The 2025 BRICS Summit in Brazil was a defining moment of the bloc as it highlighted its growing ambitions and the practical challenges of reshaping the global order. The event, held in Rio de Janeiro and hosted by President Luiz Inacio Lula Da Silva, drew significant attention in light of President Donald Trump’s tariff policies that undermine the existing liberal economic order.
The two-day summit was attended in person by PM Modi of India, Premier Li Qiang of China, President Cyril Ramaphosa of South Africa, President Prabowo Subianto of Indonesia, Crown Prince Khaled bin Mohammed Al Nahyan of the UAE, Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly of Egypt, Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed of Ethiopia, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov of Russia, and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi of Iran.
President Vladimir Putin of Russia participated virtually to avoid potential diplomatic complications in the context of an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for his role in the 2022 invasion of Ukraine. As a signatory to the Rome Statute that established the ICC, Brazil would have been obliged to act on the warrant. The absence of Chinese President Xi Jinping gained particular attention, as it is the first time he has stayed away from a BRICS summit since becoming President in 2013.
The summit, themed “Strengthening Global South Cooperation for More Inclusive and Sustainable Governance”, underlined BRICS’s intention to lead a transition toward a multipolar world order. As the confidence in the US-led global order is heading to a collapse amid strategic overreach, financial imbalances, and institutional failures, BRICS attempts to present itself as a credible platform for alternative global leadership.
What are BRICS summits generally about?
Since its formation in 2009, BRICS has sought to increase the representation and influence of emerging economies in global governance. Considering the economic interests and political ambitions of developing countries, it aims to correct structural imbalances in international institutions such as the IMF, World Bank, and the UN Security Council.
The annual summits serve as a space to build consensus on reforming these institutions, promoting development cooperation, and offering alternatives to the Western-dominated global order.
In recent years, de-dollarisation has emerged as a major topic in BRICS discussions, largely driven by concerns over the US’ weaponisation of its currency. Although the bloc has yet to agree on a single alternative to the dollar, it is actively exploring local currency trade settlements and a BRICS-led cross-border payment system to reduce its reliance on the US dollar. However, President Trump warned the bloc that the US would impose a 100% tariff on member countries if they replaced the dollar in international trade.
The strengthening of South-South cooperation is another consistent agenda item for the bloc. This is significantly advanced through initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB), which offers infrastructure financing free from the political conditionalities often associated with Western lenders. Beyond this, BRICS discussions consistently address broader shared challenges such as climate justice, food security, and equitable technology transfer.
Though not a formal alliance, BRICS functions as a multilateral platform for coordination on key global issues such as economic reform, energy security, development finance, and institutional reform. In recent years, the bloc has expanded to include new members—such as Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, the UAE, and Indonesia—reflecting its intent to become more representative of the Global South.
What was the focus of the 2025 summit in Brazil?
The 2025 Rio summit significantly advanced BRICS’s agenda for rethinking global governance and financial autonomy. The summit reiterated the bloc’s commitment to reforming global governance, even though there was no unified voice on pressing concerns related to critical geopolitical issues.
The leaders called for urgent structural changes to institutions like the UN Security Council, the IMF, and the World Bank to reflect contemporary geopolitical and economic realities. The summit specifically endorsed permanent representation for Africa and Latin America in the UN Security Council, while China and Russia reaffirmed their support for Brazil and India’s aspirations for greater roles.
Financial sovereignty remained high on the agenda, particularly due to the “America first” policy of the Trump administration that challenges the present international economic order. Member states welcomed the progress on developing a BRICS Cross-Border Payments System to facilitate local currency transactions and reduce dependency on the US dollar. There was also broad support for expanding the NDB’s lending capacity, particularly for climate-resilient infrastructure and concessional finance to low-income countries.
Security concerns also featured prominently in the summit agenda. In a rare unified stance, BRICS condemned the April 22 terrorist attack in Pahalgam, Jammu and Kashmir, that claimed 26 lives. The leaders reaffirmed a zero-tolerance approach to terrorism and called for coordinated global action against terrorism financing, cross-border networks, and safe havens.
Despite these forward-looking commitments, the summit exposed persistent internal frictions. Differences emerged over the timeline for integrating new members and over reforming BRICS’s internal governance structures. Although the bloc projects a collective vision, national priorities continue to complicate efforts at deeper institutionalisation.
How does India view BRICS and the multipolar world order?
Although India remains one of the strongest advocates for a multipolar world, its approach to BRICS is shaped by strategic pragmatism. India supports reform of international institutions and consistently calls for a greater voice for the Global South, but it is firmly opposed to BRICS becoming a vehicle for a China-centric world order.
At the 2025 summit, India reiterated its support for reformed multilateralism and a multipolar world order, with PM Modi emphasing that global governance institutions must reflect contemporary realities. He asserted that BRICS’s diversity and commitment to multipolarity are its core strengths, especially at a time when the global order is under strain. Stressing the bloc’s relevance in shaping a more inclusive international system, he proposed four key initiatives: first, that the NDB must adopt a demand-driven approach and ensure long-term sustainability in financing projects; second, the creation of a Science and Research Repository to benefit Global South countries; third, enhanced cooperation to secure and strengthen critical mineral supply chains; and fourth, a collective effort toward responsible AI governance.
India’s participation in BRICS coexists with its active engagement in other frameworks like the Quad and G20. This balancing act reflects New Delhi’s interest in shaping a more equitable world order while preserving strategic autonomy. Within BRICS, India is cautious about institutional overreach and favours issue-based cooperation over political alignment.
What lies ahead for BRICS and what are its limits?
The 2025 summit revealed both the potential and limits of BRICS as a driver of global change. Representing nearly half the world’s population and a significant share of global GDP, the bloc aspires to play a transformative role in international affairs. However, its diversity in political systems, strategic outlooks, and economic priorities remains a fundamental challenge.
The key achievements of the 2025 BRICS Summit include the adoption of the Rio de Janeiro Declaration, which reflected the bloc’s collective commitment to reforming global governance institutions; a consensus on strengthening the operational mandate of the NDB; and broad support for the ongoing development of a BRICS Cross-Border Payment System.
However, the biggest challenge for BRICS is its lack of internal coherence. The bloc includes both liberal democracies and authoritarian regimes, making consensus on key issues extremely difficult. Conflicting national interests prevent the formation of a unified strategic direction within the bloc.
For instance, India is interested in deepening defence cooperation with the West, while Iran and Russia remain openly hostile to US leadership. Similarly, the economic interests of the bloc also do not always align due to political differences. For instance, China’s Belt and Road ambitions have created unease in Brazil and India.
Institutionally, BRICS remains underdeveloped, lacking a formal secretariat, treaty-based governance structure, or dispute resolution mechanisms. The NDB, its only formal institution, remains relatively small in scale compared to the IMF or World Bank. Proposals for a common currency are still in early stages, and intra-BRICS trade remains limited when compared to members’ trade with Western partners.
Despite these limitations, BRICS holds great symbolic value, offering a platform for developing countries to resist unilateralism and dominance of the West-led institutions. It’s call for alternative financial systems, inclusive governance, and a multipolar diplomatic order reflects the aspirations of many in the Global South.
Whether BRICS can evolve from a forum for dissent into a mechanism for delivery will depend on how it manages its internal contradictions. However, there is no doubt that it has already altered the tone and terms of the global debate, even though it struggles with coherence.