MIT expert Mihaela Papa says the grouping’s biggest opportunity lies in practical cooperation on trade, development finance, health and agriculture rather than trying to become a security bloc
Brics is not necessarily seeking to replace the Western-led global order but is increasingly trying to reshape it by pushing for greater influence in international institutions, according to Mihaela Papa, director of research and principal research scientist at the MIT Center for International Studies.
Papa said the grouping had made limited progress on some of its most ambitious institutional reform goals, including reform of the UN Security Council. Differences among Brics members have often made it difficult to build a common position on major geopolitical questions.
Reform of the International Monetary Fund has offered somewhat more scope for cooperation, she said, while the World Trade Organization could emerge as a more significant area of coordination.
India’s role will be particularly important, given its influence in debates over WTO reform and food security. Brics members have only recently begun coordinating their positions and holding separate discussions on WTO-related issues, making the area one of the grouping’s more promising avenues for deeper cooperation.
The challenge for Brics, however, is determining what kind of grouping it wants to become.
With Saudi Arabia, the UAE and Iran among its members, the bloc’s role is being tested by the continuing crisis in West Asia. Papa said the conflict highlighted the limits of Brics as a security or geopolitical coalition.
More from BusinessBrics has traditionally taken broad positions on international conflicts, often reflecting an “agreement to disagree” among members with sharply different interests. That makes a major collective security initiative difficult, particularly in conflicts such as Gaza.
Instead, Papa argued that Brics may gain more by concentrating on areas where its members can deliver tangible results. Development finance is one such area. The grouping could potentially expand cooperation in development finance, disaster relief, health and agriculture, where practical collaboration may produce greater results than attempts to forge a unified security policy.
The question for Brics, therefore, is less whether it can replace the West and more whether it can build an alternative source of influence within the existing global system. As the grouping marks two decades of coalition-building, its future may depend on whether it can translate its growing economic and political weight into concrete institutional and development initiatives.
