‘Greater BRICS’ navigating diversity with unity

The BRIC grouping was established in 2006, with its first summit held in 2009, but its ideological foundation was laid decades earlier at the Bandung Conference in 1955. The Bandung Spirit, which emphasized anti-colonialism and South-South solidarity, is the historical glue that holds BRICS+ together.

BRICS+ thrives not on ideological uniformity or binding treaties but on shared knowledge, expectations and frustrations with the existing international order. There is skepticism toward unfair institutions, an enduring belief in sovereign equality and diplomatic skills to manage internal conflicts without fracturing.

Most Western paradigms expect homogeneity, which prevents them from comprehending the true nature of BRICS+. Liberal institutionalism struggles to comprehend why the group created parallel structures, such as the New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA), rather than pushing for reform within the existing Bretton Woods system.

But unlike the Bretton Woods institutions, BRICS+ decisions are made by consensus, so everyone has an equal say, regardless of their size or power. This flexibility enables BRICS+ to withstand geopolitical shocks. The glue is the practice of managing diversity, not removing it.

On the sidelines of the BRICS summit in New Delhi, President Xi Jinping emphasized the importance of advancing China-India relations by enhancing mutual trust, deepening mutually beneficial cooperation, and properly managing differences. These reflect the broader BRICS+ ethos of fostering collaboration amid diversity.

For BRICS+ members, the Bandung Conference is the fundamental background that contextualizes their present-day efforts — such as the push for local currencies in trade or the establishment of the NDB.

The theoretical endpoint of these endeavors is the idea of a pluriverse, a world where many worlds coexist. The group’s joint summit declarations are not merely news releases, but constitutive acts in forging a new normative consensus on multipolarity and respect for diverse development paths.

By insisting on sovereignty and noninterference, BRICS+ creates the ontological space for different political and economic systems to coexist without being forced to conform to a single, Western-dominated standard.

As Xi said during the summit, Global South countries should jointly defend the rule of law in international affairs, hold high the banner of multilateralism, remain committed to a people-centered development philosophy and jointly advance security governance.

He proposed five initiatives for “greater BRICS” cooperation in artificial intelligence, trade and investment facilitation, digital industry, intelligent manufacturing and talent development.

As BRICS+ turns its attention to the 2027 summit in China, a number of critical issues will be on the agenda. The 2023 expansion — adding Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates — transformed BRICS from a club of large emerging economies into a wider Global South grouping. The 2027 summit is expected to help further integrate these new members into the existing framework. By 2027, BRICS+ should promote the development of new diplomatic practices to manage a more complex web of regional relations while maintaining consensus-based decision-making.

A core practice for BRICS+ is the pursuit of strategic autonomy. The objective is to build a pluriversal financial architecture that protects emerging markets from US monetary volatility and the coercive conditionality of the Washington Consensus.

BRICS+ refrains from binding supranational dispute resolution systems, preferring to handle differences case-by-case to safeguard national sovereignty. As the group grows and economic interdependence deepens, complex trade, border or geopolitical disputes between member states may arise.

The 2027 summit should help the bloc maintain internal stability by developing indigenous, transcivilizational mechanisms for mediation and conflict resolution, grounded in the Bandung principles of mutual respect and noninterference.

A main challenge to the BRICS+ narrative comes from post-development theorists and grassroots movements. The 2027 summit should help confront the environmental and social externalities of its development model. The group’s focus on fossil fuels, massive resource extraction and GDP growth contradicts the pluriversal vision of fostering diverse, non-extractive ways of life. The 2027 agenda can help bridge the divide between industrial development and the urgent need for sustainable, ecologically balanced models.

Questions about BRICS+ cohesion stem from a static and outdated conception of global order. Through a cognitive-evolutionary lens, BRICS+ is a metastable, robust social order in which diversity is the catalyst for creative alternatives. The shared decolonial background of its members guarantees the retention of practices that enhance Global South autonomy.

As the group approaches the 2027 summit, the debate should shift from questioning the group’s viability to assessing the intricate normative and institutional challenges of its concrete projects.

BRICS+ is actively promoting the reform of global rules, norms and institutions. This is an order in permanent becoming, animated by the Bandung Spirit, aspiring toward a pluriversal future, showing that in a multipolar world the deepest cohesion is not in sameness, but in the mutual commitment to let many worlds coexist.

The author is a professor of international law at the School of Law of Lanzhou University.

The views don’t necessarily reflect those of China Daily.