
How BRICS is chipping away at the Western order
BRICS is quietly rewriting some of the rules of global politics. From de-dollarisation to alternative development models, it is increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order.
One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government. Countries can agree on rules, but no one can force them to follow them. This is what some international relations scholars call an 'anarchic system,' not because it's disorderly, but because there is no overarching authority to enforce rules.
Countries act in their own interests. Cooperation happens, but it's often fragile. Power matters. Strong states often do what they can. Weak ones suffer what they must (Recall the Melian Dialogue from Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War). Power is distributed unevenly, and when a few countries have more of it, they tend to shape the rules in their favour.
The Western-led liberal international order grew out of this system after World War II. The US, along with its allies, built a network of institutions, like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO, that reflected its values and priorities. This order was based on free markets, democracy, and above all, the dominance of the US dollar in global finance.
For a while, that order worked – at least for the West. But now, the rest of the world is starting to ask why a system created in 1945 should still define the rules of the 21st century. For a long time, emerging powers like Brazil, China, India, and South Africa largely accepted this structure. However, with the global economic landscape shifting and the world becoming more multipolar, they are pushing back. BRICS is the most visible platform for that push.
One of the loudest messages from the BRICS summit in Brazil was about de-dollarisation. It sounds technical, but it's deeply political. This idea has been gaining ground for some years, but recent events, especially the weaponisation of financial systems through sanctions, have brought it to the forefront.
The issue is that most global trade and finance depend on the US dollar. When India buys oil from Russia, it usually has to pay in dollars. When Brazil takes a loan, it often does so in dollars. When China invests abroad, the transaction typically moves through dollar-based systems like SWIFT. This gives the US not just financial influence but also political leverage.
At the Brazil summit, countries once again floated the idea of a BRICS currency – not an immediate project, but a signal of intent. In the meantime, they are promoting trade in local currencies. Russia and China already conduct over 80 per cent of their trade in Roubles and Yuan. India has begun using rupees for some transactions with Iran and Sri Lanka. India and the UAE have begun settling some oil deals in rupees and dirhams.
The New Development Bank, created by BRICS, is now issuing loans in local currencies to avoid dollar exposure. This is not just about saving on transaction costs. It's about creating freedom from a system that many in the Global South see as tilted against them.
This is not going to be easy. The US dollar dominates because it is stable, widely accepted, and backed by a deep financial system. But the fact that BRICS countries keep returning to this topic shows how deep the frustration runs. De-dollarisation may not happen overnight, but the intent is clear – reduce exposure to a system controlled by Washington.
BRICS claims to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed. The group presents itself as a voice for the Global South. It talks about fairer development, more inclusive trade rules, and reforms in global institutions. It also backs concrete alternatives. The NDB offers loans without the political strings often attached to IMF or World Bank funding. BRICS countries are exploring joint investments in infrastructure and clean energy.
There's talk of creating a BRICS rating agency to counter the dominance of Western credit rating firms. BRICS also pushes for reforms in the UN Security Council and the World Bank's voting rules to give more voice to emerging powers.
Here, Brazil, India, and South Africa play a bridging role. They are democracies with growing economies, often seen as more acceptable faces of BRICS to other developing countries. China brings deep pockets and strategic weight. Russia, increasingly isolated from the West, is strengthening its ties with non-Western partners.
This effort to build new platforms and institutions reflects a shared frustration that the rules of the global system are often written elsewhere, by people who don't face the same challenges as those in the Global South. Together, BRICS is trying to change not just policies but also the narrative about what kind of development is legitimate and who should lead.
Notably, international relations theory can help us understand why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why it matters.
Realism
Realism, one of the oldest schools of international relations, sees power as the main force shaping global affairs. States act primarily in their own interest. Institutions and alliances matter only if they help countries protect or expand their power.
From this perspective, BRICS is not a community of like-minded nations but a strategic arrangement – a balancing act against Western dominance. When Russia promotes de-dollarisation or China supports the NDB, they are not guided by ideals of fairness or cooperation. They are responding to the realities of power politics.
A good example of this logic came after the US froze Russian central bank assets following the Ukraine war. Many countries saw how exposed they were if their reserves were held in dollars. The concern wasn't ethical. It was practical. It was about survival.
Liber theory
On the other hand, liberal theory, which posits that cooperation is possible and institutions matter, would argue that if the global order is unfair, countries will attempt to establish new institutions. That's exactly what BRICS is doing by creating alternatives to Western-run systems, not through war, but through investment, banking, and trade. It believes that the way to change the system is to create better alternatives within it.
The NDB isn't just a protest against the World Bank. It's a real bank giving loans, financing projects, and developing regulations. That's classic liberal theory in action – solving global problems through cooperative institutions.
Constructivism
Constructivist theorists go a step further. They argue that power is not just about money or military strength, but about ideas. It's also about whose story is seen as legitimate. BRICS challenges the idea that Western liberal democracy is the only valid model of progress. It says there are many ways to grow and that the West doesn't have a moral monopoly.
BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. When BRICS leaders speak of 'mutual respect' and 'non-interference,' they are offering a different political culture – one that appeals to countries tired of lectures from the West about democracy and governance. Whether this rhetoric matches reality is debatable, but the narrative matters.
These theoretical perspectives are not mutually exclusive views. They all help explain why BRICS is doing what it's doing and why the West is starting to take it more seriously.
However, none of this means that the Western-led order is collapsing. The US dollar still dominates global trade and finance. Western-led institutions still make the rules. The US still has unmatched military power. Western technology and capital continue to dominate global supply chains.
At the same time, BRICS has its own internal differences. China and India are locked in border tensions. Russia is diplomatically isolated. Brazil and South Africa are wary of being seen as backing an anti-Western front. The NDB is still small compared to the World Bank.
However, the system is no longer a one-way street. Something is shifting. The fact that major economies are even talking about bypassing the dollar or creating their own financial systems was unthinkable two decades ago. The fact that they are acting on it, even though cautiously, means the world is entering a new phase.
This isn't about tearing down the West. It's about making space for the rest. The BRICS summit in Brazil didn't create headlines because it didn't need to. It was not designed to shock. It was designed to show that the world is no longer waiting for change from the West. It is building change elsewhere.
One of the fundamental starting points in international relations is the simple truth that there is no world government, prompting some international relations scholars to call the international system 'anarchic'. Comment.
How is BRICS rewriting some of the rules of global politics, and increasingly positioning itself as a challenger to the Western-led liberal international order?
BRICS is trying to shape new meanings about sovereignty, about development, about who gets to lead. It wants to change how the world imagines power, not just how it distributes it. Evaluate.
By claiming to be a platform for those countries that didn't have a seat at the table when the post-war world order was designed, BRICS presents itself as a voice for the Global South. Do you agree?
How do theoretical perspectives, realist, liberal, and constructivist, help explain why the BRICS came about, what it aims for, and why the West is starting to take it more seriously?
(The author is a Professor at MMAJ Academy of International Studies, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi.)
Share your thoughts and ideas on UPSC Special articles with ashiya.parveen@indianexpress.com.
Subscribe to our UPSC newsletter and stay updated with the news cues from the past week.
Stay updated with the latest UPSC articles by joining our Telegram channel – IndianExpress UPSC Hub, and follow us on Instagram and X.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)

First Post
16 minutes ago
- First Post
Why France has decided to recognise Palestine statehood now
France is set to recognise the State of Palestine at the UN General Assembly in September this year, becoming the first major Western power to do so. President Macron's move has drawn strong backlash from Israel and the US, but Paris hopes to revive the two-state solution and push for international momentum amid Gaza's worsening humanitarian crisis read more A man holds a placard reading "Free Palestine" during a demonstration, at the Place de la Republique in Paris, France, June 9, 2025. File Image/Reuters France has declared its intent to officially recognise the State of Palestine this September during the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) session. President Emmanuel Macron confirmed the announcement in a public message addressed to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. With this move, France is poised to become the first major Western power and G7 country to take such a step, aligning itself with over 140 nations that have already done so, but also inviting sharp diplomatic friction with key allies including Israel and the United States. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD This development has emerged amid global criticism over the dire conditions in Gaza and broader calls for reviving the stalled peace process between Israelis and Palestinians. What is behind Macron's decision? In his official communication, Macron expressed a longstanding French commitment to a peaceful resolution in the region. 'True to its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognise the state of Palestine,' he wrote, adding, 'I will make this solemn announcement at the United Nations General Assembly next September.' Consistent with its historic commitment to a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, I have decided that France will recognize the State of Palestine. I will make this solemn announcement before the United Nations General Assembly this coming September.… — Emmanuel Macron (@EmmanuelMacron) July 24, 2025 The French president's decision follows several months of internal discussions, where his administration weighed the implications of such recognition. Macron had already hinted at this direction in June, when France was co-planning a diplomatic conference with Saudi Arabia to outline a vision for Palestinian statehood while simultaneously ensuring Israel's security. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD That conference, originally scheduled for June 17-20 in Riyadh, was delayed following an escalation in regional hostilities between Israel and Iran. It has since been restructured into a ministerial event taking place July 28-29 in New York, ahead of the UNGA, where a follow-up involving heads of state is expected. According to French diplomatic sources, Macron's decision was timed to provide a framework for discussion and negotiation among international partners also weighing recognition, or those hesitant to act without broader consensus. Macron is seeking to build momentum behind the two-state solution by triggering a broader alignment within the Western bloc. The recognition also follows years of public and parliamentary support within France for the Palestinian cause. The French National Assembly passed a non-binding resolution in 2014 urging the government to recognise Palestinian statehood, which was followed by French support for an unsuccessful UN Security Council initiative aimed at achieving statehood by 2017. France's position historically supports the creation of a Palestinian state based on 1967 borders, though sources told CNN that no specific territorial boundaries were mentioned in Macron's current plan. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD How have Israel & co. reacted? Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a post on X, warned that such recognition would 'reward terror and risk creating another Iranian proxy.' We strongly condemn President Macron's decision to recognize a Palestinian state next to Tel Aviv in the wake of the October 7 massacre. Such a move rewards terror and risks creating another Iranian proxy, just as Gaza became. A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a… — Benjamin Netanyahu - בנימין נתניהו (@netanyahu) July 24, 2025 He stated, 'A Palestinian state in these conditions would be a launch pad to annihilate Israel — not to live in peace beside it. Let's be clear: the Palestinians do not seek a state alongside Israel; they seek a state instead of Israel.' Israeli Defence Minister Israel Katz condemned the move as 'a disgrace and a surrender to terrorism,' insisting that Israel would prevent the formation of any Palestinian entity perceived as a threat to its national security or existence. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Across the Atlantic, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio voiced strong disapproval. 'This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th,' he wrote on X, referring to the deadly Hamas attack on Israel in 2023 that marked the start of the current war in Gaza. The United States strongly rejects @EmmanuelMacron's plan to recognize a Palestinian state at the @UN general assembly. This reckless decision only serves Hamas propaganda and sets back peace. It is a slap in the face to the victims of October 7th. — Secretary Marco Rubio (@SecRubio) July 25, 2025 In a June diplomatic cable, US officials noted that such moves could conflict with American foreign policy and potentially result in diplomatic consequences. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD In the same month, US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee publicly questioned whether the pursuit of a Palestinian state remained a viable American objective. US President Donald Trump had earlier proposed that the United States assume control of Gaza — a plan roundly criticised by Palestinians, international human rights groups and many global institutions as a proposal amounting to 'ethnic cleansing.' Was the humanitarian crisis in Gaza behind Macron's shift? The worsening humanitarian conditions in Gaza have significantly influenced the French decision. Since May, over a thousand Palestinians have died attempting to access food. Starvation-related fatalities have also risen, with images of emaciated civilians — particularly children — circulating globally, resulting in widespread condemnation. Philippe Lazzarini, head of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees (UNRWA), described the population in Gaza as appearing like 'walking corpses.' As of July, the entire population of Gaza — approximately 2.1 million people — is classified as food insecure. The region's health ministry recently reported that nearly 900,000 children are going hungry, with at least 70,000 already suffering from malnutrition. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Palestinians gather as they carry aid supplies that entered Gaza through Israel, amid a hunger crisis, in Beit Lahia in the northern Gaza Strip, July 20, 2025. File Image/Reuters Western leaders have responded with urgent calls for ceasefires and humanitarian access. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, in announcing joint emergency talks with Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, said, 'We are clear that statehood is the inalienable right of the Palestinian people. A ceasefire will put us on a path to the recognition of a Palestinian state and a two-state solution which guarantees peace and security for Palestinians and Israelis. The suffering and starvation unfolding in Gaza is unspeakable and indefensible.' France, for its part, halted weapons exports to Israel, arranged air-dropped humanitarian aid into Gaza, and repeatedly emphasised the need for unrestricted entry for journalists and humanitarian organisations. Will France's recognition make any difference? France's diplomatic history with the Palestinian cause dates back decades. Following the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, French President Charles de Gaulle openly supported Palestinian aspirations. France has maintained diplomatic engagement with the Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) despite violent incidents involving the group in Europe. Internally, recognition is expected to garner support across the French political spectrum. France is home to the largest populations of both Jews and Muslims in Europe, a demographic balance that has made the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a sensitive domestic issue. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Macron has previously expressed concern about importing the conflict into France but has continued to criticise Israel's ongoing military campaign in Gaza. Still, Macron's push has not been without resistance. Diplomats report that French attempts to rally support from allies — especially the UK, Canada, and Germany — have met with caution or outright reluctance. Israeli officials have even warned of repercussions, including reduced cooperation on intelligence matters and diplomatic obstacles to France's broader West Asian initiatives, reported Reuters. Some Israeli voices have hinted at retaliatory measures such as the potential annexation of parts of the West Bank. Despite these tensions, Palestinian Authority officials welcomed Macron's stance. We express our thanks and appreciation to His Excellency President Emmanuel Macron for his letter addressed to His Excellency President Mahmoud Abbas, in which he reaffirmed France's steadfast position and confirmed his country's intention to recognize the State of Palestine in… — حسين الشيخ Hussein Al Sheikh (@HusseinSheikhpl) July 24, 2025 Palestinian Vice President Hussein Al Sheikh wrote on X that the decision 'reflected France's commitment to international law and its support for the Palestinian people's rights to self-determination and the establishment of our independent state.' Who recognises Palestine, who doesn't? To date, over 140 of the 193 UN member states have extended formal recognition to the State of Palestine. These include the vast majority of countries across Africa, Asia, Latin America, and parts of Eastern Europe. Countries that recognise Palestine: Africa : Nearly all nations, including Egypt, South Africa, Nigeria, Algeria, Morocco, and Kenya. Asia : Widespread recognition from countries such as China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Vietnam, Malaysia, and most Arab states (eg. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon). Latin America & the Caribbean : Countries including Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, Chile, Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Ecuador. Europe : Sweden led the way in 2014, followed by Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, Romania, and Bulgaria. In May 2024, Ireland, Spain, and Norway also recognised Palestine. Oceania: Recognition by countries such as Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu, along with other Pacific island states. Countries that do not recognise Palestine: North America : United States and Canada Europe : United Kingdom, Germany, France, Italy Asia-Pacific: Australia, Japan, South Korea These nations typically support a two-state solution but insist that recognition must result from direct negotiations between Israel and Palestinian representatives. In 1988, the Palestinian declaration of independence was immediately recognised by over 70 nations which included Russia. In 2012, the UN General Assembly granted Palestine 'non-member observer state' status through Resolution 67/19, with 138 votes in favour. In 2024, a General Assembly vote passed overwhelmingly in support of Palestinian eligibility for full UN membership (143-9-25), but the US veto in the Security Council blocked admission. While France's formal recognition may symbolise a diplomatic milestone, it is not likely to alter the immediate realities on the ground. Aid remains out of reach for most Palestinians in Gaza, and a permanent ceasefire has yet to materialise. The broader hope in Paris is that France's move might catalyse further recognitions across Europe and the West — shifting the political calculus toward a viable two-state resolution. With inputs from agencies

Time of India
16 minutes ago
- Time of India
Rubio, Netanyahu Lose Cool At Macron Over France's Palestine Recognition; Hamas Celebrates
French President Emmanuel Macron announced that France will officially recognize a Palestinian state in September during the UN General Assembly. The move was welcomed by both Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, who praised it as a step toward justice and self-determination. Macron's decision comes amid global outrage over the Gaza crisis and ahead of a France–Saudi Arabia-led UN summit on a two-state solution. Israel condemned the move, arguing it rewards terrorism after Hamas' October 7 attack. France is now the most powerful Western nation to join over 140 countries in recognizing Palestine.#Macron #PalestineRecognition #FranceSupportsPalestine #TwoStateSolution #GazaCrisis #IsraelPalestine #UNGeneralAssembly #MiddleEastPolitics #Hamas #MahmoudAbbas #PalestinianStatehood #InternationalLaw Read More


India Today
41 minutes ago
- India Today
Poll body initiates Vice President election process, appoints key officials
The Election Commission has initiated the process for electing the next Vice President of India by appointing a Returning Officer and Assistant Returning Officers, according to a government notification issued on election was necessitated after the constitutional post fell vacant following Jagdeep Dhankhar's surprise resignation on the evening of July 21, the first day of the Monsoon Session of Parliament, citing health Sabha Secretary General PC Mody will oversee the election as the Returning Officer, while Garima Jain, Joint Secretary, and Vijay Kumar, Director in the Rajya Sabha Secretariat, have been appointed as Assistant Returning Officers. A heated discussion is underway within both the BJP-led ruling alliance and the Opposition regarding potential candidates. The INDIA bloc is likely to contest the election after arriving at a consensus on a common candidate, as it believes the numbers are not overwhelmingly against it, despite the BJP-led NDA holding a members of the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha, including nominated members, are eligible to vote. The combined effective strength of both Houses of Parliament is 782, and a candidate will require at least 392 votes to win, assuming all eligible members cast their the Lok Sabha, the BJP-led NDA commands the support of 293 members in the 542-member House, while the INDIA bloc has 234 the Rajya Sabha, the ruling alliance is backed by around 130 members in the 240-member House, including support from nominated members. The INDIA bloc has the support of 79 the NDA enjoys the support of approximately 423 members across both Houses, while the INDIA bloc has 313. The remaining members are non-aligned.- Ends IN THIS STORY#Parliament