An Extension of “From Economic Bloc to Global Geostrategic Power”
Almost exactly a year ago, I wrote about BRICS as an emerging
geostrategic force; an idea taking shape in the cracks of a weakening liberal
order. At the time, it was a forward-looking argument, built on signals:
expansion, de-dollarization efforts, and a growing dissatisfaction with Western
dominance.
Today, that argument has met reality.
Not in theory, not in projections, but in war.
The ongoing confrontation involving the United States, Israel, and
Iran has become an unexpected stress test for the very idea of BRICS. And like
all real tests, it has revealed not just strengths; but limits, contradictions,
and, more importantly, its true nature.
What we are seeing now is not the rise of a unified counter power,
but something more subtle, and perhaps more consequential.
The Moment of Truth
If BRICS were truly a geopolitical bloc in the traditional sense,
this would have been its moment.
One of its expanded members—Iran—is directly embroiled in conflict
with Western-backed forces. The situation carries global implications: energy
markets are volatile, trade routes are threatened, and the risk of escalation
looms large.
And yet, BRICS has not moved as one.
There has been no unified doctrine, no collective response, no
coordinated strategic posture. Instead, what we see are individual states
acting according to national interest:
- China is
cautious, balancing economic exposure with strategic positioning
- India is
measured, mindful of its ties with both the West and Global South
- Russia is
opportunistic, leveraging the crisis diplomatically
- Gulf states
are calculating, navigating both proximity and partnership
- Brazil
remains distant, as geography often dictates
This is not failure. But it is clarity.
BRICS, as it stands today, is not an alliance.
What BRICS Actually Is
The mistake, mine included, was to interpret BRICS through the
lens of existing power structures. To expect it to resemble NATO, or even the
European Union, is to misunderstand its foundation.
BRICS is not built on shared ideology.
It is not bound by collective defense.
It is not driven by uniform political systems.
What binds BRICS is something less visible but more durable: converging
dissatisfaction.
A shared discomfort with:
- A
dollar-dominated financial system
- Sanctions as
instruments of control
- Institutions
that reflect a past era of power distribution
- A global
order where influence is often conditional
This means BRICS is not a coalition of agreement, it is a
coalition of necessity.
And necessity behaves differently from unity.
War as an Accelerator, Not
a Unifier
Wars do not always create alliances. Sometimes, they expose why
alliances cannot form.
This conflict is doing exactly that.
The idea of BRICS evolving into a NATO-style military bloc is, at
least for now, unrealistic. The internal contradictions are too deep, too
structural:
- Strategic
rivalries exist within the bloc itself
- Threat
perceptions are not aligned
- Geographic
priorities differ drastically
- Military
integration is nonexistent
No member is prepared to subordinate its sovereignty to a
collective defense mechanism.
But here is the paradox:
The war is still strengthening BRICS. Not
by unifying it militarily, but by deepening the conditions that make it
relevant.
The Quiet Expansion of
Influence
While BRICS does not respond as one, it benefits from the
environment the war creates.
Every sanction imposed…
Every trade route threatened…
Every financial restriction enforced…
…pushes more countries to reconsider dependence on Western
systems.
And BRICS offers something critical in that moment:
Options.
- Alternative
payment systems
- Bilateral
currency arrangements
- Energy trade
outside traditional frameworks
- Diplomatic
space not dominated by Western priorities
This is not power in the conventional sense.
It is leverage.
And in international politics, leverage often matters more than
alignment.
The Shift from Structure
to Environment
A year ago, I framed BRICS as a potential “alternative pole” in
global power. That framing assumed a level of cohesion that, today, appears
premature.
What BRICS is becoming is not a pole, but a platform.
Not a unified force, but a strategic environment.
An environment where:
- Countries
can hedge without committing
- Partnerships
can exist without alliances
- Influence
can be exercised without dominance
This is a different model of power; less rigid, more adaptive, and
arguably more reflective of the current global reality.
After the War: What
Changes
When this conflict stabilizes; whether through negotiation, exhaustion,
or escalation containment, the effects will outlast the battlefield.
Three shifts are likely:
1. Economic Realignment Accelerates
Trust in global systems will erode further. Countries will seek redundancy,
flexibility, and autonomy. BRICS mechanisms, formal or informal, will expand in
response.
2. Institutional Pressure Increases
Global institutions will face intensified scrutiny. Calls for reform will grow
louder, and BRICS will position itself not as a replacement, but as a
counterweight.
3. Strategic Non-Alignment Evolves
The old model of “neutrality” will give way to something more active: selective
alignment. Countries will engage multiple power centers simultaneously, and
BRICS will be central to that balancing act.
The Limits That Define It
To understand BRICS, one must accept its limits.
It will not become NATO.
It will not offer collective security guarantees.
It will not operate with unified command or doctrine.
And yet, dismissing it on those grounds misses the point entirely.
Because BRICS is not trying to replicate the past.
It is responding to a world where:
- Power is more
distributed
- Alliances
are more fluid
- Control is
harder to centralize
Its strength lies not in what it is, but in what it allows others
to do.
A Revision of the Original
Thesis
A year ago, I ended with a declaration:
“BRICS is not coming. BRICS is already here.”
Today, I would revise that.
BRICS is not yet power.
But it is becoming the condition under which power is negotiated.
That distinction matters.
Because the future of global order may not be decided by who dominates,
but by who creates the frameworks within which others can operate.
And in that quiet, often overlooked space, between alignment and
independence, BRICS is steadily, and unmistakably, taking shape.
