Between 6-7 July the 17th annual BRICS summit will take place in the Brazilian city of Rio de Janeiro. It will meet as an expanded bloc comprising of many new member nations. The annual gathering is an occasion for the member nations to take stock of the increasingly complex global order marked by conflict and chaos. As the global power relations are in a state of flux, it will also have to take stock of the situation and decide how best to navigate the choppy waters.
As an intergovernmental organisation BRICS has some impressive statistics to go on. Its membership consists of 24 nations belonging to the first and second tier global powers. It comprises of around 45 percent of the world population. BRICS also accounts for 30 percent of the global oil output. As an economic block, its share of Global GDP is larger than that of the G7.
From its initial moniker the BRICS group has already expanded from its five members – South Africa, Russia, China, Brazil and India to include a diverse group of nations displaying an array divergent ideology. To critics, what holds them together, is their undying hatred for a unipolar world order led by the United States. The forthcoming summit in Rio de Janeiro is a critical event in the life of BRICS. It is being held at a time of very challenging times.
The event, however, is likely to be overshadowed by some key issues and absentees.
One of the significant absentees in the summit will be Russian President Vladimir Putin. According to Kremlin foreign policy aide Yuri Ushakov, Putin would skip the event. Kremlin acknowledges the fact that Putin’s participation in the summit, while vital, he is forced to stay home as there is long-running arrest warning pending against him by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for his alleged war crimes in the ongoing Russo-Ukrainian war. Putin has always erred on the side of caution, only travelling where he is safe from being apprehended.
Putin, despite being considered an international pariah, has provided critical leadership to BRICS in recent years. In October 2024, Putin “ostracised by the West” played host to 36 world leaders from the powerful Global South in the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, designed to display Moscow as anything but isolated.
Other BRICS founding members have not necessarily withdrawn their support towards him despite his military adventurism in the Ukraine and his rather inglorious status in the West. It goes without saying that, some of the most powerful nations in the non-western camp consider Putin a “valued ally” and “friend”.
While many in the Western capitals would like to describe BRICS and the melee of nations that comprise its core membership, as anti-western, that labelling is not necessarily a correct assessment. While there has always been hints of anti-westernism in their ideological disposition, some core members have sought to downplay that narrative. The incoming leadership of BRICS is a case in point in this regard. Brazil’s president, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, despite his militant credentials, has always insisted BRICS is “not against anyone”, and more so “it is not anti-Western”.
To the sceptics, although they have their annual meetings with much fanfare, these summits rarely produce groundbreaking documents. In a deeply divided world in the throes of constant inter-state wars threatening global peace, deep environmental malaise, and a broken-down economic system, the BRICS has not necessarily provided a credible alternative to the status quo.
Feeble response
The powerlessness of the BRICS was amply evident in the recent Israeli-Iranian war. The BRICS, despite having Iran as a member nation, could not alternate the course of the war. Teheran, while it was counting solid support from Brazil, China, India, Russia and South Africa, it was exposed to the cold realities.
At the height of this war, Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman, Esmaeil Baqaei stated: “we hope that BRICS will take a position, none of these powers were forthcoming in their support for Iran. The only feeble statement to come out from BRICS in support of Iran was that it “express grave concern” over the incident and violation of international law and the Charter of the United Nations.”
Simply put, while it proclaimed BRICS remains committed to promoting international peace and security and to fostering diplomacy, it could do precious little when it comes to intervening in the fast deteriorating affair or act as a power broker. Instead, it is the United States that provided the critical leadership to impose a cease fire.
This not only puts in the centre questions about BRICS’ effectiveness, but most important of all, its relevance in a challenging global environment relating to peace, security and stability.
The lack of relevance of BRICS in a fast-changing international order is further evidenced from the fact that it has, yet, not able to agree upon a common currency. Given their economic importance and the market share there have been constant talk of having a common currency among the member nations to better facilitate trade, but most importantly to counter the dominance of the US Dollar.
A house divided
Despite its ambition to work as a forum for the Global South, the BRICS’ overall influence is often constrained by its own internal limitations. Although they share a common identity for being part of the Global South, the member nations have never shied away from expressing their dislike for another. Unlike the G7 grouping the heterogeneity of BRICS has always been a stumbling block towards achieving common goals. The relationships among some key members are marked by a lack of mutual trust and open rivalry.
Rivals and enemies like China and India are cases in point. Both have gone to indirect military confrontation in recent years. In fact, their rivalry and distaste for each other is legendary. When Lula’s administration offered an official invitation to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the Chinese Premier Xi Jinping pulled out of the summit.
Critics have commented, the invitation to Modi potentially puts Xi as a supporting actor in the club and the thus the snub. As in the past, bilateral conflicts among member nations and lack of a unified vision and approach to addressing pressing global issues, is likely to thwart the forthcoming summit. Such open tensions between its core members is what defines the BRICS today. Therefore, the Rio de Janeiro summit is unlikely to offer anything substantial to the world – let alone a full photo op for its leaders.
[Image: Leaders of BRICS nations during the 2023 Summit in Johannesburg. Credit: Ricardo Stuckert / PR]
Amalendu Misra is a professor of international politics, Lancaster University, United Kingdom and author of Towards a Philosophy of Narco Violence in Mexico, New York: Palgrave. He’s on X (formerly Twitter) @MisraAmalendu. The views expressed in this article are those of the author.
