The recent 16th BRICS Summit marked a significant milestone in international relations. Over 15 years in the making, BRICS has become an effective platform for dialogue and cooperation among developing economies in a multipolar world.
Held in Kazan, in southwest Russia, the gathering drew global attention from Oct 22-24. BRICS now includes nine members — Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates — alongside 13 new partners — Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Türkiye, Uganda, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam. Numerous other countries have expressed their desire to join, highlighting the growing importance of BRICS.
BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), established in 2001, share similar organizational models. The SCO, the world’s largest regional organization by geography and population, includes Russia, China, India, Iran, and numerous observer countries and dialogue-partner countries. Its purpose is to strengthen regional confidence and maintain peace across the Eurasian landmass stretching from China to Türkiye.
Initially, Western perspectives dismissed these bodies as ineffective, much like earlier views of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Compared to the highly structured European Union and its precursors, these organizations were seen as mere talking-shops.
ASEAN, BRICS and the SCO all arose from a different vision. Their roots lie with the Bandung Conference, held in 1955, when newly decolonized and developing countries, including China, got together to assert an alternative approach to world peace and cooperation through the principles of nonalignment, noninterference, mutual respect for each other’s sovereignty, nonaggression, and peaceful coexistence.
While ASEAN has a geographical focus on Southeast Asia, the SCO spans a broad landmass, and BRICS extends globally to include Africa and South America. Speculation surrounds why Saudi Arabia declined BRICS membership, possibly to maintain relations with the United States. BRICS’ flexible nature, akin to ASEAN practices, avoids forcing such issues.
Today, BRICS presents an alternative to the “rules-based international order” led by principally the US at a time when it faces fractious domestic politics, wasteful spending, and proxy wars overseas. What is clear is that BRICS aims to create a more equitable global governance framework, a desire that rich countries should respect.
The 32-page Kazan Declaration — Strengthening Multilateralism for Just Global Development and Security — articulates this ambition, which outlines BRICS perspectives and priorities. The declaration prioritizes peace, sustainable development, and climate cooperation, asserting that socioeconomic progress requires security and stability.
The 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan marked not only a shift in global alliances but also a crucial moment in pursuing a more equitable and multipolar world order
A closely watched topic regarding BRICS is the potential introduction of a new BRICS currency, though this has yet to mature. The US dollar remains the primary currency for international transactions, even those not involving the US, such as trades between Brazil and South Africa, because of the stability the dollar supposedly provides, backed by the US’ economic strength.
The health of the US economy is important to all because it continues to import significant amounts from the rest of the world. In other words, other countries look to export to the US for their growth: The good health of the US is in the interest of BRICS countries.
Nevertheless, the dollar’s stability is increasingly questioned by its growing current account deficit and a national debt exceeding $35 trillion, with annual servicing costs around $1 trillion.
Concerns about America’s debt and reliance on borrowed funds for lifestyle and military spending have sparked debates about the dollar’s long-term future as the primary reserve currency.
Even more concerning is the declaration’s mention of “the disruptive effect of unlawful unilateral coercive measures, including illegal sanctions”, which affect the global economy by using the dollar as a geopolitical weapon. Group of Seven countries have imposed sanctions on BRICS members and partners, including Russia, Iran, Belarus, Cuba and China.
This context explains why many countries are keen to pursue “de-dollarization” to establish alternative systems for trade payment settlement. It should be entirely understandable that BRICS is actively developing efficient cross-border payment systems to reduce trade barriers and ensure access through local currencies in transactions between BRICS members, their partners, and other trading counterparts.
While skeptics argue that achieving true “de-dollarization” is complicated and distant, given the unparalleled supremacy of the US dollar, BRICS is working hard to provide flexibility. As BRICS gains momentum and attracts interest from more nations, it is evident that while the US dollar maintains its status as the leading reserve currency, the call for alternatives will persist.
That the US weaponizes the dollar to serve its political interests has provoked the development of alternatives to meet the shifting geopolitical and economic landscape, with BRICS emerging as a critical platform for serious discussions, planning, and rolling out projects.
Developing nations seek peace and universal rules through multilateral efforts. The 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan marked not only a shift in global alliances but also a crucial moment in pursuing a more equitable and multipolar world order.
The author is chief development strategist at the Institute for the Environment, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, and chairperson of its biodiversity strategy and action plan (BSAP) working group.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
