BRICS Kazan Summit 2024: The Rise of a New Global Power Bloc

Instead of dwindling support, BRICS has expanded and is drawing increasing interest from nations worldwide, especially from the Global South. With 24 world leaders present and four new members officially joining this year, the message from BRICS was clear-global influence is diversifying, and the age of Western-dominated geopolitics may be fading.

Beyond pageantry, the Kazan summit showcased a deepening sense of purpose within BRICS: the drive to foster a fairer, multipolar world. The gathering highlighted the bloc’s broader mission and growing appeal to countries seeking alternatives to the West-centric international order.

With over 30 nations expressing a strong interest in joining BRICS, the summit underscores a changing landscape. Countries from the Global South-often historically marginalized by Western institutions-are gravitating toward BRICS in search of genuine political and economic alternatives. The West’s attempts to control the narrative and punish Russia following the Ukraine conflict has underscored the West’s ability to deploy economic pressures, from seizing state assets to sanctioning third parties.

But for many nations, this heavy-handedness has been a wake-up call. If the West can bring a country as powerful as Russia to its knees, what could it do to others in the Global South? This question, understandably, has made BRICS attractive as a forum to explore political and economic options independent of Western oversight.

One of the summit’s most anticipated outcomes was the question of BRICS expansion. Officially welcoming four new members this year, BRICS also rolled out “partner status” for 13 additional nations, offering a middle ground for those eager to align with BRICS without jumping fully into membership. For BRICS, finding a sustainable path for growth and cohesion is crucial; each new member brings its own agenda and sensitivities, which could complicate decision-making.

Expansion is already presenting challenges. BRICS lacks a formal voting system and instead relies on consensus, a process that becomes harder with every new member. To navigate this complexity, Putin and other BRICS leaders introduced the “partnership” status to strike a balance. Partner countries, including Algeria, Nigeria, Türkiye, and Indonesia, gain some of the benefits of affiliation while allowing the forum to retain its focus.

The strategic selection of new BRICS partners reveals the bloc’s effort to diversify its influence across regions. It’s not just about numbers; it’s about positioning BRICS as an international platform that can serve different regions and represent diverse interests.

Consider these additions:

Türkiye: While a NATO member, Türkiye has increasingly leaned toward a middle-ground approach. Its inclusion signals BRICS’ flexibility and commitment to forging partnerships based on practical interests, not ideological purity.

Algeria and Belarus: Their acceptance points to Russian influence, bolstering the group’s foothold in North Africa and Eastern Europe.

Nigeria and Uganda: Two African countries, whose inclusion reinforces the bloc’s engagement with Africa, representing a continent eager for alternatives to Western influence.

Indonesia and Thailand: By bringing in Southeast Asian countries, BRICS expands its influence in a region long tethered to the West but interested in exploring new alignments.

While countries like India initially had reservations about Türkiye’s inclusion, given its stance on issues like Kashmir, a broader consensus ultimately won out. The new additions were carefully chosen to reflect a wide geographic reach while remaining strategically relevant to each BRICS member’s interests.

The BRICS Kazan Declaration, a document spanning over 130 paragraphs, reinforced the bloc’s ambitious goals to recalibrate the global order. The declaration covered everything from United Nations reform to a rejection of unilateral sanctions, highlighting BRICS’ aim to create an environment of equality and respect among nations.

Some key points include:

UN and WTO Reforms: BRICS once again pushed for overhauling these institutions to better represent the interests of developing nations, marking a united call for global governance that transcends Western interests.

Financial Independence: With the U.S. dollar’s dominance in mind, BRICS is exploring ways to conduct financial transactions in local currencies, aiming to decrease reliance on Western-controlled financial mechanisms.

Condemnation of Coercive Measures: The declaration underscored BRICS’ stance against the West’s frequent use of sanctions, viewing them as unjust and often disruptive to uninvolved nations.

The Kazan Declaration is an assertion that the BRICS alliance wants more than a seat at the table-it wants to help set the table, creating new rules and establishing a genuinely multipolar world order. And with this vision, BRICS leaders are positioning the alliance as a voice for those who have traditionally been sidelined in global decision-making.

New Development Bank: A Financial Tool for the Global South

The New Development Bank (NDB) continues to be one of BRICS’ most powerful instruments. Established to fund projects across member countries, the NDB has sanctioned nearly $35 billion in development projects since its inception. Unlike the World Bank or IMF, which have been criticized for high-interest lending and heavy-handed requirements, the NDB offers BRICS nations a chance to finance sustainable growth on their own terms.

In Kazan, BRICS leaders discussed further financial integration, including using local currencies for trade, which could shield member countries from dollar-driven volatility. This pivot to local currencies could reduce exchange risks and offer greater stability to member economies, signaling BRICS’ determination to build a financial ecosystem that is less dependent on the dollar.

Unity in Diversity? The Challenges Ahead for BRICS

While BRICS’ aspirations are lofty, its internal challenges are significant. The alliance includes nations with vastly different political systems and economic profiles, from democratic India to one-party China, and from advanced economies like China to emerging markets like South Africa. Internal rivalries and geopolitical tensions are inevitable.

The Ukraine conflict underscored these differences. Although BRICS managed to present a unified front on the issue, disagreements remain about the extent to which the alliance should back Russia. These divisions, while managed for now, could test BRICS’ cohesion in the future.

Despite the tensions, the bloc’s united stance at Kazan showed a shared commitment to the BRICS mission. If the alliance can maintain this cohesion while continuing to add new partners, it could indeed redefine the rules of global engagement.

The Kazan Declaration’s Stance on Global Issues

The Kazan Declaration did not shy away from taking a strong stance on various international conflicts and issues, signaling BRICS’ intent to actively engage on the global stage:

Diplomatic Standoffs: The declaration condemned the recent violence in Beirut, attacks in Gaza, and the bombing of Iranian diplomatic premises in Damascus, showing a willingness to address conflicts that other global powers may sidestep.

Cybersecurity and Misinformation: In a nod to the increasing threats in the digital world, BRICS leaders emphasized the need for global standards to combat fake news and disinformation, particularly on digital platforms.

Anti-Terrorism: The bloc issued a strong statement against terrorism, advocating for a zero-tolerance approach to terror financing and radicalization.

These declarations reflect BRICS’ intent to position itself as a powerful voice in global diplomacy. Unlike the UN, which often finds itself deadlocked, BRICS seeks to make its stances known without the procedural gridlock that hinders other forums.

India’s Vision for BRICS: Non-Divisive and Constructive

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s remarks at the Kazan summit emphasized BRICS as a unifying, rather than divisive, force. He reiterated that BRICS is “non-West” rather than “anti-West,” a point that underscores India’s vision of BRICS as a constructive forum that works not to exclude the West but to complement it.

Modi highlighted key issues for developing nations, from food and energy security to the need for global regulations on cyber and AI safety. India’s goal within BRICS is to promote transparency, fair representation, and equal opportunities, ideals that resonate with other developing nations.

In addition, Modi advocated for reforms in global institutions like the UN Security Council and WTO. However, he was careful to stress that BRICS should not aim to replace these institutions but rather to reform them to be more inclusive. His message reflects India’s balanced approach, seeking to maintain BRICS’ integrity without alienating the rest of the world.

The 16th BRICS Summit in Kazan was a vivid demonstration of the bloc’s ambitions and its growing appeal to nations looking for alternatives. The Kazan Declaration and the forum’s discussions on financial autonomy, expanded membership, and international diplomacy set the stage for a BRICS-led movement toward a more balanced global order.

Yet the challenges are formidable. BRICS needs to prove it can function effectively with a larger membership, navigate internal differences, and implement its vision without fracturing. But if the alliance can uphold its principles and continue to build strategic alliances, BRICS has the potential to shape a new, multipolar world order, presenting an alternative to the Western-dominated system.

As the bloc looks forward to the next summit, the world will be watching whether BRICS can turn its bold vision into a lasting influence. With Kazan as a turning point, BRICS is emerging not just as a symbol of defiance but as a force that could genuinely reshape the future of international relations.

Originally published at https://vocal.media.