BRICS is not collapsing. It continues to attract countries
seeking greater international influence, diversified partnerships and
alternatives—or supplements—to Western-dominated institutions. The real
question is whether its expanded membership can be converted into practical
influence or whether internal rivalries and geopolitical contradictions will
gradually erode its momentum.
The grouping contains democracies, monarchies and
authoritarian states; energy exporters and importers; sanctioned countries and
close Western partners. India and China remain strategic competitors, while
Russia’s war in Ukraine and Iran’s confrontation with Israel and the United
States complicate efforts to establish common security positions. BRICS has
neither a collective defence commitment nor an effective mechanism for
resolving disputes among its members.
This does not make BRICS irrelevant. Its greater value may
lie in functioning as a consultative platform for countries that disagree on
major geopolitical issues but cannot afford to ignore one another.
Under India’s 2026 presidency, security has moved higher on
the agenda, including terrorism, cybersecurity, critical infrastructure,
emerging technologies and other non-traditional threats. These areas offer
greater scope for practical cooperation than contentious questions surrounding
Ukraine, Gaza or US strategic power. Protecting ports, energy supplies, food
systems and digital infrastructure can produce tangible benefits without
requiring political unanimity.
Economic cooperation offers another opportunity. Despite
years of talk about de-dollarization, a common BRICS currency remains
unrealistic given members’ divergent monetary systems and political priorities.
More achievable goals include expanding local-currency trade, improving cross-border
payment systems and strengthening the New Development Bank.
BRICS should also clarify membership rules, distinguish the
rights and responsibilities of full members and partners, and streamline
decision-making. Consensus can remain essential for major declarations, while
willing members should be allowed to pursue voluntary initiatives in
infrastructure, food and energy security, climate adaptation, public health,
cybersecurity and trade facilitation.
Ultimately, BRICS will not gain relevance simply by
expanding or opposing Western dominance. Its longevity will depend on whether
it can build institutions and deliver tangible benefits. Institutions do not
last because of what they oppose; they last because of what they build.
