By Advocate Sidra Sadozai
Overview
Many Westerners once disregarded the BRICS bloc—which stands for Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—as a purely symbolic alliance with minimal practical clout. That view is quickly shifting today. With the addition of nations like Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates in 2024, BRICS now accounts for more than 40% of the world’s population and almost 30% of its GDP (measured in terms of purchasing power parity). The question of whether BRICS can actually challenge Western economic dominance is crucial as the bloc works to create alternative financial structures and challenge the dollar-dominated global order.
BRICS’s Ascent: From Idea to Geopolitical Power
The term “BRIC” was first used in 2001 by Jim O’Neill, an economist at Goldman Sachs, to describe rapidly expanding emerging economies that were predicted to transform the world economy. In 2009, the official organization was created as a forum for its members to coordinate politically and economically. The 2010 addition of South Africa gave BRICS a more global identity and a stronger presence in Africa.
Following global crises, such as the 2008 financial crisis, COVID-19, and Western sanctions on Russia, the BRICS nations started to view themselves as alternatives to Western-led organizations like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO, in addition to emerging economies. Their demands for multipolarity and changes to global financial governance are becoming more and more relevant to developing nations in the Global South.
The BRICS Challenge’s main pillars are: 1. Economic Weight and Growth Potential
The combined GDP (PPP) of the BRICS nations now exceeds that of the G7. South Africa, Brazil, and Russia are resource-rich nations, while China and India rank in the top five economies in the world. Because of their economic power, BRICS have a solid platform on which to demand more influence in international finance, trade, and development.
The BRICS Challenge’s main pillars are:
1. Economic Weight and Growth Potential
Bank for New Development (NDB)
As an alternative to the Western-dominated World Bank and IMF, the BRICS-founded New Development Bank was founded in 2015 and has its headquarters in Shanghai. The NDB, which has a $100 billion capital base, finances sustainable development and infrastructure projects in its member nations and has grown to include new members like Bangladesh and Egypt.
The NDB encourages “non-interference” in domestic policies, which is a concept that appeals to many developing nations leery of Western conditionalities, in contrast to the IMF, which frequently imposes stringent conditions.
De-Dollarization Initiatives
Reducing reliance on the US dollar is one of BRICS’s most ambitious objectives. Bilateral trade in local currencies has been started by a number of member states, including China and Brazil and India and Russia. The idea of a BRICS reserve currency based on a basket of member currencies has been especially supported by Russia, which is subject to Western sanctions.
If successful, this action could weaken the dollar’s position in international trade and finance while providing developing countries greater flexibility and protecting them from the consequences of US sanctions or monetary policy.
Why BRICS Is Still Inadequate (For Now)
BRICS has significant internal obstacles that prevent it from becoming a cohesive alternative to the West, despite its aspirations and expanding membership.
1. Insufficient Cohesion
Unlike the EU, BRICS is not a political or economic union. Its members, particularly China and India, who share a disputed border and have engaged in deadly skirmishes, have different geopolitical interests. Regarding international security and diplomacy, Brazil and South Africa are very different from Russia or Iran.
BRICS finds it difficult to act together on important issues like climate change, international conflict, or institutional reform in the absence of a single policy or decision-making process.
2. Power Asymmetry With almost 70% of the BRICS GDP, China is the economic leader of the group. Smaller members are leery of a China-led BRICS because of this imbalance, believing it could replicate Western-style hegemony with an Eastern façade.
India is especially wary of Beijing or Moscow using BRICS as a geopolitical tool. How far BRICS can go as a unified anti-West front is limited by its strategic ties with the West and parallel membership in US-led organizations like the Quad.
- Institutional Restrictions
BRICS institutions are not as well-established as those in the West. Despite its promise, the NDB is still in its early stages. No BRICS customs union, free trade agreement, or political body exists to settle disputes within the bloc.The G7, IMF, WTO, and other Western organizations, on the other hand, have decades of experience, well-established frameworks, and worldwide clout. BRICS continues to construct those foundations.
Growing Interest in BRICS in the Global South
Notwithstanding these drawbacks, BRICS is becoming more respected in the Global South, particularly as more countries lose faith in the West’s policies regarding debt, development, and international governance.
Viewing BRICS as a platform that better reflects their interests than Western forums, nations like Argentina, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates have joined or shown interest in it. BRICS’s growth could ultimately make it a more potent Global South alliance that influences trade, development funding, and diplomacy in the future.
The Western Reaction: Cooperation or Containment?
Although it is not yet an existential threat, the emergence of BRICS presents a serious challenge to Western domination. Through the IMF, SWIFT network, and the dollar’s status as the world’s reserve currency, the US and its allies continue to control the global financial system.
But Washington and Brussels can no longer afford to ignore the tide of change. A contemptuous stance toward BRICS may encourage other nations to join it. Rather, the West needs to reconsider its development policies, adopt more inclusive strategies, and give emerging economies more clout in international organizations.
Conclusion: A Prolonged Multipolarity Game
Although BRICS is not ready to overthrow Western economic dominance right now, it is effectively undermining the West’s monopoly on global governance. It provides diversity, alternatives, and a forum for up-and-coming voices, especially from the Global South.
As the world’s power continues to move southward and eastward in the ensuing decades, BRICS may become a significant player in establishing international standards. Its ability to resolve internal conflicts, build institutional capacity, and present a cogent and convincing vision of a more fair and just global order will determine its success.
While the West continues to lead, BRICS is no longer in its wake.
