hile the BRICS organization was originally formed out of a Goldman Sachs acronym for what they saw as key developing markets (Brazil Russia, India, and China with South Africa joining later), the organization has become a focal point for conversations on the future of the world order—particularly with the organization inviting new nations to join at their meeting last year. In the lead–up to Russia hosting the BRICS Summit in October 2024, some commentators voiced concerns that the BRICS pose a threat to the current global order by positing an alternative vision for global governance. Some of these concerns are legitimate—the BRICS have supported undemocratic nations, whitewashed the aggressive actions of member states, and China has expressed its interest in creating an alternative world order. However, concerns of the BRICS replacing the existing international system, or even becoming a real alternative, are overblown. The existing international order took decades to form and remains resilient—albeit facing challenges from both rising and existing powers. However, the BRICS—which now includes Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates as members—represent a different challenge for global governance: contributing to an already overcrowded and competing set of international organizations.
While discussions of global governance are often dominated by the largest international organizations—such as the United Nations, the World Bank, or the World Trade Organization—there are many more international organizations. These include a wide array of topical and regional organizations. This complex network of organizations creates challenges and opportunities for effective global governance. While these organizations can create spaces to address topics that are of interest to different subsets of countries, they can also undermine the effectiveness of global governance mechanisms by creating the opportunity for countries to circumvent penalties and commitments by “forum shopping” for alternative venues. This situation of “contested multilateralism” is worsened as the number of international organizations expands and the commitments of different organizations to core values differ.
While the BRICS are unlikely to create an alternative or replace the current world order, the expansion of their membership and agenda marks an important challenge for global governance. As the number of international organizations with overlapping mandates continues to expand, states will continue to be able to find different venues to pursue their interests and undermine the effectiveness of international institutions to hold members accountable. This challenge not only hampers the existing global order, it limits the ability of the BRICS to radically rewrite global governance as countries will also be able to avoid using the BRICS. Instead, the continued expansion of global organizations aimed at creating alternative governance models will continue to erode the ability of all international institutions to meaningfully promote collective action on the world’s most pressing challenges. The BRICS will not replace what has taken decades to build, but it is yet another brick putting pressure on the wall of global collaboration.
a global affairs media network
Another BRICS in the wall
Photo by NastyaSensei via Pexels.
October 30, 2024
The BRICS bloc won't replace the international system, but it does pose a challenge to global governance that needs to be taken seriously, writes Adam Ratzlaff.
W
hile the BRICS organization was originally formed out of a Goldman Sachs acronym for what they saw as key developing markets (Brazil Russia, India, and China with South Africa joining later), the organization has become a focal point for conversations on the future of the world order—particularly with the organization inviting new nations to join at their meeting last year. In the lead–up to Russia hosting the BRICS Summit in October 2024, some commentators voiced concerns that the BRICS pose a threat to the current global order by positing an alternative vision for global governance. Some of these concerns are legitimate—the BRICS have supported undemocratic nations, whitewashed the aggressive actions of member states, and China has expressed its interest in creating an alternative world order. However, concerns of the BRICS replacing the existing international system, or even becoming a real alternative, are overblown. The existing international order took decades to form and remains resilient—albeit facing challenges from both rising and existing powers. However, the BRICS—which now includes Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates as members—represent a different challenge for global governance: contributing to an already overcrowded and competing set of international organizations.
While discussions of global governance are often dominated by the largest international organizations—such as the United Nations, the World Bank, or the World Trade Organization—there are many more international organizations. These include a wide array of topical and regional organizations. This complex network of organizations creates challenges and opportunities for effective global governance. While these organizations can create spaces to address topics that are of interest to different subsets of countries, they can also undermine the effectiveness of global governance mechanisms by creating the opportunity for countries to circumvent penalties and commitments by “forum shopping” for alternative venues. This situation of “contested multilateralism” is worsened as the number of international organizations expands and the commitments of different organizations to core values differ.
While the BRICS are unlikely to create an alternative or replace the current world order, the expansion of their membership and agenda marks an important challenge for global governance. As the number of international organizations with overlapping mandates continues to expand, states will continue to be able to find different venues to pursue their interests and undermine the effectiveness of international institutions to hold members accountable. This challenge not only hampers the existing global order, it limits the ability of the BRICS to radically rewrite global governance as countries will also be able to avoid using the BRICS. Instead, the continued expansion of global organizations aimed at creating alternative governance models will continue to erode the ability of all international institutions to meaningfully promote collective action on the world’s most pressing challenges. The BRICS will not replace what has taken decades to build, but it is yet another brick putting pressure on the wall of global collaboration.
