olivia-hartono
Leaders of the BRICS grouping are gathering in New Delhi for a high-stakes summit, seeking to project collective influence even as deep geopolitical fractures and ongoing military conflicts test the cohesion of the expanding alliance. Hosted by India across the weekend of September 12 and 13, the summit takes place against a backdrop of severe global economic strain and escalating diplomatic challenges among its own member states.
The arrival of key world leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin who landed in the Indian capital on Friday morning, underscores the diplomatic weight attached to the meeting. For the host nation, the assembly provides an opportunity to elevate the bloc’s international profile at a time when the alliance is approaching the twentieth anniversary of its initial formation.
Yet the summit's agenda is heavily overshadowed by active regional warfare. More than six months after the United States and Israel launched military strikes against Iran, the conflict has laid bare stark divisions within the newly expanded group. Iran, which joined the alliance in 2024, has been engaged in hostilities and launched attacks of its own, creating direct friction with other member states, particularly the United Arab Emirates, which entered the bloc during the same enlargement wave.
The upcoming discussions in New Delhi represent the third formal attempt by the alliance to establish a unified consensus regarding the war. The crisis has disrupted international markets and highlighted the complex balancing act facing a coalition whose members increasingly find themselves on opposing sides of major international confrontations.
Originally established by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and later South Africa, the bloc was formed to counterbalance Western dominance and advocate for emerging economies. In recent years, the group has significantly expanded its geographic footprint to incorporate Iran, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Indonesia, significantly broadening its demographic and economic footprint across the Global South.
Despite this expansion, international affairs analysts suggest that while BRICS has succeeded in accelerating the transition toward a multipolar world, it continues to face significant hurdles in building a functional, unified alternative to Western-led governance frameworks. The group has broadened economic options for developing nations, but internal discord continues to inhibit unified action on foreign policy and international security matters.
Furthermore, despite ongoing discussions surrounding alternative financial structures, the United States dollar retains its commanding role in global commerce. This dynamic has led several geopolitical scholars to suggest that the alliance’s effectiveness should not be evaluated by whether it can fully supplant Western institutions, but rather by the degree to which it restricts the unilateral exercise of Western dominance.
According to Brazilian researchers Octavio Oliveira and Enzo Godinho from the BRICS Studies Group at the University of Sao Paulo, international observers often misjudge the coalition by expecting a sudden structural revolution. They argue that although BRICS does not possess the institutional capacity or formal apparatus of organizations like the United Nations to resolve complex security crises, its value lies in providing a robust platform for Global South nations to cooperate and articulate their interests independently of Western oversight.
The scholars emphasize that BRICS was conceived to challenge the prevailing international architecture rather than completely dismantle or replace it. The initial momentum for the coalition grew out of the fallout from the 2008 global financial crisis and the collapse of the World Trade Organization’s Doha Round, which had failed to deliver structural trade reforms favorable to developing countries.
Faced with institutional inertia in traditional forums, emerging economies recognized that collective organization was essential to amplify their voices on the world stage. By pursuing a shared development agenda outside the perimeter of Western-dominated bodies and the United Nations system, the group established a foundational challenge to the post-war international order.
Academic experts point out that the fundamental motivations binding the member states remain consistent today. Sean Burges, an associate professor of international studies at Carleton University in Canada, notes that the coalition is primarily united by two pragmatic objectives: maximizing international trade opportunities and resisting Western political conditionality regarding domestic governance, democracy, and human rights standards.
Rather than assuming the expansive global governance obligations traditionally held by the G7 nations, BRICS members have focused on securing policy autonomy and advancing domestic priorities such as poverty reduction and national development. This pragmatic approach has enabled members to build practical economic mechanisms that facilitate South-South cooperation without traditional political constraints.
Burges highlights specific examples of these alternative pathways, such as China’s focus on providing development finance without political conditions and Brazil’s efforts to establish direct central bank currency swap arrangements. These initiatives have catalyzed a noticeable surge in commercial exchange among member states and across developing nations more broadly.
At the same time, traditional multilateral bodies like the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have gradually shifted their operational approaches, with governance-linked lending conditions becoming less rigid amid competition from alternative development partners.
Meanwhile, the geopolitical landscape that BRICS initially set out to confront has undergone fundamental changes. Policy analyst Guy Burton points out that the concept of a unified "West" has grown increasingly fragmented due to political and diplomatic strains between the United States and its European allies, creating ambiguity over how non-Western coalitions position their challenges.
As the leaders convene in New Delhi, the assembly highlights the central paradox defining the modern BRICS alliance: while the group commands enormous collective economic weight and represents a vital forum for developing nations, translating that scale into cohesive geopolitical action remains constrained by the diverse and competing national interests within its ranks.
Comments (0)