The BRICS+ Summit: Aspirations of Multipolarity Clash with National Interests
The recent BRICS+ summit held in Rio de Janeiro in July 2025 highlighted a basic tension within the association: while member nations publicly advocate for a shift towards a multipolar world order, their actions consistently prioritize individual national agendas. this disconnect casts doubt on the group’s ability to function as a cohesive option to established global structures like the G7.
A Rising Force Representing the Global South
The BRICS+ economic bloc – comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa, Indonesia, ethiopia, Iran, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates – collectively represents over half of the world’s population and approximately 40% of global GDP. This notable economic weight underscores the potential for BRICS+ to become a powerful force in reshaping the international landscape.The forum’s stated goal is to establish itself as a viable alternative to the G7 and the post-World War II international order, a system increasingly perceived by many developing nations as biased towards Western interests.
however, the path to achieving this ambition remains fraught with challenges. The initial BRICS nations, formed in 2009 as a coalition of non-G7 countries, have historically struggled with internal cohesion and a lack of unified objectives. While the group gained prominence following the 2010 economic crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic, and ongoing conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East, its identity has largely been defined by ideological positioning rather than concrete economic integration.
From Economic Bloc to Ideological alignment
Since 2019, BRICS has become increasingly associated with the concept of the “Global South,” positioning itself as a counterweight to the established international order.This narrative often frames the existing system as “pro-Western” and accuses it of hindering the growth of emerging economies. This stance has been amplified by leaders like Brazil’s President Lula da Silva,and echoed by nations like Colombia,Venezuela,Iran,and South africa.
However, this ideological alignment is often undermined by conflicting national interests. Divergences in policy regarding issues such as the war in Ukraine,criticisms of Israel,and the desire to reduce reliance on the US dollar demonstrate a lack of consensus that hinders the group’s ability to present a unified front. It’s certainly worth noting that initiatives like the G20,established in 1990 by France and South Africa,were also created to foster dialog between diverse economies,highlighting the ongoing need for inclusive global forums.
Contradictions and Divergent Geopolitical Goals
The Rio Summit exposed a critical contradiction at the heart of BRICS+: the attempt to forge a unified opposition to the “global west” among nations with fundamentally different geopolitical priorities. For example,the strategic alignment of India – a rising Asian power with global ambitions – with Iran,a nation focused on developing its nuclear capabilities despite international concerns,presents a significant challenge to cohesive action.
These discrepancies are fueled by broader global trends,including rapid population growth,increasing consumer demand,and the growing economic influence of countries like China. as of 2024,China accounts for roughly 18.4% of global GDP, a figure projected to rise in the coming years. This shift in economic power necessitates new mechanisms for international cooperation, but the BRICS+’s internal divisions raise questions about its ability to effectively address these challenges. The organization’s future success hinges on its ability to move beyond ideological rhetoric and forge a path towards genuine collaboration based on shared economic and developmental goals.