Editorial: Not just BRICS in the wall

The winds of change seem to be blowing hard in the prevailing world order, and nowhere was this gust more palpable than at the recently held 16th annual BRICS Summit at Kazan, Russia. As one of the most influential nations in the Global South, India took the lead in seeking a more equitable international order, urging for correcting distortions in global infrastructure that are a legacy of the colonial era. The participant nations nodded in agreement when India remarked that the benefits of globalisation have been uneven, and that the Global South has time and again borne the brunt of phenomena such as the pandemic and military conflicts, aggravating the burdens of health, food and fuel security.

It's about time this grouping stood up for itself and positioned its membership as a privilege worth vying for. And for good reason too. This year, four new members were added to the group — Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and UAE, while Saudi Arabia has emerged as an active participant, although not yet officially being recognised as a member. The 10 countries that now make up BRICS represent 35.6% of global GDP, in terms of purchasing power parity, and constitute 45% of the world's population. While Turkey, Azerbaijan and Malaysia have formally applied to become members, more than 40 nations have expressed an interest in joining the group, including emerging Asian powers such as Indonesia and Cambodia.

A majority of BRICS members see the global shift to multipolarity as a crucial process to ensure a more stable and equitable world order. One of the issues that was brought up at the summit towards that goal was recognising the need for an actionable roadmap for reforming Multilateral Development Banks (MDBs) so as to deal with the growing needs of emerging economies. India’s EAM Dr S Jaishankar sought to strengthen and expand multilateral platforms of an independent nature, while calling out the working procedures of existing platforms. The BRICS nations also called for reform of the Bretton Woods institutions like the IMF and the World Bank Group, which includes increased representation of EMDCs in leadership positions to reflect the contribution of EMDCs to the global economy.

This drove the narrative for the leaders agreeing to jointly develop the New Development Bank into a new type of multilateral development bank (MDB) in the 21st century and supporting further expansion of the BRICS-led bank’s membership. Political observers have pointed out that the initiatives that emerged around a potential BRICS-driven currency, settlement in local currency, and alternate, but inclusive cross-border payment instruments weren’t just aimed at countering the dominance of the dollar.

It is a stepping stone to counter the rising weaponisation of the dollar as well as international payment mechanisms via unilateral sanctions, freezing or confiscation of the assets or funds of other nations. Russia had specifically pushed for the creation of a new payment system that would offer an alternative to the global bank messaging network SWIFT and allow Moscow to dodge Western sanctions and trade with partners. Of course, there are a few caveats in all these optimistic overtures. Owing to its non-aligned status, India needs to be mindful and ensure that the BRICS does not emerge as a staunch anti-West group. New Delhi has successfully positioned itself as a critical component of groupings like BRICS as well as the Quad, and must use this opportunity to leverage a greater say in global governance.