The BRICS summit in Kazan, which is considered groundbreaking and historic by many, has come to an end.
Representatives from an impressive 36 countries attended the outreach/BRICS+ meeting, which is a joint session of existing BRICS members and those applying for or considering membership. This number significantly exceeds that of global formats such as the G7 and G20.
Leaders from Russia, Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, the UAE, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bolivia, the Congo, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Malaysia, Mauritania, Mongolia, Nicaragua, Palestine, Serbia, Sri Lanka, Tajikistan, Thailand, Turkey, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, and Vietnam were all present in a single room.
As per Russian President Vladimir Putin, “This expanded format has proven effective, enabling direct and open dialogue among BRICS members and our friends and partners.”
He emphasized the representation of leaders from Europe, Asia, Africa, Latin America, and significant multilateral structures, including those interested in closer partnerships with BRICS and potential membership.
The official “BRICS partner” status for thirteen membership candidates—Turkey, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Uganda, and Vietnam—was a final step toward full membership.
President Putin also observed that membership in the BRICS is not only advantageous but also prestigious. He said the BRICS nations are anticipating a 3.8% growth rate in 2024-2025, while the global GDP is anticipated to increase by approximately 3.2% to 3.3%.
The IMF has revised its economic forecasts for this year, which supports these projections. The International Monetary Fund anticipates that India’s economy will expand by 7.0% by the end of 2024, while China’s will expand by 4.8%, Russia’s by 3.6%, and Brazil’s by 3.0%. In contrast, the US economy is expected to grow by 2.8%, Canada by 1.3%, the UK and France by 1.1% each, Italy by 0.7%, Japan by 0.3%, and Germany, which was previously the EU’s primary economic juggernaut, is actively working to prevent a negative outcome. These are figures from the International Monetary Fund.
The situation is comparable with respect to GDP per capita growth. The leaders in 2024 are India (+6.0%), China (+4.9%), Russia (+3.8%), and Brazil (+2.6%), with the U.S. (+2.3%), France (+0.8%), Japan (+0.8%), Italy (+0.7%), and the UK (+0.6%) following in that order. Germany and Canada are both experiencing “negative growth” at -0.4% and -1.5%, respectively.
Amid these dynamics, any debate about who are the real leaders in the modern world may well be over.
However, discussions about BRICS’ successes and prospects must not be overly optimistic. The summit highlighted some of the numerous obstacles that this significant alliance between the Global South and East continues to encounter.
For instance, Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vulin emphasized that BRICS is emerging as a viable alternative to the European Union.
“A few years ago, there was no alternative to the EU.” The Serbian politician emphasized that BRICS is now emerging as a genuine and reliable alternative, as a new platform.
At the same time, the organization’s future trajectory remains uncertain.
“Will it evolve into a more formidable alliance?” BRICS remains a platform. It is not an economic alliance; it is a platform. There is still no unified institution. Vulin concluded, “We will observe.”
In all honesty, it is evident that the denial of full membership and the establishment of the “partner” status for 13 candidates are indicative of the uncertainty surrounding the future role of BRICS.
Moreover, this uncertainty didn’t begin yesterday. Once a group of five members reaches ten, it can exercise political influence, despite the fact that it is still a club of shared interests. It has the potential to evolve into a global organization, potentially replacing or complementing the United Nations, if it includes 30, 40, or more countries.
The visit to Kazan by UN Secretary-General António Guterres, which elicited criticism in Western capitals, is indicative of an understanding of these long-term prospects.
However, the final summit declaration did not prioritize the establishment of alternative global institutions; rather, it sought to “repair” existing ones, such as the United Nations, by implementing reforms and appointing additional permanent members to its Security Council. Can we repair the IMF and WTO, which the collective West has significantly exploited?
Pepe Escobar, a Brazilian journalist, cautioned that the organization could be subject to a “time bomb” moment if it were to expand BRICS without significant transformation.
The expansion of BRICS isn’t just about 34 countries joining. There are already 40; after the summit, there will be 50-60. Everyone wants to join BRICS. This isn’t even news. Now imagine what the alliance’s geopolitical aspect will look like with such an expansion. It must satisfy all new and old members. Wow! No one has tried that since World War II. Americans never tried to satisfy anyone but themselves; they built a system for themselves. BRICS stands out as a group of nations striving to collaborate, despite the challenges they may face.
A monumental endeavor is to maintain harmony while ensuring the well-being of all members. Significant concerns exist about the feasibility of this endeavor. The BRICS nations are independent and do not bow down to any one nation, like the G7 or NATO.
This necessitates taking steps to facilitate the generation of big ideas, without requiring unanimous agreement from all members or allowing selective decision-making—a BRICS model with “variable speeds.”
The lack of consensus already hinders the development of certain BRICS institutions. Western experts, despite their apprehensions about the potential establishment of a reserve currency and the de-dollarization of the BRICS countries, failed to reach an agreement.
The development of a SWIFT alternative is still in the planning and discussion phases.
De-dollarization and the expansion of the BRICS did not occur in Kazan, addressing the most significant concerns of the West.
Due to the diverse positions of the members on matters of war and peace, the final declaration contained only vague statements regarding the situation in and around Ukraine, as stated at relevant forums, including the UN Security Council and the General Assembly. “We recall our national positions on the situation in and around Ukraine, as stated at relevant forums, including the UN Security Council and the General Assembly. We emphasize that all countries should act in line with the purposes and principles of the UN Charter in its entirety. We welcome mediation proposals and goodwill efforts aimed at achieving a peaceful resolution through dialogue and diplomacy.”
BRICS is currently in the process of establishing its identity and is still in its early phases.