A pivotal moment for the world: an expert discusses the significance of the XVI BRICS summit.

As Akmaral Batalova writes, the 16th BRICS summit took place in Kazan, marking a significant event during the Russian Federation's presidency, attended by top leaders and officials from 35 countries and 6 international organizations. The reaction of Western media and analysts in the lead-up to this event was particularly noteworthy.

How Does the West View BRICS?

The Economist referred to the event in Kazan as "Putin's plan to dismantle the dollar." Blomberg stated: "A divided BRICS aims to challenge the U.S.-led order." Business Insider noted: "Russia is flexing its muscles at the heart of the BRICS economic bloc, which seeks to compete with the West." Conversely, other Western researchers emphasized China's leading role. For instance, Alexandra Berzina-Cherenkova, director of the China Studies Center at the University of Stradins in Riga, told Politico that "China is leveraging BRICS to give it a mandate to promote its global post-Western vision."

Jim O’Neill, the former Goldman Sachs economist who coined the BRIC acronym in 2001, which then included the four countries with the greatest potential for economic growth—Brazil, Russia, India, and China—stated:

"I'm not sure what fruitful purpose it serves, other than being a club that the U.S. is not part of."

Ahead of the BRICS summit, Vladimir Putin held a meeting with journalists from leading BRICS media agencies. Interestingly, the Russian president emphasized that the BRICS alliance is not a move against the West, but an agreement for closer cooperation, comparing it to the growing collaboration among Global South countries.

Overcoming Internal Conflicts

Western observers also pointed to internal tensions among some BRICS members, particularly regarding the strained relations between India and China over disputed territory along their shared border. However, on the eve of the summit, India and China announced that they had reached an important agreement on patrolling the Line of Actual Control (LAC), marking a significant breakthrough in their four-year standoff. Both sides agreed to restore peace in Ladakh, and India's Ministry of External Affairs confirmed the withdrawal of troops from disputed areas.

For two nuclear-armed states that had a deadly conflict in 2020, the agreement restores an important status quo that previously existed. This decision was not made overnight; it resulted from more than 30 rounds of diplomatic and military negotiations. Indian Foreign Minister Jaishankar welcomed the agreement as a return to peace along the 3,500-kilometer border. China confirmed that both countries are committed to implementing the resolutions for conflict resolution and maintaining close ties through diplomatic and military channels.

While some may have hoped that disagreements between these two giants would persist, the achieved agreement indicates that the future lies in the unity of BRICS, not in division. This is not merely a resolution of border issues—it represents a seismic shift in the global order.

Although some countries, particularly India and South Africa, have to balance their interactions with BRICS and their partnerships with the West, at the same time, Shiite Iran and Sunni Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia are finding common ground within this organization. On the sidelines of the summit in Kazan, Armenian Prime Minister Pashinyan also stated that Yerevan and Baku had agreed on all fundamental issues of a peace treaty, even suggesting that Azerbaijan "sign it already."

These examples prove that BRICS is not merely an economic alliance, but a geopolitical platform where conflicts and contradictions can be resolved through negotiation.

BRICS Expansion

Some Western analysts also predict that the expansion of BRICS against the backdrop of geopolitical tensions will inevitably give rise to new competing interests and rivalries within the organization, increasing the likelihood of internal conflicts that will hinder the group's goals and weaken its ability to take action, ultimately reducing it to meaningless negotiations.

"The expansion of BRICS is fraught with the emergence of competing camps within the group," stated Abishur Prakash, founder of the Canadian consulting firm Geopolitical Business.

Yevgeny Roshchin, a researcher at the Henry A. Kissinger Center for Global Affairs at Johns Hopkins University, remarked that the group would need to determine how to distribute power among its members if more countries join.

"Behind this rhetoric lies a huge concern—even within Russia—about whether new members will be equal to the founding countries," he said, noting that Russia may lose its leverage and decision-making power among a larger group of relatively equal members.

Clearly, all these assessments reflect a mindset characteristic of an old, fading political-economic formation, where the rules of the jungle prevail, where "the strongest is right," and the main goal is to wield power and achieve superprofits. Importantly, member states of the organization have recorded their commitment to building a more just world order based on international law and the UN Charter in their final declaration. It is no coincidence that British MP, writer, and journalist George Galloway stated ahead of the forum that the BRICS summit in Kazan could be a turning point for the entire world.

It is worth noting that starting January 2024, BRICS has already welcomed new members—Iran, the UAE, Egypt, and Ethiopia have joined the organization. Including the founding states, BRICS now consists of nine countries. Previously, Saudi Arabia received an invitation to join but has not officially done so yet, although it sent a representative delegation to the summit in Kazan. The Saudi Foreign Minister emphasized the significance of cooperation within the bloc. Prince Faisal noted that the volume of bilateral trade with BRICS countries exceeded $196 billion in 2023, accounting for 37% of the Kingdom's total foreign trade.

However, earlier this summer, the alliance decided to pause its expansion, which Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov announced back in June. This decision was made to allow the adaptation of the new participants—Egypt, Iran, the UAE, and Ethiopia—and to establish a further order for accepting new members.

In response to requests from 30 to 35 countries to join the group, criteria for obtaining partner status were developed at the Kazan summit. To accept a candidate into BRICS, the consensus of all members is required. At the first stage, a list of 13 partner countries with significant political, economic, scientific-technological, and human potential, united by common values and worldviews, was agreed upon. Kazakhstan was among the partner countries of the organization. A similar format operates in the SCO, where countries interested in joining the organization try their hand as dialogue partners or observers before obtaining full membership.

The participation of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in the "BRICS Plus" summit and his speech effectively disproved the narratives promoted in some media and social networks about any contradictions between Kazakhstan and Russia or pressure from the West. The head of state outlined specific directions for the implementation and development of Astana's partnership with BRICS countries, such as trade, IT technologies, energy and food security, transit and transport sectors, investments, etc. As a partner country, Kazakhstan can interact with BRICS institutions such as the New Development Bank and the National Research Committee.

Interestingly, few of the critics of Kazakhstan's decision not to join BRICS recall the fact that our country is not a member of OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) but still engages with it within the framework of OPEC+. The Republic is not a member of the Council of Europe but participates in the work of the European Commission for Democracy through Law and in the Group of States Against Corruption (GRECO). At the same time, Kazakhstan is a member of over 70 international organizations of various formats and levels, and Kazakh diplomacy, like a resilient tightrope walker, continues to balance on the swaying rope of multilateralism over the abyss of contemporary geopolitical turbulence, holding on to the life-saving pole of national interests.

Reforming the Global Financial System

Unsurprisingly, the main topic of the BRICS summit was the reform of the global financial system. An article in Business Insider discussed that "Dethroning the dollar will be difficult—even without considering the competing priorities and rivalries among BRICS members."

However, even before the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russian President Vladimir Putin explained that the group’s members are working on alternative SWIFT payment systems. According to reports from the Russian Ministry of Finance and the Central Bank of Russia, these alternative systems will facilitate cross-border payments among participants. They included a payment network using local currencies rather than a reserve currency like the dollar. Russia already has a model to rely on for transactions between central banks: the mBridge system at the Bank for International Settlements. BRICS members are also utilizing alternative currencies, including the Chinese digital yuan and other cryptocurrencies.

According to Dilma Rousseff, president of the New Development Bank, this BRICS institution intends to provide financing in the national currencies of Global South countries. Vladimir Putin noted that since 2018, the bank has financed projects totaling $33 billion. He emphasized the importance of expanding the use of national currencies among BRICS countries for transactions, stating that this will help reduce geopolitical risks and strengthen the