The 16th BRICS Summit: A New World Order in the Making?
The 16th BRICS Summit, hosted in Kazan under the chairmanship of Russian President Vladimir Putin, delivered a message that the West’s attempts to isolate Russia and tarnish Putin's image have largely
In a display of global support and shifting alliances, leaders from 24 nations—including representatives from the four new BRICS members—gathered to emphasise their collective vision for a fairer, multipolar world. And if attendance is any sign, BRICS is growing, not retreating, as more countries in the Global South seek alternatives to Western-dominated forums.
Amid a world order in flux, the BRICS nations are seizing their moment, and this year’s summit was a powerful reminder that international influence is no longer confined to the usual suspects. Here’s a look at why this Kazan summit could be a landmark in the emergence of a non-Western alliance that actively challenges the norms of global governance, finance, and diplomacy.
With over 30 countries expressing interest in joining BRICS, it's clear that the developing world, often dubbed the Global South, is keen to chart its own course. Countries across Africa, Latin America, and Asia are increasingly wary of Western pressures—whether in the form of economic sanctions, control over the dollar-centric financial system, or political interference in domestic affairs.
The conflict in Ukraine provided a stark warning. The confiscation of Russian reserves and the sweeping sanctions against Moscow revealed the extent of the West's financial weaponry. If such a fate can befall a resource-rich, nuclear-armed state like Russia, other nations rightly wonder what might happen if they, too, fall afoul of Western powers. The Global South’s interest in BRICS thus stems from a desire for a reformed global system, where political, economic, and security vulnerabilities are less tied to Western interests and institutions.
One of the summit’s most anticipated topics was the expansion of BRICS. With the group initially founded by Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, this year marked the inclusion of four new nations, officially broadening the BRICS bloc. But with expansion comes complexity. How do you maintain unity and consensus when you have more voices—each with its own priorities and political baggage?
Putin himself acknowledged that further expansion could dilute the forum's effectiveness. BRICS operates on consensus, and without a formal voting system, too many new voices could slow decision-making. To navigate this, BRICS introduced a "partnership status" for select countries, allowing nations eager to join to become partners without full membership. Thirteen new partners, including Algeria, Nigeria, Türkiye, and Indonesia, were welcomed at Kazan, underscoring the bloc’s commitment to inclusion without compromising its operational harmony.
It’s no coincidence that the new BRICS partners are drawn from diverse regions and hold various geopolitical interests. Each addition speaks to careful calculation, balancing regional representation with the political weight of each member’s preferences.
For instance:
Türkiye—a NATO member and strategic Russian ally—was a surprising but pragmatic addition, given its critical role in the Middle East and its unique East-West alignment.
Algeria and Belarus reflect Russian preferences, while Nigeria and Uganda bolster Africa’s presence within BRICS.
Indonesia and Thailand mark a significant shift toward Southeast Asia, a region traditionally more aligned with Western powers but increasingly interested in non-aligned options.
India's concerns over Türkiye, for example, due to its stance on Kashmir, illustrate the delicate balancing act within BRICS. Yet, with Russia’s influence, India ultimately conceded, recognizing the broader strategic value of Türkiye's inclusion.
At the heart of the Kazan Summit was the Kazan Declaration—a 134-paragraph manifesto outlining BRICS’ commitment to reshaping global norms. From reforming institutions like the UN and WTO to establishing fairer financial systems, BRICS is pushing a vision where multipolarity replaces unipolar dominance.
Key issues addressed include:
UN and WTO Reform: BRICS reaffirmed its stance on the urgent need for structural reforms in these global institutions, advocating for an inclusive approach that better represents the interests of developing nations.
Financial Independence: In a world where the dollar reigns supreme, BRICS countries are exploring cross-border payment systems in local currencies, looking at frameworks like the BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative (BCBPI) to reduce dependence on the dollar.
Countering Unilateral Sanctions: A central theme was opposition to what the bloc described as "unilateral coercive measures" imposed by the West. The declaration calls for an end to such sanctions, which often have ripple effects beyond targeted countries.
These moves mark a determined effort by BRICS to create alternatives to the traditional financial and political order, championing a system where nations have equal footing on the global stage.
Central to BRICS’ aspirations is the New Development Bank (NDB), an alternative to institutions like the World Bank and IMF, often criticized for their Western influence and high-interest lending practices. Since its inception, the NDB has greenlit projects worth $35 billion across member countries, aiming to boost sustainable development without the political strings attached to Western aid.
In Kazan, discussions extended to the use of local currencies for financing, sidestepping the dollar to give BRICS members more autonomy over their economic dealings. This shift toward local currency payments also underscores BRICS’ aim to insulate its members from fluctuations in the dollar-driven global economy, a move that could inspire similar initiatives elsewhere.
While BRICS' objectives are ambitious, internal divides loom large. The BRICS nations span continents and political ideologies—some have long-standing grievances against the West, while others maintain relatively friendly ties. Moreover, each nation brings a distinct economic profile to the table, from China’s booming economy to South Africa’s slower growth. As seen in Kazan, consensus is often a painstaking process that requires delicate compromises.
The Ukraine conflict exemplifies these divisions. While BRICS found a consensus language for addressing the situation in Ukraine, disagreements among members about how far to support Russia reveal the limits of this alliance. Additionally, the presence of vastly different political systems—from India’s democracy to China’s one-party rule—poses unique governance challenges.
Despite these obstacles, BRICS has stayed unified in its broad agenda. And if Kazan is any indication, the members seem prepared to work through their differences to maintain a cohesive front.
Beyond economic and political reforms, the Kazan Declaration took clear stances on several pressing global issues:
Diplomatic Conflicts: The declaration condemned recent violent incidents, including the bombing in Beirut and clashes involving Israel, affirming BRICS’ commitment to diplomacy and peace.
Cybersecurity and Misinformation: Recognizing the rise of disinformation and cyber threats, BRICS called for stronger regulations to combat fake news and propaganda, especially across digital platforms.
Anti-Terrorism: The bloc issued a robust condemnation of terrorism, underscoring the need for a unified global stance on countering terror financing and radicalisation.
The declaration’s comprehensive scope shows BRICS’ desire to position itself as a global voice on issues traditionally monopolised by Western powers. By speaking out on international conflicts and media ethics, BRICS is signalling that it won’t shy away from sensitive global debates.
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s address at Kazan emphasised a BRICS that is non-divisive and committed to global unity. Modi reiterated that BRICS is "non-West" rather than "anti-West," advocating a constructive approach where BRICS becomes a voice for humanity, not just for its own interests.
Modi highlighted the importance of food, energy, and cyber security for developing countries and championed regulations for safe AI and counter-terrorism. India’s call for transparency and equal participation reinforces its view of BRICS as an organization focused on genuine reform, not rivalry with the West.
The 16th BRICS Summit has set a high bar for the future. The group’s clear stance against Western hegemony, coupled with its concrete steps toward financial independence, is a bold statement of intent. But whether BRICS can truly shift the global balance of power remains to be seen.
The Kazan Declaration may go down as a manifesto for a multipolar world, but BRICS will need to navigate its internal contradictions to avoid becoming just another bloc. If BRICS can sustain its unity while staying true to its inclusive ideals, it could indeed pave the way for a fairer, more balanced international order. For now, the world is watching—because in a landscape where power is increasingly fragmented, BRICS just might be the counterweight that reshapes the future.