- Mapping The Rise Of BRICS: Declarations, Designs And A Future Unfolding
A systematic review of the BRICS declarations from 2009 to 2025 reveals not fragmentation but thematic coherence and steady institutional growth. The bloc has moved from reactive voice to constructive architect.
With the 17th BRICS summit just concluded in Rio de Janeiro, the BRICS locomotive continues to move, quietly yet unmistakably, through the shifting contours of global power. Beyond headline debates on expansion, currency alternatives, or institutional reform lies a deeper continuity: the deliberate, increasingly coordinated effort of the Global South to shape a post-hegemonic order, one summit at a time.
Over 17 years, several core themes have remained constant (Figure 1). Calls to reform global governance, particularly the UN Security Council and Bretton Woods institutions, have sharpened. So too have affirmations of sovereignty, non-interference, and multilateralism grounded in international law. BRICS has consistently opposed unilateral coercive measures, foreign intervention, and extraterritorial application of law, while emphasising peaceful dispute resolution and sovereign equality.
Yet critics persist. Some dismiss BRICS as little more than a talk shop – long on declarations, short on delivery. But that view no longer holds. A close reading of the declarations reveals growing technical coordination, policy continuity, and formalised structures. The very texts once cited as evidence of vagueness now offer proof of a maturing governance ecosystem.
In the financial domain, BRICS' critique of dollar dominance has moved from posture to practice. The New Development Bank (NDB) and the Contingent Reserve Arrangement were early steps. Most recently, the bloc's declaration proposed the incubation of a BRICS Multilateral Guarantees (BMG) mechanism within the NDB and technical advances on cross-border payment interoperability. While not yet named, these developments increasingly reflect the logic of Mutual Credit Clearance (MCC) -a decentralised, self-balancing trade system that avoids both hard currency dependency and inflationary credit creation, as EMIR Research proposed in 'BRICS' Currency Dilemma: A Necessary Quality Leap Beyond the Dollar' (2024).
Support for Africa, Latin America, and least developed countries has moved from symbolism to structured frameworks. The introduction of BRICS Partner Country status, along with the refrain 'African solutions to African problems', signals transition from advocacy to architecture.
Peace and security cooperation has also matured. What began as rhetorical condemnation of terrorism is now underpinned by working groups, action plans, and technical coordination platforms. BRICS declarations increasingly address regional conflicts – Palestine, Syria, Sudan, Ukraine – not only in solidarity but as a normative voice for international law and humanitarian principles.
Recent years also mark a decisive shift in BRICS' identity – from platform to prototype. Since 2021, technology governance and AI have become central. The bloc has shifted from addressing digital access to asserting digital sovereignty, with new frameworks on AI governance, cyber norms, and sovereign digital infrastructure.
BRICS is also becoming institutionally dense. No longer just a summit platform, the bloc's operational ecosystem now includes permanent working groups, interbank platforms, think tank networks, and civil society forums. Declarations increasingly reference cross-pillar coordination, 2030 strategies, and detailed technical annexes—hallmarks of real governance capacity.
Another shift is BRICS' growing role in humanitarian diplomacy and legal accountability. Since 2020, declarations have placed stronger emphasis on humanitarian law, unimpeded aid access, and explicit references to the International Court of Justice. The bloc is positioning itself as a normative counterweight in a system long monopolised by Western legal framing.
This institutional maturity is echoed in the block's evolving language. Early BRICS (2009–2014) spoke in terms of voice, representation, and multipolarity. Recent declarations use a more assertive vocabulary: agile, equitable, accountable, inclusive governance. This shift signals BRICS' ambition to offer a values-based alternative, not merely a structural counterweight.
Crucially, BRICS Summit 2025 marks a geopolitical breakthrough. With Indonesia admitted as a full member and eleven additional Partner Countries recognised, including Malaysia, BRICS is operationalising a decentralised, concentric model of expansion. This model preserves consensus while broadening reach.
Even its economic language has shifted. While critique of Western trade asymmetry persists, it now comes wrapped in technical nuance: exchange-rate risk mitigation for public-private partnerships, infrastructure information hubs, ESG-aligned investment platforms, and the integration of digital green finance. 'BRICS exposure' is now entering investment strategy vocabularies – not as political signalling, but as a credible diversification play.
Malaysia's moment: from observer to orchestrator
With Malaysia now chairing ASEAN, the deepening and diversification of BRICS+ offers a strategic opening – not to choose sides, but to help shape the global playing field. Long known for its diplomatic pragmatism, multilateral credibility, and evolving MADANI framework, Malaysia is uniquely placed to serve as both bridge and architect in this era of recalibration.
Already recognised as a BRICS Partner Country, Malaysia could pursue strategic alignment across three domains: monetary innovation, technology governance, and development cooperation.
While BRICS declarations have yet to explicitly adopt Mutual Credit Clearance (MCC), the logic behind it is taking form. In such a system, only countries that produce goods and services of recognised value to others can sustainably issue credit. Malaysia, with its globally demanded exports – from halal goods and palm oil to semiconductors and green components – meets this criterion. Its consistent trade surpluses, diversified production base, and stable monetary governance position it not just as a participant, but as a node of stability and trust in any future BRICS+ MCC-like arrangement.
This alignment of trust and production connects directly to the Multilateral Guarantees (BMG) mechanism now incubating within the NDB. Designed to de-risk infrastructure and sustainable development projects, the BMG reduces reliance on Western risk assessments and credit agencies. Malaysia's institutional credibility and investment-grade governance make it well-placed to act not only as a beneficiary but as a regional anchor. In combination with MCC-like logic, BMG offers the other side of the equation: a collective trust mechanism to ensure productive intent translates into investable outcomes.
Malaysia's strategic value extends further. In the digital and financial domains, it could host an ASEAN–BRICS+ forum on AI governance, data flow standards, and cybersecurity. In the development sphere, Malaysia can lead on Islamic finance, halal regulatory convergence, and biodiversity frameworks – embedding value-based norms in the emerging Global South architecture. With regional neighbours such as Indonesia now full BRICS members, the potential for regulatory coherence and innovation diplomacy is unprecedented.
The BRICS story is no longer about bloc formation – it is about framework evolution. The question is not whether the world is becoming multipolar. It is whether emerging actors like Malaysia will step forward – not merely to adapt to new structures, but to shape them.
In this spirit, Malaysia's path lies not in alignment or opposition, but in co-creation -bringing ASEAN's voice into the core of BRICS+, embedding mutual credit into trade logic, and aligning inclusive governance with pragmatic multilateralism. The moment is open, but the window is narrow. This is not just a chance to observe history. It is an invitation to help design its next chapter.
-- BERNAMA
Dr Rais Hussin is the Founder of EMIR Research, a think tank focused on strategic policy recommendations based on rigorous research.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
Roundup: African experts spot potential of Juncao technology to boost livelihoods, sustainable agriculture
KIGALI, July 24 (Xinhua) -- African agricultural experts are looking to harness Juncao technology, a Chinese innovation used in mushroom cultivation and livestock feed, to improve livelihoods and increase incomes in rural communities across the continent. "Juncao technology offers far more than mushroom cultivation; it is a comprehensive innovation having crop, livestock production, environmental protection, livelihood nutrition and economic empowerment," said Telesphore Ndabamenye, director general of the Rwanda Agriculture and Animal Resources Development Board. He made the remark while attending the closing ceremony of a Juncao technology workshop held on Wednesday in Kigali, the capital of Rwanda. Stressing the importance of Juncao technology in advancing agricultural transformation, Ndabamenye said the participation of trainees from diverse economies highlighted the broad applicability of the technology, particularly in addressing the socioeconomic challenges faced by smallholder farmers. "Juncao technology is regarded in Rwanda as a vital contributor to the country's inclusive agriculture transformation. It supports our national vision of a professionalized and commercialized farming sector with active participation of both men and women as stated under Rwanda's vision 2050," he said. He reaffirmed Rwanda's commitment to integrating Juncao technology into the country's strategy for food and nutrition security, environmental sustainability, and economic development, in full alignment with continental and global development agendas. Since Juncao was first introduced to Rwanda in 2006, more than 35,000 local farmers have received training, and over 4,000 households, along with 50 companies and cooperatives, have been supported in engaging in Juncao-related activities. The July 16-23 Juncao workshop was held at the China-Rwanda Agriculture Technology Demonstration Center, co-hosted by the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, the Rwandan Ministry of Agriculture and Animal Resources, and China's Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University. As part of the training, participants visited several projects in Huye and Nyanza, gained hands-on experience, and deepened their understanding of Juncao technology's potential. Innocent Shayamano, chief agriculture extension specialist and project coordinator from Zimbabwe's Ministry of Lands, Agriculture, Fisheries, Water and Rural Development, said the workshop covered critical areas such as cultivation management of Juncao grass, including all its agronomic aspects. "This course was relevant and significant for our country. We have seen the opportunities in embracing Juncao technology in terms of using Juncao grass as a substitute for livestock feed. This technology came to transform livelihoods and ensure that rural communities have enough income," he said. Chinese Juncao expert Lin Hui said the participants' active engagement, thoughtful questions, and enthusiasm for applying the acquired knowledge were truly inspiring. According to Lin, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University of China has organized 388 training courses over the years, benefiting more than 16,000 people worldwide. According to Li Jiahui, a representative of the Chinese Embassy in Rwanda, the technology has benefited over 100 countries since 2001, helping families lift themselves out of poverty and achieve prosperity. "It has been proven that Juncao is not merely a technology but a grass of wealth and a grass of happiness. China takes great pride in sharing the technology as part of its commitment to South-South cooperation," Li added.
The Star
an hour ago
- The Star
AU announces election of 2 new commissioners
ADDIS ABABA, July 24 (Xinhua) -- The African Union (AU) has announced the completion of the election of all eight members of the top leadership of its secretariat, the African Union Commission (AUC). In a statement issued on Wednesday, the AU declared the election of two commissioners at its seventh Mid-Year Coordination Meeting, which was held in Malabo, the capital of Equatorial Guinea, from July 10 to 13. Francisca Tatchouop Belobe from Equatorial Guinea has been appointed as AU commissioner for economic development, trade, tourism, industry, and minerals, while Gaspard Banyankimbona from Burundi was elected as AU commissioner for education, science, technology, and innovation, according to the AU. The election of the two posts was postponed at the AU's 38th Ordinary Session of the Assembly of Heads of State and Government, which was held in February in Addis Ababa, the capital of Ethiopia. The pan-African bloc said the new commissioners will be sworn in at the AU headquarters in Addis Ababa. The AU said the new commissioners were selected from the central African region, as per a decision of its Executive Council, to ensure gender parity, predictable rotation, merit-based selection and equitable distribution of the top eight jobs. All other regions secured their share of two members of the top leadership team, one male and one female each, in February, the statement noted. The AUC leadership structure comprises a chairperson, a deputy chairperson, and six commissioners, with the newly completed team to serve from 2025 to 2029.
The Star
4 hours ago
- The Star
News Analysis - Deadly Thai-Cambodian dispute puts Asean's relevance on the line
SINGAPORE: Asean's continuing silence on mounting tensions between Thailand and Cambodia is once again testing its long-standing principle of non-interference. Deadly clashes between its two member states on July 24 left at least 12 dead more than two months after border hostilities reignited. The escalation underscores Asean's limitations in handling intra-regional disputes, experts told The Straits Times, and raises fresh questions about its relevance in managing crises among its own members. 'It is institutional inertia,' said Mr Andrew Mantong, a researcher at Indonesia's Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS). 'The region has spent decades building platforms and mechanisms for peace. Yet when war erupts in its backyard, it is diplomacy by absence.' At least 12 Thais, mostly civilians, have been killed in the latest outbreak of a long-standing border dispute. Fighting erupted in a contested area, with Cambodia accused of firing rockets into a Thai village and attacking a hospital, while Thailand launched air strikes on Cambodian military targets. In response, Thailand has closed its entire border and urged its citizens to leave Cambodia. Phnom Penh has downgraded diplomatic ties, accusing Bangkok of using excessive force. The current flare-up began in May, when a Cambodian soldier was killed during a brief exchange of gunfire. Tensions have steadily escalated since, culminating in the recent air strikes and cross-border shelling. Asean has remained publicly silent throughout, although some individual members states have called for peace. The conflict was also not raised at the recent Asean Foreign Ministers' Meeting in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysia is the current Asean chair and when asked about the issue during a press conference on July 11, Malaysia Foreign Minister Mohamad Hasan called it a bilateral issue and reaffirmed the group's traditional stance of non-interference. While Asean has long prided itself on consensus-building and neutrality, Mr Andrew of CSIS said its silence in the face of open conflict is unwise and risks diminishing its standing on the world stage. That credibility has taken a further hit as Cambodia seems to have bypassed the grouping by appealing directly to the United Nations. On July 24, Cambodian media published Prime Minister Hun Manet's letter to the UN Security Council's president, Pakistan's envoy Asim Iftikhar Ahmad, calling for an urgent meeting of the 15-member body. It is the first time in more than a decade that an Asean member has made such a request. Cambodia also made the previous request in 2011, when artillery exchanges with Thailand near the Preah Vihear temple prompted Phnom Penh to seek international intervention. The UN Security Council is expected to convene in the coming days, but observers say any outcome will likely mirror that of 2011, which had included calls for maximum restraint and for Asean to play a more active role in dispute resolution. Still, the referral itself is telling. If countries in the region feel compelled to turn to New York to manage tensions with their neighbours, it reflects a worrying lack of trust in Asean, or in any regional third party, to help defuse a conflict in its own backyard. 'The gap between Asean's aspirational vision and its operational readiness has rarely been this exposed; and I am worried that the current geopolitical contour will make it more frequently exposed,' said Mr Andrew. On Thursday (July 24), Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim said that he had sent messages to the prime ministers of Cambodia and Thailand, hoping to speak with them personally. Calling the situation worrying, he said that both countries are key members of Asean and close neighbours to Malaysia, adding that he hoped they would de-escalate tensions and return to the negotiating table. Trust a key issue? Some analysts say a key factor holding Asean back is the lack of trust between the parties involved. Secretary-General Kao Kim Hourn is Cambodian, and some observers argue that Thailand may not view him as a neutral mediator. A similar impasse occurred in 2008, when Cambodia rejected mediation by then-Asean secretary-general Surin Pitsuwan, a veteran Thai diplomat, during border clashes near the Preah Vihear temple. After mediation failed, the conflict simmered without formal resolution, until 2011, when Cambodia turned to the UN following renewed violence at the same border area. However, others say the problem is structural, not personal. Ms Joanne Lin, a senior fellow at the ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute, said the issue lies with Asean's institutional design, not the nationality of its representatives. 'The Secretariat does not have the mandate to lead politically, and decisions must come from member states,' she said, noting how back in 2011 Cambodia had similarly turned to the UN. Eventually, the case went to the International Court of Justice, which ruled in 2013 that Cambodia had sovereignty over the temple and ordered Thai troops to withdraw. That verdict helped ease tensions, but more than a decade on, diplomatic relations between the two neighbours are at their lowest in years. Bilateral channels, said Ms Lin, may no longer be viable. Still, she believes Asean has a narrow window to act. Neutral members like Indonesia or Singapore could potentially step in to broker talks or quietly facilitate de-escalation. In the last bout of fighting between the two countries in 2011 – when Indonesia was the Asean chair – then Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa undertook shuttle diplomacy to defuse tensions. He held talks with both sides in their respective capitals, and also subsequently met with the UN Security Council alongside the two nations' foreign ministers. With the current ignition of tensions, Ms Lin said, 'if Asean doesn't step up, it risks being sidelined in its own region. China, which has close ties with both countries, has already shown interest in stepping in'. China on July 24 expressed deep concern over the border clashes and offered to play a constructive role in promoting peace, urging both sides to resolve the dispute through dialogue and pledging to remain fair, impartial and supportive of regional stability. Asean would prefer that the two countries resolve the conflict bilaterally, as both are members of the regional organisation. But if that is not possible, they should resolve it peacefully through third-party mediation, said Dr Mustafa Izzuddin, a senior international affairs analyst at business consultancy Solaris Strategies Singapore. However, the non-response from Asean – as of July 24 – signifies 'collective fatigue' on the part of the group in dealing with conflict in the region, he added. The group has faced criticism for its failure to implement the five-point peace plan with Myanmar's military regime, as well as its inability to conclude negotiations on a Code of Conduct for the South China Sea, aimed at managing tensions amid overlapping maritime claims. 'Asean is acting strategically so that it does not need to bite off more than it can chew as a multilateral organisation with a multitude of interests that are focused on regional integration,' said Dr Mustafa. - The Straits Times/ANN
