Hit Enter to Search or X to close
The rise of BRICS, which began as a coalition of Brazil, Russia, India, and China (BRIC) in 2009 and expanded with the inclusion of South Africa in 2010, represents more than just a threat to Western hegemony. It emerges as a response to systemic inequities perpetuated by the dominance of the United States and its allies in global governance. The group's focus on fostering multi-polarity and equitable global governance contrasts sharply with the perceived imperialism of Western-led systems.
In response to BRICS' growing influence, former U.S. President Donald Trump employed aggressive economic tactics that appeared aimed at undermining the coalition's power. Through tariffs and expansionist rhetoric, Trump created economic strain on key BRICS members like China while attempting to assert U.S. dominance in geopolitically significant regions. His attempt to annex Greenland, with its strategic Arctic positioning and valuable mineral wealth, coupled with rhetoric about incorporating Canada, signaled an aggressive strategy to reinforce American economic supremacy. This confrontational approach sought to challenge BRICS' efforts to promote de-dollarization and reduce reliance on Western financial institutions.
However, Trump's tactics risks alienating traditional U.S. allies and destabilizing global economic networks, ultimately undermining the stability required for sustained American economic dominance. By pushing other nations toward stronger alliances with BRICS countries, this strategy may have inadvertently accelerated the coalition's efforts to reshape global economic power structures
In 2024, BRICS nations were officially joined by 4 new members: Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, and the United Arab Emirates. In October 2024, at the BRICS summit in Kazan, Russia, 9 new countries, including Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Thailand, Uganda, and Uzbekistan, joined hands as partners with this alternative block to counter the U.S. and EU’s hegemony. Indonesia officially joined the south-led block in January this year as a full member. These developments have increasingly challenged the United States’ hegemony in global affairs. BRICS has also invited Saudi Arabia, but KSA is still considering this invitation. This inclusion hICS represent 45 percent of the world’s population, 28 percent of the world’s economic output, and 47 percent of global crude oil. This article explores how the BRICS countries undermine U.S. influence through de-dollarization, strengthening geopolitical alliances, and promoting alternative economic models while examining how the USA and the EU’s counter strategies are proving counterproductive.
For decades, the United States has enjoyed unparalleled dominance in global politics, economics, and military power. This hegemony has been bolstered by the Bretton Woods system, the ubiquity of the U.S. dollar, and the country’s leadership in multilateral institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and NATO. However, the rise of BRICS signals a tectonic shift toward multi-polarity challenging this entrenched dominance. BRICS, representing a significant portion of the world’s population and 41% of global GDP, aligns closely with the broader Global South’s aspirations for self-determination and equitable participation in global affairs. With a combined population of 3.25 billion people—over 45% of the worldwide population—BRICS has become a platform for advocating for a more balanced distribution of global power. Through institutions like the New Development Bank (NDB), BRICS challenges the neo-colonial tendencies often associated with Western financial systems by offering alternative models for trade, infrastructure investment, and development. Rather than merely opposing U.S. dominance, BRICS positions itself as a coalition that prioritizes equitable trade agreements, infrastructure development, and sustainable growth—addressing the systemic inequities that have long marginalized nations in the Global South.
For leaders in these regions, multi-polarity represents a geopolitical shift and a pathway to greater self-determination, enabling flexible alignments and selective partnerships that empower diverse centers of influence. This emerging multi-polar framework signifies a broader rejection of systems perpetuating dependency and inequality. While the global order remains in flux, BRICS’ role in fostering inclusive development and economic sovereignty offers a compelling vision for the future that resonates deeply with nations seeking to assert their agency in an interconnected world.
The U.S. dollar has long been the global reserve currency, providing the United States with unparalleled economic advantages, including the ability to impose economic sanctions and control international trade flows. BRICS countries actively seek to reduce their dependency on the dollar by trading in their own currencies or creating alternative payment mechanisms. BRICS leaders, including Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese leader Xi Jinping, have publicly voiced their commitment to jointly introduce an alternative payment system that would not be dependent on the U.S. dollar. They have been working towards making an alternative system, the BRICS Cross-Border Payments Initiative, or BCBPI, which is supposed to strengthen corresponding banking networks within BRICS and enable settlements in the local currencies of BRICS members. China and Russia have initiated bilateral trade agreements in Yuan and Rubles, bypassing the dollar entirely. Similarly, the NDB provides loans in local currencies to avoid dollar-denominated debt, thus insulating member countries from the volatility of U.S. financial policies. These moves not only weaken the dollar’s dominance but also erode the United States’ capacity to use economic sanctions as a tool of foreign policy, especially in the Global South. In 2024, Brazil also proposed to launch a BRICS currency to abolish the U.S. dollar domination completely.
In response, the United States has attempted to counter this trend through various policies. Washington has strengthened its network of bilateral and multilateral trade agreements, such as the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) and renewed partnerships with traditional allies in Europe and Asia to ensure continued reliance on the dollar in international trade. Additionally, the U.S. Treasury has imposed targeted economic sanctions, aiming to dissuade countries from engaging with BRICS-led alternatives.
However, these efforts often backfire, as they reinforce BRICS’ resolve to create systems immune to U.S. influence. For example, sanctions on Russia following its actions in Ukraine prompted Moscow to deepen economic ties with Beijing and accelerate the use of non-dollar currencies in trade.
Moreover, the U.S. has relied on export controls and financial restrictions to curb the technological and economic advancements of BRICS nations. While these measures aim to isolate key players like China and Russia, they have also encouraged these countries to build independent supply chains and financial systems, further reducing their reliance on the dollar. The establishment of mechanisms like the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement and the growing success of intra-BRICS trade underscores how these countermeasures often strengthen the coalition’s commitment to de-dollarization. In this context, the United States struggles to balance short-term economic pressure with long-term strategic adjustments to maintain its global influence.
BRICS has also been instrumental in building geopolitical alliances that challenge the U.S.’s unilateral approach to global governance. By aligning with countries in the Global South, BRICS fosters solidarity against perceived Western imperialism and neo-colonialism. This outreach has resonated deeply with nations that have long felt marginalized by the existing global order.Many countries in the Global South argue that the current international system disproportionately favors wealthy Western nations at their expense. They point to disparities in the global COVID-19 response, accusing rich countries of hoarding lifesaving vaccines. These nations have also criticized the U.S. for perceived double standards in its stance on the wars in Ukraine and Gaza, asserting that the West selectively upholds international laws and norms when it aligns with their own interests. This has fueled calls for a more equitable global order.Countries in Africa, Asia, and Latin America view BRICS as a platform to amplify their voices and resist the dominance of Western powers. Initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), led by China, strengthen trade partnerships and infrastructure development in these regions, creating alternatives to Western aid programs often criticized for perpetuating dependency. This growing network of alliances dilutes U.S. influence and promotes a global economic power shift. BRICS not only poses a threat to the West’s influence but also caters to the need of socially, economically, and politically deprived nations in the South to have their own say and influence.
The United States reliance on sanctions as a foreign policy tool has often backfired, particularly as BRICS and its allies find ways to circumvent these measures. While aimed at isolating adversaries, economic sanctions have inadvertently driven countries like Russia, Iran, and Venezuela closer to BRICS and other alternative coalitions.Countries affected by U.S. sanctions and export controls—such as BRICS leaders Russia and China, new members like Iran, and aspirants like Venezuela—seek to diminish the dollar’s dominance to bypass sanctions and reduce U.S. influence. For example, after the U.S. and EU imposed sanctions on Russia following its actions in Ukraine, Russia intensified its trade and diplomatic ties with China and India. This realignment has bolstered BRICS’ collective economic and political strength. Moreover, these sanctions highlight the risks of over-dependence on Western-controlled financial systems, further incentivizing de-dollarization efforts.
The combined economic power of BRICS nations is steadily rivaling that of the traditional Western block. Collectively, BRICS accounts for over 45% of the world’s population and a growing share of global GDP. The group’s focus on intra-BRICS trade, infrastructure development, and technological innovation accelerates the global economic power shift. The U.S.’ foreign policies, perceived as unilateral and imperialistic, often alienate potential allies, pushing them toward BRICS. This phenomenon underscores the limitations of relying on diplomatic isolation as a tool to maintain hegemony. Instead of weakening adversaries, such policies strengthen alternative coalitions, further eroding U.S. influence.
One of the critical contrasts between the U.S. and BRICS lies in their approach to international relations. The United States has long relied on unilateral sanctions, military alliances, and the Bretton Woods institutions, which are increasingly seen as outdated and unrepresentative of the current global economic landscape. This reliance has drawn criticism for alienating key trading partners and undermining international consensus. Military interventions and sanctions are frequently perceived as coercive measures that prioritize U.S. interests over collective global welfare, often to the detriment of developing nations.
In contrast, BRICS champions a multilateral and development-focused approach that seeks to address systemic inequities and foster inclusivity. The coalition promotes shared decision-making and greater representation of developing nations in global institutions such as the United Nations, IMF, and World Bank. Through initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB) and the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement, the bloc offers financial and developmental support that bypasses the conditionalities often imposed by Western-led institutions. This approach resonates strongly with the Global South, where nations aspire to break free from the legacy of Western dominance and chart independent development paths.
This shift is particularly appealing to countries disillusioned by U.S. unilateralism. By positioning itself as a counterbalance to these coercive practices, BRICS has created fertile ground for its expanding influence. For instance, dissatisfaction with the Bretton Woods system has driven countries to explore alternative financial mechanisms within BRICS. The block’s emphasis on infrastructure investment and equitable trade agreements serves as a compelling alternative to the exploitative tendencies associated with traditional Western systems.
While dissatisfaction with the existing international order is a key driver of BRICS expansion, some prospective members, such as Malaysia, and current members, like India, prioritize maintaining balanced global relations and strategic autonomy. For these nations, BRICS membership represents an opportunity to enhance their voice and representation in international politics without necessarily aligning against Western ideologies. By promoting a multilateral world order, BRICS not only weakens the dominance of unilateral U.S. policies but also cultivates a cooperative framework that appeals to nations across diverse geopolitical and economic landscapes.
The USA and EU’s strategies to counter the rise of BRICS often exacerbate their own challenges. For instance, their aggressive use of economic sanctions alienates targeted nations and incentivizes others to seek alternatives to Western financial systems. Similarly, their reluctance to reform global institutions like the UN Security Council and IMF undermines their credibility and drives support for BRICS-led initiatives.Moreover, the overemphasis on military alliances like NATO contrasts sharply with BRICS’ focus on economic cooperation and development. This divergence highlights the limitations of traditional Western approaches in addressing the aspirations of the Global South. As globalization continues to evolve, the rigid policies of the USA and EU appear increasingly outdated.
BRICS’ emphasis on trade partnerships and anti-imperialism appeals to nations seeking alternatives to Western-dominated trade systems. By prioritizing equitable trade agreements and rejecting exploitative practices, BRICS offers a compelling model for sustainable development. In June 2024, the BRICS foreign minister’s meeting encouraged “enhanced use of local currencies in trade and financial transactions” among BRICS members. This was a trend that was already on the upswing. From 2017 to 2022, trade between member countries increased by 56 percent. Western sanctions on Russia led to a further surge in intra-block trade relations.Trade in goods among BRICS countries has significantly surpassed trade between BRICS and G7 nations, resulting in higher intra-BRICS trade intensity. Countries seeking to join BRICS are optimistic that membership will boost trade and investment opportunities.BRICS countries provide an alternative to exploitative Western trade systems by promoting development models centered on infrastructure, financial independence, and equitable trade. For example, China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has been instrumental in fostering economic growth in the Global South. The BRI connects Asia, Africa, and Europe through massive infrastructure investments, including railways, ports, and energy projects, facilitating trade and reducing reliance on Western-controlled trade routes. Notable projects include the Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway in Kenya and the Gwadar Port in Pakistan, both of which have significantly boosted regional economic integration.
Additionally, the BRICS Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA) provides a financial safety net for member states, reducing their dependency on Western financial institutions like the IMF. Unlike IMF loans, which often impose stringent austerity measures, the CRA focuses on stabilizing member economies without coercive conditions. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, CRA mechanisms were considered to support economic recovery in member states, showcasing its role as an equitable alternative to Western-dominated financial systems.
These initiatives underscore BRICS’ commitment to fostering solidarity among developing nations while challenging the exploitative practices often associated with Western aid and trade agreements. By prioritizing shared growth and financial autonomy, BRICS offers a compelling vision for a more balanced global economic order.
The rise of BRICS represents a significant challenge to U.S. hegemony and its influence in global affairs. By promoting multi-polarity, fostering geopolitical alliances, and advancing de-dollarization, BRICS undermines the traditional dominance of the United States. The counter-strategies of the USA and EU, rooted in unilateralism and economic sanctions, often prove counterproductive, accelerating the global economic power shift. As the world moves toward a more multi-polar order, the United States must adapt its policies to remain relevant. Embracing multilateralism, reforming global institutions, and engaging constructively with the Global South could help mitigate the erosion of its influence. Failure to do so risks further marginalization in an increasingly interconnected and multi-polar world.
%20-%201.png)
