successful implementation. In order to avoid internal fragmentation and marginalization by the outside world, BRICS must be pragmatic and adaptable in approach. It must be more interested in economic cooperation through alternative financial institutions, institute conflict resolution mechanisms, and engage strategically with the rest of the global community. Merely expanding does not mean that BRICS would be powerful. Instead, its actual power in the global scene is subject to the quality of its governance and diplomatic acumen. As the world navigates through a time of geopolitical upheaval, BRICS is at a major crossroads. It can remain a symbolic coalition with minimal clout or become a driving force for economic and political stability on the international stage. In order to do so, the bloc leaders must set aside ideology and embrace practical, results-oriented solutions that work for their members and the global community.
By The European Institute for International Relations
