Eleven nations, zero trust: The great BRICS delusion

Washington Examiner | David W. Wang

The 18th BRICS Summit in New Delhi convened leaders from the expanded eleven-nation bloc to challenge G7 dominance by advocating for a multipolar global order. This diplomatic gathering highlighted the group's growing physical mass but exposed severe structural vulnerabilities that prevent it from projecting unified geopolitical power. Trust remains entirely absent.

While the joint declaration issued in New Delhi emphasizes a shift away from Western-led financial and political systems, deep-seated institutional deficiencies undermine these aspirations. Specifically, the bloc lacks the modernized, load-bearing legal and administrative frameworks necessary to sustain a cohesive international coalition. Consequently, the alliance functions more as a fragile diplomatic bubble than a robust counterweight to established Western institutions. Without fundamental structural reforms, these persistent internal divisions and institutional deficits will continue to limit the bloc's collective ability to enact coordinated economic policies or challenge the existing global financial architecture.

Comment

The expansion of BRICS to eleven members dilutes the institutional coherence required to challenge Western-dominated financial structures. While the New Development Bank was established to provide an alternative to the World Bank, its operational capacity remains constrained by the divergent geopolitical alignments of its shareholders. The lack of a unified regulatory framework or shared security architecture prevents the bloc from translating its collective economic weight into cohesive diplomatic leverage. Cohesive multilateral integration remains elusive.

This structural fragmentation directly impacts the viability of alternative financial mechanisms like the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement. Without a centralised monetary authority or mutual trust, member states will continue to rely on the US dollar for international trade settlement and reserve management. Ultimately, the inability to establish a functional alternative to the SWIFT transaction network ensures that individual members remain vulnerable to unilateral Western sanctions.

Strategic Question for Discussion

If the New Development Bank remains unable to decouple its lending operations from Western-dominated capital markets, how can the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement realistically function as an independent sovereign default shield for member states?

The available evidence points toward a persistent dependency on Western capital, as the New Development Bank relies heavily on dollar-denominated funding to maintain its international credit rating. Consequently, the Contingent Reserve Arrangement is likely to remain a dormant mechanism, unable to offer a viable alternative to International Monetary Fund bailouts without exposing its members to severe currency depreciation. This trajectory indicates that the bloc's financial institutions will continue to operate within the parameters of the existing global financial architecture rather than replacing it.

Share your assessment in the comments below.

To read in details click here