Can BRICS Reshape the Global Order?

By Nikola Mikovic

In many developing nations, BRICS is often viewed as a counterbalance to the Western-dominated world order. That is why a growing number of countries are seeking to join the organization whose acronym comes from its first five members – Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. But can BRICS, in its current form, offer a sustainable alternative for global governance?

In 2023, according to reports, over 40 states – most of them coming from the Global South – expressed interest in joining the group. On January 1, 2024, the intergovernmental organization admitted four new members: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. Many countries – from Gabon to Malaysia, from Thailand to Egypt, and from Indonesia to Cuba – remain in the BRICS’ waiting room, hoping to join the bloc during one of its upcoming summits.

At this point, Belarus has the highest chance of becoming the newest member of this informal group of states. Russia’s closest ally has recently joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). A potential BRICS membership would undoubtedly allow the Eastern European country’s President Alexander Lukashenko to proudly emphasize Minsk’s diplomatic victories amid sanctions the West has imposed on Belarus over the past four years.

Lukashenko sees BRICS as a “basis for economic development”, and claims that Minsk is ready to join “integration processes within the framework of the group.” But even though Belarus did not join the intergovernmental organization at its summit in the Russian city of Kazan, held on October 22-24, the former Soviet republic is expected to remain an important actor in BRICS’ “circle of friends” mechanism.

Meanwhile, this framework is likely to continue to expand, which means that dozens of nations around the world will collaborate with BRICS on various initiatives, sharing similar interests in promoting multipolarity and alternative global governance. But can that lead to significant changes in the international arena?

Who Do I Call if I Want to Talk to BRICS?

The problem for BRICS is that it still lacks real “levers of power.” While it has gathered a large number of countries that aspire to see a different world view, the organization itself does not have the mechanisms to influence global governance effectively. As such, it can hardly threaten the global dominance of the United States.

The famous question, allegedly set by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, “Who do I call if I want to talk to Europe?”, can now be applied to BRICS – “Who do I call if I want to talk to BRICS?” Indeed, despite being home to almost half of the world’s population, and generating 36% of global GDP, BRICS has not yet reached its full potential, and it still does not have a unified economic and political structure.

To create a more balanced distribution of power in international affairs, which is one of the organization’s major goals, BRICS would first need to form its own institutions. Presently, it has two common financial entities – Contingent Reserve Arrangement and New Development Bank. But if it aims to have a greater influence on the global economy, the group would need to create a payment system and possibly even introduce “a single BRICS currency”, which has reportedly been discussed within the BRICS expert community.

Economist Jim O’Neill, who coined the acronym BRIC in 2001 (it became BRICS only after South Africa joined the organization in 2010) predicted that the group would collectively dominate the global economy by 2050. The U.S. is, however, extremely unlikely to sit idly by watching the end of its dominance. To strengthen its role in the international arena, BRICS would need to not only create more common institutions but also achieve political unity over crucial economic and geopolitical issues. Only as a unified political and economic bloc can BRICS create a serious counterbalance to the Western-dominated global order. But it is a process that will not happen overnight.

In the long term, if it strengthens the organization’s very structure, BRICS may have the capacity to extend its influence far beyond its member countries. It may also be in a position to, as Ali Baqeri Kani, the Iranian deputy foreign minister recently said, “build a just world and safeguard the interests of independent nations.”

That is exactly what many nations in the Global South, that feel oppressed in the Western-dominated order, want to see. For some of them, BRICS represents a ray of light and hope for a prosperous and harmonious world. For BRICS members, on the other hand, the organization serves not only to expand multilateral cooperation but also to help them achieve their own geopolitical goals and improve their positions in the existing global order.

The Summit in Kazan

The summit in Kazan helped Moscow to show that Russia might be sanctioned by the West, but not by the rest of the world. Over 40 countries participated in the economic bloc of the BRICS summit in Kazan. The Kremlin, therefore, seems to have achieved its goal of turning the conference into the “largest foreign policy event that has ever been held in Russia.”

More importantly, the summit in the capital of Russia’s Tatarstan region was yet another opportunity for Moscow to increase bilateral cooperation not only with BRICS nations but also with the group’s “circle of friends.” Turkey, a BRICS hopeful, is certainly one of them. Putin’s meeting with Erdogan signals that Russia still sees Ankara as an important partner, even though Putin repeatedly delays his visit to Turkey.

Also, the fact that the leaders of two archenemies, Armenia and Azerbaijan, participated in the event and held bilateral talks allowed Moscow to present the summit as a big victory for Russian diplomacy. On the other hand, it remains unclear why Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, even though his country applied to join BRICS, skipped the summit in Kazan. It is also unclear why Russia’s nominal ally Kazakhstan, a week before the conference, said that it would not be applying for membership in the BRICS group of emerging economies.

Unlike the largest Central Asian country, Pakistan openly declared its ambition to join BRICS, while for China, the enlargement of the organization is a “major milestone in its history.” According to Chinese President Xi Jinping, the group has decided to invite many nations to become BRICS partner countries. He sees such a move as “another major progress in the development of BRICS.”

As the world enters a new period defined by turbulence and transformation, we are confronted with pivotal choices that will shape our future. Should we allow the world to descend into the abyss of disorder and chaos, or should we strive to steer it back on the path of peace and development?

Xi stressed at the summit in Kazan, pointing out that BRICS should “champion true multilateralism and adhere to the vision of global governance characterized by extensive consultation, joint contribution, and shared benefits.”

Some of those phrases were included in the motto of this year’s BRICS summit – Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security. To strengthen multilateralism, and create a multipolar world, which has reportedly been Russia’s and China’s goal for decades, BRICS nations would need to reach political unity first. That is, however, more difficult to achieve than it sounds, given that some of the organization’s key members remain great geopolitical rivals.

Thus, in the foreseeable future, BRICS may continue to expand, but gaining levers of power, crucial for positioning itself as a serious alternative to the Western-dominated world order, will be a challenging task.