The recent BRICS summit, led by China and hosted by Russia in Kazan, concluded with a declaration that underscored the coalition’s focus on global issues, particularly climate change, opposition to human rights sanctions, and the need to control misinformation. Initially comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, the coalition has recently expanded to include Iran, Egypt, Ethiopia, and the UAE. While Argentina declined membership, Saudi Arabia’s status remains uncertain. Reports indicated that discussions about Saudi Arabia’s involvement were anticipated, yet no updates were provided during the summit.
During the summit, Russia invited numerous leaders from countries aligned with BRICS, highlighting the coalition’s outreach. Reports revealed plans to potentially establish a second-tier membership for “partner” nations, with candidates including Nigeria, Turkey, Cuba, and Belarus. BRICS has garnered a reputation for supporting some of the world’s more repressive regimes, often proving to be a counterweight to American influence on the global stage. The countries within the coalition, including China and India, are frequently cited among the largest polluters. Accusations of severe human rights violations run rampant among member states, including China’s treatment of Uyghurs and Iran’s sponsorship of terrorism.
The collective objective of BRICS is evident in its push to dismantle Western dominance in global governance and institutions. The summit’s declaration openly challenged the current international order, advocating for reforms in entities such as the UN and other financial and human rights institutions. It articulated a commitment to political, economic, and cultural collaboration while condemning the impact of unilateral sanctions, which have been particularly damaging to Russia amid its ongoing aggression in Ukraine. The coalition framed human rights discussions as politicized and discriminatory, asserting a “right to development” without the imposition of human rights standards that it deems inappropriate.
Furthermore, the BRICS declaration emphasizes a commitment to combat misinformation and fake news, underscoring the perceived necessity for accurate information and digital literacy. However, within the context of its membership, particularly with Iran, Egypt, and India noted for their oppressive regimes regarding women, the declaration’s commitment to human rights raises significant questions. The mention of women’s rights in their statement contrasts starkly with the treatment women face in several BRICS nations, highlighting the hypocrisy evident in the coalition’s stance on human rights.
On environmental issues, the declaration expressed a simultaneous commitment to addressing climate change while contesting Western measures aimed at reducing carbon emissions. It criticized external financial and regulatory pressures that it views as unfair, advocating for differentiated treatment of developing countries, which ironically encompasses nations like China. In highlighting their approach to global environmental and human rights expectations, BRICS countries appear to seek exemption from responsibility and accountability that developed nations bear.
Concerning terrorism, BRICS issued a broad condemnation of terrorism in all forms while deliberately refraining from criticizing Iran’s substantial role in international terrorism. While the declaration alluded to the need for navigational security in waters affected by Iranian proxies, it refrained from explicitly naming or condemning these groups. The coalition also condemned Israel’s actions against Hamas, positioning itself in opposition to Western narratives while underlining its intent to support the territorial and political interests of member states and allies, showing the complexity of their geopolitical relationships.
In conclusion, the BRICS declaration showcases a coalition dedicated to fostering a contrasting global order against the backdrop of Western influence. It reflects the and ideologies of its member states, aiming to reshape international governance, finance, environmental policy, and human rights practices to align with their interests. Through contentious positions on these issues, BRICS emphasizes solidarity among its members, yet raises critical questions regarding their commitment to universal human rights and environmental responsibility, often prioritizing political expediency over substantive change.
