The 2024 BRICS Summit in Russia and the Changing Global Dynamics: Strengths, Weaknesses, and Internal Contradictions
By Toba Alabi
Introduction
The 2024 BRICS summit, held in Kazan, Russia, stands as one of the most significant geopolitical gatherings in recent years. Leaders from over two dozen nations have convened for this historic event, highlighting the increasing prominence of the BRICS alliance—Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—as a potential counterweight to Western-dominated global governance structures. Amid the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine, the summit offers a platform for BRICS nations to assert their influence on global economic and political affairs. While the bloc seeks to reshape the existing world order, it faces considerable internal challenges and contradictions that may hinder its ability to achieve its long-term goals.
At this summit, key figures such as Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, Chinese President Xi Jinping, and South African President Cyril Ramaphosa have made their presence felt, with Russian President Vladimir Putin hosting the event. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva is notably absent, underscoring some of the internal divergences within the bloc. For Putin, this summit is an opportunity to demonstrate that, despite Western sanctions and the isolation stemming from the war in Ukraine, Russia remains a central player on the global stage.
BRICS, Power, and National Interest in International Politics
In the dynamic field of international politics, BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) represents a significant power bloc that challenges the traditional dominance of Western-led institutions. The formation of BRICS underscores a collective effort by its members to realign the global political and economic architecture, emphasizing multipolarity over the unipolar dominance of the United States and its allies. The alliance symbolizes the rising power of emerging economies, which together account for a substantial share of global GDP, trade, and population.
Power in International Relations
Power, a central concept in international relations, often determines a nation’s ability to influence outcomes on the global stage. BRICS nations individually and collectively wield considerable economic and geopolitical power. China and India, two of the largest economies and most populous nations, contribute to shaping global trade, while Russia plays a pivotal role in energy politics and military strategy. Brazil and South Africa, while smaller in economic terms, represent regional powers in Latin America and Africa, respectively.
The cohesion of BRICS is also significant because it provides a platform for emerging powers to challenge the dominance of institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which have long been perceived as instruments of Western interests. In this sense, BRICS is a counterweight to the global governance structures dominated by the West, promoting alternatives that reflect the interests of developing and emerging nations.
National Interest and BRICS.
National interest, which typically involves economic prosperity, security, and geopolitical influence, is a key driver of each BRICS nation’s participation in the alliance. For China, BRICS represents a vehicle to expand its global influence and secure its trade routes, particularly as it promotes its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). India’s interest in BRICS lies in advancing its status as a global power and accessing new markets for its growing economy. Russia, amid Western sanctions over its invasion of Ukraine, leverages BRICS to bolster its international partnerships and reduce economic dependency on the West.
Brazil and South Africa, as regional leaders, see BRICS as a way to amplify their voices in international forums and attract foreign investment. For these nations, BRICS provides a platform to influence global economic policies in ways that better align with their developmental goals.
In sum, BRICS symbolizes a shift in the global balance of power. Its members leverage the alliance to enhance their national interests, whether through economic cooperation, strategic alliances, or geopolitical influence. As a bloc, BRICS challenges the traditional power structures of international politics, advocating for a more inclusive and multipolar world order. However, internal contradictions, such as differing political ideologies and economic systems, can sometimes complicate the group’s cohesion, but their shared interest in reforming global governance keeps them aligned.
Does Nigeria Lose Anything by not being a member of BRICS?
Nigeria’s absence from BRICS can have both immediate and long-term implications, especially given the economic and geopolitical influence of the bloc. BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) represents a coalition of emerging economies with significant influence over global trade, finance, and political alignments. As Nigeria continues to navigate its economic and diplomatic strategies, not being a member of BRICS may present both challenges and opportunities, particularly in the context of its relations with Western countries.
Economic Implications
BRICS nations control a significant portion of the world’s natural resources and economic output. Being part of BRICS would provide Nigeria access to multilateral trade and investment opportunities, especially from China and India, two of the world’s largest economies. BRICS has been vocal about creating alternatives to Western-dominated financial institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank, through initiatives such as the New Development Bank (NDB). Nigeria’s exclusion from BRICS denies it the opportunity to participate in these alternative financial systems, which could help reduce dependency on Western financial aid and conditional loans. Furthermore, BRICS also fosters intra-bloc trade, and Nigeria’s non-participation may mean missing out on tariff reductions and trade deals with the bloc’s members.
Geopolitical Positioning
Nigeria’s global ambitions as a leader in Africa may be hindered by its exclusion from BRICS, where South Africa has a leading role. As BRICS expands to include countries like Egypt and Ethiopia, Nigeria’s absence could signal reduced influence in shaping global policies that affect African development. Being outside of BRICS could place Nigeria in a position where it must seek other alliances, possibly deepening its dependence on Western nations.
The Western Option
However, Nigeria also benefits from maintaining strong ties with the West, particularly the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union. These countries are among Nigeria’s largest trading partners and sources of foreign direct investment. Western nations also offer Nigeria extensive military and developmental aid, as well as diplomatic support in international forums like the United Nations. Western-backed financial institutions, despite their criticisms, remain crucial for Nigeria’s macroeconomic stability. The African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) in the United States, for example, provides Nigeria access to a large market for its goods.
In essence, while Nigeria does lose out on certain economic and political advantages by not being a BRICS member, its Western ties still offer substantial benefits. Moving forward, Nigeria may need to strike a balance between maintaining these Western relationships and seeking more inclusion in multilateral blocs like BRICS that represent emerging powers and alternative economic models.
Key Outcomes of the 2024 BRICS Summit in Kazan, Russia
The 2024 BRICS Summit, held in Kazan, Russia, concluded with several significant developments that underscored the bloc’s expanding global influence and its potential to reshape international politics and economics. These outcomes touched on key geopolitical, diplomatic, and economic dimensions.
One major achievement was the diplomatic breakthrough between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. The two leaders met shortly after announcing a deal to resolve a long-standing military standoff at their Himalayan border. Their meeting reflected a positive shift in Sino-Indian relations, which is critical for the stability and cohesion of BRICS, as both nations are essential pillars of the bloc.
The summit also demonstrated Russia’s ability to engage major global leaders despite its ongoing conflict with Ukraine and attempts by Western countries to isolate it. High-profile attendees included Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, and leaders from across the BRICS nations. This level of participation not only showcased the importance of BRICS in global affairs but also signaled the bloc’s appeal as an alternative to Western-led institutions.
Another key discussion point was the potential expansion of BRICS. President Vladimir Putin revealed that more than 30 countries had expressed interest in joining the group. While there was no immediate resolution on the mechanics of expansion, this interest demonstrates the growing influence of BRICS as a global platform that many nations see as a counterbalance to Western powers.
On the economic front, BRICS outlined a series of ambitious initiatives aimed at creating independent systems to rival Western financial frameworks. This included proposals for a BRICS grain exchange and a cross-border payments system to reduce reliance on the U.S. dollar in international trade. These moves are part of the bloc’s broader efforts to foster economic cooperation and establish a multipolar world economy. Although the Ukraine conflict was a topic of discussion, no concrete actions were taken to address or resolve it. However, in a broader security context, Putin warned BRICS leaders about rising tensions in the Middle East, specifically between Israel and Iran, which he said could lead to a full-scale regional war. This underscored the growing security concerns faced by BRICS members in an increasingly volatile global landscape.
In summary, the 2024 BRICS Summit highlighted the bloc’s ambition to challenge Western hegemony, its resilience in maintaining cohesion despite internal and external conflicts, and its plans to strengthen economic ties. However, ongoing challenges such as the Ukraine war and broader geopolitical tensions continue to shape the trajectory of BRICS in the global order.
Challenges and Shortcomings of the 2024 BRICS Summit
The 2024 BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, while showcasing diplomatic progress, also highlighted areas where the bloc struggled to achieve substantial results.
One significant shortfall was the lack of concrete action on the ongoing Ukraine conflict. Despite the issue being raised, no collective decisions were made to address or mediate the crisis, reflecting the bloc’s limited capacity for unified action on such geopolitical matters.
Another key issue was the vague framework for BRICS expansion. Although over 30 countries expressed interest in joining, the summit failed to provide clear criteria or a timeline for expansion, leaving the process ambiguous and potentially hindering future growth.
Economic integration initiatives, such as proposals for a BRICS grain exchange and cross-border payment systems, also lacked detailed implementation plans. While these ideas were discussed, the absence of a definitive timeline for execution raised doubts about their feasibility.
Geopolitical tensions between members, notably between China and India, remained unresolved despite diplomatic engagement. This ongoing rivalry poses a challenge to the bloc’s unity.
Lastly, the summit failed to articulate a clear global strategy or cohesive vision for addressing broader international issues like climate change and global governance, limiting BRICS’ potential as a unified alternative to Western institutions.
Overall Strengths of BRICS
BRICS represents some of the largest and most dynamic emerging economies, with its members accounting for over 40% of the global population and about 25% of the world’s GDP. This substantial economic power allows BRICS to position itself as a challenger to the current Western-led world order. The diversity of its members—from Asia to Africa to Latin America—lends the group considerable geopolitical leverage and appeal, especially to other developing nations looking for alternatives to Western institutions.
The creation of the New Development Bank (NDB) is one of the most notable achievements of BRICS. The NDB aims to provide financial resources for infrastructure and development projects not only within member states but also across the developing world. This move reflects the bloc’s desire to reduce dependence on institutions like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, which are often viewed as being controlled by Western interests.
In terms of geopolitical influence, BRICS boasts considerable diversity and strategic importance. China and India, the two largest members, are rising powers with vast economic and military capabilities. Russia, despite its current isolation from the West, remains a key global player, especially in energy markets. Brazil and South Africa, while facing internal challenges, provide critical links to Latin America and Africa, ensuring BRICS’ global reach.
Weaknesses of BRICS
Despite its formidable strengths, BRICS is plagued by internal weaknesses that stem from the differing national interests and economic statuses of its members. India and China, for instance, are involved in long-standing border disputes and strategic rivalry, which threaten the bloc’s unity. These tensions came to the forefront during past military standoffs in the Himalayan region, casting doubt on whether the two countries can cooperate effectively in the long term.
Additionally, the economic disparity between member states is another source of friction. While China’s economy is by far the largest and fastest-growing, countries like Brazil and South Africa have struggled with slower growth, political instability, and corruption. This uneven economic footing leads to an imbalance in influence within the group, with China often playing a dominant role in setting the agenda.
Another major weakness is the reliance of BRICS nations on the Western-led global economy. Despite the bloc’s rhetoric about creating alternatives to Western financial institutions, members like China and India still rely heavily on Western markets for trade. Russia, too, is economically vulnerable due to its heavy dependence on energy exports, particularly to China and India, which now leverage this dependency to their advantage. This reliance raises questions about how effectively BRICS can create a truly independent economic framework.
Internal Contradictions within BRICS
One of the core contradictions within BRICS is the ideological diversity of its members. The group includes both democracies (India, Brazil, South Africa) and authoritarian regimes (China, Russia). This political divergence creates tension on issues such as human rights, governance, and global norms. While BRICS may agree on challenging Western hegemony, they are often divided on how to approach specific global challenges, such as internet governance, political transparency, and the rule of law.
Moreover, there is an inherent contradiction in the strategic goals of BRICS members. India, for instance, has developed closer ties with the United States in recent years, viewing it as a necessary counterbalance to China’s growing influence in Asia. Brazil, under President Lula, has adopted a pragmatic approach, balancing relations with both the West and BRICS members. Meanwhile, Russia, isolated from the West, is increasingly dependent on China. This divergence in foreign policy objectives often hampers the ability of BRICS to present a united front on critical global issues.
China’s dominance within the group also presents a significant challenge. As the world’s second-largest economy, China has a disproportionately large influence on BRICS decision-making processes. While China’s economic success is an asset, it also generates unease among other members, particularly India, which views China’s ambitions with suspicion. Russia’s growing economic reliance on China due to Western sanctions has further complicated the internal dynamics, as BRICS risks becoming more of a vehicle for advancing China’s interests than a truly equal partnership.
Conclusion
The 2024 BRICS summit in Russia highlights the bloc’s growing importance in the global political and economic landscape. While the alliance has considerable strengths—ranging from its demographic and economic weight to its ability to present an alternative to Western institutions—it also faces significant weaknesses and contradictions. Internal disputes between members, economic disparities, and conflicting strategic goals threaten to undermine BRICS’ long-term viability as a cohesive force.
To fulfill its ambitions, BRICS will need to address these internal divisions and build a more balanced framework for cooperation. Whether the group can overcome these challenges and offer a genuine alternative to the Western-dominated world order will depend on its ability to reconcile competing interests and find common ground. For now, BRICS remains a potent symbol of the potential for a multipolar world, even if the path to realizing that vision remains fraught with challenges.
References
Armijo, L. E. (2017). The BRICS and Collective Financial Statecraft. New York: Oxford University Press.
Chaturvedi, S. (2019). BRICS and the Global Economy: Growth and Development in Emerging Markets. New York: Routledge.
Kurecic, P. (2017). Geoeconomic and Geopolitical Conflicts and Cooperation within BRICS Countries: A Political Economy Analysis. London: Routledge.
Narlikar, A. (2010). New Powers: How to Become One and How to Manage Them. New York: Oxford University Press.
Stuenkel, O. (2015). The BRICS and the Future of Global Order. London: Lexington Books.
Stuenkel, O. (2016). Post-Western World: How Emerging Powers Are Remaking Global Order. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Toba Alabi is Professor of Political Science and Defence Studies. (08036787582)
Written on 25 October, 2024
