BRICS: Not Dead, But Thriving

Mohammed Saqib

IN HIS RECENT comments, President Donald Trump of the United States of America declared that the BRICS bloc—currently comprising Brazil, China, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, South Africa, and the United Arab Emirates—was created with a “bad purpose” and that it is, in effect, already “dead.” Even more dramatically, he – before assuming his second term threatened a 100% tariff on any sort of  trading activity involving the BRICS nations if they attempted to  de-dollarize commerce.

President Trump’s remarks on BRICS may appeal to nationalist sentiments. Despite his claims that BRICS is irrelevant or “dead,” the bloc is a formidable global economic force.  The interest of countries to join the bloc makes it more practical and a powerful entity to claim the multipolarity. Representing over 3.24 billion people—more than 40% of the world’s population—BRICS nations wield demographic influence on an unprecedented scale. Economically, the bloc contributes approximately $26.03 trillion to global GDP, accounting for 26% of the world’s total GDP. Their impact on international trade is equally significant, with BRICS countries are responsible for 20% of global exports and 18% of global imports. Beyond these metrics, the New Development Bank (NDB), established by the bloc in 2014, has approved over $33 billion in infrastructure and sustainable development projects. Far from being defunct, the economic weight of BRICS continues to shape the trajectory of regional as well as global development.

Misunderstanding BRICS’ Purpose and Potential

The perception that BRICS was established for a “bad purpose” fails to recognise the bloc’s core objective: providing a collaborative platform for emerging economies to enhance their voice at the global level. It seeks to address and rectify longstanding economic disparities. Initiatives like the New Development Bank (NDB) signify its dedication to promoting sustainable development and addressing infrastructure needs—goals that starkly contrast with any notion of a “bad purpose.” Moreover, rather than being dismissed, BRICS continues to flourish, attracting interest from numerous nations eager to join a framework that fosters multipolarity. The claim that “most people don’t want it” is unfounded and overlooks the increasing demand for a more diversified global financial landscape. Over 30 countries, including Turkey, a NATO member, have applied to join BRICS or its economic bloc.

Threat of a 100% Tariff

Perhaps the most alarming element of Trump’s comments is the threat of imposing a 100% tariff on any BRICS nation’s trading activities if it dared entertain policies aimed at de-dollarizing global commerce. It may sound like rhetoric, but such a move would have far-reaching consequences if implemented. The BRICS nations hold significant value in the age of multipolarity. China, a leading member of the bloc, is a manufacturing titan and the US’s largest trading partner, accounting for approximately $600 billion in bilateral trade in 2024, with critical imports like electronics as well as machinery underpinning American supply chains. Similarly, India is one of the fastest-growing  economies. Consider the examples of other members. India’s burgeoning trade relationship with the US is driven by key sectors such as technology, pharmaceuticals, and services. Brazil, the US’s second-largest trading partner in Latin America, supplies essential commodities like soybeans and crude oil. While trade with Russia has decreased due to sanctions, its energy export capacity remains significant. South Africa offers vital minerals and metals necessary for US manufacturing and technology. A blanket tariff would complicate economic ties and affect bilateral relations.  As a result, American businesses and consumers may have to pay higher costs. Such tariff measures may invite potential retaliatory actions that could ripple across global supply chains and further exacerbate global economic instability.

The emphasis on “playing games with the dollar” reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of why certain BRICS members are advocating for de-dollarized trade. These measures are not primarily aimed at undermining the US dollar; rather, they focus on reducing external vulnerabilities to sanctions and market volatility. Diversifying currency use is a pragmatic strategy in an unpredictable global economy, not an antagonistic action deserving of punitive tariffs. The global financial architecture is witnessing a slow shift as BRICS nations pursue the use of other means for international transactions along with the dollar. This movement manifests in three key developments: the increasing adoption of local currency settlements, exemplified by India and Russia’s rupee-ruble oil trade arrangements; the advancement of central bank digital currencies, with China’s digital yuan reaching 260 million users in its pilot phase; and discussions at the 2023 BRICS Summit regarding the creation of a shared currency for inter-BRICS trade. These efforts represent an economic diversification strategy aimed at reducing dollar dependency. At the same time it creates greater financial autonomy among BRICS nations rather than a direct challenge to the dollar’s international role. The trend reflects a broader evolution in global finance, where emerging economies seek to build resilient payment systems that can withstand geopolitical pressures while maintaining stable trade relationships.

Need for a Constructive Engagement

Ultimately, in true Trumpism style, the hyperbolic rhetoric surrounding the state of BRICS appears designed more for political theatrics than for a genuine analysis of global economic strategies. Instead of dismissively threatening an entire coalition of nations, a more productive approach would involve engaging in dialogue and developing mutually beneficial economic frameworks.

The BRICS bloc is an evolving testament to the shifting dynamics of global power. While the United States remains a dominant economic player, its influence is increasingly challenged by a world where trade, technology, and geopolitical alliances are as fluid as they are interconnected. Threats of tariffs and isolation may create temporary pressure, but they are unlikely to dismantle a bloc that is built on shared interests and growing interdependence. Rather than instilling fear through tariffs and empty threats, a future-oriented strategy would recognise the benefits of inclusive dialogue — one that respects multiple voices in the international arena.

The reality is that BRICS is not dead. In fact it’s an evolving bloc that reflects the aspirations of the Global South to have a greater voice in global affairs.

[ Mohammed Saqib is an economist and Convenor of COGGS. ]