Grouping making its own decisions

The BRICS Summit in New Delhi, India, demonstrated that a group frequently dismissed in Western capitals as an unwieldy collection of countries that "agree on little and achieve even less" can, under the right circumstances, produce a remarkably coherent political position.

The 45-page New Delhi Declaration is particularly significant. The 11 BRICS member states adopted it on the very first day of the summit, despite differences regarding issues such as the situation in the Middle East, relations with the United States, and the future of the international economic system.

The document clearly condemns protectionism and unilateral economic sanctions, calls for restraint and dialogue in the Middle East, expresses support for protecting civilians and civilian infrastructure, and demands greater representation for developing countries in international institutions, including the United Nations Security Council.

For BRICS, this is not routine diplomatic paperwork. The declaration represents one of the closest approaches to a common political position in the organization's history.

The explanation is straightforward: external pressure has become a stronger unifying force.

BRICS was never designed to become a political alliance comparable to NATO or a supranational organization such as the European Union. Yet the policies of the United States and, more broadly, the collective West are creating common concerns among countries that otherwise have little reason to agree, while BRICS is increasingly seen as an important instrument for advancing a more multipolar world and reducing Western dominance.

Tariffs, sanctions, technology restrictions, financial pressure, and the increasingly political use of economic interdependence have encouraged many countries to seek alternatives.

The question is no longer whether the existing international system should change. The question is who will shape the replacement mechanisms.

BRICS' economic foundation is already substantial. UN data show that trade in goods among the BRICS countries has increased more than 13-fold since 2003. Intra-BRICS exports reached approximately $1.2 trillion in 2025. The expanded group represents nearly half of the world's population and around 40 percent of the global GDP measured by purchasing power parity. Its members include China, India and Russia, three of the world's largest military powers, alongside major energy, commodity and manufacturing economies.

These figures explain why Washington pays attention.

Following the BRICS Summit in Rio de Janeiro last year, Washington threatened an additional 10 percent tariff on any country aligning itself with what it called the "anti-American policies" of BRICS — a warning issued without clarifying which policies it meant. It was not the first such threat: months earlier it had floated a 100 percent tariff should the group move against the dollar's international role. Neither was systematically carried out. But the political significance remained: Washington had openly signaled that it was prepared to penalize alignment with BRICS positions.

Paradoxically, such pressure strengthens the very organization Washington wants to contain.

The New Delhi summit also produced an important demonstration of BRICS diplomacy in the Middle East. Iran and the United Arab Emirates have recently occupied opposing positions in the regional conflict and have faced direct tensions over attacks involving infrastructure connected to US military facilities. Nevertheless, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian met on the summit sidelines with Abu Dhabi Crown Prince Sheikh Khaled bin Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

The significance of this encounter should not be exaggerated: There is no evidence that it resolved the underlying dispute. But the fact that such a meeting occurred at a BRICS summit, immediately after adopting a declaration calling for maximum restraint and dialogue, illustrates the organization's potential as a diplomatic platform.

BRICS therefore should not be judged according to whether its members agree on everything. Its real achievement is different: countries with different interests are increasingly willing to cooperate where their interests overlap.

That cooperation is moving beyond political declarations. As of June 30, the New Development Bank had approved 141 projects totaling $44 billion since its establishment in 2015. BRICS countries are discussing integration of national payment systems such as India's UPI and Brazil's Pix, creating possibilities for cross-border transactions less dependent on traditional dollar-based infrastructure. Russia has proposed a digital BRICS grain-trading platform linking major agricultural exporters such as Russia, India and Brazil. Cooperation also extends into healthcare, science, technology, green energy and space.

The direction is unmistakable. BRICS is gradually constructing a network of economic relationships that does not require Western approval.

This does not mean the dollar will suddenly lose its international role. Nor does it mean that BRICS is about to become an exclusive economic bloc. The group's future depends on upholding true multipolarity. Its strength lies precisely in the fact that China, India, Russia, Brazil, the Gulf states, Iran, Indonesia and the African members pursue independent foreign policies rather than a single geopolitical agenda.

The contrast with the West is increasingly striking.

Washington is demanding greater political alignment from its allies while simultaneously applying tariffs and questioning long-standing assumptions about US security commitments. In August, Bloomberg reported that Washington circulated a questionnaire among NATO allies to assess their support for the US foreign-policy agenda, reportedly linked to expectations of greater political alignment in exchange for security guarantees.

Meanwhile, European governments are consumed by domestic political and economic pressures.

The consequences extend beyond the fortunes of any individual summit. Countries that once regarded the US as the automatic choice for currency reserves, arms procurement, education, technology and financial services are increasingly considering alternatives.

This is the deeper meaning of the New Delhi summit.

Twenty-five years after Goldman Sachs economist Jim O'Neill coined the BRIC acronym, less dependence on the West has moved from an investment thesis to a geopolitical reality. The New Delhi Declaration shows that the members can find common ground even amid serious differences.

The emerging multipolar system will not be built through one dramatic institutional rupture. It will be constructed through thousands of practical decisions: where countries trade, how they settle payments, where they invest, which currencies they hold, whose technology they use and with whom they conduct diplomacy.

New Delhi demonstrated that BRICS countries have already begun making those decisions.

The author is a former prime minister of the Kyrgyz Republic.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.

If you have a specific expertise, or would like to share your thought about our stories, then send us your writings at opinion@chinadaily.com.cn, and comment@chinadaily.com.cn.