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 2025. 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 (EFSAS, 2023) within the above-listed states. 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 24 years to grow from the initial four states to a more significant number of members (Glogowski, 2024). Even though the number of states 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 intends to get the individual points on. Especially, the vague formulation of an agenda bears many uncertain aspects that can turn out to be uncomfortable settings 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 give birth to an inner instability that prevents BRICS from building 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 place continuously, we are now having a look at the uniqueness of the M.U.M. Model (Erdmann, 2024b). Such a model describes the ongoing shift between multipolarism to unipolarism and vice versa, as it presents itself at the beginning of this millennium. In my previous article „The Dynamics of Polarized Pluralism“, I already explained and outlined the nature of this phenomenon, while this edition excels the previous dynamics in global outreach and impact.
Being aware of the picture that potentially underlays a specific strategic plan, in order to achieve the above-scheduled target, and that therefore ought to be projected towards the public, we also want to paint a picture based on our own research and our own understanding of this situation, being highly interlinked with the world community. Basically, we talk about 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 economically partnering with selected members of BRICS spans all five continents.
The fact that BRICS finds itself being completely decentralized often turns out to be an impactful selling point, while it could also materialize as 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 (Solomon, 2022) of its members, 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, unreflected view may disclose that the potential goal of the alliance is simply to create a trade network of 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 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.
My article ‚BRICS: Minus x Minus = Plus?‘ discussed already the extraordinary challenge for a transcontinental and inter-political alliance to grow in a sound and sustainable way (Erdmann, 2024a) from within, especially when potential authoritarian regimes and opposing economic relations are tamped into one group. Nonetheless, besides already being extraordinarily diverse, BRICS continues to extend the number of its members and partners and thereby raises the level of internal complexity. A brief look at some rudimentary 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 come from. The worldwide economic playground offers a multitude of alliances for countries to join, to actively participate in, and to create overall lasting benefits. Forming part of or being a member of the 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 the 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 of 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.
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 I even challenge the term ‚alliance‘ as such, which 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 for looking as challenging as possible towards potential western opponents (Baunov, 2024). Such seems to be the new identity of Russian-led BRICS, namely to focus on the number of members and potentially less on the realistic, productive impact that new partners may provide. Adding 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. Here, a potential anti-Western perspective (Baunov, 2024) may serve as a common point of interest, 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 requires 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 Kazakhstan 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.
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 or create the path towards wealth that may be taken by all members, partners, and joining applicants in the same way. In order to begin building such a path, we need to understand how to build a supportive order that enables the individual, being a sole person or a nation, to understand how it defines itself and where this conceptual structure comes from.
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, based on its complexity of cultures, languages, religions, and economic necessities, 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. Currently, we do not see indications that support the understanding that BRICS needs to grow from within (Erdmann, 2024a) in order to become sound, grow in a sustainable way, and build a lasting global value for mankind. In the meantime, the focus may be placed on growing by number, based on the fact that more and more members and partners are accepted, promising them credibility and legitimacy (Adams, 2023).
Having such widespread diversity as a foundation, we may understand that what is needed is 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 the individual realizes their 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 ethnicities, 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 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 it 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 the 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.
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 the 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 different, but they are potentially diverse. Some of them share languages, but not dialects; others share religions, but not their sects. Here, we can clearly see that diversity is unequal to fragmentation, which is more likely the counterpart of unity. Having stated in the beginning that the high level of a 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 when it materializes to be able 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 the previously mentioned ones.
We may have learned so far that building a transborder identity is more likely an extensive task, especially as setting a foundation of common understanding begins with each person per se and targets the overall conformity of the sum of the diverse individuals longing to label themselves as members of the group. Here, we may challenge the traditional concepts of strategic economic growth and methods that are accordingly based on building inclusive and exclusive alliances, such as the G20, G7, BRICS, NATO, etc. The question that we need to analyze for ourselves is whether such an exclusive mindset still meets the necessities of today’s global and multilateral world.
My reflection and analysis reveal to me that exclusive behavior often turns out to be a strong hint at an advanced level of fear of loss or disadvantages. Based on our general global connectivity, referring to individuals, companies, organizations, and countries, I strongly doubt that building, separating, and fragmenting economic borders supports global growth. Accordingly, such labeling 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, at 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 their family, we have no space to further develop a sound identity that surpasses borders and that embraces the wealth of mankind.
You may already sense where this will possibly take us. BRICS, but more likely mankind per se, needs to create the 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. In order to initiate such a process, we need politicians who act like responsible adults and who understand that owning the biggest piece of the cake does not automatically grant satisfaction. Based on what has been written so far, we all may imagine a world without the previously mentioned trade associations and unions, and we may envision that we more likely need a common level of true responsibility towards the planet Earth and mankind, far beyond self-centered and ignorant behavior that is based on and 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. Hereby, it is crucial to emphasize the importance of a labeling name and not to put an excluding name 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 us 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
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
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 X Minus = Plus? About The Art And Challenges Of Growing From Within, ISSN: 2628-6998, https://worldmediation.org/brics-minus-x-minus-plus-about-the-art-and-challenges-of-growing-from-within/
Erdmann, Daniel, 2024 b, The Dynamics Of Polarized Pluralism: On The Benefits, Challenges, And Threats Of A Constantly Changing Fragmented World Order, ISSN: 2628-6998, https://worldmediation.org/the-dynamics-of-polarized-pluralism-on-the-benefits-challenges-and-threats-of-a-constantly-changing-fragmented-world-order/
Erdmann, Daniel, 2024 c, Personal Identity And Peacebuilding: A Critical Reflection, ISSN: 2628-6998, https://worldmediation.org/personal-identity-and-peace-building/
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
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
Yzerbyt, Vincent, 1997, Building A European Identity, https://www.academia.edu/84255502/Building_a_European_identity