indiahorizon

Introduction

In 2001, Jim O’Neill, head of Goldman Sachs’ global investment research division, authored a paper on four rapidly growing emerging markets that would eventually drive global economic growth. These countries were Brazil, Russia, India & China. The report was titled “Build Better Global Economics BRIC”.

Finally, in Sep 2006, the Foreign Ministers of Brazil, Russia, India & China met on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly. Fast forward to 16 Jun 2009, when Russia officially held the first BRIC summit. At that stage, BRICS emerged as an intergovernmental organisation of major emerging natural economies. A key milestone in the Organisation’s journey was South Africa’s inclusion as a member state in 2011, which marked the birth of BRICS.

Founding Aims & Objectives, as amplified and stated, centred around the following:

Economic Cooperation. Strengthening trade, investment, and financial linkages among member states.

Reforming Global Governance and advocating for greater representation & equity for developing and emerging economies in international bodies like the UN, IMF, World Bank, and WTO.

Promoting a multipolar world. BRICS presents a consolidated view that counters Western dominance and institutions like the G7 and the UNSC by advocating a more balanced, non-Western-centric world order. The methodology remains reliant on economic, geopolitical & financial frameworks.

Financial autonomy. The objective remains to reduce reliance on the US dollar by increasing the use of local currencies in inter-state trade deals and evolving the Contingent Reserve Arrangement mechanism.

Alternate financial infrastructure. To establish financial institutions like the New Development Bank to reduce dependence on Western-dominated institutions like the World Bank.

Sustainable development & innovation. BRICS aims to collaborate on Science, Technology, Innovation, agriculture, and health.

Cultural & people-to-people exchange. Builds mutual understanding through academic, cultural, youth, and sports programmes.

Genesis for the Birth of BRICS

The primary reason was deep dissatisfaction with Western-dominated global governance and excessive Western hegemony. The 2008 Global Financial Crisis further strengthened the resolve to have an alternative to the US dollar. Additionally, underrepresentation at the IMF and World Bank, along with unequal voting rights, fuelled the desire to push for reforms. The shift to a global order that reflects the Global South’s growing economic weight was a key trigger.

Evolution of the Aims & Objectives since 2011

Over the last decade, BRICS has consistently tried to build an alternative global infrastructure. The focus has remained primarily on economic multilateral representation and a level playing field on the global stage. Along this path, institutions like the New Development Bank and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement emerged. This was followed by a more concrete approach titled De-dollarisation and BRICS pay.

At the same time, the group also focused on health care, climate change, infrastructure, and sustainable development. Over the last five years, the organisation, with the addition of new member states, has sought to assert itself geopolitically in pursuit of its core aim of creating a multipolar world.

Summary of the successes of the stated aims.

Economic growth, bonding and cooperation. Institutions like the NDB and frameworks like BRICS Pay and de-dollarisation have been game-changers. These have been key catalysts of a shift in thinking and action. Although CRA has been established, it has not been used in real-world scenarios beyond trial runs. The rapidly growing economies of the founding member states have seen higher growth rates, deeper economic collaboration, and increased trade cooperation, catapulting BRICS onto the world stage.

The impact is evident in measures the EU and G7 have initiated to counter the economic alternative BRICS has been providing. These measures include trade deals like the EU-Mercosur deal, substantial economic aid to Mediterranean states, and the RISE partnership programme. The NDB is also pursuing individual trade deals with member states, such as India’s CETA with the UK.

Sustainable development, including climate change. The NDB committed over 40% of its total financing to climate mitigation,  adaptation, and energy transitions. As of 2026, $42.9 billion across 139 projects supports a green portfolio aiming to deliver 2,400 MW of clean energy capacity, reflecting the success of BRICS’ climate change efforts. China & India lead global investments in solar and wind power and in electric vehicle adoption, while Brazil continues to leverage an exceptional clean domestic energy mix (hydro & bioenergy). This is an ongoing objective, with aims extending to 2050-2070.

Alternative financial representation: The goal is to build Strategic Autonomy by offering member states alternative financial options, helping them resist geopolitical pressure and the impact of unilateral Western sanctions. This framework has been successful to an extent in many cases, such as settling trade deals in local currencies, growing intra-bloc trade, and bypassing the SWIFT mechanism.

However, the effect on Veto rights in institutions like the IMF & World Bank remains unchanged.

These have been significant successes in the BRICS roadmap, with strong metrics catapulting BRICS as an organisation with global weightage in economies, global energy supply chains, alternative financial networks, and the ability to provide much-needed support to economically weak nations.

Impact on Geopolitics stated goals.

However, when we look at geopolitical objectives, a marked difference emerges between the roadmap and its realisation.

Multipolar world. More than a decade in existence, BRICS still has not dented Western hegemony on security-related issues on the global stage. It lacks the weight to enforce its views, unlike Western-led countries and institutions.

In this light, continuing to advance views without strong action results in a total failure to meet its stated aim of a multipolar world where non-Western states also have representation & weight. It lacks the leverage to counter the various economic sanctions imposed by the US-led Western bloc.

Equal representation in Western-led institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and UNSC. As a combined entity, BRICS has been unable to effect institutional change. US &European powers continue to dominate these institutions, backed by the strength of the dollar, technological edge & military might, and a willingness to impose punitive actions.

Global governance reforms. Legacy institutions in today’s global arena are all Western-led pillars like the UNSC, World Bank, WTO, etc. BRICS demands have not led to any fundamental reallocation of governance or shifts in power.

BRICS has not been able to take credit for resolving any conflicts on a global scale. Its role has primarily been limited to normative diplomacy and providing a forum for dialogue rather than acting as a peacekeeper or net security provider.

Primary causes for the lack of change in global governance.

If we look into the core reasons for this lack of success in pushing for reforms on global governance, it comes down to :

Founding members are not ideologically aligned. In fact, members have historically been traditional opponents. The founding members have different fundamental reasons for coming together to form BRICS. For India, it was always about pushing for institutional reforms and strategic autonomy; for China and Russia, it was about pushing back against the US- and Western-crafted international order and building a non-Western consensus.

Addition of New Member states. While new members are being included, boosting the organisation’s stature, each member differs in political ideology and foreign policy outlook. This means conflicting interests of so many different members prevent a strong, common response.

Today, the world is driven more by economic considerations than by ideology. Most global organisations have seen this transition; BRICS is no different: it can state a unified position on security matters and global conflicts, but cannot implement it. Thus, diluting the organisation’s stature on the global stage.

Factors holding BRICS back. The lack of institutional teeth,  military apparatus, and internal political cohesion required to implement its declared stand collectively undermines its goal of global governance and equal representation of views and policies.

Re-evaluation of certain founding Aims of BRICS

These inputs thus mandate a re-evaluation of the relevance of its founding aim of Global Governance and the creation of a multipolar world. This aim is currently unachievable in its present form. It is largely rhetorical and is viewed similarly by other nations worldwide. This damages BRICS’ credibility as an organisation in this regard.

It is more prudent to scale up the organisation in economic fields, health care, climate change, emerging technologies, counter-terrorism, AI governance, robust supply chains, and military cooperation in the coming years.

When these areas become strong and key drivers on the global stage, Western hegemony will no longer be able to disregard the Global South’s power and influence, including in global security.

Way Ahead Suggested.

Strengthen leadership in cutting-edge technology, AI governance, supply chain management, energy transitions, and deeper economic cooperation so everyone can grow together and act as one entity.

BRICS founding members need to set aside their mutual historical mistrust and friction points, and bind themselves cohesively to realise their aim of being an alternative platform on the world stage, beyond finance.

This would stand up to Western dominance and bullying. Stating this reform is far easier than implementing it; however, it is the only path to make BRICS geopolitically relevant.

An offshoot is the statement of a new goal: formulating an institutionalised standing military component. This may seem too rigid at the outset presently.

However, the founding members need to begin mandatory, wholehearted participation in joint military exercise programmes. BRICS wants to be a geopolitical force, for which military might and intent are essential pillars. When strategic autonomy takes precedence over BRICS’ goals, it sends the wrong message to other member states. Economic progress beyond a certain point cannot be decoupled from security and military might.

The West is fracturing as we speak, and a multipolar world will emerge, with new alignments and convergence. BRICS member states need to look beyond traditional boundaries and bind themselves cohesively and militarily in time to realise their founding aims when the time and opportunity present themselves.