Tensions Rise As BRICS Fails To Align On Strategy

As the global geopolitical balance weakens, Rio hosts a tense BRICS summit on July 6 and 7, 2025. Designed as a counterweight to the G7, the bloc struggles to embody the unity of the Global South. Internal disagreements, the absence of Xi Jinping, the offensive return of Donald Trump: the 17th edition illustrates less a rise in power than a questioning of the strategic coherence of the members. In an era of multipolar ambitions, the BRICS face a legitimacy crisis as well as a test of international credibility.

A Tense Summit : Internal Divisions And Symbols Of Fractured Unity

One of the most striking facts of this year’s BRICS summit is the absence of Chinese President Xi Jinping , replaced for the first time by his Prime Minister, Li Qiang. A symbolically heavy absence in an already delicate context, as the group seeks to strengthen its influence in the face of Donald Trump’s resurgence on the international scene.

On the Russian side, President Vladimir Putin will also not attend the discussions in person, limiting himself to a videoconference appearance. It is Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov who will represent on site.

These notable absences weigh heavily on the summit’s dynamic, which aims to project the image of a united front of emerging economies against Western leadership embodied by the United States.

Several signs show that the BRICS bloc is undergoing a phase of strategic misalignment. Recent episodes have clearly revealed internal tensions within the group :

• Last April, the alliance’s foreign ministers failed to agree on a joint statement, mainly due to disagreements over wording support for permanent seats on the UN Security Council for Brazil, India, and South Africa ;

• By contrast, a few weeks later, the same countries signed a joint declaration denouncing American and Israeli strikes on Iran, described by BRICS as “violations of international law”, showing a capacity for punctual coordination, but limited to certain topics ;

• The lack of clear communication on the group’s long-term economic objectives fuels skepticism about its real cohesion.

These elements undermine the credibility of the BRICS bloc, especially in front of major Western powers. The lack of strategic alignment between China, India, and Brazil on key issues such as international institution reform calls into question their capacity to offer a credible alternative to the existing global governance model. The Rio summit, meant to mark a consolidation step, thus risks reinforcing the image of a fragmented bloc, more reactive than visionary.

Elusive Political Unity Jeopardizes BRICS’ Monetary Ambitions

While the Rio summit reveals the group’s diplomatic fractures, it also sheds light on another stalled project: that of a new monetary architecture. One of the most anticipated projects, a possible common currency or a cross-border settlement system independent of the dollar, now seems stalled.

The joint absence of Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin, two of the main architects of this alternative financial vision, significantly reduces the prospects for ambitious announcements. No concrete project has been advanced at this stage of the summit.

Contrary to expectations raised beforehand by some observers, no official statement mentioned a timeline, model, or coalition around a BRICS crypto or a decentralized monetary system.

The choice not to include these topics in the summit’s main agenda, combined with the absence of proactive leadership on this issue, suggests that internal disagreements are hindering any significant progress. This silence contrasts with positions expressed in the past by certain leaders, notably Russia and China, who advocated for an “independent payment system” capable of reducing dependence on the dollar and SWIFT networks.

This inertia has profound consequences. For actors in the crypto ecosystem, especially in Global South countries, a BRICS initiative around an investment platform and a blockchain-based payment system could have represented a major alternative to Western monetary infrastructures. As it stands, the lack of a common vision compromises this ambition. Worse, it sends a message of disorganization that could delay or even discourage any future monetary coordination attempts. The Rio summit, instead of embodying the long-awaited strategic shift, could ultimately symbolize the exhaustion of a multilateral monetary reform project championed by emerging economies.