BRICS and the end of dollar dominance: A new economic order or a global gamble?
Part 2
4. The role of new strategic partners
The latest expansion of BRICS has broadened its influence and reach by incorporating 13 new members from diverse regions, reflecting a global shift toward multipolarity and expanded collaboration. These new partners—Algeria, Belarus, Bolivia, Cuba, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Malaysia, Nigeria, Thailand, Turkey, Uganda, Uzbekistan, and Vietnam—bring valuable resources, strategic locations, and unique economic profiles to the bloc. Each member’s inclusion aligns with BRICS’ objective to strengthen economic ties among emerging economies while minimizing reliance on Western financial institutions and the US Dollar. This expanded BRICS+ membership significantly enhances the bloc’s position in global markets, particularly in sectors where Western economies have traditionally dominated, such as energy, raw materials, and manufacturing. Algeria, Nigeria, and Kazakhstan add substantial weight to BRICS’ influence in the global energy market. As major oil and gas producers, these countries offer BRICS additional leverage in determining oil and natural gas prices, potentially impacting the global energy landscape. If BRICS were to implement a policy where oil and gas transactions occur in local currencies or digital alternatives, it would challenge the petrodollar system directly, reducing global dependency on the US Dollar.
From a geographic standpoint, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand enhance BRICS’ influence in Southeast Asia, a region that has increasingly become a hub for global manufacturing and trade. The inclusion of these countries fosters closer economic integration within Asia, providing alternatives to China’s dominance in regional trade while reinforcing BRICS’ goal of diversifying global supply chains. Furthermore, these Southeast Asian economies bring significant maritime trade routes and strategic access points to global markets, providing BRICS with a more extensive logistical network that can compete with existing Western and Chinese routes. Turkey’s and Uzbekistan’s membership adds strategic depth to BRICS’ influence in the Eurasian region, linking the bloc to both European and Asian markets. Turkey, a NATO member with close ties to both the West and East, represents a unique addition, as it could bridge Western and BRICS interests while advocating for a multipolar economic order. Turkey’s role in BRICS could provide the bloc with insights into Western policy dynamics and facilitate potential dialogues between BRICS and NATO members. Uzbekistan, located in Central Asia, bolsters BRICS’ access to the region’s growing resources and infrastructure projects, linking South Asia and Europe through initiatives like China’s Belt and Road. In Latin America, Bolivia and Cuba further strengthen BRICS’ presence. Bolivia’s substantial lithium reserves, essential for the global renewable energy transition, align well with BRICS’ push for sustainable development and energy independence. Cuba, though economically smaller, symbolizes BRICS’ ideological solidarity with nations seeking independence from US influence, highlighting the bloc’s appeal as an alternative for countries marginalized by Western policies. These Latin American additions also support BRICS’ mission to diversify its partnerships across the Americas, where it can facilitate South-South cooperation with countries facing economic challenges similar to those of other Global South nations.
African nations Nigeria and Uganda bring substantial growth potential and natural resources to BRICS. Nigeria, as Africa’s largest economy and a leading oil producer, plays a pivotal role in the African Union and offers a gateway to further influence on the continent. Uganda, known for its rich mineral deposits, adds value to BRICS’ focus on natural resources. These African members also align with the bloc’s mission to develop South-South partnerships, allowing African countries to pursue development goals without Western financial dependency. The AKL Lumi digital currency, increasingly adopted across African nations, complements BRICS’ objectives, providing an alternative medium of exchange that strengthens intra-continental trade and fosters African economic resilience.
Potential and Challenges for BRICS as a multinational bloc
While the strategic expansion of BRICS offers considerable advantages in terms of resources, influence, and alternative financial systems, the integration of new members presents logistical and ideological challenges. For instance, each member brings distinct economic models, political systems, and regional alliances, which may complicate consensus-building within the bloc. Turkey’s role as a NATO member, for example, could create friction if BRICS pursues policies at odds with Western security frameworks. Additionally, ideological differences among authoritarian, democratic, and hybrid governments within BRICS could strain unity, particularly on issues like human rights, governance, and military cooperation. The expansion also introduces practical difficulties in harmonizing financial policies and infrastructure across vastly different economies. Countries like Indonesia, Uzbekistan, and Thailand, each with varying degrees of dependence on Western trade, might approach BRICS policies cautiously, seeking to balance benefits within the bloc with their existing Western ties. Furthermore, the complexity of managing cross-border digital transactions, particularly with the implementation of national CBDCs, requires extensive coordination and robust cybersecurity measures.
Nevertheless, BRICS’ growth marks a significant departure from Western-centric globalization. By welcoming diverse partners with varied strengths, the bloc enhances its collective bargaining power in international trade, energy policy, and financial innovation. As BRICS continues to attract countries marginalized by Western-dominated institutions, it underscores an expanding desire for a more equitable global system where emerging economies have greater agency. If BRICS can effectively address its internal complexities, it could emerge as a resilient counterweight to Western economic power, setting the stage for a multipolar world where multiple alliances foster growth and security through diversified global cooperation.
5. Security Implications: The UN, NATO, and Global Stability
As BRICS expands, the bloc’s growing influence poses both opportunities and challenges for global security. While BRICS itself does not function as a military alliance, the coalition’s economic and political clout indirectly affects global security frameworks, particularly those led by the United Nations (UN) and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). Countries within BRICS, like Russia and China, have historically positioned themselves as counterweights to Western influence, a stance that now resonates more strongly with the addition of new members from Africa, Asia, and Latin America. The rise of BRICS creates a scenario where countries outside traditional Western alliances may have greater freedom to pursue independent foreign policies. As BRICS expands to include nations like Turkey, Nigeria, and Algeria, its economic clout increases, making it easier for members to withstand Western pressures. Turkey’s inclusion is particularly significant, as it is a NATO member and shares strategic relations with both the West and BRICS nations. This membership crossover could potentially serve as a bridge between BRICS and NATO, offering a unique diplomatic channel. However, it could also strain NATO’s cohesion if Turkey faces conflicting loyalties, especially if BRICS moves toward more explicit opposition to Western policies.
UN dynamics and security council reform
The UN has long been a platform for advocating global peace and security, but its power dynamics reflect a post-World War II reality dominated by Western nations. The BRICS coalition has consistently advocated for reforms in the UN Security Council to include emerging economies, arguing that current structures no longer represent today’s geopolitical landscape. During the recent BRICS summit, UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres attended and reiterated the need for reforms in institutions like the UN, IMF, and World Bank, aligning with BRICS’ vision for more inclusive global governance. The expansion of BRICS strengthens the bloc’s influence within the UN, especially as new member countries like Nigeria and Algeria are prominent voices in the Global South. With these nations now part of BRICS, the bloc can exert more pressure for Security Council reform, advocating for a broader representation that reflects the interests of emerging economies. This push for reform is likely to be met with resistance from permanent members like the United States, who may view BRICS’ expansion as a direct challenge to their control over international institutions. Yet, the inclusion of countries like Turkey—already an influential member within the UN—suggests that BRICS could successfully build alliances to push for gradual reform rather than immediate upheaval.
The NATO-BRICS relationship: cooperation or tension?
While BRICS does not have a formal military function, its economic and strategic alliances can impact NATO’s influence globally. NATO, primarily a defense alliance, is focused on collective security and is often at odds with BRICS members like Russia and China, which it perceives as potential threats to its interests in Europe and the Indo-Pacific. The expansion of BRICS to include nations with diverse alliances, such as Turkey and Indonesia, creates a complex interplay between the two blocs. Turkey’s dual association with NATO and BRICS could create diplomatic opportunities or risks, depending on how Ankara navigates its dual allegiances. Furthermore, the expansion of BRICS indirectly influences the strategic security landscape by enhancing its members’ economic independence, making them less susceptible to NATO or US-led sanctions. For instance, countries like Iran and Russia, both under heavy sanctions, may find alternative markets within BRICS, diminishing the effectiveness of Western sanctions. This trend may lead NATO to reassess its economic leverage, as sanctions—one of its primary tools—become less effective against a bloc with substantial internal trade and financial alternatives. At the same time, the rivalry between BRICS and NATO could complicate cooperation on global security issues. For instance, countries with BRICS ties may be less inclined to participate in NATO-led security initiatives or peacekeeping efforts, especially if these are seen as aligned with Western interests. This division could reduce collective efforts to address issues such as nuclear proliferation, cyber threats, and terrorism, as the emerging multipolarity within BRICS and NATO creates separate security spheres.
Cybersecurity and economic sanctions
As BRICS develops its digital financial infrastructure, including Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), the security of cross-border digital transactions has become a priority. Countries like China and Russia have developed independent financial networks to protect against sanctions and reduce dependency on the US-controlled SWIFT system. A BRICS-backed financial network could become a vital security asset, enabling member nations to insulate themselves from Western economic pressures. However, with the increased adoption of digital currencies, BRICS must address cybersecurity threats, which pose significant risks to financial stability and national security. Cybersecurity cooperation among BRICS members becomes essential to protect against potential cyberattacks that target these new financial systems. NATO, recognizing the importance of cyber defense, has invested in its cybersecurity capabilities, and BRICS may need to follow suit to maintain the integrity of its digital initiatives. This could lead to a new form of arms race, where NATO and BRICS both advance their cybersecurity frameworks to secure their respective financial ecosystems.
Geopolitical fragmentation and its broader implications
The expansion of BRICS adds a layer of complexity to an already fragmented global order. With the G20, BRICS, and NATO representing overlapping but distinct spheres of influence, global cooperation may become increasingly challenging. The risk of polarized blocs reminiscent of the Cold War is heightened if BRICS moves closer to an anti-Western stance, which would create competing economic and political structures. This fragmentation could hinder cooperation on transnational challenges such as climate change, global health crises, and arms control, as each bloc pursues its interests within a fragmented international framework. Yet, BRICS has so far avoided positioning itself as a direct competitor to NATO or the G7, instead promoting itself as an alternative rather than an adversary. This approach leaves room for selective cooperation, particularly on issues where BRICS and NATO share interests, such as countering terrorism and combating pandemics. However, for these collaborations to succeed, BRICS and NATO will need to find common ground without compromising their foundational principles.
The future of global stability
BRICS’ growth underscores a shift toward a multipolar world where countries seek alternatives to Western hegemony. This expansion will undoubtedly test the resilience of global institutions like the UN and NATO, as they must adapt to a new reality with multiple influential alliances. The future of global stability depends on how these institutions navigate the rise of BRICS. If BRICS can effectively promote a multipolar balance that avoids confrontation, it could contribute to a more stable global order. However, if the bloc moves toward confrontation with NATO and the West, it risks creating a world divided into competing spheres of influence, echoing the tensions of the Cold War era.
6. Challenges and risks in the BRICS-led economic model
The expansion and influence of BRICS signal an alternative vision for global governance, but the bloc faces formidable challenges and risks that could hinder its effectiveness. As BRICS evolves, it must address the complex dynamics among its diverse members, technological vulnerabilities, and external pressures from existing global financial powers. While BRICS promotes itself as a more equitable alternative to Western-led economic institutions, its diverse membership brings internal tensions that complicate decision-making and strategy.
Dr. David King Boison: CEO of Knowledge Web Center, Senior Research Fellow CIMAG and Lead Consultant for Vanuatu Trade Commission –Ghana on AiAfrica and AKL Project
Albert Derrick Fiatui, is the Executive Director at the Centre for International Maritime Affairs, Ghana (CIMAG), an Advocacy, Research and Operational Policy Think- Tank, with focus on the Maritime Industry (Blue Economy) and general Ocean Governance. He is a Maritime Policy and Ocean Governance Expert