This chapter discusses the ongoing difficulties and future challenges that BRICS nations face on their way to a meaningful political impact and supplementary relevance on a global level. More often than not, stakeholders and decision-makers ignore crucial and fundamental necessities that societies request in order to enable and initiate a sustainable and lasting process of growth. Potentially, politicians in charge may be aware of the importance of such anthropological puzzle pieces and, accordingly, should put them on their agenda. Reality seems to prove that the general focus is widely placed on targeting and canvassing short-term financial turnovers and outcomes related to the balancing or unbalancing process of global impact only. Forecasting the failure of such progress, this chapter offers a more convenient strategy to find one’s position within the global community based on mutual respect, shared responsibility, and a holistic approach to peacebuilding.
Keywords: social identity, global alliance, political divergence, multilateral fragmentation, global stability, sustainable world order, holistic peace building.
- Introduction
Starting off our journey through this chapter, I would like to create a common ground of understanding by having a brief look at the status quo of the BRICS community in the year 2026. Being initially a group of interest, Goldman Sachs researcher Jim O’Neill discussed the geopolitical relevance of Brazil, Russia, India, and China in 2001 (O’Neill, 2001) and thereby potentially introduced the proper term and existence of BRIC (Mostafa, Mahmoud, 2013). It only makes sense to mention that South Africa was accepted as the first additional/joining member in 2010 (Harrison, 2018). Based on this action, South Africa formed the fifth member of the alliance, made the name change to the common term of BRICS, and complemented the group in a meaningful geopolitical way (Erdmann, 2024b).
By reviewing the economic history of the group’s members, we can see that all such states underwent crucial economic changes and faced challenging financial situations in the late 20th century (EFSAS, 2023). The awareness of the member’s natural resources, the increasing level of global consumption, the improvement of price strategies, and the expanding worldwide interlinked trade established later overall economic stability within the above-listed states (EFSAS, 2023). Nowadays, this group finds itself in an economically comfortable situation (Erdmann, 2024a) controlling a meaningful quantity of worldwide natural resources and obtaining a key role in global trade (Iqbal, 2021).
Being still a purely economic-oriented alliance, the group could not be more diverse in a multitude of aspects. Potentially, this and the complexity of the alliance per se are one reason why it took the group 25 years to grow from the initial four states to a more significant number of members (Glogowski, 2024). Even though the number of states being interested in partnering with BRICS extends this number by far, we may still find a lack of a focused and determined agenda explaining what BRICS actually stands for.
The currently available communiqués look like lists of interests stated by the broad quantity of members and partners, while every country intents to get the individual points on. Especially the vague formulation of an agenda bears many uncertain aspects that can turn out to become an uncomfortable setting for countries that find themselves in this specific economic alliance. While being part of BRICS, many of these members strengthen their independence and stability by trading with potential opponents of the group (Erdmann, 2024b). This inconformity and contradiction gives birth to an inner instability that prevents BRICS to build the solid and impactful global force that it might look for, namely to become an entity that strongly leads or manages the worldwide economy and politics at the same time, based on its all-embracing network and level of fundamental natural resources.
- A Hyper-Diverse Global Alliance Called BRICS
The subject of our analysis often presents itself as a fast-growing economic unity that stands up in order to challenge the potentially existing Western financial trade order and to reorganize such towards a much-needed balance or towards leading it into the opposite extreme. Even though such a balancing and unbalancing process, depending on one’s perspective, takes continuously place, we are now having a look at the uniqueness of the M.U.M. Model (Erdmann, 2024b). This model relates to global politics and describes the ongoing shift between multipolarism to unipolarism and vice versa, as it presents itself specifically at the beginning of this millennium.
The nature of this phenomenon is based on the struggle between, the often labeled and perceived, Western and Eastern alliances, targeting for economic dominance and impact on a global level. This process entails dynamics that describe a constant movement form of Multipolarism towards a potentially brief phase of balance, and a further development to the status of Unipolarism, before setting the frame for a new epoch of Multipolarism. This concept outlines the notion that terms and concepts repeat themselves over and over again. The process of improving repetition can be visualized by imagining a spiral staircase, showing that one constantly arrives at the same spot, but on a new level of escalation (Erdmann, 2024b).
Putting this into practice and being aware of the BRICS’ scheduled picture of global dominance, we also want to paint a picture based on our own research and on our own understanding of this situation, being highly interlinked with the world community and what is potentially needed by mankind and less by a few stakeholders. When we talk about BRICS, we exchange on a global alliance that stretches over four continents, currently counts nine full member countries, and recently accepted thirteen partner countries (Norton, 2024). In order to identify even more complexity, we need to say that its members are spread over four continents, while some of them economically partner with and on all five continents. We also see that a common understanding of what BRICS stands for and what it targets, is lacking in the portfolio of the alliance. As such a common ground is missing, it turns out being highly difficult to create or even imagine a strategy that supports the achievement of such a goal, and a path that maintains such a status, once it was achieved. Furthermore, it remains entirely unclear how full members derive greater benefits from their membership status compared to countries that are recognized solely as partners.
The fact that BRICS finds itself being completely decentralized turns out to be often communicated as an impactful selling point, while it could also materialize being the weakest point in the portfolio. Sharing the mutual interest of common economic growth, the alliance includes a broad quantity of languages, cultures, political systems, diverse trade partners, and foremost a wide frame of economic competencies and capabilities of its members (Solomon, 2022), while the last point may not match with all partners, as many of them suffer tremendously their economic instability. This level of diversity turns this alliance into a highly heterogeneous group (BpB, 2023) and maybe into the most diverse group that ever existed in modern history on a global scale. The ongoing strategic expansion of BRICS forms part of the alliance’s goal to raise its economic power and natural resources based on global relevance (Tseen Fu, 2024). A closer and critical view may disclose that the potential goal of the alliance is simply to create a trade network of natural resource owners, producers and consumers, excluding what may be labeled as Western countries. A far too long potential exclusion from the so-called Western World Order makes members of the alliance wishing to strike back by continuously admitting new members, propagandizing inclusiveness (Tseen Fu, 2024), and increasing the level of country-based diversity to a more extensive and questionable level. Obviously, the claimed inclusiveness turns out being highly selective.
Based on such a diverse range of starting points, interests, and capabilities setting up such an alliance turns out to be an extraordinary challenge, while the transcontinental and inter-political character of its members specifically reinforces the complexity to make such a construct grow in a sound and sustainable way (Erdmann, 2024a), especially when potential authoritarian regimes and opposing economic relations are tamped into one group. Nonetheless, beside already being extraordinarily diverse, BRICS continues to extend the quantity of its members and partners and thereby raises the level of inner complexity. A brief look at some rudimental core members of BRICS, namely China and India, shows how two almost historic rivals, find themselves put into one alliance, still being and remaining highly competitive opponents on a multitude of levels. Interestingly enough, Russia takes over the role of a mediator in order to bring such members closer together (Baunov, 2024). Four of the recently admitted members are likewise involved in complex disputes. Saudi Arabia and Iran are trapped in a long-term dispute on regional predominance and political integrity (Desta,2011), while Egypt and Ethiopia find themselves involved in an ongoing contradiction on natural resources, namely the Nile’s water dispute (BpB, 2023).
- A Baseless Iceberg?
Considering the ambitious growth and overall potential target of BRICS, namely to be the rebalancing tool in world economics, we may wonder where this vision and motivation actually comes from. The worldwide economic playground offers a multitude of alliances for countries to join, to actively participate, and to create overall lasting benefits. Forming part or being a member of G20 and BRICS at the same time is such an ambivalent example that it raises many questions. All founding members of BRICS, including South Africa, are members of G20 while they identified the need to not only join a more likely western run alliance, but also to be part of an opposing alliance that challenges the economic stability of several member states from the previously mentioned compound. Such a contradiction does not support one’s credibility in having one clear vision but more likely creates uncertainty on a global scale, actually a feature that mankind currently does not need at all, and potentially turns out to be a very poor political strategy that supports fragmentation instead of unification.
When features like mutual exchange, respect, and understanding support socio-economic peace and balance, what does fragmentation and exclusion mean to global society? It can be stated that the process of fragmentation turns out being an impactful strategic tool, specially when a group achieves and defines thereby a certain level of self-confidence and power within the global scale. Sufficient resources show, that fragmenting groups strategically exclude broad parts of a community in order to destabilize it, and to create a specific image of an enemy (Erdmann, 2024c). Hereby, the recently created splinter groups, are subject to the aggressor in number and power. Such dynamics can also be found during prosecution and ethnic cleansing (Zartman, 2010).
The more we challenge the peak of the iceberg, namely the image of BRICS that is communicated to the broad public, the more complex and confusing the setting of this potential alliance becomes. Step by step, we may discover that it looks like a bottomless construct that is lost in its own complexity. You may see that one can even challenge the term ‚alliance‘ as such traditionally identifies a group of countries or parties that share one common goal or interest (Cambridge, 2025). The previously mentioned communiqué and the global economic interlinkages of the groups’ members show more likely interests in all possible political directions, while some look for economic growth, others target financial stability, still, others try to enrich their global network, and finally, some aim to look as challenging as possible towards potential western opponents and impress such in a meaningful way (Baunov, 2024). This seems to be the new identity of BRICS in the present era, namely to focus on the number of members and potentially less on the realistic, productive impact new partners may provide. Hereby, it seems to be worth noting, that potential natural resources that a partner or member may provide, in combination with an unstable political system, does not turn out automatically to be a supportive feature to such an alliance. Furthermore, members need to observe the overall political behavior of member and partner countries. Forming part of a group, also means that other stakeholders’ action looks to be supported or at least tolerated. Accordingly, admitting new members to BRICS while continuously battling Ukraine may also serve as a wider legitimation for the Russian leadership to proceed in this political direction.
Nobody can deny that joining BRICS as a member or partner in these times does not serve as a clear political message towards the global community. Such countries should be well aware of the meaning of this symbolic act, namely that they support what BRICS members commonly stand up for or what they tolerate. Here, a potential anti-Western perspective may serve as a common point of interest (Baunov, 2024), while most members remain involved in trading with a multitude of such Western countries. Generally, we can observe that joining a group incorporates and/or requests two fundamental points, namely that each member supports the overall group target and supports what, more precisely, individual peer members stand up for. This simple fact perfectly underlines the level of contradiction that BRICS finds itself in, especially referring to handling dual memberships in pro and contra Western alliances. Whether it may be the potentially anti Western course, the unclear overall target of BRICS, or the Russian dominance in constantly inviting new members (Baunov, 2024), this uncertainty does not attract everyone. It is worth noting that Argentina and Kazakstan resigned from joining, while the role of Saudi Arabia actually remains unclear as no official confirmation of a joining act can be identified (Baunov, 2024). The fact that Russia, based on its activism, put itself apparently into the position of a presidency of BRICS, made the group’s character change from an initially cooperative alliance that targets mutual development into some sort of a plaything of unpredictable anti Western propaganda, losing itself in the baseless complexity of a self-focused worldview and biased global interests.
Even though, such a global partnership has the potential to swim solidly like an iceberg, its intransparency, beneath the surface, extends to such a crucial level that its baselessness starts creating a downforce instead of supporting the complete superstructure. The fundamental question may be what measures need to be taken to turn the currently existing construct into a globally responsible, well-respected alliance that supports peace, mutual respect, and socio-economic growth if this is the goal at all.
- An Unfortunate Coincidence?
The topic of the organization’s credibility is far more complex than only the issue of socio-economic transparency. Currently, it does not exist one single updated document that displays, in a transparent way, all members of this construct. Even though, potential members are listed on websites, on platforms, and in media channels, the specific level of membership is not clear. Hereby, the public can not easily identify which county is a full member, which one is a partner country, which one maintains friendly relations, which country is an applicant for membership, and which country delayed or canceled the joining process and for what reason (Council of Foreign Relations, 2025). Further more, no officially signed joining memoranda are accessible to the public. Such are circumstances that truly challenge a believe in an upright ambition to increase one’s membership numbers and global impact in a sound way. Far more confusing remains the fact that it is constantly highlighted how many countries participate in the annual summits, while it remains unclear which role they play in such events. The question is, what kind of countries are attracted by such a foggy environment?
Unfortunately, there is another critical topic that needs to be discussed, specially by talking about transparency and international standards. This context overshadows the current setting of the alliance but is seldomly addressed. The reason therefore may be the unpopularity of the topic per se but it absolutely needs to be brought to the table, specially by representing the perspectives and the interests of being heard by potential victims. Third party reports communicate that several members countries of this alliance show human rights violations within their territories (U.S. Department of State, 2025).
In order to use an additional source and to be able to analyze, from another angle, how deep-rooted and complex the issue presents itself in the current era, the reports of Amnesty International may offer additional insights (Amnesty International, 2026), in order to better comprehend the information shared by the reports of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations. Based on these burdening reports, it may not be sufficient to proclaim a condemnation of war, as commonly done during annual summits, specially when the addressed conflicts solemnly take place between labeled western countries and potential BRICS members (Lima, 2025), while issues that take place within the proper member’s territories are not addressed and silenced. Here, a superficial polishing of the topic may not be sufficient. It is definitely needed to address the topic in a seriously critical way and to create a path of getting back on track, following what was agreed on in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UN, 1948), a document that was signed by a significant number of BRICS related countries.
Addressing this critical topic and initiating credible requested action, in order to counter the current circumstances, may generate a higher level of global acceptance of member countries or of the alliance at all, while the question remains, why not all member countries signed this document and what this specifically means to the other associated countries, that automatically stand in for or back up the other joining member’s political setting by attending one common alliance.
- Ordo Ab Chao
Considering BRICS is currently more likely a rag rug of nations longing for sustainable economic growth and wealth management, we may commonly agree that there is no access to wealth without prior management. Such management needs to initiate a process that all members, partners, and joining applicants evaluate as useful and that all of them are willing to follow up on. This common understanding can be a cornerstone of an overall identity that supports a much needed Ordo Ab Chao – Order out of Chaos. Obviously, such a process of change takes time and definitely starts by every one of such partners before possibly spreading from partner to partner or to generate an overall code of conduct or better said, a common identity that supports the respectful and peaceful growth of the global community. And of course, such an achievement may only be possible by leaving behind the constant labeling and setting up of Western and Eastern opposing countries, in order to finally understand all of us being global citizens.
Here, we need to face one specific reality, namely that the level of diversity that BRICS covers surpasses existing regional and/or continental alliances and/or unions by far. In this way, BRICS may not be compared to any other existing union, such as the European Union, the African Union, the Association of South-Eastern Nations, the Union of South American Nations, etc. Its complexity of cultures, languages, religions, and economic necessities makes this construct face very unique challenges. Currently, we do not see indications that support the understanding that BRICS will grow from within in order to become sound (Erdmann, 2024a), grow in a sustainable way, and build a lasting global value for mankind, as previously requested. This status might continue, while the focus remains on growing, promising new members credibility and legitimacy (Adams, 2023).
Having such widespread diversity as a foundation, we may understand that what is needed looks like a common creed or a transborder identity that fixes differences and harmonizes diversity in an all-embracing way. So, the term ‚identity‘ offers us a very complex nature and a rich scale of interpretations. As soon as the consciousness is sharpened and a human individual realizes its proper existence, the quest for an identity is born. Identity per se is a multilayered word that is of importance on an individual level, a group level, a regional level, a national level, a continental level, and may reach its climax on a global level, including ethnics, languages, creeds, and cultures. Even though we may identify a multitude of different sorts of identities, they all seem to have one common denominator, namely the quest for a harmonic and organized aspect.
Accordingly, we may imagine that it is basically a very tricky and challenging project to create or build a truly transborder identity, while what is needed is something that people can believe in, that connects them, and that motivates them to start talking about them as a sound community. What we are looking for is the still missing central puzzle piece that completes the artwork and that gives a higher meaning to angles, visions, and perspectives. This puzzle piece could turn chaos into order and provide BRICS with the opportunity to stop being a potentially unpredictable underdog who challenges an existing global construct. BRICS could leave this image behind and start growing solidly within itself and within the global community in order to become a cornerstone for global balance, peace, and harmony. This missing link, or still transborder identity, can only be identified and developed by the community of BRICS itself (Yzerbyt, 1997), and starts with the discernment that only merged puzzle pieces complete the picture – or that all countries are needed to build a lasting global community. The form, structure, and character of a puzzle piece is crucial when we identify its place within the overall artwork, while the piece itself merges perfectly with the bigger picture by not focusing on its proper borders any longer. Thus, the ultimate goal, on a global level, should be to leave proper personal interests behind, and to merge to a community of conscious and truly interdependent partners.
- Conclusion
In order to be able to build a transborder identity that truly combines a high level of diverse members of a group, we need to understand the uniqueness of this common goal, and the specific challenges of the setting in question. Traditionally, a group identifies itself as such, based on a common language, dialect, culture, history, and/or tradition (Akuche, 2016). Obviously, not all members of the wider BRICS circle are completely different, but they are potentially diverse. Some of them share languages, but not dialects, others share religions, but not sects. Here, we can clearly see that diversity is unequal to fragmentation, which more likely is the counterpart of unity. This gives us a very crucial hint, namely that diversity can still be or become the starting point that has its peak in some level of unity. Having stated in the beginning, that the high level of nation’s diversity may be the weak spot of BRICS, we find ourselves at the point of turning a fragile ornament into the truss of a superstructure. This means that if it turns out being possible to build an identity of BRICS members, it should also be realistic to build an even stronger identity, namely the identity of a global community – incorporating all puzzle pieces – as previously mentioned and requested.
We may have learned so far that building a transborder identity is more likely an extensive task, especially as setting the foundation of a common understanding begins with each participant per se and targets the overall conformity of the sum of such diverse individuals, longing to label themselves a member of an homogeneous group. Here, we may challenge the traditional concepts of strategic economic growth and methods that accordingly are based on building inclusive and exclusive alliances, such as G20, G7, BRICS, NATO, etc., and more often than not, benefitting from this process of economic and political fragmentation. The question that we need to analyze for ourselves is, whether such an exclusive mindset still meets nowadays necessities, in a global and multilateral world, and if we can justify such a path in a dialogue with upcoming generations.
Reflections may unveil that exclusive behavior often turns out to be a strong hint towards an advanced level of fear of loss, disadvantages, and of being left behind in general. Based on the general global connectivity, referring to individuals, companies, organizations, and countries, one may strongly doubt that building economic borders supports global growth. Accordingly, and as previously stated, putting a name on everything and everyone supports exclusiveness, which per se is often a door opener for fragmentation and extremism (Erdmann, 2024c). What mankind potentially needs in a time of economic and social insecurity is a common creed that binds all humans, in the bottom of their hearts, together. Namely a creed that is so fundamental that it touches and supports basic human necessities, namely stability, peace, and harmony. If we do not build harmony at the grassroots level of the individual and its family, we have no space to further develop a sound identity that surpasses borders and that embraces the wealth of mankind.
It may be already sensed, where this will possibly takes the global community to. BRICS, but more likely mankind per se, needs to create a real consciousness of a global community and, more specifically, that nowadays exclusiveness and fragmentation do not support real stability and global growth in the long term but always supports that only a very selective groups that initiate such processes benefit from those dynamics. In order to initiate such a change, we need politicians who act like responsible adults and who understand that owning the biggest piece of the cake does not automatically grant satisfaction, not in the long run, and potentially less to all of us. Based on what has been written so far, we all may imagine a world without the previously mentioned trade associations and unions. Mankind may envision that a common level of true responsibility towards the planet Earth and mankind is much needed, far beyond self-centered and ignorant behavior that is based on and that supports chaotic circumstances in the human mindset and on the surface that we walk on.
Therefore, BRICS, and again mankind in general, needs an agenda that clearly communicates, in a reasonable and realistic way, shared values that offer tranquility on a global level and enable mankind to develop a common identity, not as individuals but as a global community. Such a common identity could also be the true recognition of de Declaration of Human Rights, that would enable all countries to meet upon one level, exchange and treat each other based on righteousness. Hereby, it is crucial to discharge the importance of a labeling name and to not put an excluding acronym in the front row, such as BRICS, G20 or G7. Now, it is humankind that counts first, it is humankind that needs to turn into a global community of mutual respect and responsibility, it is humankind that needs to connect and grow from within, and it is humankind that does not need a name to differ, because it already got a name that binds all of them together – Citizens of the World.
References
Adams, Mubarak, 2023, BRICS And The New World Order: Implications For The Existing World Order, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/371804604_BRICS_AND_THE_NEW_WORLD_ORDER_IMPLICATIONS_FOR_THE_EXISTING_WORLD_ORDER
Akuche, Andre Ben Moses, 2016, Nation Building And The Impediments Of Building The Nigerian Nation, https://www.academia.edu/31350929/Nation_Building_and_the_Impediments_of_Building_the_Nigerian_Nation
Amnesty International, 2026, Country Reports, https://www.amnesty.org/en/countries/
Baunov, Alexander, 2024, New Identity of Brics, https://carnegieendowment.org/russia-eurasia/politika/2024/10/brics-russia-global-power-opposition?lang=en
BpB, 2023, Erweiterung Der BRICS Gruppe, https://www.bpb.de/kurz-knapp/hintergrund-aktuell/540816/erweiterung-der-brics-gruppe/
Cambridge, Dictionary, 2025, https://dictionary.cambridge.org/de/worterbuch/englisch/alliance
Council on Foreign Relations, 2025, https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/what-brics-group-and-why-it-expanding
Desta, Teddy, 2011, The Iran – Saudi Arabia Power Struggle, https://www.academia.edu/42105879/The_Iran_Saudi_Arabia_Power_Struggle
EFSAS, 2023, The BRICS | Origins, Evolution & 2023 Expansion, https://www.efsas.org/publications/study-papers/the-brics-origins-evolution-and-expansion/
Erdmann, Daniel, 2024 a, BRICS: Minus × Minus = Plus? About the Art and Challenges of Growing from Within. In: Kiyala, J.C.K., Tshikovhi, N., Ngwenya, D.M., Netswera, F. (eds) Expanded BRICS Nations. Sustainable Development Goals Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-6986-8_4
Erdmann, Daniel, 2025 b. The Dynamics of Polarised Pluralism: On the Benefits, Challenges, and Threats of a Constantly Changing Fragmented World Order. In: Kiyala, J.C.K., Tshikovhi, N., Ngwenya, D.M., Netswera, F. (eds) Expanded BRICS Nations. Sustainable Development Goals Series. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-6986-8_2
Erdmann, Daniel, 2024 c, Personal Identity and Peacebuilding: A Critical Reflection. In: Kiyala, J.C.K., Chivasa, N. (eds) Climate Change and Socio-political Violence in Sub-Saharan Africa in the Anthropocene. The Anthropocene: Politik—Economics—Society—Science, vol 37. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-48375-2_28
Glogowski, Aleksander, 2024, India, Pakistan And BRICS After The 2024 Kazan Summit, https://www.academia.edu/125302884/India_Pakistan_and_BRICS_after_the_2024_Kazan_summit
Harrison, Philip, 2018, South Africa In The BRICS, https://www.academia.edu/116590774/South_Africa_in_the_BRICS
Iqbal, Badar Alam, 2021, BRICS As A Driver Of Global Economic Growth And Development, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/09749101211067096
Lima, Julia, 2025, BRICS Leaders’ Declaration Condemns Wars and Calls for Reform of Global Governance, https://brics.br/en/news/collabs/collaborative-communication/brics-leaders-declaration-condemns-wars-and-calls-for-reform-of-global-governance
Mostafa, Mahmood, 2013, The Rise Of The BRICS And Their Challenge To The G7, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/271724885_The_rise_of_the_BRICS_and_their_challenge_to_the_G7
Norton, Ben, 2024, BRICS Keeps Growing In A Multipolar World, https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2024/10/26/brics-13-partner-countries-summit-kazan-russia/
O’Neill, Jim, 2001, Building Better Global Economic BRICS, https://www.goldmansachs.com/insights/goldman-sachs-research/building-better
Solomon, Mussie, 2022, BRICS + And Its Major Impacts On Poor Members, https://www.academia.edu/124839172/BRICS_and_its_Major_Impacts_on_Poor_Members
Tseen Fu, Brice Lee, 2024, Legitimacy Through Diversity: China’s Leadership In The BRICS+ Expansion For Global Balance, https://www.academia.edu/122725632/Legitimacy_through_Diversity_Chinas_Leadership_in_the_BRICS_Expansion_for_Global_Balance
United Nations, 1948, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
U.S. Department of State, Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, 2025, 2024 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices, https://www.state.gov/reports/2024-country-reports-on-human-rights-practices/
Yzerbyt, Vincent, 1997, Building A European Identity, https://www.academia.edu/84255502/Building_a_European_identity
Zartman, William, 2010, https://www.ipinst.org/wp-content/uploads/publications/ipi_identity_conflicts_epub.pdf, Accessed October8th, 2026.